Pakistan Press on: Neo Colonialism, Anti Narco, Pakistan: New Age Islam's Selection, 17 April 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
17 April 2025
Neo-Colonialism and Global Agencies
Trump’s Tariff Chaos
The Anti-Narco Fight
Pakistan and The Trade War
Kicking Away the Ladder
China and Pakistan
School for Every Child
-------
Neo-Colonialism and Global Agencies
By Hina Ayra
April 17, 2025
In the context of the post-colonial world, numerous developing countries have operated under the assumption that the era of foreign domination has concluded.
However, the advent of globalisation and the increasing influence of multilateral institutions has given rise to a new form of control one that is not enforced through military presence or direct governance, but rather through economic dependency and institutional manipulation.
These global organisations have faced mounting criticism for operating in ways akin to modern-day colonial powers. These entities appear to subtly reshape the political and economic frameworks of developing nations, aligning them more closely with Western interests while often neglecting local requirements.
This manipulation, disguised as development and cooperation, carries significant implications for these countries, particularly for Pakistan. The challenges faced are not merely economic; they encompass broader issues of sovereignty and self-determination as nations strive to assert their identities and priorities in the face of external pressures. Global agencies frequently provide financial assistance or development programmes with specific conditions attached.
While these initiatives are presented as efforts for poverty alleviation, climate adaptation, or the enhancement of democratic governance, they often necessitate that recipient countries undertake significant economic restructuring, implement political institution reforms, or adopt foreign governance models. For example, aid packages from USAID have commonly included stipulations for the privatisation of public assets, the deregulation of markets and the adoption of Western-style governance. Although these conditions may serve the interests of Western investors and geopolitical strategies, they can exacerbate inequality, restrict local ownership and undermine national sovereignty.
According to a report from the Global Development Policy Center at Boston University, over 70 per cent of the aid extended by Western nations through agencies such as USAID is classified as "tied aid”, meaning that it must be utilised for the purchase of goods and services from donor countries, rather than permitting local procurement. This model tends to favour donor economies significantly more than recipient countries.
The IMF and the World Bank often collaborate with these agencies and similarly impose policy conditionalities in exchange for loans. Pakistan is a pertinent case study, having entered into over 20 agreements with the IMF since 1988, which consistently required stringent fiscal reforms, such as subsidy cuts, tax increases and austerity measures. These reforms have frequently resulted in spikes in inflation, reductions in social spending and public unrest.
As of 2024, Pakistan’s external debt was approximately $125 billion, with debt servicing accounting for over 60 per cent of its annual federal budget, according to the Ministry of Finance. The irony lies in the fact that while the ostensible aim of this assistance is to enhance governance and economic resilience, the actual outcomes frequently include increased dependency and weakened state institutions.
A critical area of influence exerted by international agencies is their control over global economic and governance rankings. Developing countries such as Pakistan frequently receive low rankings in indices such as the World Bank's now-defunct Ease of Doing Business Index and the European Union’s Generalized Scheme of Preferences (GSP+) human rights compliance reports. Although these rankings appear neutral on the surface, they play a significant role in influencing foreign investment decisions and access to international markets.
Pakistan's GSP+ status within the European Union, which provides preferential trade access to EU markets, is contingent upon compliance with 27 international conventions, which encompass labour laws, environmental policies and governance standards. While the objectives underlying these conventions are commendable, the implementation often undergoes selective scrutiny influenced by political motivations.
Despite advocating for free markets, Western agencies and governments frequently impose tariffs and non-tariff barriers that disproportionately disadvantage developing nations. Pakistan's textile industry, which accounts for nearly 60 per cent of the country's exports and employs millions, consistently faces pressure to adhere to labour and environmental standards imposed by the European Union and North America. Conversely, these same developed nations provide substantial subsidies to their agricultural and industrial sectors, thereby creating an imbalanced competitive environment.
According to the WTO, global subsidies from developed countries to their agricultural sectors surpass $500 billion annually, while developing nations are penalised for significantly smaller interventions. This double standard perpetuates the dependency and marginalisation of emerging economies.
Foreign aid frequently lacks political neutrality. USAID, for example, has a documented history of supporting political entities that align with US foreign policy objectives. Similarly, while the United Nations is primarily perceived as a neutral organization, it often aligns itself with the interests of powerful member states.
