Gold rises as weaker dollar, Trump's criticism of Powell fuels uncertainty
The reports raised concerns over the future independence of the U.S. central bank, boosting demand for safe-haven bullion.
Spot gold edged up 0.1% at $3,334.20 per ounce, as of 0507 GMT. U.S. gold futures rose 0.1% to $3,347.10.
The dollar fell to its lowest level since March 2022, making greenback-priced gold less expensive for overseas buyers.
Powell told a U.S. Senate panel on Wednesday that while Trump's tariffs may cause a one-time price hike, the risk of persistent inflation is significant enough for the Fed to be cautious about further rate cuts.
'Trump clearly wants a dovish Fed Chairman next time around, so the increased likelihood of an aggressive rate-cutting cycle is pinning down the USD,' KCM Trade Chief Market Analyst Tim Waterer said.
Bullion tends to do well during periods of uncertainty and in a low-interest-rate environment.
Gold dips as geopolitical tensions ease
On Wednesday, Trump called Powell 'terrible' and said he is considering three or four candidates for the top Fed post.
Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump has even toyed with the idea of announcing Powell's potential successor by September or October.
Markets are awaiting U.S. GDP print due later in the day, while also keeping a watch for data on Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) on Friday, for cues on Fed's rate cut trajectory.
A ceasefire between Israel and Iran appeared to be holding on Wednesday as Trump, at a NATO summit, praised the swift end to the 12-day conflict and said he would seek a commitment from Iran to end its nuclear ambitions at talks next week.
Spot silver edged up 0.1% to $36.34 per ounce, platinum firmed 1.6% to $1,376.64, while palladium surged 4.2% to $1,102.05.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
A terror tag and a diplomatic turn
Just days before President Donald Trump's inauguration for the second term, a senior Pakistani diplomat briefed a group of people including experts and journalists in Islamabad. His focus was on the Pakistan-US relationship under Trump's administration. The bottom line was: Pakistan should be prepared for a tough challenge. According to the diplomat, Trump's team was surrounded by people who had little sympathy for Pakistan. Experts and those who understand Trump as well as the nature of Pakistan-US ties echoed similar sentiments. There was consensus that despite the unpredictable nature of Trump, there was little or no room for better prospects of Pakistan-US ties. On the contrary, everyone agreed that the relationship between the US and India would only deepen under President Trump's second term. But when President Trump delivered a maiden address to the US Congress, he praised Pakistan. This was some achievement given that until then he spared no one. He launched a diatribe both against friends and foes. Pakistan was the only exception, which Trump mentioned in a positive way. His praise stemmed from Pakistan's assistance in arresting one of the key masterminds of the Abbey Gate bombing in Kabul in August 2021. Muhammad Sharifullah, one of the ISIS-Khorasan operatives and according to the US was one of the facilitators of Kabul Airport attack, was apprehended on the intelligence provided by the CIA and swiftly handed over to the US. That cooperation not only earned Pakistan praise from Trump but also opened a channel of communication that would eventually lead to Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir being invited to launch at the White House in an unprecedented turn of events. When Trump applauded Pakistan at the US Congress, people were still sceptical that this bonhomie would be short-lived as Trump cannot be trusted. Questions were raised about what Pakistan had offered or was going to offer to the US in return for this cozying up approach of the US? Many people also wonder whether Pakistan would get anything in return. But what happened over the past few weeks following high-level exchanges and frequent interactions between the two countries was that Trump's praise was not mere rhetoric but now reflecting a shift in the US policy. The substantive outcome of Pakistan helping Trump to advance his domestic agenda by arresting Abbey Gate bombing facilitator was the US State Department's move to declare Balochistan Liberation Army and its suicide squad Majeed Brigade as terrorist outfit. The designation of BLA and the Majeed Brigade, as Foreign Terrorist Organisations (FTO), was a major victory for Pakistan. Islamabad had long sought its listing but with little success. The US declared Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) as a terrorist outfit but successive US administrations refrained from taking a similar stance against groups active in Balochistan. One of the reasons included that such groups including BLA and Majeed Brigade were targeting not just the Pakistani interests but also primarily the Chinese interests in the resource-rich Balochistan province. This in many ways probably served the agendas of those who don't want China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to succeed. That was the reason the US decision was extraordinary. The United States not only listed BLA and Majeed Brigade but also seems to be ready to extend cooperation to Pakistan to fight them. The two countries held counterterrorism dialogue, a regular feature, in Islamabad recently. The noticeable change was that for the first time BLA made it to the joint statement. Both delegations underscored the 'critical importance' of developing effective approaches to terrorist threats, singling out the BLA alongside transnational outfits. Washington lauded Islamabad's 'continued successes' in containing entities that threaten regional and global peace. Therefore, listing of BLA and Majeed Brigade is a development that carries legal, political, diplomatic, and operational implications for Pakistan, the US, and even India. First, any BLA or Majeed Brigade funds or property in the US jurisdiction are now frozen. Members and affiliates are barred from entering the US. Providing material support to the group is now a serious US federal crime, even for individuals outside the US if they have US connections. The designation makes it harder for BLA to raise funds internationally through charities, front companies, or sympathetic diaspora groups. The