Venezuela: US attempt to change regime

The White House's announcement Wednesday that it had deployed three warships to the coast of Venezuela has raised fears among antiwar and human rights advocates of the US becoming embroiled in another potential "regime change" quagmire.

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has accused Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro of being one of the world's largest traffickers of illegal narcotics and of leading the cocaine trafficking gang Cartel de los Soles.

In 2020, Maduro was charged with narco-terrorism and conspiracy to import cocaine into the US, with the first Trump administration promising a US$15 million reward for his arrest. The Biden administration increased that bounty to US$25 million before Trump, earlier this month, doubled it to US$50 million.

Trump also expanded the litany of accusations against Maduro, alleging that he is the kingpin of Mexico's Sinaloa cartel, an allegation that Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says there is no evidence to support.

Even before Maduro's indictment, however, Trump had long sought to oust him from power. During his first term, he repeatedly suggested that the US should invade Venezuela to take Maduro out—an idea that his top aides rebuffed.

Trump instead dramatically escalated sanctions on Venezuela, which many studies have shown contributed to the nation's historic economic crisis. His former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo explicitly acknowledged that the goal of these sanctions was to push the Venezuelan people to topple Maduro.

In 2023, following his first presidency, Trump lamented at a rally that the US had to purchase oil from Venezuela, saying that if he were in charge, "We would have taken [Venezuela] over; we would have gotten to all that oil; it would have been right next door."

The exact objective of Trump's destroyers, which are expected to arrive on the Venezuelan coast as soon as Sunday, remains unclear.

But the Venezuelan government and others in the region have perceived Trump's threats as a serious provocation.

On Monday, Maduro said he would mobilize 4.5 million militia members following what he called "the renewal of extravagant, bizarre, and outlandish threats" from Trump. After the announcement of approaching warships, those militias began to be deployed throughout the country.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro issued a harsh warning to Trump following the news. "The gringos are mad if they think invading Venezuela will solve their problem," he said. "They are dragging Venezuela into a Syria-like situation, with the problem that they are dragging Colombia too."

The American antiwar group CodePink condemned the deployment of ships as a "reckless escalation" that "dangerously militarizes the Caribbean and brings our region closer to war."

The group argues that Venezuela's role in drug trafficking is being overblown to justify an invasion. They note that the US's own internal assessments of global drug trafficking have not identified Venezuela as a primary transit country. They also cite the UN's latest World Drug Report, which did not find Venezuela to be a central node of the drug trade.

The Washington Office on Latin America, a DC-based human rights group, has warned that a regime change war would likely be a catastrophe on par with the invasion of Iraq two decades prior.

"The 'victorious' US military would likely find itself governing an impoverished country with broken institutions, trying to hand over power to an opposition weakened by repression and exile, and probably facing an insurgency made up of regime diehards, criminal groups, and even Colombian guerrillas," they said. "There is no evidence that this approach would lead to a democratic transition in Venezuela."

"These aggressive policies seek to extend US dominance in Latin America, no matter the human cost," CodePink said. "The people of Venezuela, like the people of the United States, deserve peace, dignity, and sovereignty, not threats, blockades, and warships."

Courtesy: Common Dreams 

Trump Era: A Retribution Presidency

Back in the days when George W. Bush was president, the appointment of John Bolton as US ambassador the United Nations triggered an uproar among Democrats and even a few Republicans who viewed him as a less-than-diplomatic hawk and loose cannon. He resurfaced a decade later in the first Trump administration as a national security adviser, but soon ran into trouble over disagreements with his new boss.

Then he wrote a book about it. In it, he excoriated Trump as an alleged conspiracy theorist with little understanding of foreign policy or government. More recently, Bolton has said the 79-year-old president’s renewed interest in a Russia-Ukraine peace deal is because he wants the Nobel Peace Prize.

For years, Trump has slammed the book and Bolton, alleging the book revealed classified information despite Bolton’s contention it had been cleared by the government.

On Friday, it all escalated. Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation under director Kash Patel—a Trump loyalist who has alluded to retaliation against political opponents—searched Bolton’s home and office, a raid said to be tied to classified documents. 

In the early days of his second term, Trump pulled the security details protecting Bolton and several other former officials. Bolton had been targeted by Iran for his role in the 2020 American assassination of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Qassem Soleimani, a strike ordered by Trump.

In a recent interview with ABC News, Bolton was asked if he feared Trump might go after him. Bolton said he had already done so. “He’s already come after me and several others in withdrawing the protection that we had,” Bolton said. He called Trump’s leadership “a retribution presidency.”

 

PSX benchmark index up 2.0%WoW

Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) was supported by strong corporate earnings and Moody’s upgrade of deposit ratings for Pakistani banks, while demonstrating weakness later on in the week due to political noise. The benchmark index touched an all-time high of 151,262 points, but closed the week at 149,493 points, up 2.0%WoW.

Market participation rose 31%WoW to 790 million shares, from 606 million shares a week ago.

On the macroeconomic front, Pakistan posted a current account deficit of US$254 million as compared to a deficit of US$348 million during the same period last year.

