Western Media’s Selective Outrage on Iran

Protests are a natural and fundamental part of any society whose citizens care about their future and believe they can influence it. They are not a sign of systemic failure, but an indicator of civic health and the practice of free speech, assembly, and association. For Western states, their media, and their politicians, all of this holds true—except when the protests occur in Iran.

The unprecedented volatility in the currency market and the rapid devaluation of the Iranian Rial in recent weeks compelled business owners (known as bazaaris) to shutter their shops, go on strike, and gather in several of Tehran’s central squares to voice their discontent. Reports from journalists on the scene and footage shared by participants indicate the protests—spanning several days—remained largely peaceful.

Demonstrators refrained from vandalizing public property, kept pathways open for vehicles, and directed their slogans toward improved economic management. Anti-riot forces monitored the gatherings and seldom intervened. None of what has emerged from Iran would be unfamiliar in the regular protests seen across European capitals or American cities.

Yet this manner of protest does not sit well with the West or with Israel. Circulated videos show unidentified individuals urging bazaaris to vandalize property and block streets. In one instance, a young woman addressing a crowd fled after protesters refused to escalate into violence. In another, a man attempted to set a municipal trash bin ablaze before bystanders intervened and security forces arrested him. None of the bazaaris recognized him afterward.

Simultaneously, an online influence campaign has emerged, editing videos and fabricating audio to falsely suggest protesters are demanding the return of the deposed Shah’s son. A widely circulated image symbolizing the protests was later exposed as AI-generated.

Israel has openly admitted deploying agents to steer these peaceful demonstrations toward chaos. Mossad’s Persian-language account urged Iranians to “hit the streets,” while an Israeli television reporter openly called for organizing protests to justify a wider war. Iran International echoed similar narratives, promoting escalation as a pathway to foreign military action.

Political figures joined in. Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett declared his readiness to help Iranians achieve “freedom,” while US President Donald Trump warned Iran of further “turmoil,” without acknowledging that Iran’s economic distress stems largely from the “maximum pressure” sanctions he imposed in 2018.

Iranian authorities acknowledged the protests and announced steps to stabilize the Rial. President Masoud Pezeshkian and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf both described the demonstrations as legitimate while cautioning against foreign exploitation.

Ultimately, these events reveal a clear double standard - peaceful assembly is praised in one context yet exploited when it occurs in a country opposed by Western and Israeli interests. The true measure of these protests lies not in sensationalized narratives from abroad, but in the legitimate and orderly spirit shown by the Iranian people themselves.

PSX Benchmark Index up 51 percent in 2025

According to Pakistan’s leading brokerage house, Topline Securities, Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) during 2025 posted return of 51%, taking 2 years cumulative returns to 179%. In US$ terms, market posted return of 50% (2 year returns 180%). The stated return is inclusive of dividends received during this period.

The larger portion of the price return (40%) came through re-rating of index, with PE rising from 4.1x in December 2024 to 7.1x in December 2025. The dividend yield during the year was 8%.

The continuation of positive momentum was driven by stable and improving economy, political stability, lower interest rates and stable PKR also helped.

Major triggers during the year which helped index in re-rating included: 1) Successful IMF review throughout the year, 2) Credit rating upgrade by all 3 top global rating agencies S&Ps, Moody’s and Fitch, 3) decline in interest rate by 250 bps, 4) stable/ improved macro indicators, 5) Saudi Arabia- Pakistan Defence Pact, and 6) PIA privatization.

During the year, market also witnessed few volatile event s namely Pakistan India Conflict of May 2025, which resulted in market losing 5.6% in 3 sessions, recovered all losses in a single day after successful mediation by US president Donald Trump. Other events which caused volatility in market were, Iran Israel war, and imposition of tariffs by United States on global economies including Pakistan.

PSX market capitalisation also increased by 36% in 2025 to US$70 billion but still below its 2017 peak of US$100 billion.

Trading activity recorded strong growth in both volume and value, with volumes (ready/ cash) per day at PSX up 40% to 797 million shares/ day in 2025 which is all time high. Similarly, average traded value per day was up 64% to PKR37 billion/ day in cash market which is also all time high. In futures market, total traded volume and value per day were also up by 35% and 76% to 249 million share/ day and PKR14 billion/ day, respectively.

As per Bloomberg data, Pakistan’s KSE-100 Index was among the fifth best-performing markets in Asia/ Pacific region in US dollar terms in 2025.

The KSE Index remained the second-best performing major asset class in 2025, while gold was the top performer with a return of 73%, based on selected investment assets class in Pakistan.

PSX witnessed same momentum in offerings in 2025, with the bourse witnessing 7 offerings (including 2 GEM Board offerings and 1 Migration). However, total amount raised from investors through the 7 offerings in 2025 stood at PKR4.3 billion as against PKR8.4 billion in 2024.

Economic Assassination: US Pressure Crippling Venezuelan Economy

Donald Trump’s revived “maximum pressure” strategy on Venezuela is no longer an abstract policy tool; it is inflicting visible damage on the country’s economic core. The clearest impact is unfolding in the oil sector, where state-run PDVSA has begun shutting down wells in the Orinoco Belt as inventories swell and tanker seizures disrupt exports. What began as pressure aimed at political leverage is increasingly resembling economic strangulation.

For much of 2025, Venezuela’s oil output had been staging a cautious recovery. Production averaged around 1.165 million barrels per day in November, a 20%YoY increase that provided a rare fiscal lifeline. That momentum now appears fragile.

According to Bloomberg, PDVSA plans to cut Orinoco Belt output by at least 25%, reducing production to roughly 500,000 barrels per day. Such a reduction could wipe out nearly 15% of Venezuela’s total liquids production, reversing much of the year’s gains and intensifying balance of payments stress in an economy already under strain.

The cuts are being applied selectively, underscoring the depth of operational constraints. Extra-heavy crude from the Junín block is expected to be curtailed first, as these fields depend heavily on imported diluents. Lighter crude fields, requiring fewer blending inputs, are being kept online for as long as possible to preserve limited export capacity.

