Punjab ramps up steps to avert ‘wheat crisis’

Mansoor Malik 

Published September 21, 2025
DAWN

• Price control secretary says geotagging, verification of wheat stock decided for proactive planning; defends inter-provincial curbs to ensure ample supply

• Mills barred from using wheat for manufacturing poultry feed

LAHORE: The Punjab government has stepped up measures, including geotagging of stocks, to avert a potential wheat crisis in the province after floods in the eastern rivers washed away farmlands and destroyed stockpiles in its central districts.

The move comes amid restrictions on the interprovincial movement of the commodity by the provincial government, which has raised prices in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa by up to 68 per cent, also prompting protests by Sindh and KP.

Sources told Dawn that the decision to restrict the wheat trade was taken to ensure an ample supply of the grain in the province and to avert a looming crisis. Besides this measure, the Punjab Price Control and Commodities Management also decided to start geotagging and physically verifying wheat stocks in warehouses across the province.

Its secretary Dr Kiran Khurshid notified a four-member departmental monitoring committee led by Deputy Secretary Shazia Rehman to collect data from all districts in collaboration with the Punjab Enforcement and Regulatory Authority (Pera) and the food directorate. Through this practice, the wheat stocks stored in government and private warehouses will be registered to meet the food crisis feared in the aftermath of the floods.

Dr Khurshid said her department would implement the government policy to avert the unpredictable and unforeseen crisis post-floods. She said people had lost massive wheat stocks in the recent floods and now it was the government’s responsibility to take care of its citizens.

She said the price control and commodities department was geotagging wheat warehouses to gather information about the actual stocks and resources for predictive analysis and anticipative planning.

“The geotagging is just an intervention, not a solution,” she said, adding that it would take time to trace wheat.

She said the department had established a strategic management wing (SWM) to digitise the department’s assets, resources and activities of the department’s eight directorates. “All the scattered information would be available for the department and higher authorities in one dashboard for monitoring and taking informed decisions,” she said.

The Punjab Home Department, at the request of the price control department, had also imposed Section 144 and prohibited the mills in the province from using 10,184 metric tonnes of wheat for feed manufacturing.

Interprovincial curbs

Sources said the provincial government was keeping a strict check on the movement of wheat at the exit points of the province. They claimed that Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz had made it clear that her foremost duty was to stave off a food crisis in her province and ensure that the citizens got their due wheat share through government packages or other means.

She had also been quoted as saying that some four million people had been affected by floods and the executive machinery needed to ensure the availability of wheat for the flood survivors.

The price control secretary, Dr Khurshid, also acknowledged that Punjab was monitoring the wheat movement at the Sindh and KP borders because “businessmen would always like to sell their commodities, where they would get a better price”.

“In this situation, the government’s role is to ensure that wheat stocks in the province meet the needs of its people. It will be insane if the government lets its wheat go to other provinces at a lower price and later purchase it at a higher cost for its own people,” Dr Khurshid said. It may be mentioned that the government had not purchased wheat and there were no hefty stocks in government warehouses.

Meanwhile, the department arrested 107 profiteers, fined 12,043 profiteers, and registered cases against seven individuals. In the matter of over-charging in wheat flour prices, the department officials arrested 18 officials, registered cases against four individuals and fined 1,074 persons. In a crackdown on hoarders, the department has already recovered 334,000 metric tonnes of wheat across the province.

These measures helped increase wheat stocks in flour mills by 165,000 metric tonnes this month alone.

Additionally, the grinding of 360,000 metric tonnes of wheat has ensured a steady supply of flour and brought down wheat prices from Rs3,800 to Rs3,000 per 40kg.

Published in Dawn, September 21st, 2025

PAKISTAN

Undergraduate education quality

Faisal Bari

Published September 26, 2025

  DAWN

WE already have 270-odd universities in the country. And many new ones are being set up every year.

The government has also elevated many colleges to university status. But if we were to earnestly inquire about how many universities are offering quality undergraduate education in both the public and private sectors, we would not be able to name more than a handful of universities.

All of them together do not offer more than approximately 20,000 admissions every year. The bulk of students enrolling in undergraduate programmes end up at institutions that offer lower-quality education.

It was, thus, not a surprise to see many universities struggling to fill admission slots this year. Top schools, again across the public-private spectrum, did not have this issue. They had a record number of applicants in most departments. But places with a poorer quality of education, or education that does not guarantee adequate returns to students, struggled. These struggles are only going to increase as we move forward.

The importance of quality undergraduate education cannot be overemphasised. Students start maturing at around 18-22 years. They start understanding themselves and the world a lot better. Their personalities start evolving. They fully enter public life. This is the age where individuals and citizens are created, shaped, and refined as they learn more about the world as well as themselves.

In countries like the US, almost 50 per cent of young people around 18 enter college programmes; in Pakistan, only 7-8pc of the relevant cohort reach that level. The difference is stark. My conjecture is that we will not be able to address human capital issues in Pakistan, which are keeping our growth limited, unless we are able to educate a lot more of our children, and are able to focus on providing better quality undergraduate education to a lot more of these young people.

What does quality education at the undergraduate level entail?

Undergraduate education is mostly about learning how to learn. If we do that well, the student is set for life. Students completing undergraduate studies should definitely have some knowledge and skills pertaining to their area of study (their major). But what is more important is that they should have good communication and language skills and the ability to think deeply and critically about issues; they should have argumentation skills and the ability to present themselves well; they should know how they learn and be able to engage deeply with the subjects they are curious about. If they have and do the above, they will definitely have the confidence needed to step into new things. This confidence, based on deep knowledge and skills, is a crucial outcome of a good undergraduate education.

The economic and social background of some of our young people, as well as family support, can facilitate them in acquiring some of the skills and knowledge they need, and shape their attitudes. But for many, this is not the case, and their college or university has to step up to take care of this. Sadly, most universities in Pakistan are failing in this task quite drastically.

Universities do not have language and writing centres, and lack mentoring and co-curricular programmes that could strengthen the focus on developing the needed skills. Too many of our university managers/ administrators, and too many of our university faculty, feel that imparting subject-specific knowledge is what undergraduate education is about, and that this is what they have been hired for.


Confidence based on knowledge and skills is a crucial outcome of a good undergraduate education.

Being an economics major at the undergraduate level is not just about understanding the basics of economics and being aware of where the field stands currently. It is a lot more. One should be aware not only of the foundations of economics and its historical development, but also of the context in which the subject is being taught. It requires some knowledge of other social sciences, the sciences, and the humanities.