FTO tag makes it riskier for members to travel abroad or seek asylum in countries aligned with US counterterrorism policies. The US can now more actively share intelligence with Pakistan and allies to track, disrupt, or eliminate the group's cells. Diaspora-based sympathisers in the West could face monitoring and prosecution. If BLA finds safe havens in neighbouring states including Afghanistan, the US listing pressures those governments to take action or face reputational costs. While the designation won't end the insurgency, it can weaken its external support structure, especially for high-profile suicide attacks like those by the Majeed Brigade. Second, Pakistan has long stated that BLA is a foreign-backed terrorist group responsible for attacks in Balochistan. The US designation is an international endorsement of that position. Third, India has openly supported Baloch separatists. The US move signals that Washington is not aligning with New Delhi on this issue. Fourth, this listing highlights a warming security relationship between Pakistan and the US. Fifth, quietly, this could create discomfort in New Delhi if US counterterrorism measures start exposing any Indian contacts with Baloch separatists. It is not said publicly but the US move could also be linked to its keen interest in the untapped mines and minerals resources available in abundance in Balochistan. But security is a major challenge. Some view the US interest in mines and minerals with suspicion. The view, nevertheless, in official Pakistani circles is that the US investment in Balochistan could stabilise the situation and it may lay the bases for long-term cooperation between the two countries. The listing of BLA and Majeed Brigade is being seen in that context.
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Degrees in dysfunction
Despite growing student enrollments, increased PhD production, and persistent public investment over the years, Pakistan's higher education sector continues to underperform. No Pakistani university ranks in the top 350 globally, and graduates struggle with underemployment and limited research commercialisation. At the root of this dysfunction lies a complex intersection of poor governance, political maneuvering, low returns on education, policy stagnation, and structural economic issues that fail to reward learning. Higher education in Pakistan, continues to suffer from deep-rooted structural challenges that limit its global competitiveness and national impact. At the heart of these challenges lie governance and accountability issues. Most public-sector universities still operate with outdated management models, where political interference overrides merit-based decision-making. The situation has been further complicated by the 18th Constitutional Amendment, which created a dual system of higher education regulation — one at the federal level and another at the provincial level. This has led to overlapping mandates, inconsistent policies, and a lack of coordination between key stakeholders. Governance & structural challenges A higher education institution (HEI) is subject to numerous governance bottlenecks, including the Council of Common Interests (CCI), Standing Committees of the National Assembly and Senate, the Higher Education Commission (HEC), the Federal Education Ministry, provincial education departments, provincial HECs, the chancellor (governor or chief minister of the respective province), the courts, and finally, the internal approving bodies — the Senate or syndicate or both of the HEI. For instance, when a public HEI seeks to revise student fees in light of the incessant increase in establishment charges (payroll) resulting from annual BPS faculty salary hikes, the Senate and syndicate — the strategic decision-making bodies, often composed of majorly ex-officio members — block the move due to concerns over political capital depreciation. Similarly, many important decisions, especially the commercialisation of idle assets or the investment (if, fortunately, there are funds available) in profit-oriented but risky opportunities, such as mutual funds, also suffer due to this overreach. This creates a vicious cycle: political interference obstructs much-needed reforms, increasing dependence on the government's exchequer, which in turn invites further political interference. Further, governing boards are often constituted through non-transparent nominations without any defined eligibility criteria, and they lack representation from key professional sectors such as finance, law, or technology. The absence of clearly defined performance evaluation frameworks for both the vice chancellor and statutory bodies has left many universities in a state of administrative paralysis. Internal audit functions are largely nonexistent and, where they do exist, they lack independence and remain directly answerable to the vice chancellor. Chronic underinvestment, stagnant funding Financially, over the years, the Higher Education Commission's budget rose from 47.5 billion rupees in 2014–15 to 65 billion rupees in 2018–19, after which it remained stagnant. However, this stagnation, combined with currency devaluation, has reduced its value to nearly half in dollar terms, from around 470 million dollars to 230 million dollars. This financial squeeze reflects the chronic underinvestment in education overall and the government's misplaced priorities. From July to March, only 0.8% of the GDP was spent on education, according to the Economic Survey of Pakistan 2024-25. Far below UNESCO's recommended benchmark of 4–6%, even after accounting for provincial expenditures. Within the higher education sector, HEC's performance-based funding to HEIs remains minimal compared to base and need-based grants, leaving faculty and institutions with little incentive to strive for excellence beyond mandatory benchmarks. Unlike in the US or China, where universities serve as hubs for startups and scientific advancement, Pakistan's institutions have produced no Nobel laureates or unicorn startups. Offices of research, innovation and commercializalisation (ORICs) and business incubation centres (BICs. exist, but due to limited capacity and lack of attention from both HEIs and the government, commercialisation efforts rarely bear fruit. Yet this is vital, not only for the financial sustainability of HEIs and easing the government's strained