The cumulative impact of these influences contributes to a gradual erosion of policy sovereignty. Economic strategies, tax structures and social safety programs in Pakistan are frequently designed to meet the expectations of donors rather than reflect domestic priorities. Political reforms, including judicial restructuring and devolution policies, have often been shaped by foreign grants and technical assistance provided by Western institutions. This undermines the organic development of democratic and economic institutions, perpetuating a dependency cycle wherein subsequent governments may feel compelled to adopt foreign models to secure aid or avert sanctions.
In an evolving global order characterised by the rise of multipolarity, which includes the emergence of China, Russia and regional alliances such as BRICS, the dominance of Western-led institutions is increasingly challenged. However, this shift does not imply that manipulation will cease; rather, it may merely diversify.
Agencies such as USAID and the European Union are already adapting their narratives to focus on climate finance and digital infrastructure as new domains of influence. Although these objectives are critical, critics argue that, if not implemented equitably, they risk becoming a new form of "eco-colonialism”. Moreover, as digital governance becomes increasingly central to economic frameworks, countries like Pakistan may find themselves ensnared in a new technological dependency, one in which Western-backed cybersecurity frameworks, data regulations and artificial intelligence ethics dictate the evolution of their digital infrastructure.
To extricate themselves from this cycle, developing nations must enhance regional cooperation, invest in institutional resilience, and diversify their partnerships. For example, Pakistan could benefit from expanding trade relationships with neighbouring economies, negotiating more equitable terms with China through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and advocating for reforms within global institutions to increase representation and accountability.
Local civil society must also play an active role in scrutinising foreign aid, ensuring that development efforts prioritise the needs of the populace rather than being predominantly donor-driven. The path forward lies in fostering self-reliance not through the outright rejection of foreign assistance, but by recalibrating it to align with national priorities and cultural contexts.
The influence exerted by global agencies supported by Western powers in shaping national economic and political policies is undeniable. Often masked in the rhetoric of partnership and progress, this influence increasingly reflects the colonial strategies of the past utilising aid, rankings and access to markets as methods of control. For nations such as Pakistan, the challenge extends beyond merely resisting manipulation; it involves reclaiming the authority to define their own trajectories in an ever-evolving global landscape.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1302083-neo-colonialism-and-global-agencies
----
Trump’s Tariff Chaos
By Syed Asad Ali Shah
April 17, 2025
Over the past two weeks, global markets have been rocked by a series of dramatic and unpredictable moves from the Trump administration. In what many analysts are now calling ‘Trump’s tariff chaos’, an onslaught of unilateral executive orders, skyrocketing tariffs and ensuing market volatility has rattled investor confidence and strained international alliances.
With bond yields surging and geopolitical trust in American leadership waning, the recent announcement of a 90-day pause on further tariff hikes – while retaining the 10 per cent tariff on many imports and an escalated 145 per cent tariff on select Chinese goods – has offered only temporary relief.
In just ten days, Trump’s tariff policies have triggered a domino effect across the global economy. Financial markets have swung wildly as investors grapple with relentless policy shifts. Businesses, left scrambling for clarity, have seen global capital markets shed nearly $10 trillion, with partial recovery only after the 90-day pause. Beyond the numbers, companies reliant on low-cost supply chains – especially from China – are reevaluating strategies as production costs rise and logistics are disrupted, ultimately burdening American consumers through higher retail prices.
The 10 per cent tariff on a broad range of consumer goods is intended to bolster domestic production, but it is increasing everyday expenses for households already under economic strain. Meanwhile, the more punitive 145 per cent tariff on Chinese imports – met with resolute retaliation from Beijing – has escalated the trade war between the world’s two largest economies. China’s countermeasures reaffirm its unwillingness to yield, deepening fears of global instability.
Trump’s 90-day pause on further tariff hikes, while framed as a window for negotiations, provides limited respite. Existing tariffs remain, and deeper uncertainties persist. Companies face sustained cost pressures, while US consumers bear the brunt of price hikes on everyday goods. Businesses sourcing from China are grappling with inflated costs, with some even relocating supply chains – a move that threatens jobs and squeezes margins.
The repercussions of this crisis extend far beyond US-China relations. There could be: supply chain disruption where manufacturers face delays and higher input costs. Shifting to alternative suppliers is proving costly and complex.
There are also inflation and stagflation risks. Tariff-driven import costs are pushing consumer prices higher. A recent University of Michigan survey shows inflation expectations at their highest since the post-pandemic recovery. Rising prices are squeezing middle-income households, while wages fail to keep pace. This has ignited fears of stagflation, a toxic mix of inflation and economic stagnation.
