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.

PSX: Average daily traded volume up 49.5%WoW

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) continued its bullish momentum during the week, driven by investor optimism following the announcement of IMF Executive Board approval, for the third tranche of US$1.0 billion under EFF and US$200 million under RSF for Pakistan. Sentiments were further boosted after ECC’s decision to adjust OMC and dealer margins on MS and HSD based on national CPI, capped between 5-10% and Incremental electricity package announced by government for industries and agriculture. The benchmark index gained 2,779 points during the week, up 1.7%WoW, to close at an historic high of 169,865 points.

Market participation strengthened by 49.5%WoW with average daily traded volume up to 1.3 billion shares, from 863 million shares in the prior week.

On the macroeconomic front, Workers’ Remittances for November 2025 were reported at US$3.2 billion, up 9%YoY.

Auto sector sales for November 2025 witnessed a surge of 41% YoY, to 19,635 units.

Foreign exchange reserves held by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) increased by US$12 million to US$14.6 billion as of December 05, 2025. PKR appreciated by 0.04%WoW against the greenback during the week to 280.32 PKR/ US$.

Other major news flow during the week included, 1) ADB okays loan for Karachi-Rohri section, 2) Reko Diq’s US$7 billion deal deepens Pakistan-US economic links, 3) GoP clears PKR659.6 billion power debt, 4) Cabinet approves diversion of 45 LNG cargoes, and 5) Revenue collection grows 27%YoY to PKR12 trillion during FY25.

Textile Spinning, Engineering, Synthetic & Rayon, Textile Composite and Glass & Ceramics were amongst the top performing sectors, while Leather & Tanneries, Jute, Leasing Companies, Refinery and Vanaspati & Allied Industries were amongst the laggards.

Major buying was recorded by Mutual Funds with a net buy of US$22.7 million. Insurance Companies were major sellers with net sell of US$22.6 million.

Top performing scrips of the week were: NML, KAPCO, MLCF, ISL, and LOTCHEM, while laggards included: SRVI, HUMNL, TRG, HINOON, and SAZEW.

AKD Securities foresees the momentum in the benchmark index to continue given successful third tranche disbursement under the EFF & RSF, 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.

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

Deteriorating US-Venezuela relations: From Reliable Crude Supplier to Adversary

For decades, Venezuela was among the most dependable suppliers of crude oil to the United States. The relationship was commercially stable and strategically important. Venezuelan heavy crude suited US Gulf Coast refineries, and American demand guaranteed steady revenues for Caracas.

The shift began with the election of Hugo Chávez in 1999, which marked the start of a new ideological era. His government moved sharply away from the earlier market-aligned policies and adopted a confrontational posture toward Washington. This included expropriating foreign oil assets, reorganizing PDVSA under political control, and forging alliances with Cuba, Russia, Iran, and later China. These steps weakened commercial ties and deepened political tensions.

Venezuela’s oil sector also deteriorated due to nationalization, mismanagement, and underinvestment. Production, once above 3 million barrels per day, fell sharply over the next two decades. As quality and reliability declined, US refiners increasingly turned to Canada, Mexico, and domestic shale producers.

Washington responded to Venezuela’s political trajectory—especially under Nicolás Maduro—by imposing sanctions targeting individuals, the oil sector, and financial transactions. These sanctions further reduced the scope for commercial cooperation and pushed Venezuela to redirect crude flows toward China and other alternative buyers. The result is a relationship now defined by distrust rather than the interdependence of earlier decades.

A parallel concern for the United States has been narcotics trafficking in the region. While Venezuela is not a major cocaine producer, it has become a significant transit route between Colombia and global markets.

US agencies have accused certain Venezuelan officials of collusion with organized crime groups. At the same time, the United States faces a domestic drug crisis driven by opioids, fentanyl, and synthetic narcotics entering through regional networks. This has elevated drug trafficking to a major political issue.

Against this backdrop, President Donald Trump’s emphasis on securing access to strategic crude supplies and cracking down on narcotics networks reflects a broader domestic and geopolitical agenda.

Energy security, border control, and regional influence remain high-priority themes in US politics. Venezuela, given its oil reserves and its role in regional trafficking routes, has become central to these debates, turning a once-pragmatic partnership into a deeply strained relationship.

Pakistan must add Gold Backed Funds

Pakistan’s financial regulators often speak of diversification, innovation, and deepening of markets — yet these ambitions rarely translate into actionable reforms. One opportunity stands out, both practical and low-risk, and yet remains untouched - the introduction of gold-backed funds. With the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) holding nearly 50 tons of gold in its reserves, the country is well-positioned to convert a fraction of its dormant assets into market-enabling financial instruments.