fiscal space, but also for fostering innovation and broader economic prosperity. Research & employability gaps Despite a significant rise in the number of PhDs produced (from 287 in 2003 to 3,489 in 2024) and improvements in laboratory infrastructure, Pakistan has failed to fully leverage its research potential. While academic output has increased in both volume and citation quality, it is largely driven by individual incentives, particularly the need for faculty to meet promotion criteria, rather than by a commitment to solving real-world problems or addressing national priorities. Product-oriented research remains largely absent. This reflects flaws in regulatory policies, which prioritise publication counts over innovation, research commercialisation, industry linkages, pedagogical quality, and the meaningful academic presence of teachers. The result is a race for published papers, often at the expense of impactful research and teaching. From a student's perspective, there's a glaring gap between what the job market demands (practical, skill-based competencies) and what universities continue to teach, which remains largely theoretical. Processes like degree attestation are sluggish and bureaucratic. As noted earlier, poor pedagogy—focused more on churning out research papers than on actual teaching—compounds the issue. Grievance mechanisms, where they exist, are largely symbolic and often fail to function effectively. Thousands of graduates each year find themselves underemployed or unemployable due to a mismatch between their academic training and the evolving demands of industry. Outdated curricula rooted in rote memorisation continue to dominate classrooms, with little emphasis on critical thinking, analytical reasoning, or hands-on experience. There is an urgent need to overhaul academic programs to reflect competency-based education models. Internships, project-based learning, and interdisciplinary exposure should be core components of university life to ensure that students are better equipped to contribute to the economy and society upon graduation. With the recent economic turmoil, households see little incentive to invest in higher education, given the opportunity cost, when the job market does not value it. This is not a reflection of poor effort by students but rather a structural failure of the economy to absorb skilled labour. Our higher education faces a cycle of underperformance driven by poor governance, underused research, outdated curricula, inequitable access, and much more. Disillusionment with education stems from real economic and institutional failures, not misplaced expectations. The solution isn't merely to spend more, but to invest more strategically, aligning resources with local needs and long-term national priorities. Charting the path to effective higher education Reparation necessitates firstly, to ensure meaningful autonomy for universities. Universities must be empowered to revise fees, design market-aligned programs, and recruit faculty without political interference. The government should prioritise repairing and strengthening existing large, underperforming institutions—rather than churning out new universities for rhetorical or political gains. Without such autonomy and a focus on institutional consolidation, even the most well-crafted policies cannot be implemented effectively. Secondly, a shift toward performance-based funding is needed. Rather than relying solely on base grants – or worst, mere whims – a significant portion of public funding should be tied to measurable outcomes, such as graduate employability, research commercialisation, innovation output, and teaching quality, not just enrollment figures. Faculty standards must be raised and teaching capacity enhanced. Recruitment criteria must be strengthened, regular pedagogical training institutionalised, and competitive salaries offered to attract and retain high-performing faculty. Promotion criteria should move beyond paper publication counts to also reflect classroom impact and real-world relevance. Regulator must actively enforce these standards. Academic programs should be with market needs. The Academic Council must actively incorporate market research to align courses with industry needs, without the looming fear of the regulator's sword. ORICs and BICs should be revitalised to translate curricular outcomes into commercially viable products. Curricula must prioritise critical thinking, applied learning, and digital skills. Stronger industry linkages, mandatory internships, and project-based learning are essential to make graduates job-ready and economically relevant. Local governments should be empowered to reduce regional disparities. Provincial and district administrations should be equipped with reliable data systems, timely funding, and real administrative and fiscal autonomy. This will allow them to craft localised solutions with agility, responsiveness, and accountability. Structural governance reform need to be implemented. University governance must be separated from management. Independent boards, free from political influence, should appoint vice-chancellors based on leadership merit. A national governance code, modelled after corporate standards, must enforce transparency, annual audits, and board accountability. Clear eligibility criteria for key positions, along with key performance indicators (KPI) based performance evaluation mechanisms for each member of strategic committees as well as for the vice chancellor, should be mandated. These evaluations should be conducted by an independent third party to ensure objectivity and credibility. It is imperative to prioritise equity and inclusion, especially for women. Education policy must centre on gender and geographic inclusion. This requires scholarships, safe transport options, and secure campuses for female students; digital access in rural areas; and targeted faculty recruitment for underdeveloped regions. Prioritising female education will unlock not only individual opportunity but also national productivity. Reform, not rhetoric, is the only sustainable path forward. Furqan Ali is a Peshawar-based researcher who works in the financial sector. He can be reached at alifurqan647@ Rabia Khan is an Islamabad-based writer and researcher focusing on national and international affairs All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the authors.
