Wheat price policy fails the farmer

The war in the Middle East is not shrinking. It is spreading. The recent Houthi attacks on Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea are proof that a conflict once confined to Yemen’s borders is now reaching into international waters, threatening ships that carry oil and goods for the whole world. This is a dangerous moment, and it deserves plain, honest words rather than diplomatic silence. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif was right to call these attacks a violation of international law. Commercial ships are not military targets. When tankers are attacked in the Red Sea, it is not just Saudi Arabia that suffers. Shipping costs rise, insurance costs rise, and ordinary families far from the region end up paying more for fuel and food. This is why the prime minister called it a threat to the global economy, not only a regional dispute. Pakistan’s response also reflects a long and real relationship. For decades, Islamabad and Riyadh have stood together, through shared faith, economic support, and security cooperation. Millions of Pakistani workers live and earn their livelihood in Saudi Arabia. When Saudi Arabia faces a security threat, it is natural that Pakistan feels it too, not as a distant headline, but as something close to home. The prime minister’s message of solidarity, delivered alongside Field Marshal Asim Munir, reflects this old and genuine bond, not a hollow diplomatic gesture. But solidarity with a friend does not mean closing our eyes to the wider picture. A war that keeps expanding helps no one, not Saudi Arabia, not Yemen, and not the region as a whole. Yemen has already endured years of war, hunger and displacement. Its people deserve peace, not another chapter of conflict. At the same time, attacks on tankers cannot be excused as a fair response to that suffering. Two wrongs will only deepen the crisis. This is why Pakistan’s call for restraint must be addressed to both sides. The Houthis must stop attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea. Saudi Arabia and its partners must also avoid actions that push the conflict further, and instead pursue a political settlement in Yemen. The Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz are lifelines for global trade. Keeping them open and peaceful is not just in Saudi Arabia’s interest, or Pakistan’s interest, but in everyone’s interest. The world cannot afford another war zone at sea.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s accusation against India is not new. Pakistan has said for years that India supports terrorism on its soil. What makes his latest remarks important is the second part of his message. He asked Afghanistan’s interim government to stop militants from using Afghan land to attack Pakistan. This appeal deserves more attention than it usually gets, and it deserves a firmer follow-up from Islamabad.  The facts are hard to ignore. Pakistan has lost more than 90,000 lives fighting terrorism. The recent killing of a session judge in Mastung shows the threat has not gone away. Balochistan, the province where Shehbaz spoke, has suffered the most. It is Pakistan’s largest province by land but its smallest by population, and it has paid a heavy price in blood for years. Attacks on judges, security forces and development projects like the Karachi-Chaman highway are not isolated events. They form a pattern, and that pattern often leads back to groups operating from across the Afghan border. This is why Shehbaz’s appeal to Kabul matters more than his repeated claims about India. Pakistan has raised the India accusation for decades, often linked to the wider Kashmir dispute between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. That argument is familiar and, fairly or not, has become background noise in the region. But the Afghanistan question is different. It is about a neighbour Pakistan helped support for years, a neighbour that now hosts groups accused of attacking Pakistani soil. Kind words about good relations are not enough. Kabul needs to show real action against these groups, not just accept diplomatic requests politely and move on. Pakistan’s government also needs to be honest with itself. Blaming outside forces is easy. Building lasting peace in Balochistan requires more than statements at a workshop. It requires trust from local communities, fair development, and consistent follow-through on infrastructure promises like the Karachi-Chaman road. The National Finance Commission Award, which Shehbaz also discussed, must actually deliver Balochistan’s fair share of resources. Without that, the sense of neglect that fuels unrest will not go away, no matter how many speeches are made about foreign conspiracies. The prime minister is not wrong to raise India’s alleged role or to press Afghanistan for cooperation. But blaming others cannot be the whole strategy. Real security in Balochistan will come from addressing local grievances at home just as firmly as Pakistan confronts threats from across its borders.

The Senate Sub Committee has once again put the Federal Board of Revenue in an uncomfortable spot, and rightly so. FBR has failed to explain what happened to Rs1120 billion worth of tax exempted imports that entered former FATA and PATA regions between 2018 and 2026. That is not a small sum. It is a number large enough to demand answers, not silence. Why has FBR not provided complete records? Why is a manual tracking system still in place for imports worth over a trillion rupees? These are basic questions, yet the Board seems unable or unwilling to answer them. Every day without proper automated verification is a day that opens the door to goods slipping illegally into taxable markets, undercutting honest businesses and draining public revenue. The tobacco sector adds another layer of concern. Major companies like Pakistan Tobacco Company and Philip Morris Pakistan Limited are now under scrutiny, alongside serious cases of cigarette theft and a tax charge sheet against a senior tax official. When 2,828 cigarette cartons worth Rs25 crore go missing from an FBR warehouse, it raises a simple question: who is minding the store? FBR must stop treating Parliament’s demands as optional. Consumption certificates, tax records, and clear Standard Operating Procedures are not favours to be delayed. They are basic obligations of an institution meant to protect national revenue. Senator Saifullah Abro’s Committee deserves credit for pushing this issue repeatedly. But pressure from one Senate committee cannot substitute for real reform inside FBR. The Board must answer, and answer now, before more billions disappear into the gaps of its own negligence.