While diluent flows have not fully stopped, these are increasingly unreliable. Russian suppliers have delivered four tankers of naphtha so far in December, even as seizures of very large crude carriers continue. Yet supply disruptions are no longer the sole bottleneck. Limited storage for upgraded bituminous crude, combined with constrained export routes, is turning unsold oil into stranded inventory. Wells are being shut not for lack of reserves, but for lack of access to markets.

The broader implications are difficult to ignore. Sanctions are no longer merely restricting Venezuela’s ability to sell oil; they are shaping production decisions inside the country. When external pressure determines which wells remain operational, the line between economic coercion and economic punishment becomes increasingly blurred.

Whether this amounts to “economic assassination” is open to debate. What is clear is that the costs extend beyond political elites. With oil revenues underpinning the entire economy, Venezuela’s fragile recovery risks sliding into renewed contraction—raising uncomfortable questions about the humanitarian and strategic price of maximum pressure.

Obituary: Khaleda Zia

Khaleda Zia, Bangladesh’s first woman prime minister and one of the most consequential — and polarizing — figures in the country’s post-independence politics, died on Tuesday after a prolonged illness, she was 80. Her death marks the end of an era dominated for more than three decades by an intense rivalry that shaped Bangladesh’s political culture, institutions and democratic trajectory.

Born Khaleda Khan, she lived a largely private life until tragedy thrust her into public prominence. Described by contemporaries as shy and family-oriented, she devoted herself to raising her two sons until the assassination of her husband, President Ziaur Rahman, in a failed military coup in 1981. Three years later, she assumed leadership of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), founded by her late husband, pledging to fulfil his vision of rescuing Bangladesh from poverty and economic stagnation.

Khaleda Zia rose to national leadership during a historic moment. Alongside Sheikh Hasina, daughter of Bangladesh’s founding leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, she led a popular uprising that toppled military ruler Hossain Mohammad Ershad in 1990. Yet the alliance soon collapsed, giving birth to one of South Asia’s fiercest political rivalries. The two leaders came to be known as the “battling Begums,” their contrasting personalities and uncompromising politics dominating public life for decades.

In 1991, Khaleda Zia won Bangladesh’s first widely regarded free and fair election, becoming the country’s first female prime minister and only the second woman to lead a democratic government in the Muslim world after Pakistan’s Benazir Bhutto. Her government restored the parliamentary system, encouraged foreign investment, and made primary education free and compulsory.

Defeated in 1996, she returned to power with a landslide victory in 2001. However, her second term was overshadowed by the rise of Islamist militancy, allegations of corruption, and political violence, including the deadly 2004 grenade attack on an opposition rally — an episode that would haunt her legacy.

Ousted from power in 2006, Khaleda Zia spent years in jail or under house arrest amid corruption cases she consistently denounced as politically motivated. Her health steadily declined, and she was released on humanitarian grounds before being fully freed in 2024 following the ouster of Sheikh Hasina. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court acquitted her and her family in the long-running corruption cases.

Though long absent from office, Khaleda Zia remained a commanding presence, with the BNP retaining deep popular roots. Her death closes a turbulent chapter in Bangladesh’s history — one defined by resilience, rivalry, and the enduring struggle for democratic stability.

Netanyahu’s Washington Visit: Strategy, Sponsorship, and Shared Responsibility

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the United States is being portrayed as routine strategic coordination. In reality, it reflects a deeper convergence in which Washington is no longer a distant mediator but a principal enabler of Israel’s expanding regional agenda. The visit highlights not only Israeli ambitions, but also America’s sustained military, intelligence, and diplomatic sponsorship.

At the center of discussions lies Iran. Israel’s objective has clearly shifted from containment to systematic degradation of Iran’s strategic capabilities—nuclear latency, missile production, drones, and proxy networks. This transition would be impossible without continued US arms supplies, intelligence sharing, and political cover. While Washington publicly warns against escalation, its steady flow of advanced weaponry and repeated shielding of Israel at international forums effectively signal consent rather than restraint.

Regime change in Iran remains a sensitive phrase in Washington, but prolonged destabilization appears to be the preferred substitute. Cyber operations, economic pressure, and covert actions designed to exploit Iran’s internal vulnerabilities fit comfortably within a grey-zone strategy that allows plausible deniability. Western intelligence agencies may not openly own such operations, but coordination and silence often speak louder than formal declarations.

Saudi normalization remains another Israeli objective, though the Gaza war has made recognition politically costly for Riyadh. Netanyahu’s calculation is that the United States can again absorb the pressure—offering security guarantees and strategic incentives to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. In doing so, Washington risks further eroding its credibility across the Arab and Muslim world by prioritizing geopolitical bargains over public sentiment.

In Syria, Israel already enjoys near-unrestricted freedom of action, facilitated by US political backing and Russia’s strategic distraction. The goal now is to institutionalize strategic denial—preventing Iranian re-entrenchment and treating Syrian sovereignty as expendable in the pursuit of regional dominance.

Lebanon presents a similar pattern. Israel’s posture toward Hezbollah appears to be shifting from deterrence to attrition, with Washington focused on managing escalation rather than preventing it. Proposals to revise UNIFIL’s mandate or force Hezbollah north of the Litani risk dragging Lebanon into another devastating cycle.

Ultimately, Netanyahu’s visit is less about crisis management than about reaffirming a permissive American environment—one that allows Israel to act forcefully while the United States absorbs diplomatic costs. As Washington continues to arm, shield, and enable Israel, it also assumes responsibility for the instability that follows.

Israel to Seek US Help in Another Round of War with Iran

As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu travels to Mar-a-Lago to meet US President Donald Trump, reports suggest the visit is less about diplomacy and more about reigniting confrontation with Iran. Despite growing friction between Netanyahu and Trump’s advisers, the Israeli leader is expected to press Washington to support, or directly participate in, another round of military escalation.

According to NBC News, Netanyahu plans to argue that Iran’s expanding ballistic missile program presents an urgent threat requiring swift action. He is expected to present Trump with options for US involvement in potential military operations. Analysts, however, view this shift in emphasis with skepticism. Sina Toossi of the Center for International Policy notes that Netanyahu’s focus on missiles appears to be an attempt to manufacture a new casus belli after the collapse of the nuclear argument.