One should know how the subject relates to challenges that people deal with in their daily lives and be able to apply the theoretical framework of the subject to not only understand but also to look for ways of addressing them. The subject and ways of thinking should be internalised to the point they become a part of who one is. And one should be able to communicate all of this to others as well. This is what a graduate coming out of a decent-quality undergraduate programme should be able to do.

How many of our universities and undergraduate programmes are able to claim that they are in a position to achieve all this for their students? Or that the students are progressing in this direction?

I have been teaching for some 30 years now. During this period, I have interacted with and taught thousands of students, written hundreds of letters of recommendation, and interviewed thousands of candidates for recruitment as research/ teaching assistants, faculty, administrators, and many other positions. I have found that the quality of an undergraduate education, though not exclusively, is a very good predictor of the suitability of a candidate for the post. Of course, there are always exceptions — unimpressive people who have studied in good undergraduate programmes and impressive people who did not get the opportunity. But, in general, the correlation has been a strong one. And, as explained here, there is a good reason for that.

In Pakistan, we have neglected, especially since the birth of the Higher Education Com­mission, undergraduate education and teaching, and focused too much on graduate education and research. This is not what Pakistan needs. My plea to existing as well as upcoming universities is to focus on the quality of undergraduate teaching and learning. This will help us address many of the quality issues we are witnessing in our education system.

The writer is a senior research fellow at the Institute of Development and Economic Alternatives and an associate professor of economics at Lums.

Published in Dawn, September 26th, 2025

Quest for economic sovereignty

International aid erodes sovereignty because donors pursue their own agendas.

Saeed Ahmed 

Published September 26, 2025

DAWN


IN 1765, undivided India lost its financial sovereignty when Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II granted the East India Company the right to collect taxes (diwani) in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.

This enabled systematic extraction of wealth and control over India’s economy and redirected resources to Britain. This erosion of financial sovereignty undermined national security and ultimately state sovereignty.

After independence, Pakistan regained sovereignty when the Quaid inaugurated the State Bank of Pakistan on July 1, 1948, and issued its own currency. Until then, the Reserve Bank of India controlled Pakistan’s currency and banking system. As the Quaid noted, “The opening of the State Bank of Pakistan symbolises the sovereignty of our state in the financial sphere.”

That sovereignty has gradually eroded through unchecked reliance on external aid. At the macro level, Pakistan remains locked in IMF programmes. Budgets are passed by parliament but pre-approved by the IMF. Monetary policy is nominally independent but shaped by Fund advice. The energy sector is trapped by IMF diktats to raise tariffs and fuel taxes. Recently, the IMF has even intruded into governance and judicial realms, beyond its mandate and expertise. The 2021 SBP Act amendments — passed reluctantly by the parliament under IMF conditionality despite strong reservations by all parties — symbolised a blow to sovereignty.

Since 2000, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has financed over 300 programmes and the World Bank (WB) more than 150, many co-financed by bilateral donors. They are involved across virtually all socioeconomic sectors: tax, energy, trade, agriculture, SMEs, finance, urban management, water, health, education, and justice. Many projects overlap as donors compete. Donors claim to promote self-reliance, yet the sheer number and scale of projects undertaken for decades contradict that very claim.

Today, Pakistan appears to have become a colony of donors. Even junior staff of the IMF and donor agencies often act like viceroys and vicereines, negotiating directly with ministers and top civil servants dictating advice.

Between 2000 and 2022, Pakistan received about $50 billion in official development assistance (ODA). Yet it still ranks near the bottom of global human, social and economic indicators.


International aid erodes sovereignty because donors pursue their own agendas.

Despite the proliferation of multibillion-dollar donor projects over decades, it is difficult to find tangible positive outcomes. Growth has stalled, unemployment is rising, and poverty is deepening. Twenty-six million children remain out of school, 40 per cent of under-fives are stunted, corruption has surged, and government effectiveness has deteriorated

Waste and abuse of borrowed resources is evident from the failure of donor-driven projects to improve the tax-to-GDP ratio, exports and competitiveness, SME financing, or even Karachi’s liveability conditions. Ironically, the very sectors that have received sustained donor support remain most inefficient, resulting in policy lethargy, institutional decay, and misuse of resources.

The World Bank, ADB and others claim to be Pakistan’s ‘development partners’ but accept no responsibility for worsening conditions. Our officials outsource policy formulation and abdicate decision-making to foreign technocrats who have no stake in Pakistan’s future. Meanwhile, foreign aid has burdened the country with large, unsusta­inable debt, and repayments consume enormous resources, leaving behind little for investment in people.

International aid erodes sovereignty because donors pursue their own agendas. Bilateral donors use aid as ‘soft power’ to secure votes in international organisations, support allies, access markets for exports, deter asylum seekers, or fight terrorism. As US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated this year, changes to USAID are “not about ending foreign aid” but about structuring it to further US national interests. In 2018, UK prime minister Theresa May declared that post-Brexit Britain’s aid would be used to advance British trade and political interests.

If poverty alleviation or economic development were the true objectives, most aid would flow to the poorest nations — South Sudan, Burundi, Congo, Mozambique, etc. Instead, donor countries channel resources to strategic allies. Ukraine, for example, received $40bn in ODA in 2023 and $29.5bn in 2022, making it the largest aid recipient ever. In 2023, the US’s top five aid recipients were Ukraine, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, and Ethiopia.

Pakistan now receives little in bilateral ODA — just $116 million from USAID in 2024 and £41.5m from the UK. These sums are negligible compared to Pakistan’s $410bn economy, but grant donors disproportionate influence.

While USAID has shut down, the UK’s FCDO remains deeply entrenched. Through certain entities, it encroaches upon the SBP’s role in the financial sector. Also, in another instance, Karandaaz has penetrated the FBR to ‘modernise its tax system’, though its expertise in tax administration is open to question. Using Gates Foundation funds, it hired McKinsey to digitise FBR operations, with some fearing that such moves can give access to sensitive information. Many would see this as a breach of sovereignty.

Tax collection is a fundamental function of a sovereign state. Imagine, Pakistan’s tax authority, mobilising Rs12 trillion in taxes, needing a few million dollars from a foundation to modernise itself.

India, once dependent on foreign aid, has since transitioned from a recipient to net donor. After the 2004 tsunami, prime minister Manmohan Singh turned down humanitarian aid, saying India could cope on its own. Since then, India has disciplined aid flows, ending most bilateral programmes, channelling money through multilaterals, and restricting NGO foreign funding.