Business Recorder
4 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Outline emerges of Putin's offer to end his war in Ukraine
LONDON: Russia would relinquish tiny pockets of occupied Ukraine and Kyiv would cede swathes of its eastern land which Moscow has been unable to capture, under peace proposals discussed by Russia's Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump at their Alaska summit, sources briefed on Moscow's thinking said. The account emerged the day after Trump and Putin met at an airforce base in Alaska, the first encounter between a US president and the Kremlin chief since before the start of the Ukraine conflict. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiyy is due to travel to Washington on Monday to discuss with Trump a possible settlement of the full-scale war, which Putin launched in February 2022. Although the summit failed to secure the ceasefire he said he had wanted, Trump said in an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity that he and Putin had discussed land transfers and security guarantees for Ukraine, and had 'largely agreed'. 'I think we're pretty close to a deal,' he said, adding: 'Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they'll say 'no'.' The two sources, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, said their knowledge of Putin's proposals was mostly based on discussions between leaders in Europe, the U.S. and Ukraine, and noted it was not complete. Trump briefed Zelenskiyy and European leaders on his summit discussions early on Saturday. It was not immediately clear if the proposals by Putin were an opening gambit to serve as a starting point for negotiations or more like a final offer that was not subject to discussion. Ukrainian land for peace At face value, at least some of the demands would present huge challenges for Ukraine's leadership to accept. Putin's offer ruled out a ceasefire until a comprehensive deal is reached, blocking a key demand of Zelenskiyy, whose country is hit daily by Russian drones and ballistic missiles. Under the proposed Russian deal, Kyiv would fully withdraw from the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions in return for a Russian pledge to freeze the front lines in the southern regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the sources said. Ukraine has already rejected any retreat from Ukrainian land such as the Donetsk region, where its troops are dug in and which Kyiv says serves as a crucial defensive structure to prevent Russian attacks deeper into its territory. Russia would be prepared to return comparatively small tracts of Ukrainian land it has occupied in the northern Sumy and northeastern Kharkiv regions, the sources said. Russia holds pockets of the Sumy and Kharkiv regions that total around 440 square km, according to Ukraine's Deep State battlefield mapping project. Ukraine controls around 6,600 square km of Donbas, which comprises the Donetsk and Luhansk regions and is claimed by Russia. Although the Americans have not spelled this out, the sources said they knew Russia's leader was also seeking - at the very least - formal recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, which Moscow seized from Ukraine in 2014. It was not clear if that meant recognition by the US government or, for instance, all Western powers and Ukraine. Kyiv and its European allies reject formal recognition of Moscow's rule in the peninsula. They said Putin would also expect the lifting of at least some of the array of sanctions on Russia. However, they could not say if this applied to U.S. as well as European sanctions. Trump said on Friday he did not immediately need to consider retaliatory tariffs on countries such as China for buying Russian oil - which is subject to a range of Western sanctions - but might have to 'in two or three weeks.' Trump's summit with Putin set for 11 a.m. in Alaska on Friday Ukraine would also be barred from joining the NATO military alliance, though Putin seemed to be open to Ukraine receiving some kind of security guarantees, the sources said. However, they added that it was unclear what this meant in practice. European leaders said Trump had discussed security guarantees for Ukraine during their conversation on Saturday and also broached an idea for an 'Article 5'-style guarantee outside the NATO military alliance. NATO regards any attack launched on one of its 32 members as an attack on all under its Article 5 clause. Joining the Atlantic alliance is a strategic objective for Kyiv that is enshrined in the country's constitution. Russia would also demand official status for the Russian language inside parts of, or across, Ukraine, as well as the right of the Russian Orthodox Church to operate freely, the sources said. Trump gives Putin 'peace letter' from wife Melania Ukraine's security agency accuses the Moscow-linked church of abetting Russia's war on Ukraine by spreading pro-Russian propaganda and housing spies, something denied by the church which says it has cut canonical ties with Moscow. Ukraine has passed a law banning Russia-linked religious organisations, of which it considers the church to be one. However, it has not yet started enforcing the ban.
