MAGA and Nazism: A Disturbing Comparison

Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) slogan has, for millions of Americans, become a rallying cry for patriotism, pride, and national revival. But peel back the red caps, the rallies, and the rhetoric, and one cannot help but be reminded of the echoes of Hitler’s National Socialism (Nazism) in 1930s Germany. While history never repeats itself in the same form, it often rhymes. MAGA and Nazism may be separated by geography, time, and context, yet the patterns of politics of resentment, identity, and exclusion are hauntingly similar.

Is MAGA just politics, or is it an early verse in a dangerous rhyme of history?

Both Trump and Hitler rose from discontent. Hitler exploited post–World War I humiliation, economic despair, and national insecurity; Trump harnessed the frustration of a middle America alienated by globalization, immigration, and cultural liberalism. Both channeled that anger not toward solutions, but toward scapegoats — Jews and minorities in Nazi Germany, immigrants, Muslims, and “global elites” in Trump’s America.

The rhetoric of victimhood is another striking parallel. Hitler constantly reminded Germans they were betrayed by “traitors” and cheated by the world. Trump, in turn, insists that America has been “stabbed in the back” by foreign nations, immigrants, and even domestic institutions — media, courts, and his political opponents. The cry of “America First” is less about revival than about us-versus-them tribalism.

Though, MAGA has not built concentration camps or embarked on genocide. But the infrastructure of hate is disturbingly familiar - demonization of minorities, delegitimization of institutions, glorification of strongman rule, and calls to suppress dissent. Nazism began not with gas chambers but with words, slogans, and rallies that normalized extremism — precisely where MAGA thrives today.

Critics may argue that comparing Trump to Hitler is alarmist. Yet democracies don’t collapse overnight; they are chipped away, one “movement” at a time. MAGA, like Nazism, cloaks itself in the flag, promises restoration of greatness, and scapegoats the vulnerable. The lesson of history is clear: when leaders weaponize nationalism and fear, the road to authoritarianism is short and perilous.

Arab Silence on Iran Sanctions: Hypocrisy at Its Peak

When Western powers tighten the noose of sanctions on Iran, one would expect Muslim nations—bound by faith and shared history—to object. Yet the Arab capitals remain silent, some even nodding in approval. Why? Because geopolitics has conveniently buried the idea of the Ummah.

For decades, Arab regimes have painted Iran not as a fellow Muslim state but as a sectarian rival, a destabilizing Shia power encroaching on their Sunni domains. From Hezbollah in Lebanon to the Houthis in Yemen, Tehran’s fingerprints unsettle Arab rulers. For them, US-led sanctions are not injustice—these are containment.

Add to this the dependency on Washington. The Gulf monarchies thrive on American protection, arms, and trade. To defy US diktats is to risk the very foundations of their security. So they remain mute, even when sanctions cripple ordinary Iranians.

These same states cry foul over Palestine, condemn Western double standards in Gaza, and rally Muslim solidarity—only to abandon it when it comes to Iran. The truth is simple - Arab rulers see a weakened Iran as good for oil markets, good for their regimes, and good for their new friends in Tel Aviv.

Sanctions on Iran are discriminatory, yes. But the bigger betrayal is the silence of Arab leaders who claim to defend Muslim dignity yet quietly cheer when one of their own is strangled.

Sanctions on Iran: A Weapon of Discrimination

The United Nations reinstated an arms embargo and other sanctions on Iran on Saturday following a process triggered by key European powers that Tehran has warned will be met with a harsh response.

Britain, France and Germany triggered the return of sanctions on Iran at the UN Security Council over accusations the country has violated a 2015 deal that aimed to stop it developing a nuclear bomb.

The most disappointing fact is that Iran has been persistently denying it seeks nuclear weapons.

The latest “snapback” sanctions on Iran are being propagated as a principled stand for global security. In reality, these are a textbook case of discriminatory politics masquerading as international law.

