<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" version="2.0"><channel>
                        <title>News Opinion &amp; Reviews - The Express Tribune</title>
                        <atom:link href="https://tribune.com.pk" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
                        <link>https://tribune.com.pk</link>
                        <description>The Express Tribune keeps you up to date with all the latest happenings from Pakistan and across the world!</description>
                        <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Nov 26 19:54:45 +0500</lastBuildDate>
                        <language>en-US</language>
                        <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
                        <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
                        <generator>https://laravel.com/</generator><item>
			<title>The ownership disclosure</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638297/the-ownership-disclosure</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638297/the-ownership-disclosure#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 26 20:17:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Muhammad Hamid Zaman]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2638297</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Committee report came in the last week of October and it was damning]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Last week, the most prominent news in the higher education sector in the US was that the provost (and the chief academic officer) at Dartmouth College resigned. Dartmouth College is a premier institution of higher learning in the United States and while many readers of this newspaper may not really care about a higher education official of a US institution leaving his post, I believe that the reasons for his departure are relevant beyond the US and worthy of our reflection.

Dr Santiago Schnell, who served as the provost at Dartmouth for just over a year, was a well-regarded scholar in the field of mathematical biology. He had trained at Oxford and prior to his position at Dartmouth, he had worked at Indiana University, University of Michigan and University of Notre Dame. In August and September of this year, two news outlets &ndash; Semafor in August and The Dartmouth, the university student newspaper, in September &ndash; revealed that Dr Schnell had widely used generative AI in his writing without disclosing its use, including in journals and newspapers where there are clearly laid-out requirements for disclosure, or any use of generative AI is prohibited. When confronted, Dr Schnell acknowledged using AI for &#39;language refinement&#39; or &#39;copyediting&#39; but did not elaborate any further. As a result of the detailed story published in The Dartmouth student newspaper, many students and faculty at Dartmouth College were upset at what they saw was the blatant disregard for the university policies. They argued that if the student did such a thing (i.e. use AI and not disclose the use), they would get into serious trouble &ndash; so why is it that the chief academic officer can get away with it? There were others who found the entire episode distasteful &ndash; and antithetical to creativity, originality and transparency. The movement picked up steam and the university president tasked a faculty-led committee &ndash; comprising computer science faculty and humanities faculty &ndash; to further look into the matter.

The committee report came in the last week of October and it was damning. Dr Schnell had used generative AI in many of his recent publications, had violated policies of journals and was not forthcoming about those, and did not cooperate with the committee. Soon after the report was sent to the university president, Dr Schnell resigned and left the university.

There are many things to unpack here. First, the remarkable role of student journalists who are determined to hold university leadership to account. They deserve a lot of credit for their work and their commitment. Second, what incensed many people was that there should be same set of rules for everyone, and the faculty should be held to the same standards as they expect the students to abide by. But there is a bigger and perhaps nagging question about the pull of AI. Dr Schnell has had a distinguished career spanning well over two decades when he wrote outstanding papers and made important discoveries. His papers shaped ideas and created new knowledge. Why does someone like that choose to rely on something that takes away creativity and originality? Why does he need to rely on AI for language refinement when he did not need it for twenty something years? What pull does it have? And if someone does believe there is nothing wrong in using AI for &#39;language refinement&#39; (or more) then why not declare it? Why not be open about it, or perhaps even be proud of it?

These are complex questions and perhaps we will never know the answers. But it is worth reflecting on how the notions of efficiency can force us to compromise the very foundations research, scholarship and inquiry. We should ask on our campuses and beyond: when we choose efficiency, are we OK with giving up creativity, originality and transparency? And should we be comfortable in doing so? Is that a good thing for the enterprise of learning, and society at large? And if not, then what guardrails should we create immediately?]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Why can't I see my taxes working!</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638301/why-cant-i-see-my-taxes-working</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638301/why-cant-i-see-my-taxes-working#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 26 20:17:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Yumna Zahid Ali]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2638301</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Do not tell me that taxes are necessary]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Every month, money is deducted from my salary in the name of taxes. I work for it, I earn it, and a portion of it goes to the government. Fine. But where are the results? If my money is being collected for the country&#39;s development, then why do the services my taxes pay for never seem to reach my own four walls? Is my money building a better Pakistan, or is it lining the pockets of a system that bleeds me dry and gives back scraps?

Why can&#39;t I see Karachi&#39;s public roads being properly developed? Why can&#39;t I see free, quality education for every child? Why can&#39;t I see clean drinking water reaching every household? Why can&#39;t I see a proper drainage system that prevents Karachi from turning into a swimming pool whenever it rains? Why can&#39;t I see footpaths that pedestrians can actually walk on instead of broken concrete, encroachments and open manholes? Why can&#39;t I see a public transport system that allows working-class commuters to get to work without being drained by the journey?

Why can&#39;t I see public schools with functioning toilets, clean classrooms, qualified teachers and proper furniture? Why can&#39;t I see government hospitals with enough beds, medical equipment and doctors who are not overwhelmed by endless queues? Why can&#39;t I see streetlights working in areas where women and children have to walk after sunset? Why can&#39;t I see a proper waste management system instead of garbage becoming a rotting fixture of residential streets?

And I could ask &quot;why can&#39;t I see?&quot; forever, but the better question is: why can&#39;t they see what they&#39;ve done?

Why does being a citizen now come with a second bill for everything? I pay taxes, then pay school fees. I pay taxes, then pay hospital bills. I pay taxes, then pay for private transport because public transport is inadequate. I pay taxes, then pay for bottled water because clean drinking water cannot always be trusted. I pay taxes, then pay for private security because I am worried about safety. At this point, am I funding a government or running a parallel government out of my own pocket?

Taxes are not charity or donations. They are not money citizens hand over so officials can congratulate themselves on collecting revenue. Taxes are public money, and public money must serve the public.

Of course, running a country costs money. Nobody expects a country to be rebuilt in a week. But financial limitations are one thing; failing to show where public money goes, what progress has been made, and who answers when projects fail is another. If I am expected to pay taxes on time, I have every right to expect accountability on time.

I am not asking for gold-plated roads, private hospitals for every neighbourhood, or luxury facilities on every street. I am asking for what any taxpayer is owed. Clean water. Safe roads. Quality education. Accessible healthcare. Reliable transport. Proper sanitation. Public spaces that are maintained.

Do not tell me that taxes are necessary. I know they are. Tell me what they are achieving. Do not show me another announcement, another ribbon-cutting ceremony, or another development project on paper. Show me the road that has been repaired, the school that has been improved, the hospital that can treat patients, and the neighbourhood that finally has clean water.

A country cannot keep demanding financial sacrifice from its citizens while expecting them to remain satisfied with excuses. Patriotism does not mean switching off your brain, closing your eyes, and applauding every decision made in your name. Sometimes, patriotism means asking legitimate, justified and long-overdue questions because you want your country to function better.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Need for a change in two postures</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638302/need-for-a-change-in-two-postures</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638302/need-for-a-change-in-two-postures#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 26 20:17:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Majid Ehsan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2638302</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan demonstrated its willingness and capability to respond to aggression]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan faces two increasingly complex security challenges on its eastern and western borders. Both are characterised by hostility, mistrust and recurring confrontation, yet they differ fundamentally in their origins, character and strategic implications. India&#39;s increasingly assertive military posture and the Afghan Taliban&#39;s failure to restrain TTP call for a reassessment of Pakistan&#39;s responses. The question is not whether Pakistan possesses the strength and resolve to defend its interests, but how that strength can be exercised with prudence, confidence and clear political objectives.

The temptation to respond to belligerence with greater belligerence is understandable. However, relations between states cannot be reduced to the psychology of confronting a bully. Their behaviour is shaped by perceptions of power, domestic compulsions and national interests. A policy that succeeds in deterring one adversary may prove counterproductive against another. Pakistan must, therefore, avoid applying a common template to two distinctly different challenges.

On the eastern border, the May 2025 military confrontation altered prevailing assumptions about military coercion between Pakistan and India. Pakistan responded militarily before a ceasefire was reached on 10 May. Reuters reported? that the fighting represented the most serious confrontation between the nuclear armed neighbours in nearly three decades. The crisis demonstrated both the dangers of escalation and the continuing relevance of credible deterrence.

The strategic lesson of this short but very dangerous confrontation should not be confined to the military outcome. Pakistan demonstrated its willingness and capability to respond to aggression. Nevertheless, the larger challenge is translating that experience into sustainable deterrence and regional stability. India&#39;s decision to hold the IWT in abeyance introduced another dangerous dimension. In its award of 31 August 2026, the Court of Arbitration reaffirmed the treaty&#39;s continuing force and rejected unilateral abeyance as grounds for suspending obligations. India disputes the tribunal&#39;s jurisdiction. The controversy illustrates how political differences increasingly threaten the livelihoods and security of millions.

Pakistan needs a strong and proactive defensive posture towards India, but proactivity must not be confused with a preference for military confrontation. The purpose of deterrence is to prevent aggression, not perpetuate hostility. Military preparedness, diplomatic engagement and economic resilience must reinforce one another. Neither dialogue without credible deterrence nor deterrence without dialogue offers a satisfactory basis for lasting stability.

The western border presents a different predicament. Pakistan&#39;s expectations of a friendly government in Kabul following the Taliban&#39;s return in August 2021 have progressively given way to disappointment. The resurgence of the TTP and increasingly lethal attacks inside Pakistan have become central sources of friction. Islamabad protests the existence of terror sanctuaries, whereas Kabul consistently and knowingly denies all this. UNSC monitoring reports have repeatedly highlighted the TTP&#39;s presence in Afghanistan and its activities against Pakistan.

