Fire at Dhaka Airport: Accident or Sabotage?

A roaring blaze at Dhaka’s Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport cargo complex has ignited more than flames — it has sparked suspicion. Was it a tragic mishap born of negligence, or a calculated attempt to disrupt Bangladesh’s export lifeline? The line between accident and sabotage has rarely appeared so blurred.

The massive fire that swept through the cargo complex has raised troubling questions. Was it merely another case of poor safety and outdated infrastructure, or does it point to something more sinister — a deliberate act of sabotage? The truth is yet to emerge, but the scale of the damage and timing of the incident demand a deeper look.

According to initial reports, the blaze engulfed multiple warehouses, destroying export-bound goods and disrupting one of Bangladesh’s busiest trade arteries. Officials have launched a probe, but as of now, the cause remains “unknown.” Electrical short-circuiting — a common culprit in Bangladesh’s industrial fires — cannot be ruled out. The fact is incident occurred inside a high-security airport zone making it difficult to accept negligence as the only explanation.

Bangladesh has witnessed a string of devastating fires this year, from markets and garment factories to chemical depots. Each tragedy has exposed the country’s weak enforcement of fire safety codes and inadequate emergency response. However, when such an incident occurs within an airport’s cargo village — a zone under tight surveillance and restricted access — suspicion naturally grows.

If investigators find multiple ignition points, traces of accelerants, or evidence of tampering with security systems, the narrative could shift toward deliberate sabotage. In recent months, regional instability and heightened smuggling crackdowns have disrupted illicit trade networks. Could the fire have been intended to erase evidence or cripple exports? The possibility cannot be dismissed outright.

At stake is not just property loss, but international confidence in Bangladesh’s logistics chain. The cargo complex handles billions in textile exports; even temporary disruption can ripple through global supply lines. Authorities must therefore pursue this probe with utmost transparency and professionalism.

Whether the Dhaka airport fire proves to be an accident born of negligence or a calculated act of sabotage, it exposes a deeper vulnerability: the fragility of Bangladesh’s critical infrastructure.

The incident should serve as a wake-up call — to upgrade safety systems, tighten surveillance, and confront the culture of complacency before another disaster strikes.

 

United States Still Eyes Afghanistan

Washington’s withdrawal ended its military presence, not its strategic ambitions in the heart of Asia

When the United States hurriedly withdrew from Afghanistan in August 2021, it claimed to have ended its “forever war.” Yet, Afghanistan has not slipped off Washington’s strategic radar. The methods have changed, but the motives remain. The US still views Afghanistan as a vital piece on the Eurasian chessboard — prized for its geography, intelligence value, and economic undercurrents.

First, Afghanistan’s narcotics economy remains an unspoken factor. Despite Taliban claims of banning poppy cultivation, UN data confirms continued opium production, which fuels regional criminal networks. For decades, allegations have persisted that Western intelligence agencies — especially the CIA — have tolerated or even exploited the drug trade to fund covert operations. Renewed US engagement, framed as “counter-narcotics cooperation,” could restore informal oversight of these financial flows.

Second, the chaotic exit left behind billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware — aircraft, vehicles, ammunition, and advanced surveillance systems. Much of it reportedly fell into Taliban hands or black-market networks. Washington would prefer to track, retrieve, or neutralize sensitive technologies before they reach Iran, China, or Russia. A covert re-entry, through intelligence operations or private contractors, serves this purpose well.

Third, Afghanistan’s location remains uniquely strategic. It borders Iran, China’s Xinjiang region, and several Central Asian states under Russian influence. For US planners, it is an ideal observation post to monitor three rivals simultaneously. Hence the growing emphasis on “over-the-horizon” intelligence operations launched from Gulf or Central Asian bases.

Fourth, China’s expanding Belt and Road Initiative through Pakistan and Central Asia heightens Washington’s unease. Beijing’s efforts to stabilize Afghanistan and integrate it into regional connectivity projects threaten to edge the US out of Eurasia. Re-engagement under humanitarian, counterterrorism, or anti-drug programs provides Washington a convenient pretext to retain influence.