Pakistan must also discipline international aid by restricting it to projects that enhance productivity and directly contribute to growth, while keeping debt within sustainable limits. The approach of accepting whatever comes in, on whatever terms, must end.

The Economic Affairs Division must set clear priorities for external assistance, identify critical sectors and agencies for development cooperation, and communicate them to donors. Multilateral concessional financing should support demand-driven projects with high development impact. Bilateral donor programmes should be diminished sharply with their offices closed in Pakistan. This would immediately signal to the government to assume full responsibility for development and the welfare of its citizens.

The quest for economic sovereignty is not about rejecting aid entirely. It is about regaining control over economic policy choices and ensuring external assistance serves Pakistan’s core development priorities, rather than foreign agendas. It is not just about pride — it is vital for national security and prosperity.

The writer is the author of The Shady Economics of International Aid. He is a former senior adviser of the IMF and holds a PhD in economics from the University of Cambridge.

drsaeed1201@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, September 26th, 2025

Unacknowledged heroes

In Pakistan, the significance of insects and invertebrates is profound yet overlooked.

Ali Tauqeer Sheikh

Published September 25, 2025 

 DAWN


A RECENT encounter with the UK’s All Party Parliamentary Group for Bees, Pollinators and Invertebrates has revealed something remarkable: British parliamentarians have formed a cross-party group specifically acknowledging invertebrates’ profound connection with climate change, biodiversity, trade and human health.

This initiative raises crucial questions about Pakistan’s own invertebrate populations. As our country experiences frequent floods, droughts and heatwaves, how are these climatic extremes affecting the unsung architects of our ecosystems? What implications do these impacts hold for Pakistan’s food security and public health?

In Pakistan, the global and national significa­­n­­ce of insects and invertebrates is profound yet ov­­erlooked and critically threatened. Their collective work underpins the very foundations of life: from pollinating the crops that feed us to decomposing organic matter that enriches our soils.

These unrecognised heroes of ecosystems are indispensable to biodiversity and food security. Pakistan’s diverse ecology, from the Himalayas to the Indus delta, is home to a wide range of invertebrates crucial to environmental and economic health. As the backbone of the country’s agriculture, insect pollinators are vital for such crops as fruit, vegetables and cotton.

Beyond farming, insects play crucial roles in nutrient cycling in arid zones and maintaining the delicate balance of alpine flora. Aquatic invertebrates serve as indicators of water quality and support aquatic food chains in our water bodies. While credible data is hard to come by, some species like the Kashmir Kaiser-i-Hind butterfly are considered globally threatened. Threats to these species are multifaceted.


In Pakistan, the significance of insects and invertebrates is profound yet overlooked.

Bees are the most critical pollinators, enabling the reproduction of major food crops and wild flowering plants. Without them, farm yield would plummet. Beyond pollination, insects like ladybugs are natural pest controllers, reducing the need for chemical pesticides. Beetles and earthworms, known as detritivores, decompose organic matter, enriching soil and preventing erosion.

They also form the base of food chains, supporting birds, amphibians and mammals. The decline of insect populations is a crisis.

Impact of floods: Floods, like the recent ones in Pakistan, cause mass invertebrate mortality, as widespread floods and prolonged inundation drown or wash away vast numbers of terrestrial insects and their nests. These events also lead to habitat destruction, as floodwaters destroy the plants and soil that invertebrates rely on for food and shelter. The water itself, often polluted, can be toxic in Pakistan.

Phenological mismatch and species migration: Perhaps most concerning is the slow climatic on­­set of phenological mismatches: the decoupling of synchronised relationships between insects and their food sources. As temperatures shift, bees may emerge from hibernation before their preferred flowers bloom, while butterfly lifecycles become misaligned with host plant availability. Across Pakistan’s seven elevation zones, from the Thar desert to the Karakorams, these mismatches create unpredictable ecosystem dynamics.

Climate change has also triggered a northward movement of species. Rising temperatures and al­­tered precipitation patterns have enabled disease vectors like mosquitoes to establish their ha­­bitat in previously cooler, higher-altitude regi­ons. Stu­dies in Islamabad and Peshawar show increasing dengue transmission risk as these vectors colonise northern Pakistan, while native invertebrate populations struggle with changing conditions.

Invertebrate wealth: Pakistan’s diverse ecosystems host a range of invertebrates crucial for environmental and economic resilience. Native bee species serve as the backbone of agriculture, pollinating key export crops like cotton, fruit and oilseeds. The economic value of these pollination services is invisible in the national account.

Beyond agriculture, many unique species represent significant biodiversity assets and potential flagships for ecotourism in northern Pakistan. Aquatic invertebrates serve as vital indicators of water quality throughout our river systems, while beneficial insects like ladybugs provide natural pest control.

Growing international trade in invertebrates presents both opportunities and risks. Pakistan could develop indigenous biocontrol solutions for export while expanding its managed pollination services sector. The commercial production and harvesting of insects have emerged as a major trade commodity.

However, unregulated trade poses biosecurity threats, as seen with the global spread of Varroa mites that have devastated honeybee populations worldwide. While Pakistan also grapples with illegal wildlife trafficking of mammals and reptiles, invertebrate commerce requires distinct regulatory frameworks due to its unique biosecurity and ecological implications.

Governance gaps: Pakistan addresses invertebrate protection through multiple agencies, primarily the ministries of climate change and food security. Key legislation includes the Pakistan Plant Quarantine Act (1976) and the Pakistan Trade Control of Wild Fauna and Flora Act (2012) aligned with CITES. However, significant gaps re­­main.

Despite research conducted by the Ento­mo­logical Research Institute and various universit­ies, the Pakistan Zoological Survey lacks a centr­a­­lised national dataset for monitoring invertebr­ate populations — a critical oversight given their importance to agricultural and food security.

Conservation priorities: Protecting Pakistan’s invertebrates requires immediate action across four fronts: conducting nationwide population su­­r­veys and enhanced entomological research to un­­derstand climate vulnerabilities; strengthening protected areas and converting lands along railway tracks and road networks into ecological corridors linking fragmented habitats; impleme­n­ting agricultural reforms that reduce pesticide de­­­pendency through integrated pest managem­ent, while incentivising pollinator-friendly farming; and, developing a unified national action plan integrated into climate strategies. Crucially, Pakistan’s NDCs and national adaptation plans must prioritise investment in bees and pollinators as essential climate resilience components.