This inconsistency has drawn criticism even within Israel. Yair Golan, leader of Israel’s center-left Democrats party, questioned how Netanyahu could declare a “historic victory” last June—claiming Iran’s nuclear threat and missile capabilities had been neutralized—only to return months later seeking US approval to strike Iran again.

Iran will not be the only issue on the agenda. Israeli officials indicate Netanyahu will also push Trump to harden his stance on Gaza, demanding Hamas’s disarmament before any further Israeli troop withdrawals under the second phase of Trump’s peace plan. This comes amid mounting US frustration over Israel’s repeated violations of the October ceasefire.

While Trump has sought to cultivate a peacemaker image, Israel’s actions on the ground have complicated that narrative. Near-daily Israeli strikes have reportedly killed over 400 Palestinians, while a sustained blockade has left hundreds of thousands displaced, exposed to winter conditions, and deprived of adequate food, fuel, and medicine.

Trump’s advisers, according to Axios, increasingly fear Netanyahu is deliberately undermining the peace process to keep the conflict alive. Beyond Gaza, Netanyahu is also expected to seek continued US backing for Israel’s territorial expansion in Syria and renewed latitude to escalate against Hezbollah in Lebanon—both areas where Israeli actions have already strained US policy objectives.

As Toossi argues, Netanyahu’s visit reflects not a strategy to resolve crises but to defer accountability. The meeting’s outcome will test whether Washington continues to underwrite open-ended escalation—or begins to draw clearer limits around Israel’s regional ambitions.

Remembering Dr Shamshad Akhtar

Dr Shamshad Akhtar’s passing marks the end of an era in Pakistan’s economic and financial history. She was not merely a technocrat of rare caliber; she was a steady moral compass in moments when the country’s financial system stood at critical crossroads. Her life was defined by discipline, intellect, and an unwavering commitment to institutional integrity—qualities that are all too scarce in public life.

As Governor of the State Bank of Pakistan, Dr Akhtar played a historic role in strengthening monetary governance and safeguarding macroeconomic stability during a period of global uncertainty and domestic pressures. She believed deeply in rule-based policymaking, central bank independence, and prudent regulation—principles she defended with quiet firmness rather than public theatrics. Under her stewardship, the SBP emerged as a more credible, resilient, and professionally anchored institution.

Her contribution did not end there. As Chairperson of the Pakistan Stock Exchange, she brought the same clarity of purpose and ethical rigor to capital markets. At a time when speculation often overshadowed substance, Dr Akhtar consistently advocated transparency, investor confidence, and long-term market development. She understood that markets thrive not on hype, but on trust—and she worked tirelessly to nurture that trust.

On a personal level, Dr Shamshad Akhtar commanded respect without demanding it. She carried herself with grace, intellectual humility, and an unshakeable sense of responsibility to the public good. She inspired younger professionals—especially women—by demonstrating that excellence, not patronage, is the true currency of leadership. Her presence reassured colleagues that professionalism still had a place in Pakistan’s policy circles.

Dr Akhtar’s legacy will endure in the institutions she strengthened and the standards she set. In a system often vulnerable to expediency, she stood for consistency. In an environment prone to excess, she represented restraint. Pakistan has lost not just a former central bank governor or market regulator, but a guardian of financial discipline.

May her soul rest in peace. Her contributions will be remembered long after the noise of the moment fades, etched quietly but firmly into the country’s economic history.

 

 

Remembering Benazir Bhutto: A Trailblazer of Pakistani Politics

Benazir Bhutto made history as the first woman to lead a Muslim-majority country, breaking barriers in a world where political leadership was overwhelmingly male-dominated. Her election as Prime Minister of Pakistan was not just a personal triumph but a beacon of possibility for women across the Muslim world. With extraordinary vision, intellect, and charisma, she inspired millions to believe that courage and determination could overcome entrenched societal and political limitations. She was a leader who combined elegance with tenacity, compassion with political acumen, and ambition with a commitment to justice and democracy.

On December 27, 2007, the world lost this remarkable figure when she was assassinated, sending shockwaves across Pakistan and the international community. Her death marked a tragic end to a life devoted to political reform, social justice, and the fight for democracy.

Born into Pakistan’s political elite, Benazir inherited a legacy of leadership and activism from her father, former Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. She emerged as a formidable force in Pakistani politics in the 1970s and 1980s, defying patriarchal norms and military authoritarianism. Twice elected Prime Minister, in 1988 and 1993, she pursued ambitious reforms aimed at modernizing Pakistan, empowering women, and advancing social development. Her tenure, however, was fraught with challenges, including political opposition, allegations of corruption, and a volatile geopolitical environment that tested her resilience.

Bhutto’s assassination, in a country already reeling from political unrest, triggered widespread chaos and violence. Hundreds lost their lives in the aftermath, with reports of atrocities compounding the national tragedy. Despite her party’s participation in government and her husband Asif Ali Zardari’s presidency, the masterminds behind her killing remain unpunished, casting a long shadow over Pakistan’s justice system. Analysts continue to debate the motives behind her murder, from internal power struggles to broader geopolitical forces at play during that era.

Yet, beyond the controversies and tragedy, Benazir Bhutto’s legacy endures. She remains a symbol of courage, resilience, and the relentless pursuit of democratic ideals in the face of adversity. Her vision and leadership continue to inspire generations of Pakistanis, especially women, to dream without limits. Her life and untimely death serve as a reminder of both the dangers of challenging entrenched power and the enduring impact of a leader who dared to transform history.

Epstein Case highlights Collapse of Moral Authority

The Jeffrey Epstein affair is not merely a criminal scandal; it is an exposure of systemic rot within the US power structure. For more than three decades, a private island—Little Saint James—functioned as a protected enclave where influential figures from Western politics, finance, technology, and culture operated beyond law and scrutiny. This was not an accidental blind spot but a sustained failure enabled by privilege, power, and institutional silence.

Epstein’s operation preyed on teenage and underage girls through an organized trafficking network that spanned borders and social classes. Despite repeated investigations and mounting evidence, he escaped serious accountability for years. Such prolonged impunity was not the result of legal incompetence alone. It reflected protection—explicit or implicit—from within the highest echelons of the system he served.