No state can remain indifferent to terrorist attacks launched from sanctuaries beyond its borders. Nevertheless, the central question is whether an increasingly aggressive military posture, accompanied by punitive measures, can persuade the Afghan Taliban to alter their behaviour. Military action may disrupt terrorist infrastructure and demonstrate resolve but unless it produces measurable changes in Kabul&#39;s conduct, its strategic value remains uncertain. Punitive action must not become a substitute for a clearly articulated political strategy. Recent border confrontations demonstrate how quickly hostility can acquire momentum of its own.

Pakistan must, therefore, distinguish between coercion as an instrument of policy and coercion as a policy in itself. Pressure on Kabul should pursue verifiable objectives, including denial of TTP sanctuaries, disruption of operational infrastructure and credible monitoring mechanisms. Military measures, where lawful and necessary, must remain proportionate. Diplomatic engagement, intelligence cooperation and calibrated economic measures should complement them.

The diplomatic door has not been entirely closed. During the Moscow Format consultations on 5 October 2026, Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi maintained that differences could be resolved through dialogue. Pakistan reiterated its demand for ending terrorist impunity on Afghan territory. The challenge is converting declarations into verifiable commitments.

Pakistan cannot afford indefinite confrontation on both borders. Sustained military readiness, disrupted trade and border closures impose considerable economic costs. Internal stability, economic recovery and institutional strength are indispensable elements of national security. A state perpetually responding to external provocations risks allowing adversaries to determine its strategic priorities.

Classical realism offers useful guidance. Hans J Morgenthau, in Politics Among Nations, regarded prudence &ndash; understood as weighing the political consequences of alternative courses of action &ndash; as the supreme virtue in politics. Prudence does not imply weakness or abandonment of national interests. Strength is indispensable, but without political judgment it can become a liability.

Pakistan&#39;s approach towards India and Afghanistan should rest on a common principle but follow different operational paths. With India, the priorities should be credible deterrence, strategic confidence, crisis management and meaningful political engagement. With Afghanistan, effective counterterrorism must be supported by diplomatic pressure, verifiable commitments and proportionate measures.

A bully&#39;s bluff may be called through a demonstration of resolve, but the underlying conflict is seldom resolved by humiliation. Tactical success may impose immediate costs; strategic success lies in creating conditions under which threats diminish, and recurring confrontation becomes less likely. Pakistan has both the right and responsibility to protect its sovereignty and citizens.

The need of the hour is neither appeasement nor unrestrained retaliation. It is a recalibration of the two postures, anchored in confidence, credible deterrence and prudence, while pursuing improvement through sustained dialogue. Ultimately, the true measure of national strength is not how severely an adversary can be punished, but how effectively a nation can safeguard its interests without becoming a prisoner of perpetual confrontation.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>GM seed governance - lessons from cotton</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638303/gm-seed-governance-lessons-from-cotton</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638303/gm-seed-governance-lessons-from-cotton#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 26 20:17:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2638303</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan initially recorded a substantially higher yield of 622 kg/ha and peaked at 815 kg/ha in 2011]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Genetically modified (GM) seed technology has improved agricultural productivity, pest management and climate resilience globally. Bt cotton is a GM variety containing a gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) that protects against bollworms, reducing the need for insecticides. Pakistan formally commercialised Bt cotton in 2010 as its only widely adopted GM crop.

Yet despite Bt cotton accounting for an estimated 95% of the country&#39;s cotton area by 2022, national cotton production has fallen to a 40-year low. While many factors have contributed to this decline, including pests beyond Bt cotton&#39;s targeted bollworms, diseases such as Cotton Leaf Curl Virus, climate change and evolving crop economics; weaknesses in GM seed governance remain an important part of the story. This insight examines Pakistan&#39;s GM seed governance through the case of Bt cotton.

GM crops have been commercially cultivated since 1996 and, by 2025, were grown in 30 countries on 216 million hectares. GM cotton accounted for 76.7% of global cotton area, with Pakistan in fifth place. Yet large-scale adoption has not translated into sustained gains. India offers a useful regional comparison given similar adoption timelines and production systems.

India&#39;s cotton yield more than doubled from 191 kg/ha in 2002 to 440 kg/ha in 2024, reaching 511 kg/ha in 2016. Pakistan initially recorded a substantially higher yield of 622 kg/ha and peaked at 815 kg/ha in 2011, but subsequently experienced considerable volatility, falling to 390 kg/ha in 2022 before recovering to 590 kg/ha in 2024. Consequently, Pakistan&#39;s initial yield advantage over India narrowed substantially, suggesting that its early productivity streak was not sustained.

Bt cotton, based largely on Monsanto&#39;s first-generation Cry1Ac (MON531) technology, entered Pakistan informally around 2002, before effective systems for biosafety, variety registration and seed quality assurance were in place. By 2007, an estimated 60% of Pakistan&#39;s cotton area was already planted with unregulated Bt cotton. Despite formal commercialisation in 2010, regulatory oversight struggled to catch up with the established informal market. By 2012, 52 Bt varieties were being cultivated, but only nine were officially approved. Around 85% of seed samples had an unknown origin and only 1% met the required Bt toxin level.

Consequently, these factors increased Bt-targeted pest resistance and secondary pests, pushing farmers back towards pesticide use. Cotton area declined from 3.2 million hectares in 201415 to 1.9 million hectares by 2025, with pink bollworm alone estimated to cause annual losses of around one million bales. Furthermore, first-generation Cry1Ac technology remained widely used even as its effectiveness declined.

The experience also highlighted the importance of conserving cotton&#39;s genetic diversity. Studies found a narrow genetic base among cultivated varieties in Pakistan, while gene flow between Bt and non-Bt cotton was documented in Faisalabad. These findings raise concerns about cross-contamination and the long-term preservation of indigenous varieties and genetic resources essential for future breeding.

Pakistan has introduced a series of reforms to strengthen GM seed governance. Together, they provide a stronger institutional foundation than existed during the early years of Bt cotton adoption. However, important gaps remain.

The first gap is institutional coordination. GM crops must complete two separate regulatory processes: biosafety approval by the National Biosafety Committee (NBC) and seed certification and variety registration by the National Seed Development &amp; Regulatory Authority (NSDRA). Yet, neither the Pakistan Biosafety Rules 2005 nor the Seed (Amendment) Act 2024 explicitly establishes a formal mechanism for coordination or information-sharing between the two authorities. A joint coordination mechanism could ensure that biosafety approval, seed certification and post-release oversight inform one another throughout a GM variety&#39;s lifecycle.

The second gap concerns post-release monitoring. While institutions such as the Pakistan Central Cotton Committee (PCCC) generate technical evidence, provincial agriculture departments are better placed to monitor crops in the field and identify local changes in crop performance and pest pressure. A formal linkage between provincial field monitoring, research institutions and NSDRA could ensure that such evidence informs national seed regulation and future approvals.

The third gap is research capacity. Sustained research and resistance monitoring are essential to maintaining GM crops&#39; effectiveness. Globally, documented cases of practical resistance to Bt crops rose from three in 2005 to 16 by 2016. Pakistan&#39;s constrained agricultural research funding, including financial challenges at PCCC, underscores the need for stable funding for varietal evaluation, resistance monitoring and preservation of genetic diversity.

GM maize is the next test for Pakistan&#39;s seed governance. Maize covers 1.59 million hectares, with production estimated at 8.79 million tonnes in 202526. Unlike Bt cotton, which spread informally before effective regulation, GM maize is now being considered through a government-led commercialisation framework, with coexistence of GM and non-GM maize under discussion.

Safeguards should therefore be established before widespread adoption, including traceable seed, post-release monitoring and a clear biosafety framework. Designated cultivation zones, alongside appropriate isolation distances, could further limit cross-contamination between GM and non-GM maize, protecting non-GM production and preserving genetic diversity.

In conclusion, Pakistan&#39;s Bt cotton experience shows that technological adoption without strong governance can limit long-term gains. As GM agriculture expands, Pakistan must strengthen regulation, monitoring, research and stewardship before adoption outpaces oversight.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>State of the state</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637967/state-of-the-state</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637967/state-of-the-state#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 26 19:48:13 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Fahd Husain]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2637967</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Dictatorships may have concentrated more power through extra-constitutional means, but resistance was also stronger]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The state today is the master of all it surveys. That should concern it.

It has been a very long time since so much power was concentrated in so few hands. Such power is defined not just by the ability of the powerbrokers to bend others to their will, but also to the level of resistance to such power. In times of unalloyed dictatorships, the concentration of power through extra-constitutional levers may have been more, but so was the resistance from those at the wrong end of the stick.

Not so today.

With all other branches of the state weakened at the expense of the executive, and with the political opposition quasi-emasculated, there is nothing that the state seems to fear. Its control is total. Its will has hardened. It will bend those who must bend, and those who do not, it will break.

When the state reaches such a state, it runs risks. One such risk is not knowing when to lay down the stick and pick up the carrot. This is a classic by-product of the dilution of the system&#39;s checks and balances. In today&#39;s situation, nothing illustrates this more vividly than the state&#39;s approach towards the opposition.

The opposition is in a mess. Even the opposition acknowledges this. Ever since the PTI lost its government in Khyber-Pukhthunkhwa, it has been flailing around trying to figure out what to do and whom to blame. The PTI&#39;s leadership is, on a daily basis, mocked by the PTI&#39;s leadership. And by its massive support base. Even the staunchest supporters of the party take solace in the argument that the party leadership matters not. The party, they say with sound logic, is just one man. That man remains as popular as ever, despite the party leadership&#39;s embarrassing failures to hold itself together.

If the PTI is in a shambles, the TTAP is not helping it either. In fact, probably on the contrary. Holding the two most prestigious offices that the opposition holds, the TTAP leadership has a leading role in terms of the opposition&#39;s political strategy. Yet, the leader of the opposition in the National Assembly is himself being seen as part of the problem by many within the PTI ranks. He remains offensive in his approach towards negotiations with the government even though many within the PTI believe that their leader in Adiala appointed him for his experience in guiding the opposition through tricky political situations. Well, today is as tricky as tricky gets.