The invertebrate crisis threatens our food security, economic stability and ecological resilience. The 2022 and 2025 floods exposed this catastrophic vulnerability while also demonstrating invertebrates’ essential role in ecosystem recovery. As climate change intensifies phenological mismatches and drives species’ migration or extinction, I cannot imagine a healthy childhood without chasing butterflies and fireflies or running away from wasps.

The writer is a climate change and sustainable development expert.

Published in Dawn, September 25th, 2025

Divine encounters

Jan-e-Alam Khaki 

Published September 26, 2025

VISITING sacred places, persons and objects may be regarded as encounters of the human and divine. These encounters evoke in the visitors’ hearts a sublime, transcendent and holy feeling. When visitors to a sacred place describe their experiences as “… a serene spiritual experience … beyond words… .”, these may echo in those of us who have had similar visits to our own sacred places. Such visits often tend to enrich, for some, inner spirituality, while for others, who do not believe in any sense of sacred or holy, they may wonder at, or even question, such experiences.

Sacredness is a concept that evokes veneration and sublimity rendering us often speechless, as the above comment of a friend admits. Lutf Zada rightly argues that when complexity rises, precise statements lose their meaning and meaningful statements lose precision. Language can support us only thus far and surrenders when its scope shrinks in light of extraordinary experiences. Such experiences know only feelings as reality, not words.

The concept of sacredness is all-pervasive in world religions and other traditions. The sacred can be defined in many ways. For example, when probed, artificial intelligence takes it to mean “something regarded with reverence and respect, often associated with the divine or holy”. It adds, and rightly so, that different cultures have unique sacred persons, things, symbols, rituals and practices that are venerated and celebrated based on their beliefs. AI further tells us that sacred texts, places and objects are central to worship and spiritual life. At a philosophical level, thinkers may view the sacred within the context of ethics, morality and human experience.

The concept of sacredness is all pervasive.

So, the notion of sacredness is all-pervasive to so many dimensions of human life, such as revealed texts, inspired poetry, sacred places, revered things, art, literature, architecture and rituals. Such sacred objects or places have a purifying, sanctifying and transforming role when they are approached with humility. Being a subjective experience, the sense of sacred is often private; it cannot be shared with others. Sacredness is associated with human ingenuity of meaning-making, a quality uniquely seen in humans.

The experience of sacredness may be subjective; what seems to be a ‘sacred’ thing, or object or a place or time may appear to others as normal, devoid of any such thing. This is why each religion or a sacred tradition develops elaborate rituals that are aimed at generating the sense of sacredness or holiness. They are experienced very differently by different participants. For example, millions may experience the ritual of Haj or ziarat of a sacred place or a mausoleum, but each one may undergo a very different nature of experience. Some may get transformed, others may go back as they came without changing much.

Obviously, a lot depends on one’s perspective and belief with which one participates in an experience of the sacred. Even when we consider the teachings of the prophets, sages or reformers, people respond to them differently. The Quran gives an example of this. “Behold, as for those who are bent on denying the truth — it is all one to them whether thou warnest them or dost not warn them: they will not believe. God has sealed their hearts and their hearing, and over their eyes is a veil; and awesome suffering awaits them” (2:6-7).

How would we understand the “sealing” of hea­rts, hearing and veils in their eyes? Does this mean lack of ca­­pacity to think?

The Quran reg­a­rds them as “…deaf, dumb, blind… .” (2:18). It even dubs them worse than anim­als; “Do you suppose that most of them listen or exerc­ise their reason? They are just like cattle; indeed, they are further astray from the way” (25:44). Thus, the Quran ascribes this state of human thinking not just to refusal to listen or give thought, but stubbornness. The Quran says, “And they [on the Day of Judgement] will say: Had we but listened or pondered, we should not have been among the inmates of the burning fire” (67:10).

Thus, the feeling of sacredness may be developed through listening (obviously with the inner ear) and watching closely the marvels of creation (the Quran calls them aayaat). These divine encounters develop a sublime feeling, often spurred spontaneously, not consciously generated.

Sacredness is a feeling of the divine, at the intersection of the human and supra-human, through the experience of, for instance, a sacred thing, meeting an enlightened person, or while undergoing a ritual wherein the participants try to transcend themselves to the realm of the sacred and the holy.

The writer is an educationist with an interest in the study of religion and philosophy.

Published in Dawn, September 26th, 2025

New territorial claim

Zahid Hussain 

Published September 24, 2025 

DAWN



US PRESIDENT Donald Trump now wants Bagram airfield in Afghanistan to be returned to American control.

 He has threatened the Afghan Taliban rulers with “bad things” if they do not hand over the former US airbase. He might not have specifically talked about using military force, but has not ruled out the option either. “You’re going to find out what I’m going to do,” he told a reporter when asked whether he would consider sending troops. How seriously should the world take Trump’s latest threat of acquiring a foreign territory?

It’s not the first time the maverick leader has brandished such a wild threat. Previously, he had threatened to take over the Panama Canal and Greenland. He is now focused on regaining control of the former US airbase, as he reiterated at a press conference alongside the British prime minister in London recently.

Although Trump has been discussing renewed American control of Bagram since his return to the White House, his statement at the press conference was more specific. The American president spoke about a possible diplomatic approach in order to reach an agreement with the Taliban administration. “We’re trying to get it back because they need things from us,” he was quoted as saying.

Trump’s threats of reoccupying Bagram intensified after Kabul’s rejection of any deal.

Trump repeatedly cited the base’s proximity to China’s nuclear facilities as a reason to control the key airfield. “It’s an hour away from where China makes its nuclear weapons,” Trump said in his comments during the press conference. Trump has also said that China has established a presence at the base, located 40 kilometres north of Kabul.

Bagram was built by the former USSR in the 1950s but was later vastly improved and expanded by the US military. For decades, the base symbolised not only the struggle for Afghanistan but also the wider contest for influence in one of the world’s most volatile crossroads — where South Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East converge.

It once served as the headquarters of the US occupation forces and their allies. The airbase, which accommodated 10,000 troops at a time, was vacated after the chaotic American exit from Afghanistan in 2021 that also ended the two-decade war. It was the worst humiliation suffered by the world’s most powerful military as the Taliban returned to power.

Interestingly, the withdrawal of American forces from Bagram and the rest of Afghanistan came following the Doha Agreement, which was signed in February 2020 under Trump’s first presidency. But he has repeatedly blamed the Biden administration for abandoning the airbase. His threats of reoccupying the base, potentially renewing the American presence in Afghanistan, became more pronounced after a strong rejection by the Kabul administration of any possible deal ceding control of Afghan territory.