Finally, a chronically unstable Afghanistan serves certain geopolitical interests. It prevents regional integration and complicates projects like Iran’s Chabahar port or China’s CPEC. Controlled instability ensures continued leverage without the burdens of occupation.

In essence, the US may not reoccupy Afghanistan with troops, but it seeks reassertion through intelligence, proxies, and influence networks. The 2021 withdrawal ended one phase of occupation but opened another — quieter, subtler, and more strategic. Afghanistan remains too valuable for Washington to abandon — not for peace, but for power.

Trump’s America: Angrier, Divided, and Diminished

Donald Trump has left an indelible mark on American politics — and not necessarily for the better. As anti-Trump demonstrations re-emerge across major cities, the United States stands at a moral and institutional crossroads. The man who promised to “Make America Great Again” may have, in fact, made it angrier, more divided, and dangerously unpredictable.

Trump entered politics as an outsider, a businessman who vowed to drain the Washington “swamp.” Instead, he deepened the very rot he claimed to fight. His tenure blurred the line between governance and self-promotion. Policy became theatre, and truth became negotiable. America’s traditional allies were alienated, global agreements torn up, and diplomacy reduced to Twitter outbursts. Under the banner of “America First,” the United States often stood alone.

Economically, Trump’s initial years delivered the illusion of prosperity — rising markets, corporate tax cuts, and record-low unemployment. But beneath that glitter lay unsustainable deficits, widened inequality, and a fragile economy that crumbled under the first major shock of COVID-19. His pandemic response was chaotic, driven by denial and blame rather than science or empathy. The cost was measured not only in lives lost but in the erosion of public trust.

Perhaps Trump’s most lasting legacy is the deep polarization he cultivated. He thrived on division — turning neighbors into adversaries and truth into casualty. His relentless attacks on media, judiciary, and federal institutions weakened the very foundations that once made America resilient. The January 6th attack on the Capitol was not an aberration; it was the logical culmination of years of incitement and contempt for democratic norms.

Internationally, Trump diminished America’s moral authority. He cozied up to autocrats, undermined multilateralism, and reduced global leadership to transactional bargaining. Even where he scored diplomatic points — such as Middle East normalization deals — the motivation seemed less about peace and more about personal legacy. The result: a world less trusting of American commitments and more skeptical of its leadership.

Today’s protests are not just about Trump’s politics — these are about what America has become under his shadow. A nation once admired for its democratic strength now struggles with internal distrust, misinformation, and fear of its own divisions. Trump did not create America’s anger, but he weaponized it — and that will remain his most enduring contribution.

Let us explore, has Trump made the United States better or worse? The evidence is painfully clear. He has exposed America’s vulnerabilities, exploited its divisions, and left behind a democracy that feels more fragile than ever. The real question is whether America can recover from the politics of resentment he unleashed — or whether Trump’s version of greatness has permanently altered the American soul.

 

Media reports rarely tell truth about crude oil dynamics

Crude oil is produced in many countries, but mostly traded at United States and European exchanges. The producers are often cheated through “cash-settled contracts,” where traders make or lose money without ever taking physical delivery. The real beneficiaries are traders and brokers, while producers are conveniently blamed for rise or fall in production.

The global oil market thrives on numbers — and the manipulation of those numbers. In recent months, a wave of contradictory reports about production, inventories, and demand forecasts has left analysts scratching their heads. This confusion is not the result of poor data collection; it is often a calculated strategy to influence markets, politics, and perceptions.

OPEC Plus producers have long mastered the art of “strategic opacity.” By understating their actual output, they create the illusion of compliance with agreed production cuts and keep prices artificially firm.

At the same time, major consumers — particularly the United States and China — have their own reasons to talk down prices by projecting excess supply or slowing demand. The numbers they release, or the ones they emphasize, are shaped not by accuracy but by advantage.