The opposition finds itself out of power, out of ideas, and frankly, out of options. Which is the exact spot where the state should engage it. But the fear is that &ndash; in its hubris &ndash; the state will miss the opportunity.

It will miss it because the political input coming from the government for the state is, at best, recommendatory in nature. There is little pushback if the state is resistant to this input. The power imbalance, and the dilution of checks and balances, has skewed the system&#39;s dynamics in such a way that juggernaut of the state feeds more on its sheer momentum than on the logic of a given situation. With the two political parties within the ruling setup concerned more with the protection and promotion of their provincial domains, the Centre just does not seem to carry the political heft needed to inject its input into the state&#39;s fuel tank. They all prefer to just go with the flow.

That flow is ensuring that once the state has the opposition&#39;s back to the wall &ndash; as it does now &ndash; it prefers to break the back and the wall instead of bringing it back into the fold. The PTI is vulnerable. It is looking for a way out of this corner. It needs political oxygen. This is the time for the state to engage it and find space for it under the huge tent. That&#39;s what good politics demands. That&#39;s what good statecraft demands.

But don&#39;t hold your breath.

Not for this, and not for other developments that need more carrots and less sticks. The hubris, the momentum, the uber-confidence, the lack of pushback, the geo-strategic grandstanding, all of these are propelling the state into a state where its ability to weigh the costs and benefits of its actions dispassionately is weakening. The hammer-and-nail approach to dealing with human rights activists, journalists, opposition members and any one else who may not be ready and willing to say &quot;yes sir, yes sir, three bags full&quot; can be a recipe for consequential problems further down.

There are major reforms on the way. The 28th Amendment may still be under wraps, but it is a work in progress. One hears of many other sweeping changes to the governance architecture being considered. The power wielders say such mega changes require the state to cross all hurdles that are usually placed in the way of reforms that undercut vested interests. The ability to remove these hurdles, and to prevail over any resistance is, these people say, the true measure of the state&#39;s resolve to do the right thing.

While there may be merit in many of these reforms &ndash; smaller administrative units, empowered local governments &ndash; the fact is that done wrong, these reforms can create more problems than solve them. Doing them right means taking everyone along as much as possible. It means not rushing through decisions without painstaking consultations and deliberations and discussions. It also means creating an environment that is conducive to such deliberations and discussions. In fact, it also means realising that carrots are often much more useful than sticks.

It is precisely when the state is at its strongest that it must reach out to those that do not agree with its policies. We may be divided into political, social and institutional groupings, but we all unite under one flag. That&#39;s the north star that should guide those who wield the most power in today&#39;s Pakistan.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Charity, (in)justice and hunger</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637962/charity-injustice-and-hunger</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637962/charity-injustice-and-hunger#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 26 19:48:13 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Ali Hassan Bangwar]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2637962</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[A society with justice rarely needs charity, and one without it will not establish justice through charity]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Have you ever seen a politician, bureaucrat, or any other member of the elite waiting in line for free food, subsidised petrol, or a government relief package? Have you ever spotted them outside charitable organisations, NGO offices or public departments in Pakistan? You probably haven&#39;t. However, you might not have missed pictures of them standing in queues abroad. Why not in the country? The country&#39;s queues are reserved for the people. For people who stand in lines for survival or service, the queues might seem like lifelines - a grand favour or a blessing. They are, in fact, the queues of decay: of life, of hope, of dignity as humans, of rights and potential, of responsive and efficient governance. For most of these borrowed lifelines lead to a lifeless life.

Though we take pride in being one of the world&#39;s most philanthropic nations, boasting hundreds of charities and NGOs, we still harbour a deeply marginalised population. Reports indicate that half the country is trapped in abject poverty - to say nothing of the even more horrendous ground realities. Per the Global Hunger Index 2026, Pakistan faces severe, systemic hunger, alongside grappling with rampant begging, injustice and governance failures.

One might wonder how philanthropy on such a massive scale can coexist with endemic poverty, hunger and crisis. The truth is, it is not the sheer volume of charity that determines a society&#39;s well-being, but its underlying intent, how it is received by the masses, and - critically - the presence of justice. Unjustly depriving people of their systemic rights, only to meet their basic needs as a mere courtesy, does not fix the system; instead, it fosters a self-sustaining culture of dependency.

Granted, charity helps sustain lives and makes up for the governmental vacuum in service delivery; yet the ultimate acceptance of this as a culture costs the people in many ways.

First, charity absolves the ruling elite of its responsibility vis-&agrave;-vis delivering to the masses and allows it to evade potential accountability for its failures. Second, the culture of charitable settings and NGOs makes people live unquestioningly at the receiving end. Third, it reinforces begging tendencies and causes people to abandon the traditional means of survival they once relied on, thereby rendering them subservient to others. In short, charity prevents people from becoming self-reliant.

Fourth, an excessive emphasis on these cultivated servile tendencies makes the victims internalise dependence as their fait accompli. Fifth, by operating under the dictates of the rulers, charitable settings also carry out propaganda, and thereby strengthen the stakes of the system. Behind their magnanimity, they advance agendas that serve their stakeholders, donors included.

Last, they tend to present an improved picture of people&#39;s development and prosperity, casting people&#39;s plight in an overly optimistic light and sweeping under the carpet all that people truly struggle with.

A society with justice rarely needs charity, and one without it will not establish justice through charity. An ungenerous society with justice will not need charity. An unjust one, however much charity it may have, will remain unjust - or grow even more unjust over time. Charity is no substitute for justice and rights. It should follow the provision of people&#39;s rights, filling gaps in delivery or resource constraints.

When charity precedes justice and rights, it both blinds people to their rights and deepens the unjust divide between the rich and the marginalised. Behind the scenes, charity, presented as a grand favour, generates an ill-conceived goodwill in the hearts of the people toward those who usurp rights.

Today, we have multiplying charitable organisations, growing hunger and dysfunctional institutions - all existing within a strange mix of goodwill and complicity. It suggests that systemic injustice and the denial of rights are merely being atoned for with ever more charity.

The day you see the elite standing in queues in the country will either be the day of equitable justice or the day of equitable injustice.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Two leaders and their political twilight</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637968/two-leaders-and-their-political-twilight</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637968/two-leaders-and-their-political-twilight#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 26 19:48:13 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Dr Muhammad Ali Ehsan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2637968</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Resuming hostilities may help Netanyahu and Trump regain political ground, but the consequences could be far-reaching]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Today, the world fears the final, dangerous act in the twilight of what has become the world&#39;s most consequential and controversial bilateral partnership. It is a partnership sustained by the overwhelming power of one benefactor, the United States, and the relentless disregard for international law and human values by its malefactor, the state of Israel. Today, both leaders confront mounting political uncertainty at home. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has failed to secure a majority in the recently concluded Israeli elections, while opinion polls increasingly point towards a defeat for President Donald Trump in the upcoming US midterm elections.

What makes this political predicament dangerous is the possibility that the war against Iran could become a strategic gamble and disaster from which neither leader can afford to retreat. At 77, Netanyahu, Israel&#39;s longest-serving prime minister, is set to continue as interim prime minister until fresh elections next year seek to resolve the deadlock in the Knesset. This arrangement could persist if Likud and Gadi Eisenkot&#39;s party remain committed to their declared refusal to form a coalition with the Arab parties, which have secured 19 seats and consequently emerged as potential kingmakers. Netanyahu, popularly known as &#39;Mr Security&#39;, has already abandoned Israel&#39;s traditional security doctrine of fighting short, limited wars of defence. Instead, he has presided over the country&#39;s longest-running military campaigns, fighting on multiple fronts, including Gaza, Lebanon and Iran.

The elimination of the Iranian regime has long been Netanyahu&#39;s overriding political objective. The 53 seats secured by his party in the latest elections suggest that a substantial section of Israeli society continues to endorse his approach. Now entering its ninth month, the US-Israeli war against Iran carries the danger of becoming something far more dangerous than a military confrontation. For two leaders facing electoral setbacks and eroding political credibility, the temptation to finish what they started may weigh heavier than the political wisdom of ending it.

The erosion of American influence and global credibility can be attributed to several factors, but one that stands out is the transformation of US statecraft into a system that increasingly divides the world into favoured and disfavoured regimes. Israel tops the list of US-favoured states, and the distinction in how the US treats the two categories has become an open secret. While the US routinely calls out governments it disapproves of for repression, tyranny and human rights abuses, it overlooks similar conduct by its allies and strategic partners.

Since 1972, the US has cast at least 45 vetoes against UNSC resolutions critical of Israel. American patronage, therefore, extends well beyond the economic and military assistance it provides to Israel. Its diplomatic protection has been equally consequential, shielding Israel from international accountability and emboldening it to pursue policies that contribute to global instability, disorder and an erosion of the international rules-based system.

One of the principal military justifications for going to war with Iran was to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. The nuclear ambitions of Iraq, Libya and Syria, similarly, were treated as matters of grave international insecurity. Yet Israel&#39;s undeclared nuclear arsenal remains largely beyond the reach of the same international scrutiny. The only American president to openly challenge Israel over its nuclear ambitions was John F Kennedy. In 1961, Kennedy warned that American support for Israel could be seriously jeopardised if Washington&#39;s concerns over Israel&#39;s nuclear programme remained unresolved. He did not live long enough to witness the eventual trajectory of that programme.