An Afghan Taliban official denied that any negotiations were going on with Washington on the issue. The statement said it had been “consistently communicated to the United States in all bilateral negotiations that, for the Islamic Emirate, Afghanistan’s independence and territorial integrity are of the utmost importance”. The statement also reminded stakeholders that, under the Doha Agreement, the US had pledged that “it will not use or threaten force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Afghanistan, nor interfere in its internal affairs”. It advised Washington to abide by its commitment.

Apparently, the strongly worded statement by the Kabul regime was too much for Trump’s ego. Not surprisingly, his tone has become more threatening towards the Kabul regime. It remains to be seen what option the Trump administration will deploy after the Taliban’s firm rejection of any deal on Bagram. Any use of force would certainly end up in another invasion of Afghanistan, which would have serious consequences not only for the region but also for global peace. It would draw in all the regional powers, especially China.

Responding to Trump’s comments, a Chinese foreign affairs ministry official said that China respects Afghanistan’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. “Afghanistan’s future should be decided by its own people,” the official said, adding: “Stirring up tension and creating confrontation in the region won’t be popular.”

Although China has not formally recognised the Taliban regime, it is among the five countries that have upgraded their diplomatic ties with the interim administration to full ambassadorial status. Beijing is also the largest investor in Afghanistan, primarily in the mining and infrastructure sectors. There are negotiations going on to extend CPEC to Afghanistan. Any military misadventure by the Trump administration in Afghanistan could also pull Russia into the conflict. Russia is the only country that has formally recognised the Taliban regime

Pakistan would be directly affected by any American military intervention in Afghanistan, with which it has a 2,500-kilometre-long border. As a front-line state in two previous wars in Afghanistan involving superpowers, which had cost this country massively, it’s still reeling from the effects. Pakistan needs to be extremely cautious of any possible American misadventure.

Over the last few months, we have seen Trump re-embracing Pakistan, showing interest not only in investing in mining but also in strengthening security cooperation with Islamabad. One cannot be sure about Trump’s next move, given his unpredictability and the absence of any institutional policymaking process. One is not sure what kind of expectations he has from Pakistan. These are valid concerns.

It’s true that Pakistan has serious problems with the Taliban regime’s refusal to take action against the militant groups operating from their sanctuaries in Afghanistan. These groups are also believed to have active support from some Afghan commanders, and Pakistan faces a serious security challenge. But any outside military intervention in Afghanistan would also threaten Pakistan’s national security.

Trump must also learn some lessons from America’s military failure in Afghanistan. One can only hope that Trump’s latest threat of retaking Bagram airbase is as hollow as the one to take over the Panama Canal and Greenland.

The writer is an author and journalist.

zhussain100@yahoo.com

X: @hidhussain

Published in Dawn, September 24th, 2025

Light we can’t lose

 World News Day 

Branko Brkic 

Published September 24, 2025 

ON this World News Day (Sept 28), for too many people, the future is getting too dark to see. This moment is best described as living in a state of perpetual flux, of global uncertainty and unsettling insecurity. Our world is increasingly built on information, sometimes almost exclusively, and the news media is its basic infrastructure. Like water and energy, we often only notice its absence when the service stops. So too with reliable news. Only when it disappears will we realise how deeply our daily lives depend on the steady delivery of reliable information.

AI is an important part of our common future, but it will not be a panacea for every problem we encounter. An algorithm still cannot replace a dogged reporter or a savvy investigative journalist. It is humans who make a crucial difference, because only humans can bring empathy, moral judgement and persistence to the search for truth.

As the institutions of old are crumbling, and many are already gone with no replacement, this task is getting more complex. In this perilous moment, news media’s duty, its daily delivery and indeed its existence itself, feel more important and consequential than ever before. We are still truth’s most important messengers. If we are to continue delivering on our mission’s promise, we in the news media also must think long and hard about the years ahead.

Journalism is suspended precariously.

We understand that, with the greatest urgency, we must reaffirm news media’s compact with the communities we serve; to fortify our personal covenant with each and every reader, viewer and listener; to hold steady while the very ground is shaking under our feet. We strive to be guardians of the line separating current times from an all-too-realistic dystopian future. As you read this, journalism is suspended precariously between old and new worlds; an integral part of history but also of the transformation that is rewiring our humanity right; a force for change and yet itself in danger of becoming a relic of the past.

What once was a comfortably profitable business has now transformed into a struggling sector with an uncertain future. In these changing times, our old media business model has rapidly aged. A new one is still nowhere to be found. When newsrooms close, communities lose watchdogs. Corruption flourishes in the dark. Truth has fewer defenders. We are hardly making any money anymore, harassment is our daily norm, and our long-term viability is under threat. Financial precarity knocks on the doors of all but the most secure outlets.

Autocrats, Big Tech, influencers, and industries of all colours are still major news media consumers even as many from those circles claim it has no importance anymore. ‘Ordinary’ readers might not know, but in every discussion, every debate, every understanding and every decision made, there was a significant, and most times decisive, component of the news media reporting.

For many decades, journalism has been a defender of global democratic values and the rules-based system that has defined our civilisation and underpinned an unprecedented, if unevenly distributed, period of planetary growth and prosperity. We were there every step of the way: to report on human rights abuse, the horror of armed conflict, the injustice of corruption and much more. It is highly unlikely that we will ever return to these ‘old’ times — the march of technology is ushering in a new era that changes the very fundamentals of our lives together. And yet, whichever shape our ‘new’ civilisation may take, it will still have to have its foundations in trustworthy information. That’s the only solid ground that anything lasting can be built on. As a human race, we evolved because we were able to pass information to the next generation. Information is the best and possibly the most powerful technology we have ever invented. But we cannot create, or recreate, anything while flying blind, or stumbling in the dark.

It is not only democracies that die in darkness, it is entire civilisations that perish. The news media’s message on this World News Day is not about saving sectoral jobs; it is about saving what we all built over thousands of years. Our civilisation is worth fighting for. An overwhelming majority of journalists swear a silent oath to serve our communities by serving truth. It is a sacred duty that fulfils our lives in ways that richly compensate for any financial shortcomings and deprivations. Truth and trust are truly of the essence in moments like these.

And the best way to respect yourself is to be careful about your sources and who you trust. Support the news that supports you. Subscribe, share, defend truth. Choose trustworthy journalism — without it, the light goes out for us all.

The writer is leader, Project Kontinuum, and co-founder, Daily Maverick. This piece was commissioned as part of the World News Day campaign.

