Over 80 US aircrafts destroyed or damaged

According to Saudi Gazette, the US military has had at least 81 aircraft destroyed or damaged during military operations against Iran. The figures comprise of operational incidents recorded since February 28, 2026 across Pentagon records, US Central Command (CENTCOM) statements, military inspector general findings, and press accounts.

The number includes both airplanes and helicopters as well as drones, with the MQ-9 Reaper drone – used for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, close air support and combat search and rescue – accounting for more than half of the losses.

Also on the list are some of the Pentagon’s most-prized assets, including an F-35A fighter jet and an E-3 Sentry, the four-engine jet with a large radar dome atop the fuselage used for target tracking and airspace management.

The total cost of the aircraft lost is between US$1.9 billion and US$3.3 billion, depending on the Defense Department’s plans for replacements, the report said, citing figures from the Congressional Budget Office.

The total cost of the war is much higher – at least US$45 billion. That figure doesn’t include damage to infrastructure at US bases in the region, including those where some of the aircraft losses happened.

Some of the aircraft included in the count may have been returned to service, including eight F-15 Strike Eagle fighter jets that sustained light damage in an Iranian strike on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, Jordan, in September.

The report is based on numbers contained in statements from the Defense Department; its inspector general; US Central Command, which has been conducting the operations against Iran; and news reports reviewed by the CRS.

The report poses several questions for congressional consideration, including whether lawmakers are getting enough information from the Pentagon on the losses to determine effects and remedies.

Defense Department reporting on Iran war losses has, to date, been vague. Even the Pentagon inspector general’s report on the losses, released in September and covering action from February 28 to June 30, cites previous CRS reports for some of its aircraft loss numbers.

Other issues Congress needs to think about are whether to provide funding for repairs or replacements; whether there is enough industrial capacity to satisfy those requirements; and the effects on US military sales to foreign partners.

It also raises questions about how the Iran war has affected US posture outside the Middle East.

“Congress may assess whether losses in certain high-demand platforms that are aging and limited in number, such as the E-3 Sentry, create capability gaps or increase risk in other theaters,” the report says.

Analysts have said actions in the Middle East, including the Iran war and earlier confrontations with the Houthi rebels in Yemen, an Iranian proxy group, have taken an especially heavy toll on the MQ-9 drones, which Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach told Congress earlier this year was the military’s “most valuable player” in the war with Iran.

Forty-five have been lost in the Middle East this year, “an alarming rate,” according to a September report from the Atlantic Council.

The Air Force has lost about 35% of its MQ-9s since 2004, it says.

 

Has the World Forgotten the Gazans?

October 7 has become a date the world remembers for different reasons. Three years ago, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups attacked Israel, killing more than 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages. The attack was horrific, and nothing can justify the deliberate killing or abduction of civilians. But October 7 also marked the beginning of a catastrophe whose human consequences in Gaza continue to unfold.

Nearly three years of Israeli bombardment and ground operations have killed more than 74,000 Gazans, according to figures reported by Gaza authorities. Much of Gaza has been reduced to rubble. Hundreds of thousands of homes have been destroyed or damaged, hospitals and schools have been devastated, and essential water, sanitation and electricity infrastructure has been severely compromised.

Yet statistics cannot capture what life means for a population that has lost homes, livelihoods, schools, hospitals and basic services. Gazans have been displaced repeatedly and continue to live in extremely difficult conditions. Even after a ceasefire agreement, violence and humanitarian challenges persist.

Then came another geopolitical shock. Since February 28, 2026, the US-Israel war with Iran has consumed international attention. Gaza, already pushed to the margins, has slipped even further down the world's agenda. This raises an uncomfortable question: Has the world become accustomed to Gazans' suffering?

The most disturbing possibility is that Gaza's destruction will eventually be viewed not as a humanitarian catastrophe requiring justice, but as a redevelopment opportunity requiring investment. With billions of dollars needed for reconstruction, the temptation to see Gaza primarily through the lens of real estate, tourism and strategic interests could become enormous.

History may therefore record these three years in one devastating sentence: The world watched Gaza being destroyed, then waited for the rubble to clear so that the real-estate bonanza could begin.