Even institutions with global credibility — the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) — frequently publish forecasts that seem less about data science and more about timing. Their revisions often coincide with key policy announcements or diplomatic shifts.

When oil prices rise too fast, one report warns of “demand destruction.” When prices fall, another quickly highlights “tight supply.” Such contradictions do not reflect improved understanding; they reflect managed narratives.

Private analytics firms and trading houses add another layer of distortion. In a market driven by algorithmic trading and speculative bets, even a single misleading headline can trigger billions in movements. The ambiguity surrounding real supply-demand dynamics benefits those who can manipulate sentiment faster than facts can catch up. For import-dependent nations like Pakistan, this fog of misinformation results in erratic import costs, unpredictable subsidies, and fiscal strain.

The fundamental problem is that oil data remains under the control of those with vested interests. Despite advances in satellite tracking and tanker monitoring, governments and cartels still decide what to disclose — and when. Transparency is talked about endlessly, but practiced sparingly.

Oil has always been more than just an energy commodity; it is a weapon of economic control. The constant release of conflicting numbers is part of a broader game — one where perception, not reality, drives policy and profit. Until the world moves toward truly independent and verifiable reporting of global oil flows, the “truth” about crude will remain flexible, convenient, and profitable — for a select few.

In the end, the market is not confused by accident. It is kept confused — deliberately.

PSX benchmark index records nominal increase despite volatility

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PX) ended the week on a positive note, albeit remaining volatile throughout the week, pressured by investor skepticism given uncertainty stemming from heightened geopolitical tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Pakistan secured a staff-level agreement with IMF in its second review for the US$7 billion Extended Fund Facility program and first review of Resilience and Sustainability Facility. The benchmark index gained 708 points during the week, witnessing it’s second highest single-day gain of 7,033 points on Tuesday, up 0.4%WoW, to close at 163,806 level.

Market participation strengthened by 36%WoW with average daily traded volume reported at 2.2 billion shares, as compared to 1.6 billion shares a week ago.

On the macroeconomic front, petroleum imports for September 2025 were reported at US$1.2 billion, down 11%YoY.

Textiles and clothing exports for September 2025 were recorded at US$1.6 billion, down 2%YoY.

Roshan Digital Accounts inflows for September 2025 were recorded at US$196 million, up 17%YoY

LSM output increased by 0.5%YoY during August 2025.

Foreign exchange reserves held by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) increased by US$21 million to US$14.4 billion as of October 10, 2025.

Other major news flow during the week included: 1) Pakistan and Saudi Arabia agreed to explore new trade, investment avenues, 2) Shehbaz and COAS to visit Saudi Arabia from October 26, 3) Pakistan and Vietnam begin PTA talks to expand trade, investment, 4) Nepra gives the go-ahead to effect CTBCM, and 5) Petrol and diesel prices slashed.

Vanaspati & Allied Industries, Commercial Banks, INV.Banks/ INV.Cos/ Securities Cos, Power Generation & Distribution and Paper & Board were amongst the top performing sectors, while Close-end Mutual Funds, Leasing Companies, Modarabas, Textile Weaving and Leather & Tanneries were amongst the laggards.

Major selling was recorded by Mutual Funds and Insurance aggregating to US$36.5 million, which was mostly absorbed by Companies recording net buy of US$30.3 million.

Top performing scrips of the week were: PSEL, BOP, SSOM, PSX, and LOTCHEM, while laggards included: GADT, PKGP, PABC, and JVDC.

According to AKD Securities, believes the bullish momentum o continue given successful staff-level agreement 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.

The outlook is supported by the lack of alternative investment avenues and the attractive valuation of local equities, offering attractive dividend yield.

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

 

Dollar Bomb Ticking Faster and Louder

When I uploaded my post “Dollar Bomb Can Burst Any Time” on August 24, 2020, only a few took it seriously. Five years later, the warning sounds louder — and far more credible — as de-dollarization gains momentum across continents. The same excesses once confined to American finance have now evolved into a global geopolitical fault line. 