Global central banks have already moved in this direction. In dozens of jurisdictions, gold is no longer treated as a static reserve item but as a strategic financial asset supporting exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and structured investment products. Pakistan, in contrast, keeps its bullion locked away — valuable, but economically inactive. This conservative mindset needs a calibrated rethink.

The proposal is simple and regulator-friendly. State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) should release 100 kilograms of gold through the Pakistan Mercantile Exchange (PMEX), specifically targeting the creation of gold-backed ETFs. The quantity is symbolic when compared to total reserves; it carries no threat to reserve adequacy. But its impact on market depth, investor confidence, and product diversity would be significant. SBP-verified bullion sold through PMEX would enhance transparency, improve price discovery, and finally allow Pakistan to list a credible gold-backed fund in its financial ecosystem.

Once the ETF market is seeded, SBP should gradually import around 150 kilograms of gold, timed with favorable global prices. This ensures reserves are not only restored but increased, allowing for future expansion of gold-based investment products. The goal is to create a sustainable, market-driven cycle — not a one-off intervention.

For regulators, the benefits are clear. Gold-backed funds broaden the investment menu in a market dominated by government securities. They attract new investor segments, document savings that would otherwise sit in unreported physical gold, and add liquidity to PMEX. More importantly, they align Pakistan with global best practices, where commodity-based financial products are now standard tools for stabilizing markets.

The concern that releasing central-bank gold might destabilize reserves is misplaced. A 100-kilogram sale out of a 50-ton stock is hardly a depletion; it is prudent activation of an underutilized asset. Paired with a planned replenishment strategy, the initiative strengthens rather than weakens Pakistan’s reserve position.

Pakistan’s financial system suffers from chronic concentration, limited innovation, and excessive reliance on debt instruments. Gold-backed funds offer a low-risk, high-credibility avenue for reform — one that regulators can implement without disrupting monetary policy or fiscal planning.

It is time to stop treating gold as an untouchable relic of reserve management. If Pakistan truly wants deeper, more diversified capital markets, then adding gold-backed funds is no longer optional — it is need of the time.

 

China backs expanding Iran-Saudi ties

Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia have wrapped up their third Trilateral Committee Meeting, with Beijing once again underscoring its commitment to strengthening relations between Tehran and Riyadh.

The meeting was held Tuesday at Iran’s Foreign Ministry in Tehran and was chaired by Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi. Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Walid al-Kharaji and China’s Deputy Foreign Minister Miao Deo also took part.

During the session, the three sides issued a joint statement outlining key commitments and recent progress.

They reaffirmed Iran and Saudi Arabia’s dedication to fully implementing the 2023 Beijing Agreement, the China-brokered deal that restored diplomatic ties between the two nations. Both countries stressed the importance of upholding sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence, and security in line with the UN Charter, the Charter of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), and international law.

The statement also praised China’s “continued positive role” in facilitating dialogue and overseeing the agreement’s implementation.

For its part, China reiterated its willingness to support and encourage further cooperation between Tehran and Riyadh in political, economic, cultural, and security areas.

The joint statement highlighted progress in consular coordination, noting that this cooperation helped ensure the safe travel of more than 85,000 Iranian Hajj pilgrims and over 210,000 Umrah pilgrims in 2025.

It also welcomed the expanding exchanges between Iranian and Saudi research centers, universities, media outlets, and cultural institutions.

Addressing regional issues, the three countries called for an immediate end to Israeli military operations in Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria, and condemned violations of Iranian sovereignty.

Iran’s representative expressed appreciation for the steadfast support shown by Saudi Arabia and China during Israel’s June aggression against Iran.

The parties further reaffirmed their backing of a comprehensive, UN-led political solution in Yemen.

Iran and Saudi Arabia restored diplomatic ties in March 2023 after a seven-year break, following a China-mediated agreement that led to the reopening of embassies.

Earlier rounds of the trilateral committee were held in Beijing and Riyadh, where all sides restated their commitment to respecting sovereignty and non-interference, and acknowledged China’s ongoing mediation in support of regional dialogue.

 

Pakistan Plunging Deeper into Debt Trap

If 2025 has revealed anything, it is the alarming disconnect between Pakistan’s economic reality and the self-congratulatory narratives pushed by its policymakers.

The year has passed without a single meaningful breakthrough—no new productive units, no serious investment in balancing, modernization or replacement (BMR), and no expansion in industrial capacity. The economy is drifting, yet those responsible for steering it remain disturbingly complacent.