There is also bond market turmoil. US Treasury yields – typically seen as a benchmark for global economic stability – have risen sharply. Rather than signaling growth, the spike reflects investor concern that the US may no longer be viewed as the ultimate safe haven for surplus capital. Countries like China and Saudi Arabia are reportedly scaling back Treasury purchases, unsettling global markets.
A weakened dollar and soaring gold: the US dollar index has declined steadily in recent weeks as confidence wanes. In contrast, gold prices have surged to historic highs, underscoring a global pivot toward safe-haven assets outside the US financial system.
Then there’s investor volatility. Equity and bond markets remain turbulent. Continued uncertainty over Trump’s economic direction signals a heightened risk of capital flight to regions with more predictable policy environments.
The threat of a global recession is no longer hypothetical. With the world’s two largest economies in conflict, growth forecasts are increasingly pessimistic. Major global institutions, including the CEO of BlackRock, have warned of a looming downturn and possible recession.
Within the US, consumer sentiment has deteriorated sharply. Retail spending is slowing, credit conditions are tightening and corporate investment is being deferred. The housing market is also showing signs of stress. The US economy appears to be walking a fine line between inflation and contraction, a classic setup for stagflation.
Meanwhile, China has adopted a more strategic and patient approach – combining targeted retaliatory tariffs with a focused push for self-reliance in key sectors. While the Trump administration has reportedly been waiting for a call from Chinese President Xi Jinping, there is no indication such outreach is forthcoming. Beijing’s restrained yet calculated response suggests a longer-term game plan, positioning itself as an anchor of stability in an increasingly unstable world.
Traditional allies are beginning to reassess their dependence on US leadership. Trade blocs such as the EU, Asean and the African Union and traditional allies such as Canada, Mexico, Japan, South Korea and Australia are prioritising regional integration and exploring new trade partnerships.
Multinational corporations are delaying capital expenditures, reevaluating risks, and redirecting investment toward jurisdictions with greater policy consistency. A growing number of investors appear to be moving away from US-centric strategies in favour of diversified, multipolar portfolios. As Trump’s erratic policies heighten global uncertainty, the economic centre of gravity may begin to shift.
For Pakistan, this geopolitical realignment presents both challenges and opportunities. US market volatility and enhanced tariffs may impact key export sectors like textiles. While a trade delegation is being sent to address immediate trade imbalances, over the medium term, Pakistan can benefit by leveraging its strategic location – especially through enhanced regional cooperation and CPEC-led trade expansion.
To position itself effectively, Pakistan must diversify export markets. Reduce reliance on US markets by strengthening trade ties with Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Central Asia. Pakistan also needs to reopen trade with India, reinvigorate Saarcs, and expand overland routes through Iran and Central Asia.
We need to shift from raw material exports to high-value, branded, and certified products across textiles, agriculture, surgical instruments and IT. Apart from that, Pakistan also needs to negotiate smarter FTAs. It should ensure new trade agreements protect local industry while opening up high-potential sectors.
Pakistan should offer incentives for export-oriented tech firms, promote automation in manufacturing and attract investment from the diaspora. It also needs to leverage lower oil prices. Reduce energy import costs and redirect fiscal savings into infrastructure and logistics development.
And, finally, the country should upgrade trade infrastructure and accelerate digitization at ports and customs to enhance efficiency and transparency.
Trump’s tariffs represent a departure from decades of US-led economic consensus. The short-term pause may temporarily delay further escalation, but the broader trajectory remains unchanged. As global trust in US leadership diminishes, the foundations of the post-WWII economic order – open trade, capital mobility and dollar dominance – are beginning to crack.
For developing nations like Pakistan, this is both a warning and an opportunity. The road ahead demands nimble diplomacy, bold reforms, and strategic foresight. The global chessboard is being reset – and those who act early may shape the rules of the new game.
Trump’s tariff chaos has triggered a historic inflection point. With inflation rising, bond yields climbing, gold soaring and recession risks mounting, the world is entering uncharted territory. For Pakistan, the imperative is clear: act with vision, prepare for turbulence and seize the moment to reimagine its economic future in a rapidly changing world.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1302084-trump-s-tariff-chaos
----
The Anti-Narco Fight
By Dr Sana Imran
April 17, 2025
Pakistan’s geographical positioning has long placed it at the crossroads of global trade. However, the country now finds itself unwillingly entangled in the relentless tide of the international drug trade.