Published in Dawn, September 24th, 2025

Opinion...

Pakistan’s nuclear gamble: The new great game in the Middle East

J
Pakistan national flag. [Photo by Matt King-ICC/ICC via Getty Images]

by Jasim Al-Azzawi
Middle East Monitor 

September 25, 2025 

Three capitals —Washington, Tel Aviv, and Tehran —are suddenly recalculating after a development that, on the surface, appeared to be routine defence cooperation. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan’s deepening strategic ties have carried whispers of something larger: a pathway, however tentative, toward Riyadh acquiring nuclear capability should it decide that Iran’s march toward enrichment leaves it no other choice.

The chessboard of global power politics has just been tilted on its side, and the pieces are sliding into new and dangerous positions. The shift is seismic. Pakistan has signalled its willingness to extend its nuclear umbrella to Saudi Arabia, an unprecedented declaration that reorders the strategic calculus from the Arabian Peninsula to the Indian Subcontinent.

The announcement, delivered by Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif in the wake of a newly minted Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement with Saudi Arabia, is not just about a bilateral pact; it is the culmination of a half-century-old strategic bargain. Riyadh’s discreet financing of Pakistan’s nuclear program in the 1970s, a response to the twin shocks of the Iranian Revolution and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, was an investment in a security future that is only now coming to fruition. It was a classic case of what the late Henry Kissinger called “the paradox of nuclear proliferation”: efforts to prevent it often create the very insecurities that accelerate it.


READ: Pakistan expands nuclear umbrella to cover Saudi Arabia

Pakistan’s history makes it the one country that could plausibly offer Riyadh more than vague assurances. Islamabad possesses not only the bomb but also the A.Q. Khan legacy — a reminder of how nuclear expertise was once traded across borders with little transparency. While Pakistan today insists on strict controls, its economic struggles and reliance on Gulf investment give Saudi Arabia leverage it has not had before. This creates the unsettling possibility that what begins as conventional military cooperation could evolve into something with nuclear undertones.

This new arrangement introduces a form of what might be called “entrepreneurial deterrence,” where a middle power like Pakistan leverages its nuclear capability not just for its own defense but as a tool for broader strategic influence. The language of the pact is deliberately NATO-like, asserting that “any aggression against either country shall be considered an aggression against both.” But unlike the North Atlantic alliance, this is a partnership without decades of institutional safeguards, without the command and control mechanisms that have prevented miscalculation for seven decades.

The timing of the overture is not accidental. Pakistan’s recent spectacular military engagements with India have served as a tactical audition. In the May 2025 conflict, Pakistan’s air force demonstrated a new level of precision strikes and electronic warfare capabilities enhanced by its expanding relationship with China. These were not just operations; they were a strategic advertisement, an unambiguous message to Riyadh that Pakistan possesses the technical and military prowess to back up its nuclear promises. This sudden development will undoubtedly be closely studied by New Delhi, given its implications for India’s own national security.

To understand what is happening here, one must look not just to Islamabad and Riyadh, but to Beijing. China’s role is that of a quiet choreographer. Through its massive Belt and Road investments, particularly in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), Beijing has cultivated Pakistan as a strategic client. By offering a nuclear security guarantee to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan is, in effect, serving as a proxy extension of Chinese influence in the Gulf. This allows Beijing to offer Riyadh a security buffer against Iran—and a hedge against a potentially disengaging United States—without direct Chinese entanglement. It is a brilliant piece of grand strategy, straight out of the Zbigniew Brzezinski playbook: control the rimland of Eurasia through proxy relationships.

The implications for the region are a proliferation cascade waiting to happen. For Israel, long the region’s undeclared nuclear power, this is a fundamental challenge to its strategic ambiguity. The prospect of Pakistani nuclear weapons, or even command authority over them, in the hands of a regional rival fundamentally alters the balance of power. For Iran, the message is even more stark. Tehran will almost certainly interpret this pact as an existential threat, a final piece of evidence that the regional balance of power has shifted decisively against it, thus accelerating its own nuclear timeline. As one senior Saudi official told Reuters, “This is a comprehensive defensive agreement that encompasses all military means.” It is precisely that comprehensiveness that will unnerve Iran and could trigger a dangerous arms race.


READ: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the unmaking of an American order

This strategic realignment places the United States in a highly challenging position. For decades, Washington has been the ultimate guarantor of Gulf security. However, as America’s strategic focus shifts to Asia, and China strives to fill the void, a new reality is emerging. The Saudis, with their immense wealth and growing ambition, are no longer content to be a client state; they are actively seeking security. Pakistan’s offer of “entrepreneurial deterrence” is precisely the kind of alternative they are looking for.

This is the new great game in the Middle East, and America’s rules will not apply to it. As former Pakistani diplomat Maleeha Lodhi noted, “For Pakistan, the power projection into the Middle East is huge, even though it has inserted itself into a volatile region.” The question now is whether this new architecture leads to a new and more stable form of multipolar deterrence or, as many fear, descends into nuclear anarchy. The old era of informal alliances and gentlemen’s agreements is over. The Middle East is entering a new, more explicit, and potentially far more dangerous phase of deterrence, and Pakistan is at its very center.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia 

Elite pact

Arifa Noor 

Published September 23, 2025
DAWN

THERE is a new defence pact in town — or, shall one say, the region.

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have signed a defence agreement with pomp and celebration and the announcement has caused much noise and buzz at home and abroad (in some places). Commentary, analyses, songs and discussions, applause — it is all there.

And while the discussion is far from over and one can find much praise and a little bit of criticism from the cheerleaders and doubting Thomases, there is a consensus that very little information is available at the moment. Serious and insightful comment, it seems, will have to wait.

Indeed, more details will need to be filled in and a fuller picture made available before a comprehensive analysis can be undertaken. No wonder then that at the moment, there are more questions than answers and more conjecture than information — questions about what this pact will mean operationally; what the two countries will commit to each other; whether or not this pact has been signed with a specific state in mind or not; and whether it will be expanded to include more countries or followed by more bilateral accords.

But even in the absence of answers, the euphoria in Pakistan is instructive. There is hope, conjecture and even belief that this pact will bring ‘good’ times for the country. And these hopes do not necessarily emanate from officialdom but are also being discussed privately.

Partly, this is understandable because Saudi Arabia has always come to Pakistan’s rescue in the past — with oil on deferred payments as well as loans that help with our forever crisis, ie, low foreign reserves. Even now, the country is one of the biggest contributors to our reserves, with a loan that will be rolled over (and over) whenever the moment arrives.