Today, whenever an attempt is made to bring Israel&#39;s undeclared nuclear capabilities under discussion at IAEA, American influence becomes a big obstacle. The contrast is difficult to ignore as nuclear ambitions in adversarial states are presented as threats to global security. Such selective application of international norms not only speaks of an American inconsistency but also a wider failure of the US-led Western order to uphold the principles of justice, equality and accountability on which its legitimacy rests.

They say when you refuse to visit disorder, disorder eventually comes knocking at your own door. This is precisely the predicament confronting Europe and the wider West today. Having failed to uphold an international order grounded in justice, freedom and equality, the US and its European partners are now confronting the domestic consequences of their own political and strategic choices. The promises of the Western-led global order have hardly translated into meaningful benefits for much of the developing world, where poverty, inequality and political instability continue to persist. Nor has the Western world itself remained immune to the resulting consequences. Across Europe, political dissatisfaction is increasingly finding expression through the rise of populist and far-right movements. Countries such as France, Spain, Italy and Poland are witnessing growing political polarisation, while far-right parties have gained significant ground in countries including the Czech Republic, Finland, Slovakia and Croatia.

Public confidence in democracy and its ability to deliver is also showing signs of erosion. A recent Pew Research Center survey found that 69% of respondents in France, 68% in Spain, 62% in Italy and 69% in the US expressed declining optimism about democracy. The West has invested far more political capital and military resources in fighting wars of questionable necessity than in strengthening democratic institutions and delivering the social and economic dividends that make democracy meaningful. No wonder a growing numbers of Western citizens are gravitating towards populist movements and far-right politics.

The greatest danger confronting the world today is not only the possibility of another war with Iran, but also the strategic miscalculation that could accompany its recommencement. For Netanyahu and Trump, resuming hostilities may offer them an opportunity to recover lost political ground, but the consequences could extend far beyond their domestic political fortunes. A war restarted to rescue two embattled political careers could plunge an already fragile international order into an even deeper crisis. The world cannot afford to become the collateral damage of two leaders unwilling to accept their political twilight.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>War madness</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638298/war-madness</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638298/war-madness#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 26 20:17:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Editorial]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2638298</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Encouraging sign, nonetheless, is that Qatari and Pakistani interlocutors are being heard in Tehran and Washington]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[There is widespread war hysteria despite credible diplomatic maneuvering in the Middle East. The fear of the unknown stems from an impulsive American President, whose Republican party is performing poorly in midterm exit polls. Consequently, it is widely forecast that a new attack on Iran is being planned to distract from domestic political struggles. There are also reports that the Israeli Prime Minister is persuading the White House incumbent to launch &quot;tactical nuclear strikes&quot; against Iran, which remains unrelenting in its refusal to compromise over its enriched uranium. The war criminal has been pushing hard for this barbaric option for quite some time.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei, however, categorically stated yesterday that his country &quot;will not transfer its enriched uranium to a third country&quot;, just as Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi once again laid down his preconditions for a thaw. These conditions included lifting the new sanctions imposed after the Islamabad MoU, scaling back the US military presence in the region, and ending the blockade at the mouth of the Arabian Sea.

The encouraging sign, nonetheless, is that Qatari and Pakistani interlocutors are being heard in Tehran and Washington. Araghchi has confirmed that a proposal is currently under discussion through Qatari and Pakistani mediators. This proposal is primarily based on Iran&#39;s original seven-day plan, which promises the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz &quot;on the sixth day&quot; if Iran&#39;s conditions are met. This is a welcome development that coincides with Vice President Vance&#39;s eagerness to open new vistas of dialogue with the Islamic Republic.

With a follow-up meeting expected between the warring sides and the mediators, the rising volatility could certainly be tamed. Saudi Arabia, having put three of its cities on high alert, is keeping its fingers crossed as the Houthis continue to push things over the brink. Likewise, the UAE foresees wider destruction if the region returns to war. This uncertainty can only be addressed if dialogue is recognised as the sole option. Let serenity triumph over insanity.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Police brutality</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638299/police-brutality-5</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638299/police-brutality-5#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 26 20:17:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Editorial]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2638299</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Article 14 of the Constitution expressly prohibits torture for extracting evidence]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The use of excessive force by police personnel remains a serious concern in Pakistan, where allegations of torture and abuse of authority continue to surface despite laws prohibiting such practices. The custodial death of Akmal Ali Khan, allegedly following an assault by policemen at a check-post in Taxila, calls for immediate accountability. The victim was reportedly beaten following a minor roadside dispute and later declared dead at a hospital. Three police personnel have been booked for murder. Such incidents are grave and must be investigated impartially, with those found responsible subjected to the full force of the law.

The persistence of police brutality reflects serious shortcomings in the country&#39;s law enforcement system. The police have long operated within a culture that tolerates coercion and intimidation, particularly when dealing with ordinary citizens who lack the means to challenge abuses of authority. Torture is frequently employed as a method of investigation or punishment, while officers accused of misconduct often escape criminal accountability. This has contributed to public distrust of the police and weakened the institution&#39;s ability to perform its fundamental duty of maintaining law and order.

Article 14 of the Constitution expressly prohibits torture for extracting evidence, while the Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention and Punishment) Act, 2022, provides a legal framework for prosecuting such offences. However, the implementation of these protections remains inadequate. FIA, which is empowered to investigate torture and custodial death cases, must be provided with the institutional independence necessary to fulfil its mandate. Investigations must be transparent and proceedings must be concluded without unnecessary delays. Departmental suspensions and transfers cannot be permitted to replace criminal prosecution. There is also an urgent need to strengthen the police system through comprehensive institutional reforms.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Killer Karachi roads</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638300/killer-karachi-roads</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2638300/killer-karachi-roads#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 26 20:17:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Editorial]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2638300</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[While measures such as the Sindh government's daytime ban exist, they are not properly enforced]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The authorities continue to fail as yet another heavy vehicle barrelling down Karachi&#39;s roads claims a precious life. Forty-five-year-old Faiza, who was pregnant, was riding pillion on a motorcycle driven by her husband, Fahim (55), when a speeding trailer hit them in Liaquatabad. Faiza succumbed to her injuries, and with her, her unborn child was also lost. Fahim remains under treatment for his injuries.

The ill-fated Faiza is not the first casualty of what has now become a hit-and-run culture in Karachi - driven by a host of factors, namely untrained drivers, excessive speeding, poor fleet maintenance, and, most critically, a total lack of regulatory oversight. Tragically, she will not be the last unless this fatal tendency to speed is acknowledged as a societal malady.

These heart-wrenching losses are part of a much wider, systemic crisis, as demonstrated by the staggering casualty numbers. In August 2025, a speeding dumper truck struck a motorcycle, killing siblings Mahnoor and Ahmed, while leaving their father critically injured. Another young man lost his life in December 2025 when a truck crashed into his motorcycle on the National Highway. Similarly, in January 2026, two seven-year-old boys were crushed to death in separate incidents &ndash; one by a water tanker and the other by a truck. It has been estimated that heavy vehicles claimed 147 lives in Karachi during the first six months of 2026.

While measures such as the Sindh government&#39;s daytime ban exist, they are not properly enforced. There must be rigid liability measures in place, such as revising Section 320 of the Pakistan Penal Code to make &quot;causing death by rash or negligent driving&quot; a non-bailable offence, which would compel drivers to be more vigilant. Additionally, installing GPS trackers and dashcams in commercial trucks would allow regulators to monitor speed and operating hours effectively. The daytime ban must also be strictly enforced through regular checks and increased police patrolling to prevent future violations.

Our roads must not become death traps. Enough lives have been lost. The carnage must stop now.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>NUST's triumph</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637965/nusts-triumph</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2637965/nusts-triumph#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 26 19:48:13 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Editorial]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2637965</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[45 researchers from NUST ranked in world's top 2% of scientists]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The announcement that 45 researchers from the National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST) have been ranked among the world&#39;s top 2% of scientists is a moment of genuine national pride. Data compiled by the prestigious Stanford University and academic publishing giant Elsevier places NUST and its faculty among the world&#39;s finest, crediting their work with advancing knowledge across disciplines. In a country where education-related headlines are usually limited to lacklustre education standards and dilapidated buildings, this is a reminder of what Pakistan can achieve when merit, investment and institutional vision align.

The achievement reflects decades of hard work. NUST&#39;s representation in the prestigious list has grown from 23 researchers in 2022 to 31 in 2023, 43 in 2024, and 47 in 2025. Although the number fell to 45 in 2026, it includes 16 scholars who have appeared consistently over successive years, which should be taken as proof of durable scholarly impact rather than fleeting recognition. It is also worth noting that the researchers&#39; areas of expertise span AI, nanotechnology, biomedical engineering, cyber security, materials science and fluid mechanics, which is a breadth of expertise that any world-class university would envy.

In fact, they are a major reason why NUST itself is now a member of the world&#39;s elite - the university currently ranks 384th in the QS World University Rankings, was third in South Asia in last year&#39;s Asia ranking, and had more citations per paper than several universities ranked higher than it in both scales. If properly leveraged, these statistics could also be critical in making the university in particular, and Pakistan&#39;s academic sector in general, more attractive for foreign investment and collaboration.

At the same time, there is no doubt that there is room for improvement - being the best in Pakistan is akin to being the big fish in a small pond. If NUST&#39;s administration and faculty keep up the good work, the university could one day be one of the biggest fish in the ocean.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Modern Tech Leadership: Building Systems That Scale</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545646/modern-tech-leadership-building-systems-that-scale</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2545646/modern-tech-leadership-building-systems-that-scale#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 25 18:54:31 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Shaukat Ali Khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2545646</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The author is Advisor to the President, Aga Khan University.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[In the crucible of modern technology leadership, where AI advancements outpace human adaptation and market shifts occur in real time, a new paradigm has emerged. The most effective tech leaders no longer rely on individual brilliance alone; they architect organizational systems that transform pressure into performance.

