Dar reviews pricing, supply of sugar
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Senator Ishaq Dar on Friday chaired a follow-up meeting to review the pricing and supply of essential food items, particularly sugar.
The meeting was attended by the Minister for National Food Security, SAPM Tariq Bajwa, Secretaries of Food Security & Industries, and other senior government officials.
The committee reviewed key aspects of the sugar sector. It also decided the in-principle approval for the import of 0.5 million tonnes of sugar. Dar reaffirmed the government's commitment to protecting the interests of both consumers and suppliers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
2 minutes ago
- Business Recorder
Pakistan has video evidence of downed six Indian aircraft, says Mohsin Naqvi
Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi on Sunday that Pakistan has video evidence of six Indian aircraft, which were shot down during the recent military conflict between the two neighbouring nuclear states. Speaking at a seminar hosted by the Professor Waris Mir Foundation at Aiwan-e-Iqbal, titled 'Global Impacts of Pakistan's Military and Diplomatic Victories over India', the minister stressed that the country's intelligence and defense preparedness outmatched India at every level. Naqvi said, 'We have videos of six Indian aircraft that were shot down.' He said it was decided that no announcement would be made until field evidence was obtained, 'and believe me, we had it within minutes.' Pak-India conflict: Indian opposition assails Modi for failures Naqvi credited Pakistan's intelligence agencies for providing real-time information during the conflict. 'Every decision made in India, every flight their aircraft took — we knew in advance. This was the extraordinary work of our intelligence agencies, the silent warriors who rarely get the credit they deserve,' he said. He also spoke of divine protection, recounting an incident in which seven Indian missiles targeted a major Pakistani base but failed to hit it. 'Some missiles fell short, some landed to the side, but none hit the base. It was nothing short of a miracle,' he added. In contrast, Naqvi said that Pakistan's retaliatory missile strikes hit India's largest oil storage facility with precision. The interior minister praised Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir's leadership, saying he led with great courage and bravery. 'At that time, a delegation from the Saudi government visited Pakistan. The delegation had come from India to Pakistan, seeking peace. The field marshal told them: 'India is like a shining Mercedes, but we are like a dumper truck loaded with stones. Now imagine what will happen when the two collide.' The members of the delegation remained silent,' he said. The minister also highlighted that for the first time, the army, air force, and navy devised a joint strategy and fought the war under one plan. Whereas, he said India's each service chief reported separately to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. '…their viewpoints were entirely different and split. The result was before the world.' Naqvi said that two key figures behind India's strategy were National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and Home Minister Amit Shah, not Modi himself. 'These two will be responsible for Modi's downfall and for the damage they are bringing to India,' he warned. IAF chief must have claimed downing Pakistan's aircraft under pressure: defence analyst He also emphasised political unity within Pakistan during the conflict, stating that all parties stood together. 'The Indian delegation failed to lobby international support, particularly in the U.S., while Pakistan's diplomatic front, led by the PPP chairman, was far more effective,' he said. Naqvi further stated India sponsored terrorism in Pakistan, especially in Balochistan, and used post-9/11 narratives to delegitimise the Kashmiri freedom movement. The seminar was also addressed by Chairman Senate Syed Yusuf Raza Gillani and Speaker Punjab Assembly Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan.
Express Tribune
8 hours 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
8 hours 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.