When European countries and the United Nations reimposed sweeping restrictions on Iran, they claimed it was about enforcing the nuclear deal. But anyone watching global affairs knows the truth - rules are not applied equally.

Some states, Israel being on the top, are allowed to violate treaties, wage wars, and commit human rights abuses without facing meaningful penalties. As against this, Iran is being punished relentlessly and disproportionately for nearly half a century.

This double standard makes the sanctions discriminatory. International law is supposed to be blind, yet it routinely blinks when powerful countries or their allies are in the dock. If a rule is enforced against one country but ignored for another, then it is not law at all—it is selective punishment.

The impact of these sanctions is another form of injustice. These do not primarily weaken Iran’s ruling regime. Instead, these strangle ordinary Iranians—families struggling to buy food, patients unable to access medicines, students cut off from opportunities abroad.

These sanctions drive inflation, hollow out the middle class, and breed resentment. Yet policymakers continue to inflict this suffering while pretending it advances diplomacy.

The legality of the move itself is shaky. Critics, including Russia and China, argue that the so-called snapback mechanism was triggered improperly. If great powers can bend procedures to suit their interests, then the credibility of international agreements collapses. Why would any state trust deals if enforcement depends on politics rather than principle?

Supporters of sanctions insist these are a peaceful alternative to war. But sanctions do not bring peace—these are economic warfare and are designed to coerce, to cripple, and to remind weaker nations of their place in a hierarchy where might makes right.

Scrutiny should come through fair, consistent, and negotiated mechanisms—not through discriminatory punishment imposed by those who selectively police the world. Otherwise, sanctions cease to be instruments of justice and become tools of domination.

Unless international sanctions are applied evenly, transparently, and with safeguards against humanitarian harm, these will continue to deepen global mistrust.

The sanctions will not be accepted as a neutral enforcement of law, but as another weapon of geopolitics. And the more the world tolerates selective justice, the more fragile the entire international order becomes.

If global powers truly want compliance and stability, they must abandon the hypocrisy of discriminatory sanctions. Anything less will only harden grievances, destabilize regions, and erode what little legitimacy international institutions still command.

While the sanctions should be about justice, at present these are about power. It will not be wrong to say that in case of Iran, the power is not being used to usher peace, but to punish the strongest opponent of Israel.

 

 

Protests and walkouts eclipse Netanyahu's UN appearance

The scene in New York — empty UN rows, diplomatic walkouts and sustained street protests, including large marches from Times Square to the UN and demonstrations outside Netanyahu’s Manhattan hotel — crystallized the political cost of the address.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to the United Nations General Assembly on Friday was an attempt at a carefully staged and combative defense of Israel’s aggressive campaign in Gaza and its wider military actions across the region. Yet the performance could not mask the widening gulf between his narrative and the findings of international institutions, public-health agencies, and human-rights organizations.

Netanyahu employed one prominent map, alongside visual aids and rhetorical flourishes critics deemed theatrical props, and he repeated the phrase “Israel must finish the job.”

The line landed amid visible diplomatic rebuke - dozens of delegations staged walkouts and large sections of the Assembly remained conspicuously empty, while thousands of demonstrators in New York took to the streets demanding a ceasefire and accountability.

Independent UN mechanisms and leading rights groups have drawn a far grimmer picture than the one Netanyahu offered. In a September report, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry concluded that the Israeli conduct in Gaza meets the legal threshold of genocide.

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented patterns of indiscriminate bombardment, forced displacement, and the deliberate deprivation of essential services that they say amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Public-health agencies and UN partners, drawing on figures from Gaza’s Ministry of Health, estimate that more than 65,500 people have been killed since October 2023.

The war has forced the displacement of up to 90 percent of the population, while famine conditions have taken hold in several areas. The World Health Organization has confirmed hundreds of deaths from malnutrition, many of them children.