The import bill tells a story of its own. A 15 percent surge in imports exposes how deeply dependent the country has become on everything from basic raw materials to high-end consumer goods. Simultaneously, a 5 percent decline in exports reflects both declining competitiveness and an industrial sector gasping for breath. This is not a temporary imbalance; it is a structural failure in the making, now accelerating under an administration that mistakes cosmetic measures for policy.

Instead of responding with urgency, Pakistan’s economic managers have taken refuge in denial. They continue celebrating short-term dollar inflows as if these lifelines represent real progress. Their strategy—if it can be called one—rests entirely on IMF bailouts, emergency loans from friendly countries, and repeated rollovers of past obligations. This is not economic management; it is firefighting with borrowed water.

Worst of all, there is no sign of strategic thinking. No national plan for industrial revival, no push for technological upgrading, no attempt to diversify exports, and no investment in productivity. The economy is being held together by ad hoc decisions, political gimmicks, and a misplaced belief that stabilization alone can substitute for growth.

Pakistan is not suffering from a lack of options; it is suffering from a lack of seriousness. Nations facing crises reform their energy sectors, modernize their agriculture, incentivize manufacturing, and push for export-oriented growth. Pakistan, by contrast, has spent 2025 celebrating marginal improvements while ignoring the collapse taking place beneath the surface.

With rising imports, shrinking exports, stagnant industries and policymakers lost in complacency, the direction is painfully clear, Pakistan economy is plunging deeper into debt trap.

PSX benchmark index closes almost flat

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) gained 408 points or 0.24%WoW to closing at 167,086 points on Friday, December 05, 2025. The appointment of Field Marshal Asim Munir as Chief of Defense Forces and the extension in maturity of Saudi Arabia’s US$3.0 billion deposit helped settle mid-week volatility.

Market participation dropped by 22%WoW due to volatility, with average daily traded volume declining to 863 million shares from 1.1 billion shares in the prior week.

On the external front, trade deficit widened by 33%YoY to US$2.9 billion in November 2025, driven by 5%YoY increase in imports and 15%YoY decline in exports.

Headline inflation remained in line with expectations at 6.1%YoY for November 2025.

Cement and E&P contributed the most to index’s gains, while cement sector rallied on the back of 2% YoY growth in local dispatches and LUCK’s foreign expansion announcement, while E&P sector advanced as LNG diversion plan progressed and the auction of offshore blocks attracting Turkish investment.

Foreign exchange reserves held by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) increased by US$14 million to US$14.6 billion as of November 28, 2025.

Other major news flow during the week included: 1) Petroleum product sales drop 10% YoY in November, 2) FBR faces PKR143 billion shortfall in achieving November 2025 target, 3) Refinery upliftment jumps 40%YoY in November, 4) Wheat sowing likely to beat target in Punjab, and 5) Business confidence rises to 22%, as per OICCI.

Inv. Banks/ Cos, Refinery, and Cement were amongst the top performing sectors while, Automobile parts & assembler, Textile spinning, and Fertilizer were among the laggards.

Major buying was recorded by Individuals and Mutual Funds with a net buy of US$17.8 million and US$12.0 million, respectively. On the other hand, Insurance and Foreigners were major sellers with net sell of US$32.4 million and US$9.7 million, respectively.

Top performing scrips of the week were: BNWM, PTC, SRVI, PIOC, and TRG, while laggards included: THALL, AICL, HUMNL, HGFA, and FHAM.

According to AKD Securities the momentum in the benchmark index of PSX is likely to continue given successful IMF Executive Board approval of the IMF’s second review, minimal flood impact and improved credit ratings by global agencies amid falling fixed income yields.

Investors’ sentiment 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 also supported by the lack of alternative investment avenues and the attractive valuation of local equities.

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

Damages caused by Iranian attack to strategic installations forced Israel to ceasefire

The ceasefire Israel reluctantly embraced did not emerge from any humanitarian awakening. It was triggered by the sobering reality that Iranian ballistic missiles had successfully targeted some of Israel’s most sensitive strategic installations. A fresh State Comptroller report details how institutional negligence allowed these vulnerabilities to fester until they exploded into national exposure.

During the June conflict, Iran managed to breach Israel’s sophisticated air-defense systems and strike core facilities: Beersheba’s medical center, the Bazan oil refinery in Haifa, and crucial laboratories at the Weizmann Institute. These were not incidental targets—they were pillars of Israel’s medical, energy, and scientific infrastructure. Their exposure underscored a deeper structural failure.