Sharing contiguous borders with Afghanistan and Iran, Pakistan is often mischaracterised as a source country for drugs, despite being a victim of the illicit flow transiting through its territory. The gravity of this challenge demands proper recognition of Pakistan’s sustained struggle against drug smuggling, the immense problems it faces, and the unwavering resolve demonstrated by the Anti-Narcotics Force (ANF) and other law-enforcement agencies in combating this transnational crisis.
Globally, the economic model of illicit drug trafficking revolves around the principle of demand and supply, with Afghanistan positioned as the epicentre of heroin production, supplying almost 90 per cent of the world’s opioids.
According to data from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), around 40 per cent of Afghan-produced heroin transits through Pakistan, making its way to lucrative markets in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, Europe, and beyond. The 2,640 km-long porous border with Afghanistan, coupled with a 1,046 km coastal belt, provides traffickers with multiple avenues to exploit, making enforcement an ongoing battle against smuggling networks.
While Pakistan is often depicted as a conduit for drug trafficking, it is imperative to understand that the country itself is not the intended consumer market. Being used as a transit route for drug trafficking brings its own detrimental effects. Pakistan is grappling with a rising number of addiction cases. According to a drug survey conducted in 2013, an estimated 6.7 million Pakistanis suffer from substance abuse disorders, the majority of whom are young people.
This crisis, fueled by international drug trafficking networks, not only disrupts the social fabric of society but also places an enormous strain on public health infrastructure and law-enforcement resources. As a frontline state, Pakistan is battling an epidemic it did not create but one due to which it continues to bear the socio-economic burden and security threats associated with the menace of international drug trafficking.
The Anti-Narcotics Force (ANF) is at the frontlines of Pakistan’s counter-narcotics response. In 2024, ANF intercepted and confiscated over 176 metric tons of illicit drugs, valued at $10 billion in the international markets. ANF efforts span multiple domains, including high-risk interdiction operations at border crossings, airports and seaports, where traffickers continuously evolve their methods to deceive security measures.
Beyond seizures, ANF has also strengthened its collaborations with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations and other international law-enforcement agencies (LEAs) like DEA (USA), NCA(UK) and CTF-151 (Multi-nation Naval Task Force) to enhance intelligence sharing and disrupt smuggling syndicates before shipments reach their destinations. Recent joint operations with authorities in Saudi Arabia and the UAE have led to the dismantling of several transnational trafficking networks.
With the continuous evolution of concealment methods and tactics, one growing concern is the use of courier services to transport narcotics. Concealed within parcels, disguised as legal goods, and accompanied by forged documentation, drug traffickers have increasingly exploited international logistics networks to bypass traditional security measures. In the past year alone, the ANF intercepted over 200 drug shipments linked to courier services, highlighting the need for updated screening protocols and stronger collaboration between law-enforcement agencies and private-sector service providers.
The challenge goes beyond physical interdiction; the digitalisation of illicit transactions and the use of the dark web for narcotics trade further complicate enforcement efforts, necessitating the integrated use of advanced technologies and data-driven intelligence operations.
The impact of drug trafficking extends far beyond the realm of law enforcement. Pakistan’s youth, comprising 64 per cent of the nation’s population, remain vulnerable – with drug trafficking fueling an insidious cycle of addiction, crime and societal deterioration. Every year, thousands of young Pakistanis become dependent on substance use, resulting in traumatised futures, diminishing productivity and a surge in drug-related crimes.
Addressing the drug menace is not merely a security imperative; it is a battle to safeguard the future of the nation. Advocacy campaigns, grassroots educational interventions, and targeted rehabilitation programmes are crucial in preventing young individuals from falling prey to addiction and in reintegrating recovering patients into society.
The fight against narco-smuggling cannot be waged by any single nation alone. Given the transnational nature of the narcotics trade, a unified global response is essential. The GCC nations, along with other key stakeholders, must recognise Pakistan’s role as a frontline state and extend meaningful diplomatic and operational support to strengthen its efforts to curb the menace of narcotic substances and their trafficking.
Strengthening maritime patrols, investing in border security technology, enhancing legal frameworks and institutionalising intelligence-sharing mechanisms are just a few of the collaborative steps necessary to stem the tide of drug trafficking. Without such coordinated efforts, drug traffickers will continue to exploit systemic vulnerabilities, perpetuating a crisis that threatens both regional stability and global security.