Beyond Gaza, Israel’s military actions have extended across the region, with deadly strikes in Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, where more than 1,065 people were killed in the 12-Day War. Attacks have also targeted sites in Qatar and other parts of West Asia, widening the conflict’s footprint and drawing condemnation for what critics describe as a campaign of destabilization.

Netanyahu sought to rebut such charges by pointing to evacuation orders and intelligence claims, and by portraying Iran as the backbone of a regional “terror axis.”

Those assertions did not persuade critics who point out that warnings alone cannot absolve a belligerent of responsibility for operations that hit hospitals, shelters, and schools or that substantially hinder lifesaving aid.

The repeated refrain to “finish the job” in an enclave of nearly two million civilians risks being read not as a constrained military objective but as justification for actions with catastrophic humanitarian and legal consequences.

A particularly contentious decision during the UN appearance was the transmission of the speech into Gaza via loudspeakers on the border and, according to multiple reports, through mobile devices.

Framed by Tel Aviv as communication aimed at captives, the broadcasts were described by many humanitarian advocates and Palestinian journalists as coercive psychological pressure imposed on a population already under bombardment and facing starvation.

 

 

PSX benchmark index closes at yet another record high

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) remained positive throughout the week, closing at a record high of 162,257 points on Friday, September 26, 2025, posting a weekly gain of 4,220 points or 2.67%WoW.

Bullish sentiments were supported by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s successful meetings with US President Trump on Thursday, and the signing of long-awaited PKR1.2 trillion debt arrangement with banks to retire power sector circular debt.

Consequently, E&Ps and Power sector scrips remained highest index contributors, along with Commercial Banks. Moreover, Pakistan is expecting a delegation of Saudi businesses to explore bilateral trade opportunities following the recent strategic defense agreement.

The said positives boosted investors’ confidence, driving weekly market participation to an all-time high, with average daily traded volume increasing by 20%WoW to 2.2 billion shares.

Fertilizer sales surged in August 2025, with urea and DAP offtakes rising 46%YoY and 53%YoY, respectively, supported by discount offerings and lower inventories.

Foreign exchange reserves held by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) increased by US$22 million to US$14.4 billion as of September 19, 2025. PKR appreciated by 0.03%YoY to close at PKR281.37 to a US dollar.

Other major news flow during the week included: 1) IMF presses Pakistan on missed tax targets, 2) Power tariffs set for 10% cut after PKR1.225 trillion debt repayment, 3) Japan intends to invest in Reko Diq project, 4) Unilateral tariff concessions on 700 items sought from China, and 5) FBR chief says no proposal for mini-budget.

Power generation, E&P, and Pharmaceutical were amongst the top performing sectors, while Woollen, Leasing companies, and textile spinning were the laggards.

Major selling was visible from Bank and Foreigners with net sell of US$29.5 million. Mutual funds and Individuals emerged net buyer with net buy of US$42.3 million.

Top performing scrips of the week were, KEL, BWCL, HUBC, DGKC, and MARI, while laggards included: TGL, EPCL, POML, PKGP, and BNWM.

According to AKD Securities, PSX is expected to remain positive in the coming weeks, with the upcoming IMF review remaining in the limelight.

The benchmark index is anticipated to sustain its upward trajectory, with a target of 165,215 points by end December 2025, primarily driven by strong earnings in Fertilizers, sustained ROEs in Banks, and improving cash flows of E&Ps and OMCs, benefiting from falling interest rates and economic stability. The top picks of the brokerage house include: OGDC, PPL, PSO, FFC, ENGROH, MCB, LUCK, DGKC, FCCL, INDU, ILP, and SYS. 

Tony Blair being tipped to run Gaza

According to the reports published in Haaretz and the Times of Israel the White House is backing a proposal to install former British prime minister Tony Blair at the head of a new “Gaza International Transitional Authority” (GITA), which would serve as Gaza’s supreme political and legal authority for as long as five years.