Comptroller Matanyahu Englman’s report shows that warnings about these vulnerabilities date back to 2011. A detailed assessment issued in 2020 was also ignored. Despite years of alerts, the Defense Ministry, IDF, National Security Council, and Finance Ministry never created a coherent legal or operational framework to physically protect these sites. Instead, bureaucratic turf wars and funding disputes ensured that little to nothing was done.

Englman stressed a fundamental distinction: Israel’s air-defense umbrella—Iron Dome, David’s Sling, Arrow—may intercept threats, but no system is airtight. Once a missile breaks through, physical defenses must protect critical installations. Yet these were virtually nonexistent. Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iran all managed to exploit this weakness during the war.

Even after large-scale attacks began, the Defense Ministry continued to delay decisions. Committees met without purpose, deadlines were missed, and responsibility was shuffled between agencies. It was only in late 2024—when senior officials were preparing to depart—that any meaningful action started.

Once Iranian missiles struck strategic sites, Israeli leaders recognized that further escalation risked even more damaging hits. The country could not afford to expose additional “underdeclared” facilities, nor could its leadership sustain the political and economic fallout of deeper infrastructure disruption.

Israel did not choose ceasefire out of compassion for Gaza. It chose it because Iranian pressure exposed vulnerabilities its leadership could no longer hide.

When Arms Thrive - Humanity Pays Price

As missiles streak across skies from Gaza to Ukraine, another explosion is happening far from the battlefield — an explosion of profits. The global arms industry has just booked its highest revenue ever recorded, turning geopolitical turmoil into an unprecedented financial windfall.

According to the latest Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) report, the world’s top 100 arms manufacturers earned a staggering US$679 billion in 2024 — the highest figure in more than 35 years of monitoring. The trend is unmistakable - the more insecure the world becomes, the richer the military-industrial complex grows.

SIPRI notes that rising geopolitical tensions, nuclear weapons modernization, and sustained conflicts drove the bulk of the increase. A remarkable 77 of the Top 100 companies boosted their revenues, and 42 recorded double-digit growth.

For the first time since 2018, all five of the largest defence companies — Lockheed Martin, RTX, Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems and General Dynamics — expanded their earnings simultaneously, raking in a combined US$215 billion. Four of these giants are American; the fifth is British.

Europe and North America led the surge, but increases were registered across almost all regions — except Asia and Oceania, where Chinese industry struggles dragged totals down.

One of the most troubling profit spikes came from the Gaza war. Israel’s leading arms producers — Elbit Systems, Israel Aerospace Industries, and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems — collectively increased revenues by 16% to US$16.2 billion, as the assault on the enclave killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and flattened civilian infrastructure. The numbers expose a stark reality - war zones are becoming revenue streams.

In the United States — responsible for nearly half of all global arms revenue — a new entrant emerged. SpaceX, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, entered the Top 100 for the first time, more than doubling its arms revenue to US$1.8 billion. Musk’s deep alignment with US political power, including major donations to Donald Trump and Republican candidates, underscores how closely defence profits now intertwine with political influence.

The SIPRI figures raise a sobering question, when conflict becomes profitable, who is truly invested in peace?

Winner and Loser of G20 Meeting in South Africa

Global summits rarely deliver thunderclaps, but they often reveal the silent shifts shaping the world. The G20 meeting in South Africa did exactly that. What appeared, on the surface, to be another routine gathering of world leaders actually exposed the changing geometry of global power—who is rising, who is tightening their grip, and who is quietly losing influence. Behind the polished protocol and diplomatic smiles, the summit told a far more compelling story.

The most surprising winner was South Africa itself. For decades, African hosts have been expected to simply provide the stage while major powers dominate the script. This time, Pretoria seized the pen. It pushed Africa’s priorities—climate financing, debt restructuring, fairer market access—onto the centre table with unusual assertiveness. South Africa didn’t just moderate the discussion; it shaped its direction. The message was unmistakable - Africa is no longer willing to play the audience in global decision-making.

China emerged as another strategic winner. While Western delegations appeared divided and preoccupied with their internal political headaches, Beijing arrived with clarity and purpose. Its emphasis on development partnerships and a more inclusive economic order resonated strongly with emerging economies hungry for alternatives. China did not need to dominate the summit; it simply positioned itself as the reliable, steady voice amid Western hesitation.

The United States found itself on the losing side. Its delegation carried the weight of domestic polarization, resulting in cautious, often diluted messaging. Washington struggled to offer bold commitments—on climate, investment, or economic cooperation. For a country accustomed to setting the global agenda, the lack of strategic energy was hard to ignore.

Europe performed slightly better but still fell short. Its rhetoric on rules-based order and environmental responsibility was admirable, yet it lacked the financial muscle to persuade. Fine principles without practical incentives seldom win followers.