IT exports for July 2025 increased by 24%YoY to US$354 million, from US$286 million during the same period last year.

LSM index witnessed an increase of 4.1%YoY in June 2025, resulting in FY25 declining by 0.7%YoY.

As regards sectoral developments, urea fertilizer offtakes moderated by 1%YoY during July 2025, mainly due to weak farm economics and higher phosphate prices.

Foreign exchange reserves held by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) increased by US$13 million to US$14.3 billion as of August 15, 2025. As a result, PKR appreciated for the 5th consecutive week against the greenback.

Other major news inflows during the week included: 1) ADB to promises to provide US$410 million package for Reko Diq copper and gold mines, 2) Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi arrives in Islamabad on three-day visit, 3) July 2025 FDI rises 7%YoY to US$208 million, 4) Tehran agrees raising trade with Pakistan to US$10 billion, and 5) GoP slashes high-speed diesel while leaving petrol price unchanged.

REITs, Leather & Tanneries, and Transport were amongst the top performing sectors, while Vanaspati & allied industries, Close-end Mutual funds, and Chemical sectors among the laggards.

Major selling was recorded by Foreigners and Banks/DFIs with a net sell of US$21.6 million. Mutual Funds and Companies absorbed most of the selling with a net buy of US$24.7 million.

Top performing scrips of the week were: KOHC, SEARL, BAHL, THALL, and MUGHAL, while the laggards included: PGLC, PKGP, HUMNL, YOUW, and NESTLE.

According to Pakistan’s leading brokerage house, PSX is expected to remain positive in the coming weeks, with further developments over circular debt expected to drive the market along with upcoming corporate results 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.

Top picks of the brokerage house include: OGDC, PPL, PSO, FFC, ENGROH, MCB, FCCL, INDU, and SYS.

US issues sanctions on entities from China, Hong Kong and UAE

Reuters reports that the Trump administration on Thursday issued more Iran-related sanctions, targeting 13 entities based in Hong Kong, China, the United Arab Emirates and the Marshall Islands, as well as eight vessels, the US Treasury Department said.

The measures cover Greek national Antonios Margaritis and his network of companies and vessels that Treasury said was involved in transporting Iranian oil exports in violation of sanctions.

Treasury also designated Ares Shipping in Hong Kong, Comford Management in the Marshall Islands and Hong Kong Hangshun Shipping in Hong Kong.

Designated crude oil tankers include Panama-flagged vessels Adeline G and Kongm, and Lafit under the flag of Sao Tome and Principe.

The State Department separately said it imposed sanctions on two China-based operators of oil-related terminals and storage. It said they handled imports of Iranian oil aboard tankers previously targeted by US sanctions.

The firms were identified as Qingdao Port Haiye Dongjiakou Oil Products Co. in Shandong province and Yangshan Shengang International Petroleum Storage and Transportation Co in Zhejiang province.

Golden Ocean-CMB.Tech merger

Golden Ocean’s shareholders approved an all-stock merger with CMB.Tech at a meeting on August 19 with the green light from Golden Ocean’s shareholders the merger was expected to close on August 20, reports Seatrade Maritime News.

Under the terms of the merger all common shares in Golden Ocean will be cancelled an exchanged for 0.95 shares in the newly enlarged CMB.Tech.

CMB.Tech shareholders will own around 70% of the merged company, and Golden Ocean shareholders will have a roughly 30% stake.

The deal will see Golden Ocean’s fleet of 90 bulk carriers, comprising 59 Capesizes and 31 Panamaxes, with a capacity of 13.7 million tons, join CMB.Tech’s diversified fleet of 160 vessels. CMB.Tech operates a range of crude oil tankers, dry bulk vessels, container ships, chemical tankers, offshore wind vessels and workboats.

The merged company will have a combined fleet of 250 vessels estimated to be worth US$11 billion.

The merger will see Golden Ocean delisted from the NASDAQ and Euronext Oslo Børs, while CMB.Tech adds a secondary listing on Euronext Oslo Børs in addition to its NYSE and Euronext Brussels listings.

The merger followed CMB.Tech acquiring John Fredriksen’s Hemen Holdings 40.8% stake in Golden Ocean for US$1.18 billion in March this year. It was a move that was to see Fredriksen selling most of his dry bulk shipping assets.

Antwerp-headquartered CMB.Tech is controlled by the Savery’s family. The listed-company formerly known as Euronav acquired 106 vessels from the Savery’s owned CMB in 2024.

The move was part of a strategy to diversify the business of the former Euronav from tankers into dry bulk, container ships and offshore wind, with a focus on green ships and renewable energy.

 

Geopolitical stunts are created to maneuver oil prices

It may not be wrong to say that geopolitical stunts (or deliberate political maneuvers) are often used to influence oil prices. The time proves that oil is one of the most geopolitically sensitive commodities, and even the perception of instability can trigger price movements. Here are some ways this happens:

Military Conflicts and Threats

Tensions in oil-producing regions (Middle East, Russia, and Ukraine) raise fears of supply disruptions. Even without actual disruption, rhetoric, military drills, or strikes can cause speculative buying, lifting prices.