When Epstein was finally arrested in mid-2019, expectations of a reckoning briefly surfaced. They were swiftly extinguished. His death in federal custody—officially declared a suicide—occurred under conditions that defied standard security protocols. Given the number of powerful individuals implicated, public skepticism was inevitable and justified. The belief that Epstein was silenced to prevent wider exposure has since become embedded in public consciousness.

Subsequent government conduct only reinforced suspicion. Congressional pressure forced partial disclosures, yet key documents were withheld or re-redacted, undermining claims of transparency. Under the Trump administration, selective leaks appeared designed less to uncover truth than to manage political fallout—diverting attention toward rivals while distancing allies. This was narrative control, not justice.

What remains most troubling is not what is known, but what appears implausible to dismiss. An operation of this scale—global in reach, durable across administrations, and populated by high-value individuals—could not have existed in isolation.

History demonstrates that intelligence services routinely exploit sexual entrapment and kompromat as tools of leverage. Whether through direct involvement, tacit tolerance, or post-facto exploitation, the notion that Epstein’s enterprise existed entirely outside intelligence interest strains credulity.

Was Little Saint James merely a den of elite depravity, or a controlled environment with strategic utility? Was Epstein the architect—or merely a facilitator? These questions persist because no authority has convincingly answered them.

Ultimately, the Epstein case exposes a deeper hypocrisy. A state that postures as the global arbiter of morality and human rights has revealed its own elite to be insulated from consequence. The truth may never fully surface, but the convergence of power, corruption, and silence is now impossible to deny.

PSX benchmark index closes at an all-time high of 172,401

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) experienced volatility throughout the week, driven by portfolio adjustments and realignments at year-end. However, the bullish momentum prevailed on the continuation of investor optimism amid recent 50bps rate cut announced by the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP). Benchmark index gained 996 points to close at an all-time high of 172,401 points, reflecting an increase of 0.6%WoW.

Market participation weakened by 3.5%WoW due to average daily traded volume falling to 1.1 billion shares, as compared to 1.2 billion shares in the prior week.

The Government of Pakistan successfully executed the privatization of the national carrier, PIA, with a consortium led by the Arif Habib Group emerging as the winning bidder for the acquisition of a 75% stake.

T-bills yields declined on one-month, 3-months, 6-months and 12-months paper, on the first auction after surprise 50bps cut in policy rate.

Foreign exchange reserves held by SBP increased by US$16 million, to US$15.9 billion as of December 19, 2025.

Other major news flow during the week included: 1) Pakistan eyes January Panda Bond debut, 2) Pakistan receives US$700 million from the World Bank for tax reforms, 3) ADB reviews progress on ML-I rail upgradation, and 4) Pakistan, Korea look to boost chemical trade.

Property, Technology, Modaraba, Paper & Board, and Fertilizer were amongst the top performing sectors, while laggards included: Inv. Banks, Woollen, Textile Weaving, Vanaspati, and Leasing

Major buying was recorded by Mutual Funds with a net buy of US$4.4 million, while Insurance Companies emerged as major sellers with net sell of US$5.0 million.

Top performing scrips of the week were: JVDC, PTC, KOHC, BOP, and MEHT, while laggards included: YOUW, RMPL, UNITY, SSGC, and GADT.

AKD Securities foresees the momentum in the benchmark index to continue given successful third tranche disbursement under the EFF & RSF, monetary easing environment, minimal flood impact and improved credit ratings by global agencies amid falling fixed income yields.

Investor sentiment is expected to further improve on the likelihood of foreign portfolio and direct investment flows, driven by improved relations with the United States and Saudi Arabia.

This outlook is supported by the lack of alternative investment avenues and the attractive valuation of local equities, with the KSE-100 trading at a multiple of 8.0x while offering a dividend yield of 6.5%.

Top picks of the brokerage house include: MEBL, MCB, HBL, OGDC, PPL, PSO, ENGROH, LUCK, DGKC, FCCL, ILP and INDU.

From Superpowers to a Super Syndicate

This writeup discusses a proposition that may appear unconventional but is rooted in long-term observation. After more than a decade of writing on geopolitics in South Asia and the Middle East and North Africa, it has become increasingly evident that the traditional concept of regional and global superpowers no longer adequately explains contemporary international politics. Power today is exercised less through overt state rivalry and more through a coordinated, transnational arrangement that may best be described as a Super Syndicate.

This emerging order is not ideological in nature. It is driven by strategic convergence among states possessing advanced intelligence capabilities and sustained by powerful economic interests. The principal beneficiaries include the global military-industrial complex, energy exploration and production companies, major financial institutions, and international shipping networks. These actors provide the financial backbone, while intelligence agencies of aligned states facilitate operational coordination, risk management, and narrative control.

Unlike the bipolar or unipolar systems of the past, the Super Syndicate does not thrive on direct confrontation among its members. Instead, it functions through a tacit division of strategic space. Countries and regions are assigned defined spheres of influence, minimizing direct competition while maximizing collective gain. Conflicts, when they occur, are managed rather than resolved, ensuring continuity rather than closure.

The Russia-Ukraine conflict illustrates this dynamic. While Ukraine has suffered extensive human and infrastructural losses and Europe has faced economic and security disruptions, the broader global system remains intact. Arms manufacturers have recorded unprecedented growth, energy markets have been restructured, and financial systems have adjusted without systemic shock. The conflict persists not because resolution is unattainable, but because prolonged instability serves entrenched interests.

The situation in Gaza further exposes the asymmetries of this order. Israel’s military campaign has continued despite widespread international criticism and humanitarian concern. Yet institutional accountability has remained elusive. This is not merely a failure of diplomacy; it reflects a structural imbalance in which certain actors operate with effective immunity due to their strategic positioning within the broader system.

Iran’s experience offers additional insight. Despite its aspirations for regional influence, Tehran has remained constrained by prolonged economic sanctions. The recent escalation involving Israel revealed a notable regional alignment. Several Middle Eastern states, while publicly maintaining neutrality, actively supported Israel through intelligence cooperation and defensive measures. The episode underscored the limitations faced by states attempting to operate outside the prevailing strategic framework.