The body, modeled on transitional administrations in Kosovo and Timor-Leste, would initially be based in Egypt and later enter Gaza with a supposedly UN-endorsed, largely Arab peacekeeping force.

According to the details, GITA would oversee a technocratic Palestinian Executive Authority tasked with delivering services, running ministries such as health and education, and supervising vetted civil police.

Hamas is explicitly excluded, while the Palestinian Authority (PA) is promised an eventual role — but with no firm timetable.

By contrast, the UN General Assembly recently backed the “New York Declaration,” a plan for a one-year interim administration that would then hand power to a reformed PA following elections.

Arab states have warned that their support for any peacekeeping force depends on a credible political horizon toward Palestinian statehood. Many fear that the Blair plan offers only a more palatable form of occupation, granting Israel reassurances while denying Palestinians genuine sovereignty.

Blair’s involvement is especially controversial. While he enjoys ties with Arab leaders from the Persian Gulf, Palestinians broadly resent his record as Middle East envoy and his role in the US-led invasion of Iraq. To many, his leadership would symbolize not liberation but a continuation of externally imposed control.

The plan comes against the backdrop of Washington’s earlier floated ideas — including transforming Gaza into a “Riviera” or even facilitating mass removal of Palestinians — rhetoric widely condemned as edging toward ethnic cleansing.

Though the details from the Blair proposal do not explicitly call for displacement, critics warn that without guarantees of rights, participation, and a binding timeline, Gaza risks foreign control and loss of sovereignty.

 

Yemeni drone attack injures more than 20 in Israeli city of Eilat

According to media reports, at least 22 people were injured, including two seriously, after a drone fired from Yemen hit the city of Eilat in southern Israel on the Red Sea coast on Wednesday.

Video and images from emergency responders and the Israeli military show the drone landed near stores and restaurants. The drone was fired during the final hours of the holiday of Rosh Hashanah, which marks the Jewish New Year.

Houthis have repeatedly launched drones and ballistic missiles at Eilat and other areas in southern Israel, but these launches are frequently intercepted. It’s unclear how Wednesday’s drone penetrated Israel’s air defenses.

“Interception attempts were made, and search and rescue teams are operating in the area where the report was received regarding the impact,” the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement.

Many of those who were injured in the attack suffered shrapnel from the explosion, according to Magen David Adom (MDA), Israel’s emergency response service.

A 60-year-old man who was seriously injured was struck by shrapnel in his limbs, while a seriously injured 26-year-old man suffered shrapnel wounds to his chest, MDA said. One other person suffered moderate injuries, MDA said.

The IDF said in a separate statement that its troops “are assisting in evacuating civilians from the area and providing initial medical care.”

“An IDF helicopter was dispatched and is currently assisting in evacuating injured individuals from the scene,” it added.

The Houthi militant group in Yemen later claimed responsibility for the attack, calling it a “qualitative military operation.”

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz vowed to revenge against Houthis following the attack on the city.

“The Houthi terrorists refuse to learn from Iran, Lebanon, and Gaza – and they will learn the hard way,” Katz said in a statement.

“Whoever harms Israel will be harmed sevenfold,” Katz added.

Earlier in September, a drone launched from Yemen by Houthi rebels hit the arrivals hall at Ramon Airport in southern Israel on Sunday, the Israeli military and the Israel Airports Authority said.

No sirens were sounded, the IDF said, since the drone was identified but not classified as hostile. An “extensive investigation” was expected.

Since Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza began in October 2023, the country has come under fire from missiles and drones from the Houthis in Yemen, who claim to strike Israel in solidarity with the Palestinians.

Israel has carried out waves of strikes targeting Houthi military facilities and civilian infrastructure the IDF says is used by the Houthis. But the long-range exchange of fire has escalated recently.

In late August, Yemen’s Houthi rebels vowed to take revenge for the killing of their prime minister and other political leaders by Israeli airstrikes earlier that month.