Recent data reveals a troubling reality: 61% of tech executives report unsustainable stress levels (Harvard Business Review), while leadership fatigue costs the industry $300 billion annually in lost productivity (Deloitte). These numbers underscore a fundamental truth &mdash; the challenges of tech leadership have evolved beyond what any individual can manage through sheer willpower.

The unique pressures facing tech leaders manifest in three critical dimensions. Decision-making occurs against a backdrop of exponential data growth, with IDC reporting that global data volumes double every two years &mdash; a reality that leaves 49% of tech leaders experiencing decision paralysis (MIT Sloan). Alignment becomes increasingly fragile in distributed engineering teams, where Gallup finds only 28% of technologists feel deeply connected to their company&#39;s mission. Meanwhile, the World Health Organization documents a 35% surge in leadership burnout since 2020, particularly acute in the tech sector&rsquo;s always-on culture.

What separates thriving tech leaders from those who merely survive? The answer lies in systematic approaches to five fundamental pillars of leadership. Vision in technology organizations must be both aspirational and adaptable. McKinsey research confirms that tech companies with dynamic, clearly articulated visions grow 1.5 times faster than competitors. Microsoft&rsquo;s transformation under Satya Nadella exemplifies this principle, where reframing the company&rsquo;s mission around empowerment rather than devices catalyzed a trillion-dollar market cap surge while increasing engineering team alignment by 32% (Harvard Business Review).

Transparency serves as the operating system for modern tech organizations. In an industry where Gartner reports 70% of technical initiatives fail to meet objectives, Gallup data shows that teams with transparent leaders demonstrate 3.5 times higher engagement. This principle manifests in radical openness &mdash; from GitLab&rsquo;s 6,000-page public handbook to Datadog&rsquo;s transparent incident postmortems &mdash; practices that Aberdeen Group links to 47% higher shareholder returns in tech companies.

The velocity of technological change demands unprecedented decisiveness. Stanford research indicates that hesitation costs tech firms 30% in lost innovation speed, while Bain &amp; Company data reveals that leaders who make critical decisions within 48 hours of receiving data drive 40% faster growth. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang&rsquo;s 2006 bet on CUDA architecture, made against prevailing wisdom, demonstrates how such decisive leadership builds enduring competitive advantage in the AI era.

Resilience in tech leadership requires more than personal fortitude &mdash; it demands institutionalized systems for recovery. The Journal of Applied Psychology documents that resilient tech leaders drive 25% more innovation output, with MIT research showing 82% attribute their success to structured problem-solving frameworks rather than individual heroics. Apple&rsquo;s resurgence under Steve Jobs emerged not from charismatic leadership alone, but from implementing ruthless product prioritization systems that transformed a billion-dollar loss into a $350 billion valuation.

Stakeholder trust functions as technical debt for tech leaders &mdash; it compounds quietly but determines long-term viability. PwC&rsquo;s CEO Survey finds 85% of tech leaders directly link trust to valuation, a connection exemplified by AMD&rsquo;s Lisa Su, who rebuilt investor confidence through transparent technology roadmaps after near collapse. Edelman data confirms that tech companies maintaining high stakeholder trust achieve 2.5 times greater revenue growth during market fluctuations.

The most forward-thinking tech leaders recognize that sustainable success emerges from systems rather than individual brilliance. Harvard research demonstrates that structured decision frameworks reduce deliberation time by 50% &mdash; critical when AI models can obsolete strategies overnight. McKinsey findings show that teams with clear systems adapt 60% faster to disruptions like API deprecations or supply chain shocks. Even failures become accelerants when properly analysed. Stanford studies reveal that tech organizations conducting rigorous postmortems improve 30% faster after setbacks.

This new leadership calculus represents a fundamental shift in how tech organizations scale. The most effective leaders don&rsquo;t simply make better decisions &mdash; they build better decision-making systems. They don&rsquo;t just communicate; they engineer transparency into their organizational DNA. They recognize that in an era of continuous deployment and real-time market shifts, sustainable leadership comes not from being the smartest engineer in the room, but from creating environments where every engineer can perform at their best. As artificial intelligence reshapes the technological landscape, this systematic approach to leadership may prove to be the ultimate competitive advantage.

The data leaves little room for debate &mdash; the future belongs to tech leaders who architect organizations as thoughtfully as they design systems. In doing so, they transform the overwhelming complexity of modern technology leadership from a crisis to be managed into a competitive edge to be leveraged. The organizations that embrace this paradigm won&rsquo;t just survive the coming waves of disruption &mdash; they&rsquo;ll define them.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Hurdles in materialization of GCC’s economic ventures in Pakistan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2517229/hurdles-in-materialization-of-gccs-economic-ventures-in-pakistan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2517229/hurdles-in-materialization-of-gccs-economic-ventures-in-pakistan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 24 05:55:06 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Syed Ahmed Ali]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2517229</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan must boost economic productivity to enhance trade ties with GCC countries and ensure sustainable growth.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The organization of the Gulf Cooperation Council was formed in 1981 which consists of six states: Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. The Gulf region is one of the most resource-rich areas namely crude oil and gas. In recent years the GCC countries have reduced their dependency on energy trade and promoted economic diversification. To pursue their economic diversification initiative, GCC countries have engaged in cooperation with other regions such as South Asia, which offers key resources and technical expertise. Pakistan being a member state of the South Asian region, stands at the crossroads to either connect itself with external regions such as the Middle East or risk economic isolation.

Huma Yusuf in an article titled &ldquo;Wide Gulf&rdquo; analyzed the GCC approach to the South Asian region, which seems to develop economic relations with India while maintaining military cooperation with Pakistan on specific security issues alongside occasional economic packages to aid Pakistan&rsquo;s ailing economy. Pakistan&rsquo;s GCC policy prioritizes political and security issues over developing economic relations. As noted by Shashank Joshi, Pakistan&rsquo;s relations with Arab states seem to be military-centric. As a consequence, Pakistan&#39;s economy suffers from a lack of a conducive environment for economic productivity and regional integration.

Pakistan&#39;s economic cooperation with GCC states while still in its infancy does touch some important sectors which need to be explored. The most important sector between Pakistan and the GCC economic relations is the energy trade. In July 2023, Saudi Arabia announced that it would invest 10 billion dollars in Gwadar, Balochistan to construct an oil refinery, which would help with GCC energy exports in the South Asian region. In the same year, the UAE signed a memorandum (MoU) for the possibility of developing renewable energy in Pakistan. In 2016 Qatar became a major supplier of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) to Pakistan through its LNG terminal agreement which was worth 15 billion dollars for a 15-year supply.

Apart from helping the energy sector, the GCC has also helped develop the Infrastructure of Pakistan, particularly in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. On the 22nd of October 2022, Saudi Arabia agreed to fund infrastructure projects in Neelum Valley and Muzaffarabad worth 30 billion rupees as a part of its Saudi Fund for Development (SFD). The SFD is a Saudi government assistance program that helps provide financial assistance to developing countries. Apart from providing financial aid to governmental projects, the GCC is a major investor in the real estate business in Pakistan. In 2013 Malik Riaz of the Bahria Group and Sheikh Nahyan of the Abu Dhabi Group invested 45 billion dollars in Pakistan&rsquo;s real estate industry, where they invested 10 billion dollars in Lahore and 35 billion in Karachi.

Apart from the real estate industry, the GCC countries have made a significant impact on various sectors of Pakistan&rsquo;s economy. In 2009 the Saudi government leased 500,000 acres of agricultural land from Pakistan to grow wheat as a means to ensure Saudi food security. Apart from the agricultural industry, the GCC supports Pakistani manufacturing by importing construction materials like cement. In 2004 Pakistan received a demand for cement of about 2000 tons per week from the UAE, which was supplied by Lucky Cement, DG Khan, and Attock In the field of fertilizer production Saudi Companies like SABIC have invested in Pakistan&rsquo;s fertilizer manufacturing through National Chemical Fertilizer Company (NFC).

The investments and economic aid provided by the GCC to Pakistan are channeled through joint cooperation organizations. One such organization is the UAE-Pakistan Assistance Program (UAE-PAP) which provided 200 million dollars of economic aid to Pakistan in May 2018. The objective of this funding was to provide humanitarian assistance to the vulnerable people in Pakistan. More recently, the Saudi-Pakistan Investment Conference announced a 20 billion investment, which covered diverse areas including energy, agriculture, and the environment.

Pakistan GCC trade relations are import intensive, where Gulf investors look to attract Pakistani investment in real estate, export their energy industry, and lease agricultural lands. In 2016 the trade deficit between Pakistan and GCC countries was 1.1 billion dollars, this increased to 1.3 billion dollars in 2020. The trade relationship between GCC and Pakistan is driven by rising imports and the depreciation of the Pakistani rupee which leads to the depletion of Pakistan&rsquo;s foreign exchange reserves. This vicious cycle of rising import costs and increasing foreign debt can only be mitigated through boosting economic productivity which is essential to have a long-lasting sustainable trade relationship with the GCC.

Pakistan faces significant challenges in its governance system to boost its economic productivity. Pakistan historically has inconsistency in its policy-making owing to political instability and frequent change in governments. Pakistan lacks a shared framework of economic policies shared by all stakeholders, which often leads to disruption of the previous policies initiated by the previous government. To make matters worse Pakistan&#39;s administration system suffers from red-tapism, where bureaucratic delays and complicated forms make it difficult for potential investors to invest.

Pakistan faces an acute energy crisis, where the cost of energy makes the cost of doing business too high. This leads to industrial regression where many investors look to set up their production plants where the energy costs are low. The use of renewable energy resources such as hydroelectric power plants can help reduce the cost of energy production. Solar panel technology for localized energy production is ideal in remote areas lacking grid connectivity. Energy costs can be reduced by using localized source fuels, such as Thar coal which is a cheaper alternative than foreign imported coal.