But Gaza is not an empty piece of land awaiting developers. It is home to Gazans who have survived war, displacement and unimaginable loss. Reconstruction must restore not merely buildings, but dignity, ownership, livelihoods and the right of Gazans to determine their own future.

The world still has a choice: remember Gaza as a human tragedy—or allow the suffering of Gazans to become someone else's opportunity.

Brewing Turmoil in India

The brewing turmoil should be treated as a warning—not dismissed as merely another season of protests.

India's impressive economic numbers increasingly appear to be masking a more uncomfortable reality. Beneath the narrative of rapid growth and rising global influence, public frustration is building over unemployment, stagnant real wages, inflation, women's safety and growing doubts about the integrity of democratic institutions.

The latest wave of protests reflects this widening disconnect between India's economic performance on paper and the everyday experiences of many citizens, particularly the young. Although, India remains one of the world's fastest-growing major economies, employment opportunities and real wage growth have not kept pace with expectations. Rising consumer prices have further eroded purchasing power, encouraging an increasing number of young Indians to seek opportunities abroad, including in the European Union.

Monetary policy is also reflecting these pressures. The Reserve Bank of India has raised its key interest rate by 25 basis points to 5.50% in an effort to contain inflation and bring it closer to the central bank's 4% target. Higher interest rates, however, can also constrain investment and consumption, complicating the government's challenge of creating sufficient employment for a rapidly expanding workforce.

Political tensions are adding another layer of uncertainty. Youth-led protests that initially focused on alleged examination leaks have now expanded to accusations of electoral manipulation. The Election Commission's revision of voter rolls—officially intended to eliminate duplicate, deceased and ineligible voters—has become politically contentious, with opposition groups alleging that the process could benefit the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Questions about institutional independence are particularly sensitive in the world's largest democracy. Reports that election commissioners themselves have objected to certain decisions, coupled with the Supreme Court seeking explanations from the BJP and Election Commission over voter-roll changes, have intensified public scrutiny.

Meanwhile, protests in New Delhi following the alleged rape of a young woman have highlighted another deeply troubling issue: women's safety. Public anger becomes particularly potent when citizens believe government officials are dismissive of their concerns.

India's challenge is no longer simply to sustain high economic growth. It must ensure that growth translates into jobs, purchasing power, institutional credibility and personal security. Economic statistics can impress investors, but social stability ultimately depends on whether ordinary citizens believe that the system works for them.

Oil Supply and Price: What Is the Reality?

For decades, we have been taught a simple economic principle: prices are determined by demand and supply. But crude oil tells a different story. Demand and supply matter, yet they do not, by themselves, determine the price consumers ultimately pay.

I was confronted with this question in 2005 when an anchor of a leading business channel asked me live, what drives crude oil prices? My instant response was, “Crude oil prices are not driven by demand and supply alone; there are other factors which analysts either do not discuss or do not know.” After the program, the anchor remarked, “Kazmi Sahib, your white hairs do not mean people will accept your absurdity.”

Two decades later, the question deserves to be revisited.

Today, Middle Eastern crude exports have recovered to, and on some days exceeded, pre-war levels despite continuing disruption around the Strait of Hormuz. Yet Brent remains above US$100 a barrel. At the same time, Saudi Aramco has cut November crude prices for Asian buyers to a six-year low, while G7 countries have agreed to release 100 million barrels of crude and diesel from emergency reserves.

If supply alone determines price, such developments should have produced a much sharper decline.

The missing piece is the financial market. Crude is priced through highly sophisticated benchmark and futures markets in which fund managers, commodity traders, banks, physical traders and financial institutions constantly buy and sell expectations about future supply, demand and geopolitical risk. Brent futures are cash-settled, meaning positions can be closed financially without physical delivery. Yet those financial markets remain closely connected to physical benchmark pricing.

This creates a powerful feedback loop. Financial-market movements are reported almost hourly by major media houses. Headlines influence expectations; expectations influence trading; trading influences benchmarks; and benchmarks influence the prices paid for physical crude.