The warning signs are flashing brighter than ever. The scale of money creation in the United States has reached alarming proportions. With public debt now exceeding US$35 trillion and fiscal deficits continuing to mount, the Federal Reserve faces a trap of its own making. Keeping interest rates high risks plunging the economy into recession, while lowering them could reawaken inflation. Either way, the era of cheap money that once fueled global dominance of the dollar is drawing to a close.

Now critics openly say that the so-called “resilient” US economy rests on shaky foundations. Growth is being financed not by productivity, but by unprecedented monetary expansion. More than 60 cents of every dollar the federal government spends is borrowed or printed. This illusion of prosperity masks structural decay — the same speculative excesses and fiscal irresponsibility that triggered the 2008 financial crisis, now magnified many times over.

The repercussions are no longer confined to American borders. A growing number of countries are openly challenging the dollar’s hegemony. The BRICS alliance — now expanded to include energy-rich nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE — is laying the groundwork for a new trade settlement system that bypasses the US financial network. China is leading the charge, pushing for the yuan in energy transactions and bilateral trade, while Russia and Iran have turned to local currency arrangements to circumvent sanctions.

The Gulf states, long considered the backbone of the petrodollar system, are quietly rethinking their dependence on the greenback. Deals between Beijing and Riyadh to price oil in yuan have sent shockwaves through Washington. Once the world’s major energy producers start accepting payments in other currencies, the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency will erode faster than expected.

The US, meanwhile, continues to export inflation through its fiscal recklessness. Ordinary Americans face rising living costs, while policymakers keep resorting to debt-financed spending. Analysts warn that if confidence in the dollar falters, the US could face a sovereign debt crisis of its own — one that no amount of printing can avert. When foreign creditors and central banks begin to question Washington’s ability to repay without devaluation, the “safe haven” myth collapses.

Gold purchases by central banks have surged to multi-decade highs, underscoring a quiet but steady return to real assets. The shift is not just financial — it is geopolitical. The world’s emerging powers are building an alternative order that no longer depends on US control of money, trade, or technology.

If the dollar bomb bursts, the consequences will be global and enduring. Markets will convulse, commodities will reprice, and the old financial hierarchy will crumble. The illusion of endless American solvency will fade — replaced by a multipolar monetary world, one no longer bound by the dictates of Washington.

Gaza: Ceasefire Brings Pause, Not Peace

The guns may be silent, but Gaza’s agony speaks louder than ever.

A so-called ceasefire has brought convoys of aid — yet little real relief.

Food, medicine, and hope still arrive in drips, controlled by politics, not compassion.

Since the ceasefire, the World Food Program has doubled its food deliveries, moving over 30,000 metric tons into Gaza. UN agencies report that food parcels now reach around two million people, while a handful of bakeries and community kitchens distribute bread and cooked meals. Hospitals, crippled by months of bombardment, are receiving trauma kits and essential drugs. Fuel is trickling in to keep generators and water plants barely alive.

Beneath the headlines of “increased aid,” the reality is bleak. Bureaucratic controls, damaged crossings, and arbitrary inspections keep the flow of food and medicine painfully slow.

Relief convoys wait for hours—sometimes days—before getting clearance. Many trucks carry only a fraction of the approved supplies. Even after the ceasefire, Gaza remains under a suffocating blockade that decides who eats, who heals, and who waits.

The world celebrates “humanitarian access,” but it is access rationed by politics. The people of Gaza are being fed just enough to survive, not enough to recover. Hospitals still run without electricity, clean water is scarce, and disease spreads in overcrowded shelters. Aid workers describe the situation bluntly: this is not relief—it is controlled suffering.

If the international community truly wants peace, it must go beyond token shipments and staged announcements. Gaza needs unrestricted, sustained aid and a genuine commitment to rebuild lives, not just manage despair. Otherwise, the ceasefire will be remembered not as a turning point, but as another pause before the next tragedy.