Pakistan needs export diversification, where the government needs to encourage the growth of new industrial sectors such as IT and the pharmaceutical industry. These industries produce greater value-added products which have a greater value meaning a greater inflow of foreign currency. Pakistan can help the growth of these new industrial sectors by providing export incentives such as reducing taxes on export industries. The government can also provide technical training services to help improve labor productivity.

Through these measures, Pakistan can improve its economic productivity and increase its foreign exchange currency reserves, which is important to build a more sustainable and long-lasting trade partnership with GCC countries. Such trade relations will help Pakistan&rsquo;s economy to grow and build stronger cooperation with the Gulf region.

The writer is an analyst on Middle East and South Asia]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Schrödinger’s Cat and Pakistan’s Economy: Alive, dead, or both?</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2517054/schrodingers-cat-and-pakistans-economy-alive-dead-or-both</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2517054/schrodingers-cat-and-pakistans-economy-alive-dead-or-both#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 24 10:18:40 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Dr Aneel Salman]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2517054</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan’s economy is in flux, showing signs of life but facing challenges that keep it uncertain.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Imagine a cat in a sealed box, both alive and dead at the same time&mdash;Schr&ouml;dinger&rsquo;s famous thought experiment in quantum mechanics. Now replace the cat with Pakistan&rsquo;s economy, and you have a paradox that would make even Erwin Schr&ouml;dinger scratch his head.

Is Pakistan&rsquo;s economy thriving, or is it a mirage of temporary improvements? Like the metaphorical box, the truth only reveals itself once we look deeper. On the surface, Pakistan&rsquo;s economy seems to be showing signs of life. Inflation, which was roaring just months ago, has started to ease, particularly in food prices.

In November 2024, inflation dropped sharply to 4.9%, down from over 30% in 2023, providing relief to households that have struggled with sky-high grocery bills.
From a broader perspective, fiscal and external accounts appear to be turning a corner. The government&rsquo;s disciplined spending has led to a primary surplus, a feat that many developing economies struggle to achieve.

The current account has posted a surplus for three consecutive months, indicating improved external balances. Foreign exchange reserves have crossed $12 billion for the first time in over two years, reaching $12.04 billion in November 2024, reducing immediate fears of default.
There&rsquo;s even talk of Pakistan re-entering the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, which could bring much-needed foreign portfolio investments.

The stock market has responded with renewed enthusiasm, with the benchmark share index hitting a lifetime high following the IMF&rsquo;s approval of a $7 billion bailout deal.
Corporate Pakistan, despite the recent turmoil, is cautiously optimistic. Banks have reported soaring profits, with some of the highest returns in Asia, due to high-interest rates and increased government borrowing.

The technology sector has attracted international venture capital, signalling confidence in the country&rsquo;s young talent pool. Agricultural reforms, including better irrigation and the introduction of high-yield seeds, are starting to pay off. In the FMCG sector, multinationals are reporting growth as consumer demand begins to recover. Meanwhile, automotive assemblers and manufacturers are ramping up production after a prolonged slump.

But here&rsquo;s the twist: Schr&ouml;dinger&rsquo;s cat is still in the box. Is this economic revival genuinely sustainable, or is it a temporary high? Much of the current stability hinges on policy measures that are inherently short-term. Import restrictions and remittance inflows have propped up reserves, but what happens when those restrictions are lifted? Is the economy fundamentally stronger, or are we just seeing a Band-Aid over a deep wound?

Debt remains the elephant&mdash;or perhaps the tiger&mdash;in the room. Pakistan&rsquo;s external debt obligations are massive, requiring substantial foreign exchange outflows. Without consistent export growth or foreign direct investment (FDI), the current account surplus could quickly vanish. The energy sector, despite progress in renewable projects, still struggles with circular debt and over-reliance on imported fuels, making it vulnerable to global shocks.

And let&rsquo;s not forget the perpetual wild card: politics. Policy consistency and investor confidence often take a backseat to political turmoil. In a country where ministers change faster than seasons, long-term economic planning is easier said than done.

So, what&rsquo;s the way forward for Pakistan&rsquo;s Schr&ouml;dinger economy? To truly open the box and find a thriving economy inside, Pakistan must shift from firefighting to systemic reform. Exports need to diversify beyond textiles&mdash;IT services, for instance, hold enormous untapped potential. Investment in renewable energy and domestic resources can reduce the dependency on volatile global fuel markets.
The tax system needs a complete overhaul.

Broadening the tax base by formalizing the informal economy is crucial. Digitization of tax processes has started, but enforcement and trust-building with businesses remain key. Regional trade offers another lifeline. Strengthening trade with Afghanistan, Central Asia, and even India could open up new economic corridors and stabilize supply chains.

Pakistan must also tackle inefficiencies in state-owned enterprises, which continue to bleed the exchequer. Privatization or restructuring, though politically sensitive, could reduce fiscal drag. Finally, political and institutional stability cannot be overstated. A consistent policy framework and good governance are critical to unlocking the country&rsquo;s potential.

As of now, Pakistan&rsquo;s economy remains in a superposition&mdash;alive, dead, or somewhere in between. The current signs are hopeful, but as any physicist&mdash;or economist&mdash;would tell you, the true state only reveals itself with time, data, and bold action. Until then, Schr&ouml;dinger&rsquo;s cat, or rather Pakistan&rsquo;s economy, keeps us guessing.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Breaking free from inertia</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2573191/breaking-free-from-inertia</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2573191/breaking-free-from-inertia#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 25 19:19:25 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Nadeem Javaid]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2573191</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan finds itself unable to prosper]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan once stood at the edge of promise - a young nation alive with ambition, industry, and the dream of joining Asia&#39;s rising tigers. But somewhere along the way, that energy dimmed. Growth lost its rhythm, and progress began to circle instead of climb. The country now finds itself caught in what economists call the Middle-Income Trap &mdash; a place where nations rise above abject poverty but fail to reach prosperity. In this zone, costs rise faster than productivity, innovation stalls, and ambition outpaces capacity. Pakistan, once a symbol of potential, risks becoming an example of inertia &mdash; not poor enough for aid, yet not strong enough to compete.

The trap captures countries that grow through low-wage manufacturing and basic exports but stumble when wages rise, and productivity fails to keep pace. Argentina, Brazil and Thailand have struggled in this space for decades. Pakistan&#39;s case is similar: an economy that moves, but no longer moves forward.

Take exports. Pakistan&#39;s total exports stood around $32 billion, barely changed in years. By contrast, Vietnam&#39;s exports crossed $354 billion, despite both economies starting at similar levels two decades ago. While Bangladesh and Vietnam diversified into electronics, garments and machinery, Pakistan remains locked into low-value textiles and primary commodities. Its inability to upgrade the export base has kept the external sector stagnant and vulnerable.

Human capital tells a similar story. Pakistan spends barely 1.5 per cent of GDP on education - among the lowest in Asia. Millions of children remain out of school, and even university graduates often lack market-relevant skills. Without investment in people, productivity cannot grow - and without productivity, prosperity cannot follow.

Institutional fragility compounds the problem. Every few years, the cycle repeats - IMF bailouts, currency shocks and short-term fiscal fixes. Political volatility and administrative discontinuity have turned policymaking into crisis management. Investors, both domestic and foreign, hesitate in such an environment. High interest rates, arbitrary taxation and poor contract enforcement have produced what might be called a &quot;fear economy&quot; - one where capital hides instead of builds, and risk-taking gives way to risk-avoidance.

Meanwhile, the informal sector dominates. More than 70 per cent of Pakistan&#39;s workforce operates outside formal structures - underpaid, unprotected and untaxed. This keeps productivity low and deprives the state of much-needed revenue. Weak public investment in infrastructure and services then reinforces the cycle of low growth and inequality.

But the most subtle trap is psychological. A comfortable middle class has learned to live with stagnation. Malls expand, cars multiply and consumption thrives, but innovation languishes. Too many seek safety in government jobs or overseas remittances, while too few take the risks that fuel enterprise. It is this quiet acceptance of &quot;just enough&quot; that makes inertia so powerful - and so dangerous.

History, however, offers a way out. South Korea in the 1960s was poorer than Pakistan but climbed out of poverty through export discipline, industrial upgrading and massive investment in education. China transformed from low-end assembly to global technology leadership through long-term planning and institutional focus. Malaysia avoided the trap by building a diversified, knowledge-based economy anchored in policy continuity and political stability. None of these transitions happened overnight; each demanded decades of consistent reform and national purpose.

For Pakistan, breaking free from inertia requires a similar commitment - not cosmetic fixes, but foundational change.

First, invest in people. Raise education and skills spending to at least 45 per cent of GDP. Focus on digital literacy, STEM education and vocational training through public-private partnerships that connect learning with livelihoods.

Second, reform the tax system. Agriculture, real estate and retail must enter the tax net. Simplify compliance through technology and transparency, broaden the base, and reduce distortions that punish the formal sector.

Third, empower cities. Urban centres generate nearly 80 per cent of GDP yet remain fiscally suffocated. Devolving authority to local governments, simplifying business licensing, and expanding microfinance - especially for women - can unleash immense productive potential.

Fourth, separate economic governance from political turbulence. The National Economic Council should guide long-term policy insulated from election cycles, ensuring continuity and coherence.

Fifth, engage the diaspora as partners, not just remitters. Pakistan&#39;s nine million overseas citizens can drive entrepreneurship, investment and technology transfer - injecting new ideas and capital into the economy.

Finally, open markets and ensure fair competition. Decades of protectionism and rent-seeking have entrenched inefficiency. Phasing out distortive subsidies, arbitrary tariffs and discretionary powers would reward productivity and innovation rather than privilege and influence.