Sanctions and Embargoes

Sanctions on major producers (Iran, Venezuela, and Russia) reduce their exports, tightening supply. Announcements of new sanctions, even before implementation, often drive markets up.

OPEC Plus Announcements

OPEC and allies strategically announce production cuts or increases to move prices. Sometimes the timing is politically motivated — for example, cuts ahead of US elections or global summits.

Diplomatic Stunts

Leaders may signal alliances, threats, or peace talks to calm or unsettle oil markets. For instance, US–Saudi or US–Iran engagements often coincide with volatility in oil futures.

Domestic Politics

Countries that depend heavily on oil revenues (Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria, and Venezuela) may trigger or amplify tensions abroad to keep oil prices high. Conversely, big consumers (United States, China, and European Union) may release strategic oil reserves to cool prices.

Media Amplification

Headlines about “possible war,” “pipeline sabotage,” or “shipping lane blockades” often move markets more than the actual underlying event. Traders react to expectations and fear, not just physical supply-demand.

Therefore, it could be concluded that oil markets are not purely economic — they are political battlegrounds, and states often use geopolitical stunts as levers to maneuver prices in their favor.

Here are three recent real world examples (2025) where geopolitical maneuvers clearly influenced oil prices—either via threat driven surges or optimism amid shifting sanctions and diplomacy.

Threat to Close the Strait of Hormuz

In June 2025, escalating attacks between Israel and Iran triggered a spike in oil prices—Brent crude climbed to US$70 per barrel amid concerns over supply disruptions and potential threats to the vital Strait of Hormuz.

On June 14, 2025, Iran explicitly threatened to close the Strait, which handles nearly 20% of global oil traffic. Analysts warned this could push prices even higher—possibly into the US$100 to US$150 per barrel range.

While a full closure didn’t materialize, the mere threat created a sharp short-term price shock, echoing how geopolitical risk can rapidly alter market sentiment.

Russia Ukraine Peace Talks

In August 2025, oil markets closely tracked developments—or lack thereof—in high-profile diplomatic efforts involving Russia, the United States, and Ukraine.

When President Trump proposed a trilateral summit (Putin–Zelenskiy–himself), Brent crude briefly climbed—markets anticipated that a ceasefire could eventually ease sanctions and boost supply.

Conversely, when the Trump–Putin summit yielded no binding oil or policy changes, markets cooled; analysts noted the event lacked the "magic lever" to relieve supply constraints.

Ongoing sanctions and inventory draws in the US—especially amid strong demand—continued to support prices amid supply uncertainty.

OPEC Plus Production Moves

In June 2025, OPEC Plus surprised markets by announcing a modest output increase of around 411,000 barrels per day, despite prevailing worries of oversupply. This unexpected move served as a geopolitical reminder of OPEC Plus ability to tweak supply—and kept oil prices elevated.

This came at a time when global crude production was running high, yet the announcement shaped expectations that geopolitical coordination could still swing the market.

Geopolitical Stunts Still Matter

Perception matters:

Markets often react more sharply to the fear of disruption—like threats to chokepoints—than to actual events.

Short-term risk channel:

As historical analyses show, geopolitical shocks typically drive short-term price spikes via risk premiums, though long-term economic slowdown may offset these gains.

Strategic signaling:

Diplomatic posturing—summits, threats, tariffs—can sway trader sentiment and pricing, even without concrete policy shifts.

Israel's plan to erase idea of Palestinian state

According to Reuters, a widely condemned Israeli settlement plan that would cut across land that the Palestinians seek for a state received final approval on Wednesday, according to a statement from Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

The approval of the E1 project, which would bisect the occupied West Bank and cut it off from East Jerusalem, was announced last week by Smotrich and received the final go-ahead from a Defence Ministry planning commission on Wednesday.

"With E1, we are delivering finally on what has been promised for years," Smotrich, an ultra-nationalist in the ruling right-wing coalition, said in a statement.

"The Palestinian state is being erased from the table, not with slogans but with actions."

Restarting the project could further isolate Israel, which has watched some Western allies frustrated by its continuation and planned escalation of the Gaza war announce they may recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly in September.

"We condemn the decision taken today on expanding this particular settlement, which ... will drive a stake through the heart of the two-state solution," said UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric. "We call on the government of Israel to halt all settlement activity."

The Palestinian Foreign Ministry also condemned the announcement, saying the E1 settlement would isolate Palestinian communities living in the area and undermine the possibility of a two-state solution.

British Foreign Minister David Lammy said on X: "If implemented, it would divide a Palestinian state in two, mark a flagrant breach of international law and critically undermine the two-state solution."

A German government spokesperson commenting on the announcement told reporters that settlement construction violates international law and "hinders a negotiated two-state solution and an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not commented on the E1 announcement.

On Sunday, during a visit to Ofra, another West Bank settlement established a quarter of a century ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made broader comments, saying, "I said 25 years ago that we will do everything to secure our grip on the Land of Israel, to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, to prevent the attempts to uproot us from here. Thank God, what I promised, we have delivered."