Pakistan and China are entering a new phase of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, known as CPEC 2.0. This time, the focus is shifting from big government-funded projects to stronger business-to-business ties. This change is a smart and necessary move, but only if Pakistan can actually deliver on it. For years, CPEC meant huge Chinese loans for roads, power plants and infrastructure. Nearly 30 billion dollars went into these projects. They helped fix Pakistan’s energy crisis, but they also added heavy debt. Now, China wants a different kind of partnership, one based on trade, manufacturing and private companies working together instead of government-to-government deals. This shift makes sense. Federal Minister Ahsan Iqbal rightly pointed out that Pakistan’s biggest problem is not a lack of ideas but a lack of exports. China buys goods worth 2.6 trillion dollars every year from around the world, yet Pakistan sells it barely 3 billion dollars worth of products. That gap shows how much room there is to grow, if Pakistan gets its act together. The plan to focus on manufacturing, agriculture, robotics and automation is encouraging. Bringing in small and medium businesses from both countries could create real jobs and real growth, not just concrete and steel. This is the direction Pakistan should have taken years ago. But good intentions are not enough. Pakistan has often struggled to make its industries competitive enough to compete internationally. Poor production standards, red tape and inconsistent policies have held back exporters for decades. Simply announcing a new phase of cooperation will not fix these problems overnight. China, too, seems more cautious this time. It has not yet committed to financing the long-delayed ML-1 railway project, a sign that Beijing wants to see business results before pouring in more money. CPEC 2.0 offers Pakistan a real chance to fix its economy through trade and industry rather than loans. But turning this vision into results will require discipline, consistency and follow-through, qualities that have often been missing in Pakistan’s economic planning.

The country is having an important conversation again. Should the country create new provinces to fix its governance problems? Or should it strengthen local governments and give real power to mayors instead? Federal Minister Mohsin Naqvi recently argued that the current system of governance has become outdated. He warned that without real reform, Pakistan will still face the same problems ten years from now. He is right that something needs to change. Large provinces, especially Punjab, are simply too big to manage efficiently from one provincial capital. But former State Bank Governor Dr Ishrat Hussain offers an important word of caution. He points out that creating new provinces means building an entirely new layer of bureaucracy. Each new province needs its own secretariat, its own cabinet, its own departments, its own buildings and vehicles. All of this adds permanent, recurring costs to a country that is already struggling with debt and financial pressure. Creating a new province does not solve a problem. It often creates an expensive new one. Dr Ishrat Hussain’s proposed solution deserves serious attention. He suggests that instead of drawing new provincial boundaries, Pakistan should strengthen mayoral systems and local governments in every major city. If cities like Lahore, Karachi and Faisalabad were given real financial and administrative powers, with elected mayors controlling budgets and development projects, this could fix governance problems without the heavy cost of new provincial structures. His argument makes sense. The real issue is not how many provinces Pakistan has. The real issue is that power has never properly reached the local level, where problems are actually felt and solved. This is a reasonable middle path. Strengthening city governments should be the first priority. Giving elected mayors genuine control over budgets, infrastructure and daily administration would bring government closer to the people it serves, without adding new layers of expensive bureaucracy. That said, there may still be a limited case for new provinces where genuine historical, linguistic and administrative grounds exist. Punjab is an unusually large province, and two regions within it, the Seraiki belt in the south and the Potohar region in the north, have long-standing and distinct identities, dialects and development needs that differ from central Punjab. If any new provinces are ever created, these two are the most defensible candidates, since they rest on real cultural and administrative logic rather than short-term political convenience. But this should remain the exception, not the rule.

The Supreme Court has given a landmark ruling on women’s rights. It has declared that a woman’s right to seek khula, or judicial divorce, is a constitutional right. The court said that violence against a woman for exercising this right is an attack on the Constitution itself. A three member bench dismissed the jail petition of convict Waseem Abbas and upheld his death sentence. Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar wrote the four page detailed judgment. The court said women are fully protected under Articles 9, 14 and 25 of the Constitution, which guarantee their security, dignity and equal rights. It said anyone who uses violence against a woman seeking khula will face the full force of the law, and called the killing of a woman for exercising her legal right an act of brutality and open defiance of the law. The court also ruled that a person involved in a cold blooded and planned murder does not deserve any concession. It clarified that the testimony of relatives cannot be automatically rejected in cases that happen inside a home. Forensic evidence, including a match between bullet casings and the weapon linked to the crime, gave conclusive proof against the accused. The court found no flaw in the lower courts’ decisions. According to the case record, Waseem Abbas shot and killed his former wife, Shehnaz Bibi, on October 11, 2020, about 48 hours after she obtained a khula decree from a family court. A trial court had sentenced him to death, and the Lahore High Court upheld that sentence. This judgment sends a strong message and gives justice in this one case. But the law alone cannot protect every woman in Shehnaz Bibi’s position. Many women never even reach the court, because they fear exactly this kind of violence at home. A verdict can punish a killer after the fact, but it cannot undo the loss of a life. To truly protect women, society itself needs to change how it views a woman’s right to leave a marriage. Courts can deliver justice, but only a shift in mindset, at home, in communities, and among families, can prevent the next Shehnaz Bibi.