For Pakistan and other developing states, these trends carry important implications. Sovereignty in the contemporary international system is increasingly conditional, shaped by economic leverage, intelligence alignment, and narrative positioning rather than formal equality among states. Moral appeals and legal arguments, while important, rarely translate into decisive outcomes without strategic backing.

The conclusion is not conspiratorial but analytical - global power is no longer exercised solely through identifiable superpowers. It is mediated through a coordinated network of state and non-state actors whose interests converge across military, financial, and strategic domains. Recognizing this reality is essential for policymakers, analysts, and scholars seeking to navigate an international order that is less visible, more complex, and increasingly resistant to traditional frameworks of analysis.

Pakistan Economic Turnaround: A Narrative Built on Illusions

Finance Minister, Muhammad Aurangzeb’s upbeat portrayal of Pakistan’s economy may sound reassuring to international audiences, but it rests on fragile assumptions and selective facts. The claim that Pakistan has reached a “critical turning point” reflects more narrative management than economic reality.

There is no denying that inflation has eased, foreign exchange reserves have inched upward, and the current account has temporarily moved into surplus. However, these outcomes are not the result of deep structural reform or productivity gains. They are the by-product of harsh demand compression, import suppression, excessive taxation, and reliance on remittances. This is stabilization through pain, not sustainable recovery.

A primary fiscal surplus achieved by slashing development spending and squeezing an already overburdened tax base is hardly a triumph. It signals a state retreating from growth and social investment rather than fixing long-standing inefficiencies. Economic growth of 2.7 percent in a country with one of the fastest-growing populations in the world is not progress—it is stagnation disguised as stability.

The minister’s repeated emphasis on an export-led transition remains largely aspirational. Pakistan’s exports are still narrow, low value, and vulnerable to external shocks. Textiles dominate, agriculture remains inefficient and climate-exposed, and the IT sector faces policy inconsistency and weak infrastructure. Announcing reforms does not equal executing them. Competitiveness is earned through governance, not rhetoric.

Privatization, energy sector restructuring, and tariff liberalization continue to be recycled promises. State-owned enterprises remain a drain on public finances, while circular debt persists as a structural failure. Investors do not respond to interviews and roadmaps; they respond to credible institutions, policy predictability, and contract enforcement—areas where Pakistan remains deficient.

Remittances are hailed as a pillar of stability, yet they highlight a deeper failure - an economy unable to generate opportunities at home. Similarly, foreign reserves covering barely two-and-a-half months of imports offer little protection in an increasingly volatile global environment.

Invoking an “East Asia moment” borders on self-deception. East Asian success was built on disciplined industrial policy, export diversification, human capital investment, and institutional strength—none of which Pakistan has demonstrated at scale. Acknowledging challenges such as population growth, learning poverty, gender exclusion, and climate vulnerability means little without decisive action.

Pakistan’s economy is not transitioning from crisis to opportunity. It is trapped in a cycle of cosmetic stability and structural decay. Until growth becomes productive, inclusive, and job-creating, celebrating macroeconomic indicators is dangerously misleading.

Middle East Riviera: Monetizing Gaza Ruins

The US administration has once again revealed its moral blindness by reviving the fantasy of turning Gaza into a “Middle East Riviera.” Branded as “Project Sunrise,” the initiative—first reported by the Wall Street Journal—presents itself as a visionary reconstruction plan. In reality, it is a deeply cynical attempt to monetize devastation while erasing Palestinian political existence.

Marketed as a decade-long transformation of Gaza into a high-tech coastal hub, the plan is anchored in luxury housing, tourism, AI-managed infrastructure, and private investment. Glossy presentations speak of smart cities, high returns, and urban renewal. What they conspicuously avoid mentioning is the fate, rights, or consent of Gaza’s 2.4 million Palestinians—the very people whose land is being redesigned.

At its core, Project Sunrise is less about reconstruction than control. It conditions any rebuilding on Hamas’s total disarmament, a demand Israel and the United States failed to achieve after two years of relentless war. If one of the region’s most advanced militaries could not impose this outcome through force, the assumption that it can now be achieved through PowerPoint diplomacy borders on fantasy.

The proposal’s credibility erodes further with its emphasis on a new administrative capital, “New Rafah,” designed to house more than half a million people in southern Gaza. Framed as orderly development, these risks becoming population transfer by stealth—concentrating civilians away from their homes while large parts of Gaza are redeveloped under rigid security and investment regimes. History shows that such “development-led relocation” often serves as a precursor to permanent displacement.

Equally troubling is the project’s financial logic. Washington has committed roughly 20 percent of the estimated US$112 billion cost, positioning itself not as a guarantor of rights, but as a stakeholder expecting influence and returns. The involvement of figures linked to Trump’s real estate networks reinforces the perception that Gaza’s ruins are being treated as a commercial opportunity rather than the aftermath of mass suffering.

Nowhere does the plan address accountability for the devastation, the ongoing blockade, or the thousands still buried beneath rubble. Palestinian self-determination is absent; justice is ignored. Instead, Palestinians are reduced to a population to be managed, not a people with rights.

Trump’s vision offers luxury towers atop unresolved injustice. Without addressing occupation, security, and political freedom, the “Middle East Riviera” will remain what it truly is: a real estate fantasy built on denial.

 

Bangladesh becoming “Panipat ka maidan”

Despite formidable odds, Bangladesh managed to script an enviable economic story over the past decade. Consistent GDP growth, export-led industrialization anchored by the ready-made garments sector, improving social indicators, and relative macroeconomic stability placed the country among Asia’s fastest emerging economies. Ironically, this very success appears to have turned Bangladesh into a theatre for competing global and regional ambitions.

Much like Panipat in South Asian history—where decisive battles were repeatedly fought by rival powers—Bangladesh is increasingly being reduced to a battleground for influence rather than a partner in prosperity. India, the United States, China and Russia have all attempted to secure strategic leverage in Dhaka. Each power has pursued its own interests, but none has prioritized long-term economic stability for the country itself.

The United States’ regime-change initiative ultimately succeeded. However, Washington’s engagement has remained narrowly political. Unlike past global interventions that at least carried economic reconstruction frameworks, there is no visible recovery plan, stabilization package or trade-driven agenda for Bangladesh. Regime change, without an accompanying economic roadmap, has only amplified uncertainty.