The result is that oil producers do not necessarily determine the price of their own product. Saudi Arabia, Russia, the United States and other producers can influence supply, but the marginal price is increasingly shaped by a financial ecosystem of traders, fund managers, benchmark mechanisms and information flows.

That is why the real beneficiaries of oil-price volatility may not always be producers. They can be the financial intermediaries and speculators positioned to profit from every rise and fall.

Perhaps it is time to ask a more fundamental question, who really sets the price of crude oil—the producers who pump it, or the financial markets that trade expectations about it?

Is Gold Losing Its Glitter?

For centuries, gold has been regarded as a store of value, a hedge against inflation and a refuge in times of uncertainty. Yet 2026 has challenged this conventional wisdom. Gold crossed US$5,000 per ounce in January 2026 before retreating sharply. The decline raises an intriguing question, is gold losing some of its traditional glitter?

Several factors may explain this reversal.

First, central banks were major buyers of gold during the global drive to diversify reserves and reduce dependence on the US dollar. Any slowdown in this accumulation could weaken an important source of demand. However, it would be premature to conclude that central banks have stopped accumulating gold.

Second, higher oil prices increase the dollar requirements of oil-importing countries. Governments also need foreign exchange to build strategic reserves and meet external obligations. In such circumstances, liquid dollar reserves may take precedence over additional gold purchases.

Third, geopolitical uncertainty can have an unexpected impact. Gold is traditionally considered a safe haven, but crises also create an urgent need for immediately deployable liquidity. The US dollar, backed by deep and liquid financial markets, can therefore compete directly with gold for safe-haven demand.

Fourth, persistent inflation creates a paradox. Although inflation can support gold as a hedge, rising food, energy and housing costs erode household purchasing power. Families facing higher living expenses may simply have less surplus cash to invest in gold.

Fifth, the increasing availability of bank financing against jewellery may change household behaviour. Instead of selling gold to meet urgent cash requirements, owners can pledge jewellery as collateral while retaining the underlying asset.

Finally, buoyant equity markets can divert investment flows. When stocks and other risk assets promise attractive returns, investors may prefer them to non-yielding gold and gold-backed funds.

None of these factors alone explains the decline. Together, however, they suggest that the investment environment surrounding gold may be changing.

Perhaps gold has not lost its glitter. Perhaps, for the moment, liquidity has become as valuable as a safe haven. The real question is whether this is merely a correction after an extraordinary rally—or the beginning of a structural change in the way investors value gold.

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia: From Brotherhood to a Strategic Partnership

Saudi Arabia’s National Day is an appropriate occasion to reflect on a relationship that has evolved from traditional bonds of faith and friendship into a broader strategic partnership. Pakistan and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have maintained close relations for decades, supported by deep people-to-people contacts, economic cooperation and shared security interests. Today, energy, investment and regional diplomacy are adding new dimensions to this enduring relationship.

Saudi Arabia has consistently stood by Pakistan during periods of economic difficulty. In April 2026, Riyadh agreed to provide an additional US$3 billion deposit to Pakistan while extending its existing US$5 billion deposit for a longer period rather than continuing the earlier annual rollover arrangement. The support is important for Pakistan’s foreign-exchange reserves and external financing requirements.

Oil financing has also remained an important element of bilateral economic cooperation. In February 2025, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signed a US$1.2 billion oil-import financing facility under which payment for petroleum imports could be deferred for one year. The arrangement helped Pakistan secure energy supplies while easing immediate pressure on its foreign-exchange position.

Such support is valuable, but the relationship is increasingly moving towards investment and productive cooperation. This transition is particularly visible in the energy sector.

Pakistan is working with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar on a bonded oil-storage scheme under which the Gulf countries would store crude oil and petroleum products in secure facilities in Pakistan at their own cost, with the stocks also potentially serving international markets. The initiative could strengthen Pakistan’s energy security while creating a new commercial and logistical role for the country.

For Pakistan, this opportunity is strategically important. The country remains heavily dependent on imported energy and has historically lacked adequate strategic petroleum reserves. Developing storage capacity for crude and finished products can provide greater protection against international supply disruptions while improving the efficiency of the domestic energy supply chain.