Breaking free from inertia is more than an economic task - it is a national awakening. It means replacing short-term fixes with long-term vision, dependency with creativity, and fear with confidence. Pakistan cannot grow by surviving; it must thrive by transforming.

The choice is simple yet profound: remain comfortable in stagnation or embrace the hard climb toward renewal. The Middle-Income Trap is not an inevitability; it&#39;s a choice: to reform or to resign to mediocrity. The real trap isn&#39;t income; it&#39;s inertia. And only courage, consistency and commitment can break it.

The next generation of Pakistanis deserves more than survival. They deserve momentum - born of bold, consistent action, and the courage to leap forward rather than limp in circles.

The writer is the Vice Chancellor of the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE) and Member at Planning Commission of Pakistan]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Disaster, destiny and our responsibility</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2564513/disaster-destiny-and-our-responsibility</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2564513/disaster-destiny-and-our-responsibility#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 25 20:46:59 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[M Zeb Khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2564513</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The problem in Pakistan is not belief in destiny itself, but its misinterpretation]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[When a tragedy strikes in Pakistan, the most common reaction is: &quot;It was God&#39;s will.&quot; This simple phrase has profound power and implications. It helps people cope with unbearable grief, cushions them from prolonged trauma, and provides a collective psychological framework in which loss is given meaning. In a society where faith is deeply woven into daily life, belief in destiny is not just theology - it is therapy.

But beneath this comfort lies a danger. By placing disasters solely in the realm of fate, we risk absolving ourselves of responsibility. Fatalism, when misapplied, can slide from a spiritual solace into a culture of complacency. Instead of asking hard questions about preventable causes, we retreat into resignation. Disasters become not moments of accountability but acts of destiny.

Consider floods. It is true that global climate change has placed Pakistan among the most vulnerable nations on the planet. These global forces are outside our immediate control. Yet, the devastation that follows each season of heavy rains is not a simple natural occurrence. It is compounded, amplified, and often manufactured by local realities.

Overpopulation has pushed communities into flood-prone areas, often along riverbanks where survival is precarious. Unplanned urban sprawl has overwhelmed fragile drainage systems. Deforestation in the north has stripped away natural barriers against floods and landslides. Poorly constructed homes collapse at the first touch of water, while weak infrastructure - roads, bridges and embankments - crumbles under pressure. Corruption and short-term politics mean that dams and canals remain mismanaged, and flood-prevention plans gather dust.

The same logic applies to other calamities. Road accidents are too easily accepted as &quot;God&#39;s will&quot;. But many stem from reckless driving, poorly enforced traffic rules, or vehicles unfit for the road. Factory fires, often deadly, are not acts of destiny but the result of absent safety standards and greed-driven shortcuts. Even terrorism, while politically complex, thrives when security lapses and governance failures create fertile ground. In each case, responsibility disappears behind the shield of fate.

Ironically, this is not what Islam teaches. The Qur&#39;an consistently calls for both reliance on God (tawakkul) and accountability for human action. &quot;Indeed, Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves&quot; (13:11). Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) famously advised a man to tie his camel before trusting in God&#39;s protection. The message is clear: trust in divine decree must go hand in hand with human responsibility. To rely on fate without effort is not faith - it is negligence.

The problem in Pakistan is not belief in destiny itself, but its misinterpretation. Instead of a balanced philosophy that combines spiritual acceptance with worldly responsibility, destiny has been reduced to an excuse. It allows individuals, communities and governments to evade accountability. It transforms what should be moments of collective learning into cycles of repeated tragedy.

The way forward requires a shift in mindset. Disasters must be understood not only as divine tests but as opportunities for reform. When floods strike, the question should not only be, &quot;Why us?&quot; but also, &quot;What must we change?&quot; When accidents occur, the response should not end at grief but extend to improving safety and enforcing laws. When violence erupts, society must hold accountable not only the perpetrators but also the structures that allowed it.

Pakistan cannot afford to treat destiny as a shield against responsibility. The Qur&#39;anic vision of humans as khalifa - stewards of the earth - places upon us a duty of care. This stewardship means planting trees instead of cutting them, enforcing safety standards instead of ignoring them, building resilient infrastructure instead of cheap structures, and investing in disaster preparedness rather than leaving everything to chance.

Disasters will always come. Climate change will make them more frequent, urbanisation will make them more complex, and global politics will make them more unpredictable. But whether they destroy us or strengthen us will depend less on destiny and more on the choices we make.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Gaza war - winning and losing</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2572800/gaza-war-winning-and-losing</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2572800/gaza-war-winning-and-losing#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 25 19:25:22 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Aneela Shahzad]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2572800</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The truth behind global politics is often obscured by power plays and egos, leaving the innocent to suffer]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The upright never defeat evil, but they pretty much expose it. But evil, when exposed, even when drenched in ignominy, raises itself from its lewd bottomness, with the power of its dishonesty and deviousness, to heights of vainglory and fanfare - so that the distance between brazen tyranny and honourable virtue is so great that it is virtually unbridgeable.

This is not new; it is a repeated history. Over 3,000 years back, when Moses brought God&#39;s message, asking the Pharaoh to stop tyranny upon his people and give them their freedom; and proved his truth with the miracle of the staff - what did Pharaoh and his chieftains do with all the miracles? Even when their consciences were telling them that Moses had brought the truth, their self-interests, their gluttony and their rapacity forced them to turn over their inners voices and unite upon the evil that ensures them their worldly luxuries.

&#39;So, they disputed, one with another, over their affair, but they kept secret their whispers. They said: These two are magicians: their object is to drive you out from your land with their magic, and to do away with your most exemplary ways. So, put together your plan, and then assemble in ranks: He wins today who gains the upper hand,&#39; (TaHa;62-64).

Three lines from the Quran give a complete anatomy of the psychology in play. If you are for the overkill, the lavish overabundance, the excess powers, you suppress your morality. You malign the righteous as criminals, terrorist and &#39;magicians&#39;. And you unite with all the powerful, resourceful elites, ensure one another of the exemplary &#39;way of life&#39; and regimes you have, and put your plans together. And then you tell each other that you just need to win the moment - meaning that if you are able to show the people that your sorcerers are abler than the two brothers, the people will willfully accept your power.

Now, 3,000 years later, imagine Pharaoh&#39;s court and his chieftains, and imagine Sharm as Sheikh! And just imagine for yourself, who is the Pharaoh, who are the chieftains, who are the ones who aggrandise their tyranny as true power, and who are the sorcerers that make the people of the world believe that peace has been brought to war-torn Gaza!

Humanity looks with bewildered eyes - on Monday there was a ceasefire. On Tuesday, Israel shot down five more Gazans. On Monday, UN Undersecretary General for Humanitarian Affairs Tom Fletcher was excited about the humanitarian scale-up; on Tuesday, he said the organisation faced &quot;further setbacks to the implementation&quot;. On Monday, President Trump was hailed for the Gaza Plan; on Tuesday, he was threatening to disarm Hamas &quot;violently&quot;. And on Wednesday, Centcom chief Brad Cooper was calling upon Hamas to &quot;immediately suspend violence and shooting at innocent Palestinian civilians in Gaza&quot;, both in Hamas-controlled areas and behind the so-called yellow line where Israeli troops are stationed. What was the peace deal then, if there was any?

The truth is that humanity was not told anything about the deal or what had been agreed to. On the face of it, it seems that Hamas was forced to hand over its only leverage, the hostages, in return for empty promises that most of us don&#39;t believe in. Was it a deal for letting Netanyahu go scot-free from all his court cases then, and let the Israelis pretend they have won? Was it just a prop-up to satisfy Trump&#39;s ego after he lost the Nobel peace prize? Was it a move to put a quiet on the Gaza front so that a full attack on Iran could be prepared for? Or was it just a commonplace sorcery, to stupefy humanity, while the genocide goes on in full? Or, was it a game of the survival for leaders, who want legitimacy in the eyes of their people, and who don&#39;t actually want an end to wars because they thrive on conflict and enmity.

Offensive realist Mearsheimer describes an anarchic world where every state is for its own and where states transfer the responsibility to act to other states while remaining on the sidelines - it&#39;s called buck-passing. So do we see the Muslim states passing the buck over to the Arabs? And the Arabs conveniently passing the buck onto Trump, who has no concern with the lives or welfare of the Palestinians, and who is best buddies with Netanyahu? So how does all this work? Are the states of the Ummah just thinking to keep passing the buck so that they can have peace in their states and have their multi-billion projects and their luxuries, while Gaza and the West Bank burn and bleed? How long will this work?

By the way, are the &#39;innocent Palestinian civilians in Gaza&#39; that Brad Cooper mentioned Hamas was killing, not the IDF collaborators that they have prepared to wreak havoc in Gaza when they are gone? Are they not the same gangsters who have been looting the humanitarian aid at IDF&#39;s behest? If the Centcom chief wants to protect them, imagine what the calculus of peace drawn in his mind would be!

All this when the IDF forces still remain in two-thirds of Gaza; when humanitarian convoys are still not passing the check-posts; when Israeli leadership is repeating to this day that it won&#39;t have a Palestinian state; and that it is determined to destroy Hamas; and, in the words of Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Gaza. The truth is that Israel sees every war as an opportunity for expulsion of Palestinians, just like in 1948 and 1967.

And the truth is that the US will never cut Israel&#39;s aid; Israel will blame Hamas for something, backfoot on the ceasefire, and the genocide will go on. Because, Israeli perspective is not peace and political stability in the region, its perspective is Zionistic, it is maximising Jewish control, minimising Palestinian presence.

So, the question every member of human society must ask is: is this the way global politics is being run - of satisfying egos of biggity men; of putting trade over human lives; of letting the killing of 70,000 people just for the imperialist dream of an ally? Is this the exemplary &#39;way of life&#39; the leaders of our times propound? And are our votes in the ballot box stamping upon their powers?