India continues to view Bangladesh largely through a strategic and security lens, while China’s engagement remains infrastructure-focused, tied to connectivity and supply chains. Russia’s role is limited and transactional. Yet none of these actors has articulated a comprehensive, people-centric recovery strategy for a nation now facing political paralysis.

The recent killing of a student leader has pushed the country into a state of standstill. Historically, student movements have been central to Bangladesh’s political evolution. Today, unrest is unfolding amid intense geopolitical rivalry risks prolonged instability. Investor confidence is weakening, export momentum is under pressure, and economic continuity is increasingly fragile.

The irony is unmistakable. Every power eager to influence Bangladesh shows little willingness to assume responsibility for economic recovery. Bangladesh does not need to become another Panipat—where outcomes are dictated by external forces and costs borne by the local population. Without a credible recovery plan rooted in stability and economic continuity, this power contest will exact a heavy price from the Bangladeshi people.

Iranian efforts to improve relations with Afghanistan

Iran will make every effort to give fresh impetus to its interactions with Afghanistan along the border. Masoud Pezeshkian made the comment in a televised address to the people at the close of his trip to the eastern Iranian province of South Khorasan, which borders Afghanistan.

“Many of the needs could be met, and this is possible,” he explained.

He said the provincial governor has been authorized to expedite engagement with neighboring Afghanistan.

Iran’s trade volume with Afghanistan is currently described as decent by economic reports, with Tehran investing significant effort into maintaining commerce since the Afghan government was toppled in 2021. The Taliban, who were ousted by US forces in 2001 and faced a 20-year occupation, swiftly returned to power following the American withdrawal. 

Since then, the new rulers have managed to improve security, with terrorist attacks becoming less frequent. Yet, the country remains burdened by the remnants of the occupation, facing escalating poverty and unemployment.

Although trade continues, Iran has yet to officially recognize the Taliban. Tehran remains at odds with the group over a host of issues, including the withholding of Iran’s water rights from the Hirmand River, the ongoing influx of refugees, and the lack of inclusivity within the new government. Nevertheless, Iranian officials have kept their embassy in Kabul active and continue to engage in regular discussions with Taliban leadership.

Tehran has also been working to establish deeper ties between the Taliban and Afghanistan’s other neighbors, none of whom have officially recognized the group’s government. 

To this end, Iran hosted a meeting in Tehran last week involving representatives from Afghanistan’s neighboring countries and Russia. During the summit, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi emphasized the significance of stability and security, noting that Afghanistan’s integration into the region would be mutually beneficial. He described Afghanistan as possessing unique human, economic, and natural potential, historically serving as a bridge between neighboring regions.

Afghanistan’s relationship under the Taliban has been specially friction-ridden with Pakistan. The two countries engaged in a brief military conflict earlier this year; while a ceasefire is currently in effect, it is widely considered to be fragile.

 

PSX: 7 IPOs worth PKR4.3 billions issued during 2025

The Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) witnessed momentum in initial public offering (IPO) activity during 2025, with a total of 7 offerings recorded during the year, including two GEM Board listings and one migration. This momentum mirrors 2024, when the bourse also hosted seven IPOs, underscoring sustained capital market activity.

The total amount raised from investors through the 7 offerings (including migration) in 2025 aggregated to PKR4.3 billion as against PKR8.4 billion last year. Despite the lower quantum of funds raised, investor appetite remained robust, as all offerings were oversubscribed, reflecting strong market enthusiasm.

This sustained IPO momentum is largely a continuation of last year’s trend, driven by macroeconomic stability under the IMF programme, improving investor confidence, positive equity market sentiment, and a declining interest rate environment.

The benchmark Index surged significantly by 47.9% in PKR terms and 47.1% in US$ terms in 2025 to date, reflecting overall positive sentiment and renewed investor interest.

The average daily traded volume has also increased by 40%, reaching 797 million shares, while the daily traded value has risen by 64% to PKR36.6 billion during 2025 to date.

In 2025, new listings on the main board included Zarea Limited (ZAL), Barkat Frisian Agro Limited (BFAGRO), Image REIT (IRIET), and Pak Qatar Family Takaful (PQFTL). There was one migration of BlueEx from GEM Board to Main board while two companies were added to GEM board which are Nets International Communication (GEMNETS) and Pakistan Credit Rating Agency (GEMPACRA). To highlight, out of 4 main board listing, Topline was advisor in 2 listing in 2025.

In terms of performance, ZAL was the best-performing IPO in 2025, delivering a return of 202% in 2025TD, in which topline was the advisor.

The global IPO market has also gained momentum. According to Ernst & Young (E&Y), a total of 914 IPOs were recorded through 9M2025, raising US$110 billion, as compared to 870 IPOs that raised US$78 billion during the same period last year. The growth in IPO activity is primarily driven by larger deal sizes, supported by robust equity markets, monetary easing, and more accommodative financial conditions. Despite ongoing geopolitical and macroeconomic uncertainties, investor sentiment continues to improve. Geopolitical risk is increasingly being viewed as part of the “new normal”—a persistent backdrop to market dynamics rather than a one-off shock.

Topline Securities expects IPO activity in 2026 to remain strong compared with the current year, supported by a healthy pipeline of offerings, improving economic conditions, and a lower interest rate environment.

In mainboard, 4 companies raised funds through IPO. These companies represented various sectors including Technology, Food & Personal Care, Real Estate Investment, and Insurance.

Zarea Limited (ZAL):

Zarea is one of leading digital technology company specializing in the commodity trading market of Pakistan. The primary purpose of the IPO is to achieve growth by increasing their customer base and improving the user interface of its online platform. For this purpose, company is raising money to meet their working capital needs, establish its own logistic fleet, upgrade it online platform etc. The company offered 62.5 million shares at strike price of PKR16.5/ share, raising PKR1,031 million in February, 2025 with an oversubscription of 1.9x.