Domestically, the Pak-Saudi pact is being viewed exactly the same way as some past moments.

So now that there is a formal agreement in place for a bilateral defence pact, in which each promises to come to the aid of the one that is under attack, the conclusions everyone is jumping to are quick. Obviously, Pakistan will provide the muscle power in this relationship, with its well-known military prowess, and obviously, Riyadh will provide some financial concessions or assistance to Islamabad. The good times, they are a comin’.

But these assumptions reveal the elite consensus, shaped over decades, which continues to be in place. A consensus in which the elite want to use external funds to run the economy, wittingly or unwittingly accepting the primary role of the military in not just ensuring these funds but also being the main player domestically. And the politicians are willing to accept the role of the junior partner, in politics and in terms of the share of the money. Funds they too squirrel away while spending a wee bit on the populace.

Even though the past few years seemed to offer little to no chance of geostrategic rents, the ruling elite was and is reluctant to change its mad, bad ways. The previous PML-N government counted on CPEC; the PTI had hopes of investment from overseas Pakistanis; the 2022 floods led to talk of climate-related aid; then came the talk about investment from the Gulf. The common thread running through all this is the notion that some external flows would help end the crisis without the country having to go through the pain of reform and real adjustment.

It is noteworthy that this ‘hope’ was real even though it was accompanied by a public debate on critical economic challenges and problems, in terms of diagnosis and prescriptions — whether it was to increase the tax base or to reduce government spending at the centre or even amend the NFC. The detail with which these discussions took place was unprecedented. But for those in power, even as they took part in these discussions, the political will was missing. Bad habits formed over years are simply part of the explanation.

Another reason for this is also the challenge of legitimacy. Those in power, be it the PTI government in power or the present set-up, are so insecure they would rather offer immediate relief, however unsustainable, than go through the painful reform process.

It is this hope of immediate relief that led to the ‘chatter’ around the domestic implications of this pact. While much of this conversation was positive, there were also comments about the fear of Pakistan selling itself cheap. This stems no doubt from the view that post-9/11, Pervez Musharraf had been overly eager to join the US-led effort and had not bargained well enough. Whether or not one agrees with this view, there is no doubt that the decision allowed the general to successfully create the mirage of economic prosperity and buffer his regime.

Hence, it is no wonder that, however much the world and Pakistan’s place in it are changing, domestically, this pact is being viewed exactly the same way as some past moments — an opportunity to stabilise and sustain this set-up, along with the balance of power it has put in place.

However, it would be worth asking if the inflow that is being expected is going to be comparable to what came our way in the past — a question which requires the expertise of those more familiar with economic matters. But even if the sums are generous, what will this mean for the populace at large? For this elite consensus, for the most part, has also meant a complete disregard, if not wilful negligence, of the development of the people. And this neglect of the people will continue to pose the biggest challenge to the ruling elite, even if they are able to sustain the current set-up as well as successfully evade the criticism about the quality of democracy. It would be worth paying attention to this in the middle of celebrations.

The writer is a journalist.

Published in Dawn, September 23rd, 2025

Regional security

Editorial 

Published September 20, 2025

DAWN

THE Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement, signed between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, is making an impact far beyond Islamabad and Riyadh.

While there is talk of extending the bilateral pact to other states, thus creating a larger regional security framework, there has also been unnecessary speculation about the use of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. Indeed, the expansion of defence cooperation is a project worth pursuing as currently both the Middle East and South Asia are experiencing geopolitical volatility. But where questions about nuclear arms are concerned, Pakistan should reiterate that its atomic weapons are a deterrent, meant solely for self-defence.

Pakistan has joined military alliances earlier, including the Cold War-era Seato and Cento pacts, which put it squarely in the Western camp. In these US-led alliances, Pakistan was little more than a bit player. However, the defence pact with Riyadh is different, as Pakistan today has a combat-hardened military and much-improved defence capabilities. The country’s profile was strengthened following the military clash with India earlier this year, sending the message that Pakistan could defend itself against a much larger foe. All these factors, as well as the irresponsible Israeli attack on Qatar, likely convinced the Saudis that it was the right time to seal the deal.

Now, there are indications that the military partnership could expand. Defence Minister Khawaja Asif told an interviewer that “the doors are not closed” on other states. As we have argued, the Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition could be repurposed for a larger defence role, bringing together Muslim states under one banner. Such an alliance, along the lines of Nato, would strengthen the security of all member states, and deter enemies from violating the sovereignty of Muslim and Arab countries. But the doors of membership should remain open to all Muslim states.

Meanwhile, all relevant circles should exercise caution in their words and actions. There is much speculation in the Western media that the Pakistan-Saudi deal would make this country’s nukes available to Riyadh — perhaps because some Saudi officials have been quoted as saying that the pact ‘encompasses all military means’. When asked about the nuclear issue, Khawaja Asif said that “our capabilities, will absolutely be available under this pact”, though he added that Pakistan remains a responsible nuclear power.

Any concerns on this front must be allayed immediately, and government officials in particular should unambiguously state that, as per Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine, the atomic weapons are meant as a deterrent.

Meanwhile, Pakistan and the other Muslim states should pool their conventional defensive resources. Numerous Muslim states in the Middle East have been attacked by Israel, while Pakistan has increasingly faced Indian aggression. A defence pact could thus make adversaries think twice about launching strikes.

Published in Dawn, September 20th, 2025

HPV Vaccine challenge

Editorial 

Published September 26, 2025 

DAWN

 

PAKISTAN’S rollout of the world’s first cancer-prevention vaccine has been sobering. A 12-day campaign, ending tomorrow, to vaccinate 13m girls against HPV — the virus that causes cervical cancer — has reached just 4.5m. 

That is barely a third of the target. Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among Pakistan’s women, with two in three of those diagnosed not surviving. Yet a vaccine that is safe, free, and long proven elsewhere has struggled to gain acceptance. It is already part of immunisation schedules in Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Bangladesh. The uptake failure reveals a problem Pakistan has long known but not fixed: the gap between medical science and public trust. In Karachi, the country’s largest city, only a third of eligible girls were vaccinated, with coverage in Keamari a dismal 12pc. By contrast, smaller districts in interior Sindh surpassed 80pc, helped by local leaders who urged families to participate. Where trusted voices were absent, social-media agitators filled the void, fuelling suspicion. The pattern is familiar. Polio campaigns have faced the same cycle of myth-making and refusals — and, at their worst, vaccinators being roughhoused, kidnapped, or killed. Now HPV teams too are coming under pressure. In Mandi Bahauddin, a Lady Health Worker was beaten while carrying out vaccinations, underscoring the risks borne by front-line staff. Such incidents deepen mistrust and deter other vaccinators, leaving girls unprotected against a deadly but preventable disease.