In the end, the G20 meeting in South Africa did not merely debate global problems; it exposed a shifting world. Africa is stepping forward, China is consolidating influence, and traditional Western powers are wrestling with diminishing authority. The polite diplomacy could not hide that the global balance is changing—fast.

PSX benchmark index up 2.8%WoW

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) continued its bullish momentum during the week, driven by investor optimism following the announcement that the IMF Executive Board will meet on December 08, 2025, to consider and approve third tranche of US$1.2 billion for Pakistan.

The benchmark index was up 4,575 points during the week, up 2.8%WoW, to close at 166,678 points. However, market participation weakened by 14.2% WoW with average daily traded volume down to 1.1 billion shares, as compared to 1.3 billion shares in the prior week.

Sentiment further boosted after Petroleum Minister Ali Pervaiz Malik announced that Reko Diq is close to achieving financial close with US$3.5 billion in loans secured, sparking a strong rally in the Oil and Gas Exploration sector. The inclusion of FFC in the Shariah-compliant index fueled a surge in the scrip.

Foreign exchange reserves held by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) increased by US$9 million to US$14.6 billion as of Nov 21, 2025.

Other major news flow during the week included, 1) SIFC unveils business-friendly roadmap, 2) PM Shehbaz eyes US$1 billion trade with Bahrain in three years, 3) Chinese group to establish US$1.5 billion industrial park on 300 acres, 4) Food Exhibition 2025 draws strong international interest as B2B deals reach US$615 million, and 5) IMF recognizes Competition Commission of Pakistan’s major turnaround.

Leather & Tanneries, Fertilizer, Commercial Banks, Technology & Communication and Cement were amongst the top performers, while Jute, Modarabas, Refinery, Leasing Companies and Glass & Ceramics were amongst the worst performers.

Flow wise, major buying was recorded by Banks/ DFIs and Mutual Funds with a net buy of US$14.5 million and US$9.5 million during the week, respectively. Foreigners & Individuals were major sellers with net sell of US$12.9 million and US$9.1 million, respectively.

Top performing scrips of the week were: SSGC, SRVI, PIOC, HUMNL and FATIMA, while laggards included: PKGP, BWCL, YOUW, CNERGY and ATRL.

AKD Securities foresee the momentum at PSX to continue given successful IMF Executive Board approval of the IMF’s second review, 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 US and Saudi Arabia.

This outlook is supported by the lack of alternative investment avenues and the attractive valuation of local equities.

Top picks of AKD Securities include: MEBL, MCB, HBL, OGDC, PPL, PSO, ENGROH, LUCK, DGKC, FCCL, and INDU.

Trump’s Second Term Is Damaging US Image

As Donald Trump settles further into his second term, concerns are mounting among observers who expected the United States to restore steadiness in its global leadership. Many Americans who voted for him again may have hoped for economic revival or decisive action, yet the outcomes so far have been uneven at best and deeply troubling at worst. His first term already raised questions about the quality of decision-making in Washington, but the second term has amplified those doubts.

To be fair, no US president operates in isolation. The power centres of oil conglomerates, the military-industrial complex, and Wall Street—longstanding financiers of electoral campaigns—shape the contours of policymaking. This is not unique to Trump; it reflects a broader structural reality embedded in the American political system. Likewise, administrative norms in any government impose limits, compelling leaders to follow certain procedures irrespective of personal preference.

What distinguishes Trump, is his persistent disregard for these constraints. Many of his executive actions—whether aggressive tariff regimes, abrupt withdrawal from international agreements, or confrontational moves in international waters—reflect a governing style marked by impulsiveness rather than foresight. These decisions have often produced more disruption than strategic advantage, leaving allies unsettled and adversaries emboldened.

The United States continues to project itself as the world’s largest and most resilient democracy, yet Trump’s leadership is testing that claim. His tendency to bypass institutional checks and frame governance as a personal mandate creates the perception of a leader more interested in consolidating authority than strengthening democratic norms. While he may not be a “king” in the literal sense, some of his actions signal an uncomfortable tilt toward unilateralism.

The cost of this approach is increasingly visible on the global stage. Instead of enhancing America’s influence, it has chipped away at its credibility. Partner nations now question Washington’s consistency, while global institutions struggle to anticipate US positions on critical issues. For a country that built its reputation on predictability and democratic stewardship, this erosion is significant.

If the United States wishes to reclaim moral authority and strategic stability, its leadership must demonstrate that democracy is anchored in institutions—not in the whims of an individual.

Can Iran Revive a Dormant ECO?