Barkat Frisian Agro Limited (BFAGRO): 

BFAGRO is the Pakistan’s only producer of pasteurized egg products. It is a Pakistan-Dutch Joint venture between Buksh Group and Frisian Egg International B.V. which is Dutch company. Company raised funds to setup new facility in Faisalabad which will increase production capacity by 12,000 tons totaling to 29,000. This expansion will enable the company to explore new export opportunities and target new customers in the local market. The company offered 67.7 million shares at strike price of PKR18.2/ share, raising PKR1,232 million in February, 2025 with an oversubscription of 16.25x.

Image REIT (IREIT): 

Image REIT is hybrid REIT scheme having both Rental and Developmental Component managed by Sino link RMC. The principal activity of IREIT is to invest directly in real estate assets with the objective of generating sustainable income and long-term returns for investors through rental income, capital appreciation, and value creation. The principal purpose of the Issue is to raise funds to complete the construction of the Developmental Component. The company offered 92.0 million shares at a strike price of PKR10.0/ share, raising PKR921 million in September, 2025 with an oversubscription of 2.1x.

Pak Qatar Family Takaful (PQFT): 

Pak Qatar Family Takaful Limited (PQFTL) is Pakistan’s largest dedicated family takaful company which offers comprehensive Takaful and investment solutions. The company raised funds to be utilized for: 1) Expansion of Digital Footprint, 2) Strengthening Solvency and Enhancing Underwriting Capacity, and 3) Compliance with Minimum Paid-up Capital requirements. The company offered 50 million shares at strike price of PKR18.0/ share, raising PKR901 million in December, 2025 with an oversubscription of 3.2x.

 

PSX benchmark index closes at highest ever 171,960 level on Thursday

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) continued its bullish momentum during the week ended on December 19, 2025. The benchmark index achieved its highest ever closing on Thursday, at 171,960 points, witnessed some profit taking on Friday, closing the week at 171,404 points, up 1,539 points or 0.91%WoW. Market participation weakened by 5.6%WoW with average daily traded volume down to 1.2 billion shares, from 1.3 billion shares in the prior week.

Investors’ optimism was boosted following the announcement of a surprise 50bps rate cut by the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP), as against market’s anticipation of status quo. Sentiments were further boosted after current account recorded a surplus of US$100 million for November 2025.

On the macroeconomic front, Textile exports for 5MFY26 increased by 3%YoY to US$7.8 billion, whereas, Petroleum imports declined by 2%YoY to US$6.4 billion.

Foreign exchange reserves held by SBP increased by US$1.3 billion to US$15.9 billion as of December 12, 2025 after receiving IMF’s disbursement under the EFF and RSF.

Other major news flow during the week included: 1) Finance Minister rules out mini budget; insists revenue gap to be met via tax compliance, 2) Pakistan and Uzbekistan agree to extend PTA, 3) Pakistan seeks oil deal with Russia, 4) SIFC prioritizes brownfield refinery upgrades, and 5) Pakistan, China advance talks on US$2.2 billion industrial complex at Port Qasim.

Jute, Real Estate Investment Trust, Commercial Banks, Close – End Mutual Fund and Engineering were amongst the top performing sectors, while Woollen, Modarabas, Synthetic & Rayon, Textile Spinning and Vanaspati & Allied Industries were amongst the laggards.

Major buying was recorded by Individuals with a net buy of US$16.7 million, while foreigners and Insurance were major sellers with net sell of US$12.7 million and US$8.2 million, respectively.

Top performing scrips of the week were: RMPL, PIBTL, NBP, UBL, and DCR, while laggards included: SSGC, BNWM, PIOC, IBFL, and PGLC.

AKD Securities foresees the momentum in the benchmark index to continue given successful third tranche disbursement under the EFF & RSF, monetary easing environment, minimal flood impact and improved credit ratings by global agencies amid falling fixed income yields.

Investors’ sentiments are expected to further improve on the likelihood of foreign portfolio and direct investment flows, driven by improved relations with the United States and Saudi Arabia.

This outlook is supported by the lack of alternative investment avenues and the attractive valuation of local equities, at a multiple of 8.1x while offering a dividend yield of 6.5%.

The top picks of the brokerage house include: MEBL, MCB, HBL, OGDC, PPL, PSO, ENGROH, LUCK, DGKC, FCCL, ILP and INDU.

Trump Keen on Turning Gaza into His Personal Property

Nothing has been more destructive for Gaza over the past two years than the bombs dropped with unwavering Western backing. Yet nothing has been more cynical than Donald Trump’s repeated appearances promoting his so-called “peace plan” for the besieged Strip. Wrapped in the language of diplomacy, Trump’s proposal reeks not of reconciliation but of ownership—an attempt to treat Gaza as a geopolitical asset to be managed, traded, and reshaped according to American convenience.

While Trump speaks of calm and reconstruction, Israeli aggression continues almost daily, violating ceasefire understandings with impunity. Washington, far from being an honest broker, remains the principal enabler—arming, financing, and diplomatically shielding Israel while performing concern for Palestinian suffering. Trump’s rhetoric cannot conceal this contradiction. Peace cannot be brokered by those underwriting the war.

As large-scale bombing subsided, a new phase of pressure emerged. Gaza became the subject of maps, crossings, donor conferences, and discussions about “the day after.” Central to this discourse is the idea of a “peace council,” international forces, and a transitional governing arrangement imposed from outside. These proposals move slowly because they are designed not to end occupation, but to recycle Western control while avoiding a frank admission of failure.

Trump’s plan—Israeli withdrawal in exchange for Hamas’s removal, followed by an internationally supervised administration—lays bare a colonial mindset. Gaza is reduced to a problem to be solved, not a people with rights. Palestinians are expected to accept a future negotiated in Washington, as if sovereignty were a favor Trump can dispense. The voices of those who endured siege and destruction are conspicuously absent.

What drives Trump’s sudden peace enthusiasm is not compassion but damage control. After a prolonged and devastating war, Israel failed to impose its will militarily, exposing the limits of US-backed force. The myth of invincibility collapsed, and global opinion shifted sharply. Trump now seeks to repackage defeat as diplomacy, positioning himself as a peacemaker while rescuing a deeply tarnished ally.

Reconstruction, under this framework, becomes another weapon. Aid is offered conditionally, tied to disarmament and political submission. This transactional logic—treating freedom as a commodity—has failed everywhere it has been tried, from Iraq to Afghanistan.