Surely then, with our votes, genocide has won and humanity has lost.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>American strategic deception</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2518072/american-strategic-deception</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2518072/american-strategic-deception#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 24 20:24:21 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Zamir Akram]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2518072</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The US also maintains massive nuclear deterrence capability in comparison with which Pakistan's assets are miniscule.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Speaking at an American think-tank on 19 December, Jon Finer, the Deputy National Security Advisor in the Biden Administration, claimed that Pakistan&#39;s development of long-range missiles &quot;will have the capability to strike targets well beyond South Asia, including the United States&quot;. He added that it was &quot;hard for us to see Pakistan&#39;s actions as anything other than an emerging threat to the United States&quot;.

This sweeping and speculative assertion coming only two days after the US imposed sanction on Pakistani entities allegedly involved in missile development could hardly be a coincidence.

This is obviously part of a well-orchestrated charade intended to deny Pakistan the capability to ensure credible deterrence against India&#39;s rapid development of its strategic arsenal including long range air, land and sea based missiles to be deployed on offshore Indian assets and nuclear powered submarines.

This blatantly discriminatory American policy behind the smoke-screen that Pakistan seeks to threaten the US itself is patently ludicrous and disingenuous. Even objective Americans would find this hard to digest. Indeed, this is strategic deception at its worst.

The US is well aware that ever since Pakistan&#39;s nuclear tests in response to India&#39;s in 1998, its strategic doctrine is focused on ensuring credible deterrence exclusively against India.

Accordingly, Pakistan&#39;s strategic capabilities are not directed against any other country except India, least of all the US. Besides, there is no rationale for Pakistan to threaten the US with which it has no dispute and where millions of Pakistanis reside.

The US also maintains a massive nuclear deterrence capability in comparison with which Pakistan&#39;s assets are miniscule. For Pakistan to attack the US would, therefore, be suicidal.

In open forum discussions on this issue over the recent past with American officials and experts, Pakistani interlocutor, myself involved, have sought clarity and rational arguments that would explain American concern. But none have been offered.

There have been vague and weak arguments that since Pakistan is China&#39;s ally, its strategic capabilities are a part of the threat from China. This begs the question as to why Pakistan, even as a Chinese ally, would jeopardise its own existence by attacking the US?

The truth is that these American allegations are a ploy and an obvious deception. The objective is to protect India&#39;s strategic interests against China. To achieve this, the US wants India to focus on China and not be distracted by competition from Pakistan.

But from Pakistan&#39;s perspective, Indian capabilities ostensibly against China can also be used against Pakistan. In fact, after the thrashing India received from China in 1962, it has no inclination whatsoever to engage in a conflict with the Chinese. But New Delhi will continue to exploit the threat from China to benefit from American hand-outs as Washington&#39;s &#39;Net Security Provider&#39;.

However, for Pakistan, the Indian military build-up presents an existential threat. India has used the American supported nuclear waiver to increase its nuclear arsenal. It has developed short, medium and long range air, land and sea based missiles. It has acquired nuclear powered and nuclear armed submarines. In 2019, India tested an anti-satellite missile (ASAT) and has developed a multi-layered Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) System, involving American Patriot, Israeli Arrow and Russian S-400 missiles.

India is also developing hypersonic missiles while inducting new and emerging technologies into its weapon systems with American assistance. At the same time, Indian strategic bases are being set up in the Indian Ocean, most notably in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and possibly in the Indian Ocean. Additionally, as a part of the US-backed Quadrilateral alliance in the Asia-Pacific, India may obtain basing facilities in the territories of its alliance parties - the US, Japan and Australia.

For Pakistan these developments present existing and potential challenges in the future for which it must be prepared to ensure credible deterrence. Pakistan has already ensured, through its full spectrum deterrence policy, deterrence at the operational, tactical and strategic levels.

It maintains credible second strike capability adequate for its needs. Its land, air and sea based Babur cruise missiles and the MIRVed Ababheel missiles provide capability to penetrate Indian BMD systems. The Shaheen 2 and 3 long range missiles cover the Indian mainland and offshore assets.

However, since deterrence is dynamic depending on changes in technologies and policies, Pakistan cannot afford to foreclose its future options. For instance, development of Indian bases with nuclear armed missiles deep in the Indian Ocean would require Pakistan to develop longer range missiles.

Similarly, Pakistan&#39;s space assets including satellites which are becoming increasingly vital for civilian and military purposes, may come to be threatened by ASATs which India has already tested.

Therefore, for effective deterrence to protect its satellites in future, Pakistan would need an ASAT capability for which long range missiles are essential. Also, to benefit from future space operations, Pakistan would need the capability to launch satellites which require developing a Space Launch Vehicle (SLV) capability. For all these reasons, Pakistan has a legitimate right to develop its long range missile/rocket programme.

If the US has legitimate concerns about Pakistan&#39;s missile development programme, even as the assertion that Pakistan would threaten the US is nonsensical, a reasonable arrangement based mutual non-attack assurances can provide a logical solution. But, since the US does not seek this option, the conclusion is inescapable that America&#39;s true motives are different and the allegations made by the likes of Jon Finer are nothing but an elaborate deception.

America&#39;s true intentions are betrayed by its discriminatory sanctions imposed on Pakistani entities as was done again a few days ago. There are more than 160 such entities that have been sanctioned since 1998 while none in India.

If Washington was truly interested in South Asian security and protecting its own national interests, it should pursue a non-discriminatory and balanced policy towards Pakistan and India. Instead, India has been given a free pass to build up its strategic capabilities while restraint is only being sought from Pakistan. History has demonstrated that discrimination has never succeeded with Pakistan.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Time to heal the wounds with Dhaka, and beyond</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2518067/time-to-heal-the-wounds-with-dhaka-and-beyond</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2518067/time-to-heal-the-wounds-with-dhaka-and-beyond#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 24 20:24:21 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Ishtiaq Ali Mehkri]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2518067</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Five decades down the line as Bangladesh and Pakistan look back at the trauma, it pains.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The month of December reminds me of Fall of Dhaka in 1971, and the iconic poetry of Naseer Turabi, who in an instant heart-wrenching aura penned a poem reflecting the remorse of dismemberment of East Pakistan in all humility. To this day, the ghazal (ode) he wrote reverberates as a grim reminder of our fallacies in the national milieu, and the trust that the poet had in the truncated section of our erstwhile nationhood.

The legendary poet was felicitous as he wrote: &quot;Woh humsafar thaa magar us sey humnawai na thiKay dhoop chaaon ka aalam raha, judaai na thi&quot; (He was my companion, but with him I didn&#39;t have like-mindedness; Like the clouds and sunlight, together but as apart as can be).

Turabi went on to state the obvious with a big heart: &quot;Adaavatein theen, taghaaful thaa, ranjishein theen magar; Bicharne walay mein sab kuch thaa, be-wafaai na thi&quot; (There were feelings of animosity, indifference and anguish (between us) but; my departed lover had everything (but) hadn&#39;t had unfaithfulness).

Five decades down the line as Bangladesh and Pakistan look back at the trauma, it pains and has nothing to account for but regrets. It is, however, some great consolation that Dhaka is willing to bury the hatchet, and wants to normalise relations with Islamabad. The desire on the part of Dr Muhammad Yunus, the interim leader, to &quot;move on from 1971&quot; is statesmanship.

The new thinking, perhaps, hints at the Bengali nation having come a long way from the Bangabandhu psyche to a progressive, all-inclusive emerging society. The end of Shaikh Hasina&#39;s regime has also impacted in helping Dhaka realise that in an era of geo-economics, carrying the baggage of animosity is an undesired liability.

The plausible interactions are many. The first that needs to be done is to reorient the academia and intelligentsia, and let them brief and debrief over the checkered history in all openness. Trade, commerce and communication avenues are aplenty for a joint populace of around half a billion, with a collective GDP of more than $750 billion.

Apart from buoying trade, both the countries must work together for reviving the moribund eight-nation SAARC, which was conceptualised by Dhaka as a viable organic regional organisation in 1985. Bangladesh can prevail over India to give in its resistance to the regional bloc and help rewrite a new chapter of homogeneity on the pattern of ASEAN. As India sits fingers-crossed with the fall of its ally-dispensation in Dhaka, there can be a quid pro quo for regional amalgamation making it a win-win situation in bilateralism.

The opening up of our quondam eastern flank can unfurl lessons in pluralism, institutional building and respect for political mandate that Bengalis had cherished. Pakistan, unfortunately groped in parochialism these days, can learn a lot and work inwardly for strengthening national unity. With origins of our freedom movement and its founding fathers from Bengal, there is a lot of intellectualism that needs to be revisited, and made part of our national life.

To pick a thread from Faiz Ahmed Faiz, &quot;Kab nazar mein aaye gi be-daagh sabzay ki bahaar; Khoon ke dhabbay dhuleinge kitni barsaaton ke baad...&quot; (When will we see the unsullied green of spring? After how many monsoons will the stains of blood be washed?), it&#39;s time to take a leap forward and connect the dots with Dhaka. An apology from Pakistan - which has expressed regrets over the debacle though - is direly needed for a fresh start.

This also comes as an opportunity to touch-base on the Bihari legion and make an earnest effort to embrace them and heal the wounds of history. Indeed, this reconnecting desires some soul-searching as more than 300,000 Biharis are stranded in Bangladesh - poor souls who stood for Pakistan and paid a price in blood and misery.

If Dhaka can embrace Rohingya Muslims, what prevents Islamabad from bringing back Biharis and undoing their statelessness? Looking beyond the bitterness of 1971 demands an open head and heart, and a comprehensive leap forward is indispensable.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item>	</channel>
                </rss>