Iran’s renewed diplomatic activity suggests a determined effort to resuscitate the long-underperforming Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO). The arrival of Iranian Minister for Industry, Mining and Trade, Seyed Mohammad Atabak in Istanbul—where ECO ministers gathered at this level for the first time in two decades—reflects a deliberate push by Tehran to reposition the bloc as a relevant regional economic platform. For Iran, this moment is less about protocol and more about strategic necessity.

At the heart of the Istanbul discussions is a long-awaited effort to revisit trade agreements, especially tariff reductions aimed at boosting intra-ECO commerce. For Iran, which has endured years of Western sanctions and now sees minimal prospects for diplomatic relief, regional economic arrangements have become a priority. The US-Israeli strikes on Iranian infrastructure earlier this year further hardened Tehran’s conviction that Western partners cannot be relied upon for economic stability.

The second Iran-ECO Conference held in Tehran in September clearly signaled Iran’s aspirations. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi openly stated that the current level of ECO cooperation “does not match the enormous capacities” of its member states. His remarks were not diplomatic rhetoric— but a candid assessment of a bloc that has failed to convert geography into economic strength. Stretching across South, Central, and West Asia, ECO should have been a natural trade corridor. Instead, it has remained largely dormant.

This renewed push comes amid a shifting global economic order. As economist Majid Shakeri points out, the US — once the world’s “demander of last resort”—no longer plays its traditional role. Washington’s declining appetite for foreign goods and its reliance on punitive tariffs have weakened the post-WWII economic framework. For ECO members, this creates both a void and an opportunity: if global structures are eroding, regional alliances must step in.

Iran seems ready to do the heavy lifting. By pushing for tariff reforms, expanded connectivity, and practical cooperation, Tehran aims to keep ECO from fading into geopolitical irrelevance. Whether the other member states share the same urgency remains uncertain. But one thing is clear: Iran is positioning itself as the driving force behind ECO’s overdue revival.

Why Another Attempt by Trump to Term Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Outfit?

US President Donald Trump has once again moved to classify select branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations. This has reopened an old debate - is this a necessity or a politically motivated classification aimed at reshaping US engagement with the outfit.

Trump’s push reflects both a strategic calculation and a political impulse. The Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928, is a sprawling and diverse movement that mixes religious activism, social services, and political participation.

Over nearly a century, it has evolved into a constellation of national chapters, each shaped by its own environment. Some branches participate peacefully in politics; others have drifted into confrontation or splintered into militancy. This complexity is precisely what makes blanket designations controversial.

Trump’s argument is straightforward: certain Brotherhood factions — particularly in Egypt, the Levant, and parts of North Africa — engage in or enable violence, undermine regional stability, and maintain ideological ties with militant groups such as Hamas. His camp sees the Brotherhood as the “mother ship” of modern political Islam, capable of inspiring radicalism even if a given chapter claims to operate peacefully.

For Trump, the designation strengthens counterterrorism posture and aligns the US with governments that have long viewed the Brotherhood as an existential threat.

But critics warn that the move is far riskier than it appears. The Brotherhood is not a single command-and-control structure. Lumping all its branches together under a terrorism label ignores the internal diversity and may end up targeting groups that operate legally, contest elections, or run social welfare networks. Such a sweeping designation risks criminalizing civil society, shutting down charities, or ensnaring individuals with loose associations — all without improving security.

There is also the geopolitical cost. Many US partners in the Middle East suppress the Brotherhood not because of terrorism, but because it challenges entrenched power structures. By echoing these regimes uncritically, Washington may be empowering authoritarianism rather than isolating true extremists. The move could also fuel anti-US sentiment by portraying America as hostile to political Islam in all its forms.

Trump’s latest attempt is therefore less about clarity and more about convenience. It may satisfy a political constituency, but it blurs the line between legitimate security concerns and ideological overreach — a distinction the US can’t afford to ignore.

 

Restricting Trading of Cash Settled Crude Oil Contracts

After closely observing commodity markets for more than a decade, one conclusion becomes unavoidable: the system has drifted far from its original purpose. Commodity futures were designed to help producers and consumers manage risk. Instead, they have become playgrounds for speculative capital. The overwhelming dominance of cash-settled crude oil contracts —now estimated to account for over 90% of global energy trades—has allowed speculation to overshadow genuine hedging. It is time to reconsider this model and work toward a gradual reduction of trading in cash-settled crude oil contracts.

Cash settlement fundamentally changes the nature of commodity markets. When traders can enter and exit massive positions without ever taking delivery, the market becomes unanchored from physical realities. Price discovery—the core justification for futures markets—suffers. Prices increasingly reflect sentiment, algorithms, and fund-driven volatility, rather than real supply–demand conditions. Producers are left navigating distorted signals; consumers face unpredictable swings that have little to do with harvests, inventories, or shipping flows.