Pakistan’s relentless battle against narcotics smuggling is not merely a domestic concern but a vital contribution to the broader international efforts against narcotic smuggling. Despite economic constraints and mounting security challenges, Pakistan remains steadfast in its commitment to dismantling Drug Trafficking Organizations (DTOs) and protecting future generations from the perils of drug addiction. International players must work together to eliminate the billion-dollar illicit narco-economy. Through sustained collaboration, intelligence sharing and strategic enforcement the tide can be turned against this transnational menace, securing a safer future for all.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1302086-the-anti-narco-fight
----
Pakistan and The Trade War
By Omar Quraishi
April 17, 2025
It would be fair to say that US President Donald Trump’s second term’s main highlight so far, at least on the economic and business front, has been the tariffs issue.
His administration started off by imposing a range of tariffs on just about every country in the world. Initially, he had said that the new tariffs would reciprocate what the other country had imposed on US imports of goods and services.
However, when the tariffs were announced, the formula used by the US government seemed to take into account mostly the trade balance, or imbalance, that America had with a particular tariff, and the measure of the new tariff imposed was designed to offset that imbalance.
In the case of Pakistan, the Trump administration proposed a tariff of 29 per cent. This would be in addition to any existing tariff on imports from Pakistan – which currently on textiles is 8.6 per cent. The US is Pakistan’s largest trading partner and in FY2024, Pakistan’s exports to the US were $5.3 billion, most of which were textiles and related goods. Pakistan’s exports from the US are in the region of $2 billion which translates into a trade surplus for Pakistan of around $3 billion.
A closer look at Pakistan’s exports reveals that of the top ten exporters in the country, nine of them export textiles and related products, with big names like Interloop, Nishat, Artistic Milliners and Gul Ahmed leading from the front.
According to a study by the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE), the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration could cause Pakistan's exports to the US to fall by between 20 and 25 per cent. This could translate into a reduction of total exports by between $1 billion and $1.5 billion.
The existing tariff on Pakistani textile exports to the US is 8.6 per cent and if the proposed 29 per cent is added then Pakistan's exports to the US will have a total tariff of 37.6 per cent. That would mean that regional competitors like India and Bangladesh would end up pricing Pakistan out of the US market.
Therefore, quite clearly, the government of Pakistan needs to act to avoid this from happening. It needs to engage with the Trump administration on ways to cut tariffs, which are then likely to be reciprocated by the US. If this does not happen, and exports decline as forecast, then the country's companies involved in exports, in particular those selling textiles and related goods, could take a big hit if the proposed tariffs come into effect then regional competitors like India and Bangladesh will have an advantage in exporting to the US market.
So what needs to be done by the government of Pakistan?
As far as the short-term is concerned, Pakistan could consider slashing tariffs on imports from the US to a point that the 29 per cent tariff imposed by the Trump administration is taken back. That would be one way for Pakistani exporters to the US to not suffer a decline in their exports and would prevent a decline in Pakistan’s overall exports.
This, however, is easier said than done and even if enacted won’t necessarily see the US reverse its proposed tariff. The reason for that is that its rationale for the tariff isn’t actually to reciprocate what other countries are doing to the US but to stem the trade deficits that the US has with many countries – including Pakistan.
So, as far as the short term goes, unless Trump has a change of heart and extends the current 90-day pause indefinitely, it is likely that Pakistani exports will take a hit – and also likely that it will be disproportionately felt by textile exporters. Pakistan has said that it is sending a high-level team to the US to try and resolve this matter but the truth is that they won’t have much leverage – unless they use the security and counterterrorism angle.
As for the long-term, that is where Pakistan and its export-oriented businesses can try and make a difference and change in direction. Much of what needs to be done on this count has already been suggested many times before. For example, explore new markets, innovate to make new products and services so that you gain a competitive edge compared to other countries, add value to your goods and services ready for export, develop the skills of your labour force, use technology and AI in the production cycle and so on.
Both the government and Pakistani industry and businesses will have to take on this challenge head-on if they want annual exports to rise to $50 billion and beyond.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1302085-pakistan-and-the-trade-war
---
Kicking Away the Ladder
Sakib Sherani
April 17, 2025
THE ‘Liberation Day’ import tariffs announced by President Donald Trump on April 2 mark a tectonic shift in the global economic as well as geopolitical order.