The missing link is awareness. A few social media posts and a minister publicly vaccinating his daughter cannot substitute for sustained engagement. Parents need to hear not only from doctors but also from those they trust, such as teachers and religious leaders. Civil-society groups can help map refusal hotspots, address concerns in local languages, and reassure parents through direct communication. Out-of-school girls — nearly half the target group — must also be reached with dedicated outreach. The government must learn from this first phase. Risk-mapping resistance, investing in parental counselling, and integrating HPV into routine immunisation is essential. Above all, it must treat this not as a one-off campaign but as a long-term commitment. The WHO wants 90pc of girls worldwide vaccinated against HPV by 2030. Pakistan aims to meet this goal. It will not do so without treating communication as seriously as logistics. Vaccinating girls now can protect lives later.

Published in Dawn, September 26th, 2025

Pakistan calls for AI to be regulated under UN charter, warns against military application

APP | Dawn.com 

Published September 25, 2025




Google logo and AI Artificial Intelligence words are seen in this illustration taken on May 4, 2023. — Reuters/File


Pakistan has called for the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to be regulated by the United Nations charter, particularly its military use, warning that “AI must not become a tool of coercion.”

As artificial intelligence advances without meaningful checks, Pakistan’s call at the UN reflects wider concerns voiced by developing nations that powerful states will shape the rules to their advantage.

Earlier this year, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a resolution urging inclusive and equitable AI governance that bridges the digital divide, while countries in the Global South, from Indonesia to Brazil, have warned that unchecked deployment risks deepening inequalities.

Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif, while speaking at a high-level debate on AI under the agenda item ‘Maintenance of international peace and security’ during the sidelines of the 80th UNGA session in New York, highlighted AI’s potential for misuse and called for the UN Charter and international law to “fully govern the development and use of AI applications”.

”AI must not become a tool of coercion, or technological monopoly,“ the state-run Associated Press of Pakistan (APP) quoted him as saying.

The APP reported that the meeting was chaired by South Korea’s President Lee Jae Myung, as the country holds the 15-member Council’s presidency for September.

Warning against AI’s military applications, the minister stressed that while AI may be the “most consequential, dual-use technology,” it also has the potential to deepen “inequalities, and destabilizing international order.”

“Applications, without meaningful human control, should be prohibited,” he added while addressing the 15-member council.

Noting the perils of unregulated AI, Asif pointed out that, “Unregulated and irresponsible use of AI enables disinformation campaigns, offensive cyber operations, and development of new types of armaments.“

“The accelerating weaponisation of AI, through autonomous weapon systems, and AI-driven command and control systems, poses a grave danger.”

He urged the states to “commit to measures that prevent destabilising use, and pre-emptive incentives.”

Referring to the four-day military standoff between India and Pakistan in May, Asif noted that during the conflict, “autonomous munitions and high-speed dual-capable cruise missiles were used by one nuclear-armed state against another during a military exchange,” cautioning that the instance demonstrates the “dangers that AI can pose.”

Warning against the changing future of warfare, he said, “AI lowers the threshold for use of force, making wars more politically and operationally feasible.”

AI “compresses decision-time, narrowing the window for diplomacy and de-escalation,” the minister cautioned, adding that AI also “blurs domain boundaries, merging cyber, kinetic, and informational effects in unpredictable ways.”

He called for AI use to promote “peace and development” rather than “conflict and instability.”

“Let us preserve the primacy of human judgment, in matters of war and peace, ensuring that, even in an age of intelligent machines, innovation is guided by principles of morality and humanity,“ Asif said.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who opened the debate, while highlighting the many uses of AI along the lines of food insecurity, de-mining, and violence outbreaks, cautioned that, “Without guardrails, it can also be weaponised.“

AI is “no longer a distant horizon — it is here, transforming daily life, the information space and the global economy at breathtaking speed,“ he said; however, “innovation must serve humanity — not undermine it.”

Recalling the establishment of the UN’s Independent International Scientific Panel on AI and a Global Dialogue on AI Governance, Guterres remarked, “humanity’s fate cannot be left to an algorithm” as “humans must always retain authority over life-and-death decisions”.

On that note, he called on the council and the member states to “ensure that human control and judgment are preserved in every use of force,” APP quoted him as saying.

Gueterres further called for “a ban on lethal autonomous weapons systems operating without human control, with a legally binding instrument by 2026,” APP reported.

“Similarly, any decision in nuclear weapon use must rest with humans — not machines”, APP quoted the UN Secretary General as saying.

“From nuclear arms control to aviation safety, the international community has risen to the challenge of technologies that could destabilise our societies —by agreeing to rules, building institutions, and insisting on human dignity,” he said.

“The window is closing to shape AI — for peace, for justice, for humanity. We must act without delay.”

Addressing the council, Yejin Choi, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Institute for Human-Centred Artificial Intelligence, pointed out that the “current progress in AI is too concentrated among a handful of companies and countries.”

“When only a few have the resources to build and benefit from AI, we leave the rest of the world waiting at the door,” she said.

“Let us expand what intelligence can be — and let everyone everywhere have a role in building it.”

“Ms Choi urged governments and international institutions to invest in alternative approaches beyond scaling ever-larger models, arguing that smaller, more adaptive systems could lower barriers to entry,” APP reported.

“She also pressed for stronger representation of linguistic and cultural diversity, noting that today’s leading AI models underperform for many non-English languages and reflect narrow cultural assumptions.”

The development comes a day after Google announced the rollout of its “Google AI Plus plan” in 40 more countries, including Pakistan.

“Pakistan’s digital landscape is vibrant and growing, and we’ve been inspired by the creativity Pakistanis have shown in adopting AI tools,” said the Country Director of Google Pakistan, Farhan Qureshi, in a statement.

In July, the federal cabinet approved the National AI Policy 2025.

The policy outlined training a million AI professionals by 2030, establishing an AI Innovation Fund and AI Venture Fund to boost private sector involvement, creating 50,000 AI-driven civic projects and 1,000 local AI products in the next five years.

“Our youth are Pakistan’s greatest asset. Providing them with education, skills, and equal opportunities in AI is a top priority,” PM Shehbaz said while chairing the July meeting.