The ultimate beneficiaries of this system are large speculators—most notably fund managers—who profit from volatility without any connection to the underlying commodity. With no storage constraints or delivery obligations, speculative capital can dominate volumes and dictate market direction. Meanwhile, genuine hedgers find themselves pushed to the margins of markets supposedly created for them.

None of this suggests that cash-settled contracts should be banned overnight. Liquidity matters. But the current balance is unhealthy and unsustainable. A phased rebalancing is both practical and necessary. Exchanges should gradually increase the share of physically deliverable contracts, strengthen warehouse receipt systems, and enforce stricter inventory reporting. Regulators should impose higher margins on purely speculative cash-settled positions to curb excessive leverage.

Physical delivery brings discipline. It forces markets to acknowledge storage capacity, transport costs, stock levels, and real economic flows. It restores transparency and aligns futures pricing with fundamentals. More importantly, it reduces the outsized influence of speculative capital on commodities that are crucial for food security, energy planning, and industrial production.

Commodity markets must serve the real economy, not the speculative ambitions of a few. The dominance of cash-settled trading has diluted that purpose. A deliberate move toward more physically grounded trading is essential to restore credibility, stability, and fairness in global commodity markets.

 

 

 

Israel kills Hezbollah military leader Tabtabai

According to Reuters, Israel killed militant group Hezbollah's top military official in an airstrike on a southern suburb of Beirut on Sunday, the Israeli military said, despite a US-brokered truce a year ago.

The strike, the first on the outskirts of the Lebanese capital in months, targeted Iran-backed Hezbollah's acting chief of staff, Ali Tabtabai, the military said in a statement.

Israel's strike crossed a "red line", Hezbollah official Mahmoud Qmati said as he stood near the bombed-out building in the Haret Hreik suburb, a Hezbollah stronghold.

Hezbollah's leadership would decide on whether and how the group would respond, he added.

Lebanon's health ministry said the strike killed five people and wounded 28 more. It hit a multi-story building, sending debris crashing into cars on the main road below.

People rushed out of their apartment buildings, fearing further bombardment, a Reuters reporter said.

The United States imposed sanctions on Tabtabai in 2016, identifying him as a key Hezbollah leader and offering a reward of up to US$5 million for information on him.

The Israeli military statement said Tabtabai "commanded most of Hezbollah's units and worked hard to restore them to readiness for war with Israel".

In a short-televised statement, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would not allow Hezbollah to rebuild its forces and that he expected the Lebanese government "to fulfill its obligation to disarm Hezbollah."

 

 

 

Pakistan Still Remains Afghanistan’s Most Practical Trade Corridor

Regional connectivity has become one of the most contested conversations in South Asia, with every major player seeking influence through trade routes, port access and infrastructure diplomacy. Amid these competing narratives, one reality often gets overlooked - when it comes to Afghanistan’s transit needs, Pakistan continues to offer the most practical, cost-efficient and geographically logical route. This is not a political claim — it is a commercial and logistical fact shaped by geography, infrastructure and decades of established trade flows.

Pakistan’s strategic location provides Afghanistan with the shortest and most direct access to the sea. For more than forty years, the Karachi–Torkham and Karachi–Chaman corridors have served as the main arteries linking Afghan traders to global markets. These routes are supported by a fully developed logistics ecosystem that includes deep-sea ports, highways, customs facilities, warehousing chains and thousands of transport operators who understand the specific dynamics of cross-border trade. This maturity reduces time, cost and uncertainty — three critical factors for a landlocked economy.

Alternatives exist, but none match Pakistan’s combination of scale and efficiency. Iran’s Bandar Abbas route is functional but burdened by longer distances, higher freight costs and the unpredictability of sanctions. The much-publicized Chabahar corridor, backed by India, remains more of a political project than a commercially competitive pathway; its capacities and market traction are still limited. Northern routes through Central Asia involve multiple border crossings, harsh climatic conditions and infrastructure gaps that add both cost and delay.

Afghanistan may wish to diversify its transit options — a reasonable aspiration for any landlocked nation. However, diversification should not be conflated with cost effectiveness. Geography remains the defining factor. Pakistan’s ports are closest, its transit infrastructure is the most established, and its logistics sector is already aligned with Afghan commercial patterns.

Despite shifting regional politics and the emergence of competing narratives, Pakistan retains a natural advantage that no alternative route has yet been able to match. It remains Afghanistan’s most practical, cost-efficient and reliable corridor to the world — a fact that regional policymakers should recognize as they debate connectivity, competition and the future of trade in South Asia.