The ‘Trump tariffs’ are far more than just about re-balancing trade or an effort to contain a geopolitical rival. It is the manifestation of a nativist, anti-globalisation and thinly veiled xenophobic mindset that is unlikely to roll back despite the interim pause and exemptions, or the long-term costs.
Most of the commentary in Pakistan has been narrowly focused on the potential first-order effects on the country’s exports, ignoring the wider dynamic unleashed by the inward pivot by the US. (Even on trade, the partial-equilibrium analysis so far has ignored the second- and third-order effects that are likely to be set in motion despite the temporary pause in tariffs for non-retaliating countries.)
The pivot underway in the US is one for the history books, marking the end of an era. Some international economic commentators have, rightly in my view, placed the consequences of the ‘Trump tariffs’ at par with the Ming dynasty’s historic own-goal in the 15th century with the Edict of Haijin, when China decided to shut itself off from the world.
What has also been ignored so far in the commentary here is that there is a long history of America in particular, and of the West more generally, conducting its affairs completely contrary to its stated ‘ideology’, or contrary to what it preaches to the rest of the world. And global trade is no exception. The conventional wisdom that it is for the first time that the US has suddenly moved away from ‘free trade’ is without historical basis.
As the title of this article, borrowed from Prof Ha-Joon Chang’s provocative book, suggests, the West has not only vigorously used protectionism as an economic development strategy for itself, but it has also actively conspired throughout history to prevent developing countries from achieving ‘developed’ status.
One of the main tools at its disposal to pursue the latter objective has been the so-called ‘rules-based order’ constructed after World War II, which used the World Bank, IMF and the World Trade Organisation to force developing countries to eschew protection for domestic industries and to completely open up their markets for competition from better-placed Western companies.
This deliberate and cynical strategy has prevented the development of an industrial base in some of the poorest countries in the so-called Third World, blocking a potential pathway to economic development. At the same time, these resource-rich countries have been consigned to exporting raw materials to the advanced economies, which more often than not are extracted (exploited) by Western transnational corporations, while becoming unwitting markets for Western products and services.
Perhaps the two most egregious examples from history of the West using military power to force other countries to open their markets and accept ‘unequal treaties’ are the Opium Wars in China, and Commodore Matthew Perry’s sailing into Tokyo Bay with US warships in 1853 to force the Japanese to open their ports for American ships, their major cities for placement of US diplomats, and their entire country for trade.
More recent examples of Western countries using ‘gunboat diplomacy’ to secure their economic interests include the CIA coups to overthrow prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh in Iran in 1951 after he nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (now BP), and against president Jacobo Árbenz in Guatemala in 1954 after he introduced land reforms that hurt the interests of United Fruit Company, a large US corporation.
The US unease with the economic rise of China, and its desperation to ‘de-couple’, should be seen in this rich historical context. Those of us growing up in the 1980s would recall a very similar angst expressed in America about the rise of another Asian economy.
Unlike China today, which is labelled by the US as a ‘strategic competitor’, thus attempting to justify the use of restrictive and unfair trade practices of its own, the target for America’s ire back then was none other than a close ally — Japan. Fear of American companies being forced to shut down by more competitive Japanese exporters, or of Japanese investment ‘taking over’ America, was whipped into a nationalist and near-xenophobic frenzy.
This culminated in a slew of measures by America designed to restrict access by Japanese firms to the US market, and to force them to relocate production to the US mainland. These measures included Voluntary Export Restraints, Section 301 Trade Actions, and the ‘Super 301’ (1988 Trade Act). Growing concerns in the 1980s and 1990s about foreign acquisitions of US assets — especially by Japanese companies — also led the US to introduce specific laws and regulations aimed at vetting and, in some cases, restricting foreign investment in strategically sensitive areas.
These included the Exon-Florio Amendment (1988), which gave the president the authority to block foreign acquisitions of US companies if they “threatened national security”, and provided for review of individual deals by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.
In addition, a concerted campaign took place via Congressional hearings and media coverage to amplify public pressure against Japanese exports as well as investment (much like China has been demonised in the US for the past decade).
These efforts culminated in the infamous Plaza Accord of 1985, under which the US coordinated with its allies to force Japan to massively appreciate the Japanese yen. This laid the basis for the downfall of the Japanese economy and the lost decades that have followed. In the current iteration, pro-Trump US strategists have floated the idea of a follow-up ‘Mar-a-Lago Accord’ to weaken the US dollar.