The proposed greenfield refinery represents an even more ambitious opportunity. The project envisages an integrated refinery and petrochemical complex with a minimum crude-processing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day, supported by marine infrastructure, storage, pipelines and related facilities. Saudi Aramco has been associated with the project alongside Pakistani state-owned energy companies.

If implemented successfully, such projects could change the character of Pakistan-Saudi economic relations. Instead of relying primarily on deposits, concessional financing and deferred payments, the two countries can increasingly build a partnership around investment, energy security, industrial production, logistics and trade.

There is another area where Pakistan can make a meaningful contribution - relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Pakistan has a unique diplomatic position. It has strategic relations with Saudi Arabia while sharing a border, history and longstanding diplomatic relations with Iran. Islamabad therefore has a natural interest in encouraging communication between Riyadh and Tehran rather than allowing regional rivalries to deepen.

Saudi Arabia and Iran themselves demonstrated in 2023 that dialogue is possible. With China’s facilitation, the two countries agreed to restore diplomatic relations and emphasized respect for sovereignty, non-interference and the peaceful resolution of differences.

Pakistan’s role has become more relevant amid the regional turbulence of 2026. Saudi Arabia publicly welcomed Pakistani mediation efforts in June, while Pakistan has continued to emphasize dialogue and diplomacy. In September, Pakistan’s Foreign Office stated that Islamabad maintains good relations with both Saudi Arabia and Iran and would continue its mediatory role.

Pakistan should build on this position carefully. Its objective should not be to replace established mediators or take responsibility for resolving every regional dispute. Rather, Islamabad can provide a trusted channel for communication, encourage confidence-building measures and facilitate dialogue whenever both sides consider such assistance useful.

Improved Saudi-Iran relations would also serve Pakistan’s interests. Greater stability in the Gulf would reduce risks to energy supplies, maritime trade and regional investment while creating a more favourable environment for economic cooperation.

On Saudi Arabia’s National Day, Pakistan can therefore celebrate more than a historic friendship. The relationship is entering a phase in which financial support remains important, but investment, energy security, industrial cooperation and regional diplomacy can provide its stronger foundations.

For Pakistan, the strategic objective should be to preserve the warmth and trust of its relationship with Saudi Arabia while converting that goodwill into long-term economic cooperation and using its unique position to promote greater regional stability.

Flydubai FZ1073: What Are We Not Being Told?

The more details emerging about flydubai Flight FZ1073, the more questions arise. The UAE prosecutor general has now described the incident as an attempted terrorist attack, saying the co-pilot attacked the captain with a crash axe and attempted to take control of the aircraft. Yet the motive and the full circumstances remain under investigation. I believe investigators must look beyond the immediately available narrative.

Was FZ1073 really an ordinary commercial flight, or was there something unusual about its passengers, identities or cargo?

The first question concerns identities. Were all passengers and crew travelling under their genuine identities? Were passports, immigration records, airline databases and security clearances independently cross-checked? Did any passenger or crew member have a travel history or identity requiring closer scrutiny?

The second question concerns cargo. Was every item loaded on the aircraft properly declared and recorded? Did the physical cargo correspond exactly with the manifest? Were any packages loaded, transferred or handled outside normal procedures?

Then comes the cockpit mystery. Was the co-pilot genuinely the aggressor, as now officially stated, or could the sequence of events have been more complicated? Investigators should reconstruct the confrontation through cockpit voice recordings, flight-data records, access logs, communications, forensic evidence and eyewitness accounts.

The presence of additional pilots aboard the aircraft also deserves careful examination. Their role in bringing the aircraft safely to Tabuk is established, but investigators should establish precisely when and how they became involved.

Most importantly, why have so many conflicting details appeared in the media? Fake videos and contradictory claims have already circulated, prompting fact-checkers to warn about misinformation surrounding the incident.

This is not an attempt to convict anyone through speculation. It is a demand for evidence.

If FZ1073 was simply the victim of a lone insider attack, a transparent investigation should establish that beyond doubt.

But if identities were concealed, cargo was undeclared, or the cockpit incident was merely one part of a larger plan, investigators must uncover it.

The real story will emerge only when every passenger, every piece of cargo and every minute of the flight is accounted for.