Gazans refuse to be reduced to property or a bargaining chip. Their resistance has transformed from a marginal humanitarian case into a global symbol exposing Western hypocrisy. Trump may imagine himself redesigning the region, but Gaza stands as a reminder that peace imposed through power, money, or arrogance is not peace at all.

Venezuela: US Regime Change Obsession

The seizure of Venezuelan oil tankers by the United States is not an isolated enforcement action; it is the logical extension of a failed regime-change project. Having been unable to dislodge the Maduro government through sanctions, diplomatic pressure, and political engineering, Washington has doubled down on economic warfare—this time by targeting Venezuela’s sole economic artery.

Venezuela is not a diversified economy. Oil exports generate the bulk of its foreign exchange, fund public services, and pay for essential imports. Intercepting tankers is therefore not about legal compliance; it is about choking the economy into submission. When financial strangulation is designed to produce political collapse, it crosses from diplomacy into coercion—what many rightly describe as economic terrorism.

The justification offered by Washington is familiar - sanctions are portrayed as tools to restore democracy and punish alleged wrongdoing. Yet the outcomes tell a different story. Years of sanctions have neither produced regime change nor improved governance. Instead, they have devastated living standards, disrupted fuel supplies, and weakened healthcare and food security. Political elites adapt; ordinary citizens absorb the shock.

More troubling is the international silence. The seizure of commercial shipments bound for third countries raises serious questions under international law, yet few Western capitals have voiced concern. This selective outrage exposes a deeper truth, rules-based order often bends when great power interests are involved. Actions condemned as piracy if undertaken by rivals are quietly normalized when executed by Washington.

There is also a broader pattern at play. From Iran to Venezuela, energy-producing states that resist US strategic preferences face sanctions, asset freezes, and trade blockades. The message is unmistakable - control over energy flows remains central to geopolitical power. Democracy rhetoric provides cover, but energy dominance appears to be the underlying driver.

Ironically, such pressure often entrenches the very systems it claims to oppose. Economic siege fuels nationalism, strengthens hardliners, and closes political space. It also pushes targeted states toward alternative trading networks, accelerating the fragmentation of the global economic order—an outcome that ultimately weakens US influence rather than consolidates it.

For Venezuela, continued economic suffocation offers no path to stability or reform. For the world, accepting unilateral seizures as normal practice sets a dangerous precedent. If regime change pursued through economic destruction becomes an accepted tool of statecraft, global trade itself becomes hostage to power politics.

History suggests a simple lesson: coercion may punish, but it rarely persuades.

Gold March Toward US$5,000: A New Reality

Gold’s surge in 2025 — the strongest since the 1979 oil shock — would normally invite calls for a painful correction. Prices have doubled in two years. Yet this rally is not built on speculative froth alone. It is anchored in a structural shift that could carry bullion to US$5,000 an ounce by 2026.

Spot gold touched a record US$4,381 in October, crossing milestones once thought distant. The drivers are neither exotic nor temporary - persistent US fiscal deficits, an implicitly weak-dollar posture, geopolitical fractures from Ukraine to NATO’s eastern flank, and rising unease over the Federal Reserve’s independence. In such an environment, gold is not merely a hedge — it is a statement of mistrust in paper promises.

What distinguishes this cycle is the role of central banks. For five consecutive years, they have been diversifying away from dollar assets, stepping in when investor positioning becomes stretched and prices wobble. This behavior places a firm floor under gold, resetting its trading range far higher than in previous cycles.

JP Morgan estimates that while 350 tons of quarterly demand keeps prices stable, actual buying may average 585 tons per quarter in 2026 — a telling imbalance.

Investors are following suit. Gold allocations have risen to 2.8% of total assets, up from 1.5% before 2022 — elevated, but hardly extreme given the scale of global uncertainty.

Forecasts from Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan and Metals Focus converge on the same conclusion, US$5,000 gold is no longer sensational. It is increasingly plausible. The real question is not how high gold can go, but how fragile confidence in fiat currencies has become.

Why Trump Is Edging Toward a Serious Conflict with Venezuela?

US President Donald Trump has significantly escalated pressure on Venezuela and President Nicolás Maduro through sanctions, military action, and economic measures, raising concerns about a potential serious conflict. The latest flashpoint was the US seizure of a sanctioned oil tanker en route to Cuba, part of a broader campaign targeting Maduro’s government, which Washington labels illegitimate and accuses of leading a drug-trafficking network.

Trump has justified his actions on multiple fronts. Migration is a central issue, with the president frequently blaming Maduro for sending criminals, gang members, and former prisoners into the United States. While Venezuelans now number around 770,000 in the United States as of 2023, they represent less than 2 percent of the immigrant population. Most Venezuelan migrants—over 80 percent—remain in Latin America and the Caribbean. Nonetheless, the issue has gained urgency after a Supreme Court ruling led to more than 250,000 Venezuelans losing Temporary Protected Status following the program’s expiration.

Drug trafficking is another pillar of Trump’s campaign. The administration accuses the Maduro regime of facilitating narcotics flows into the US, citing this as justification for lethal strikes on suspected drug-smuggling boats near Venezuela. Since September, US forces have carried out at least 22 maritime strikes, killing dozens of alleged traffickers. These actions have sparked political controversy, particularly after reports that survivors of one strike were killed. While the administration claims these operations have sharply reduced maritime drug trafficking, lawmakers note that the vessels were believed to be carrying cocaine, not fentanyl, and that Colombia remains the region’s top cocaine producer.

Economic pressure, especially targeting oil, has intensified tensions. Oil accounts for nearly 90 percent of Venezuela’s export revenues. The seized tanker reportedly carried over one million barrels of oil, and analysts warn that continued seizures could amount to a de facto naval blockade, crippling Venezuela’s economy and limiting its ability to import food, weapons, and fuel.

Finally, regime change remains an underlying concern. Trump has said Maduro’s days are “numbered” and has deployed an unprecedented US military presence in the region, though he has not ruled out negotiations. Senior officials deny seeking regime change outright, but skepticism remains over whether any agreement with Maduro could be enforced.