One consistent lesson from history is that Western powers will go to any length, including staging wars and coups against foreign countries, and imposing unequal treaties, to secure and protect their economic interests. Like democracy and human rights, free trade is just another useful beating stick and expendable slogan.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1904772/kicking-away-the-ladder
----
China and Pakistan
Khurram Husain
April 17, 2025
HOW should Pakistan choose between the US and China? So far, a choice has not been foisted upon us, but the time is coming when it will be. Before that time arrives, it is a good idea to devote some structured thinking to the matter and be prepared to act.
Not too long ago, a piece of advice was offered by Hina Rabbani Khar, one-time minister of state for finance and foreign minister of the country and an otherwise very smart individual whose words deserve to be taken seriously. In an internal memo that was leaked in April 2023, she cautioned against trying to appease the West and underlined the importance of maintaining the “real strategic” tie-up with China, despite mounting Western pressure. In a separate interview, Khawaja Asif echoed much the same thinking, emphasising the difficulty Pakistan faces in undertaking a rupture either way — with the US or with China.
But the time is drawing near when not making a choice will become harder and harder and it becomes necessary to make one. The imperatives driving the American trade war against China are powerful, and rooted in the emergence of China as a great power over the past quarter of a century, a fact that is not going to change any time soon regardless of what trade measures the Trump administration takes. The current round of the trade war may possibly settle down a bit, following an agreement between China and America. But the pause will be temporary before frictions flare up once again, because the underlying dynamic of a growing China and stalling America will still be there.
Those in power understand how difficult this choice is for Pakistan to make. Pakistan earns its capital by participating in the markets of America and the European Union, and it spends this capital to purchase consumer goods as well as intermediate goods and machinery from China. We run a trade surplus with the US and EU and our largest trade deficit with China. On top of this, we get our bailouts from American-led institutions, with some top-ups from the Gulf kingdoms and a brief episode of rescue lending by China (which has now ended). Even these top-ups were dependent on Pakistan having an IMF relationship first.
Second, and very importantly, Pakistan has long been the largest buyer of Chinese arms in the world. According to data from the Swedish think tank Sipri, Pakistan bought $5.28 billion worth of arms from China in the five years between 2019 and 2024. This was 81 per cent of Pakistan’s total weapons imports during this period, up by 7 percentage points from the previous five-year period before 2019.
With this arms relationship comes longer-lasting maintenance, upgrades and training relationships. Pakistan is critically dependent on Chinese supplies of spare parts to keep its stock of Chinese arms operational. This makes a rupture even more difficult to contemplate.
More than half of Pakistan’s bilateral external debt is owed to Chinese entities. This figure rises further if one takes liabilities into account as well, but for now let’s look only at the official obligations. Of $41.7bn in total external debt owed to bilateral creditors, $23.7bn is to China (including $8.2bn of swaps and deposits with the central bank). This is slightly less than a quarter of the total external debt of the country, a staggeringly high exposure through multiple instruments, and owed to multiple entities within China.
Given these exposures, it would be nearly impossible for Pakistan to make a clean break. Even an orderly reduction of these exposures, undertaken slowly over a longer period of time, would take many years to make any significant impact. Whichever way we look at it, Pakistan is deeply embedded with both the US and China.
So how would Pakistan handle matters when the time comes to choose? So far the country has successfully parried attempts to force a choice on it. For example, one unwritten condition coming with the IMF loans — something the IMF denies in its official capacity — is not to make Chinese debt repayments or service liabilities of Chinese investments in Pakistan during the programme period. This is one reason why Pakistan has accumulated large arrears with regard to its Chinese projects since 2019, and seeks rollovers of all maturing Chinese debt obligations as they come due.
In times to come, this demand could well be dilated upon. And Pakistan could find that not making a choice will be costlier than making one.
One obvious answer to the coming dilemma is to reduce our reliance on the episodic bailouts that Pakistan keeps needing every few years. That is where a significant share of the leverage that America has over Pakistan comes from. Other than the need for these bailouts, the debt exposure to the US is large, but indirect as it comes through multilateral creditors. And the trade exposure is also large, but in low-value-added products that are not likely to become a major sticking point in the superpower’s trade policy in the future. Those things can be managed much more easily.
From China’s perspective, it seems that Pakistan has lost its shine. The country enjoyed some goodwill in China because of its role in helping bring about a thaw with the US, and its support during the years when China was shut out of the world. It also earned some goodwill in the speed and efficiency with which some CPEC projects were executed, earning the nickname of ‘Punjab speed’.