 

Gazans Being Buried Under Broken Promises

At times, one gets a chilling feeling that Gazans have been buried alive under the rubbles—not only of their shattered homes, but of the world’s broken promises. The Trump-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was marketed as a bold diplomatic breakthrough, complete with plans for an interim administrative setup backed by a handful of states. But what followed was not diplomacy—it was a carefully choreographed deception.

The promised administrative structure, which was supposed to stabilize governance and allow humanitarian breathing space, has never moved beyond press statements and political theatrics. Nothing substantial has been established. No credible mechanism has been deployed. The so-called “international support” evaporated the moment cameras were switched off. The agreement now stands as an empty shell, useful only for speeches and selective justification.

Meanwhile, Israel has shown absolute contempt for the spirit and substance of the ceasefire. The killings have not stopped; on the contrary these have intensified. Entire blocks have been vaporized. Families have vanished under collapsed concrete. The word “ceasefire” has become a cruel joke—a hollow term used to mask a campaign that continues with alarming impunity.

Even more disturbing is Israel’s pursuit of an anti-Hamas armed group inside Gaza. Instead of honoring the agreement, Israel appears determined to reengineer Gaza’s internal dynamics through coercion and proxy militias. This is not conflict resolution; it is social engineering under the guise of security.

For Gazans—already trapped in the world’s largest open-air prison—the message is brutally clear: no agreement will protect them, no international promise will be honored, and no external actor will intervene before the next bombardment begins. The world watches, counts casualties, and moves on.

What remains today is not just rubble, but a moral collapse. A ceasefire that exists only on paper, an international community performing selective outrage, and a population slowly erased from global consciousness.

Gaza does not need more signatures. It needs protection. It needs enforcement. And above all, it needs a world willing to acknowledge that “ceasefire” cannot coexist with continued annihilation.

Indian Search for an Afghanistan Corridor—Bypassing Pakistan

For decades, India’s access to Afghanistan has been shaped—more accurately, restricted—by geography and politics. A quick look at the regional map explains the dilemma, India shares no border with Afghanistan, and the only direct land pathway runs through Pakistan. But with Islamabad refusing transit to Indian goods, New Delhi has to explore alternative corridors. Over time, these alternatives have evolved from theoretical proposals into functioning routes that reduce Pakistan’s leverage and expand India’s strategic reach. To read details click https://shkazmipk.com/india-afghanistan-trade/

Trump-Mamdani Meeting: An Unexpected but Constructive Moment

In an unusually cordial Oval Office meeting, President Donald Trump and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani set aside months of mutual criticism to explore areas of cooperation. The encounter between two ideologically opposite figures was striking not only for its substance but for its tone. Gone were the harsh labels and charged rhetoric. Instead, both men emphasized affordability, shared responsibility, and their mutual interest in seeing New York City thrive.

Trump, who had previously characterized Mamdani in stark ideological terms, repeatedly stepped in to shield the mayor-elect from adversarial questions. The president even joked about photo angles and urged reporters to acknowledge areas of agreement. Mamdani, for his part, maintained his positions while stressing that ideological differences should not impede work on the city’s urgent economic challenges.

For the 34-year-old mayor-elect, the meeting was politically advantageous. He demonstrated a willingness to engage constructively with the president without compromising on principle. Trump’s warm remarks — including saying he would feel comfortable living in New York under Mamdani — undercut months of attempts by critics to paint the mayor-elect as a radical threat. The optics alone blunted a central Republican attack line heading into the midterms.

Trump also gained from the interaction. By surprising observers with an affable, conciliatory tone, he created a media moment that highlighted his ability to find common ground across ideological lines. His focus on affordability resonated with voters who have long cited economic pressures as their top concern, and he capitalized on the contrast between expectations of conflict and the reality of cooperation.

The sharpest blow fell on GOP strategists and media voices who had sought to build a sustained anti-Mamdani narrative. Trump’s own comments deflated that effort in minutes, raising questions about the future viability of that messaging. Meanwhile, Mamdani’s media critics found their lines of attack weakened as Trump dismissed hostile framing during the press exchange.

Beyond the political theater, the meeting holds meaningful implications for New York. Trump’s earlier signals about potentially withholding federal funds now seem remote, and the prospects for coordination on affordability have improved. If both leaders maintain this pragmatic tone, New York City stands to benefit from a rare moment of cooperation at the highest levels.

In a polarized era, the encounter offered a refreshing reminder that dialogue — even between unlikely partners — can still yield positive outcomes for all involved.