But all that is gone now. With the deaths of Chinese personnel at the hands of terrorists, coupled with repayment difficulties, China has wearied of Pakistan’s chronic demands for capital. The bailouts Pakistan requires every few years have now become the country’s Achilles heel, and unless we resolve this problem comprehensively, it will be the single biggest complicating factor in the stark decisions that lie ahead.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1904770/china-and-pakistan
---
School for Every Child
Naeem Sadiq
April 17, 2025
UZBEKISTAN has 6.84 million children between the ages of six and 17 years. Every child is enrolled and there are no out-of-school children. Uzbekistan law mandates parents to ensure that their children regularly attend schools from Class 1 to 11. Failure to do so can lead to fines up to 5,100,000 soms (approximately Rs110,000) or arrest for up to 15 days. All schools use ‘E-Dars’, a digital attendance recording app, which records attendance for teachers and students. Chess is a compulsory subject in primary schools and taught by qualified teachers. Creditably, the Zindagi Trust in Pakistan has also adopted the chess tradition in its schools. But that is where all comparisons end.
Pakistan has about 65m children between the ages of five and 16 years. Of these, an estimated 26m to 28m children (approximately 40 per cent) do not have access to schools. Around 77pc of the school-going children suffer from ‘learning poverty’, ie, not having the knowledge, understanding and skills corresponding to their age or grade. The daily arrival of 18,917 newborns makes this an increasingly insurmountable task. Slowing down this unstoppable ‘out-of-school’ tsunami calls for several specific, sustained and non-traditional responses.
Begin by making a national commitment (currently missing) on two fundamental issues — controlling our runaway population and providing schooling to every child in Pakistan. While there have been excellent reports by the Annual Status of Education Report and the Education Management Information Systems, we need far more accurate and specific data for every child in Pakistan. This ought to include name, age, child registration certificate, years of schooling (if ever enrolled), current status (student, employed, idle), class, school, and name and address of parents of every child in every union council (UC) of Pakistan. Unless we have accurate data, our entire discussion will remain hypothetical and unrealistic. Employ 100,000 or so men and women to collect this data in two to three months.
Make ‘educating every child’ a national movement, delinked from all party politics, personal publicity and political bribes (free laptops, ration bags or electrical scooters). Order all schools to use a standard (student and teacher) tracking and monitoring app, such as Railer, TeacherKit, EduPage or MyClass Attendance. Reduce the number of school hours to three and operate three shifts in every school. Reduce the number of subjects and use a preloaded tablet connected to a TV screen in each class for teaching maths, science and English.
Use open-source educational platforms that give offline access like Khan Academy, Kolibri, and PhET Interactive Simulations, allowing students to learn through videos, quizzes, and experiments. Given Pakistan’s shortage of trained teachers, AI-powered solutions like Khanmigo offer a scalable and cost-effective means to rapidly enhance teaching quality. The recent collaboration between The Citizens Foundation and the Khan Academy for integrating Khanmigo teaching assistant to support educators is a praiseworthy initiative. Khanmigo’s bilingual support could allow teachers to instruct in both English and Urdu.
Pakistan could increase and modify a large part of BISP funds to create education-related incentives. These could be rewards for parents who limit their children to two and whose children show regular attendance in school, with girls receiving twice the incentive amount. The nature of other incentives could be cycles for girls where the school is at a distance, free uniforms and books, free, wholesome and healthy meals at school, laptops for children who showed over 95pc attendance till Class 10, free bus system to transport children to schools and national awards and commendations for parents whose children show regularity and excellence in schools.
Can we not extricate ourselves from the compulsion of needless pampering of our bureaucrats and politicians and instead increase the education budget by 50pc? Building more schools and improving the existing structures can be done without foreign assistance. Incentivise corporates to build schools as a part of their corporate social responsibility. Promoting compulsory education and family planning ought to be made essential aspects of Friday sermons. Enact laws that mandate parents to ensure that their children regularly attend schools from Class 1 to 10. Digitise the entire schooling data and make it accessible on a national website for real-time monitoring. The chairman of each UC and the assistant commissioner ought to be personally held accountable to ensure that every child in their jurisdiction is indeed a school-going child.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1904768/school-for-every-child
-------
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/pakistan-press/neo-colonialism-anti-narco-pakistan/d/135192
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism