By: Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal

Ramadan is approaching, and even before its arrival, the prices of essential food items have already begun to soar. This phenomenon has become an annual occurrence in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, where, instead of facilitating the people in this sacred month, market forces exploit the demand for profit. This stands in stark contrast to other Islamic countries, where governments and business communities work together to ensure that prices remain stable or even decrease in the spirit of Ramadan. Even Western nations, despite not being Muslim-majority, extend special discounts to accommodate their Muslim citizens, recognizing the importance of this Holy month. However, in Pakistan, the situation is completely reversed—rather than easing the financial burden, the cost of basic necessities doubles, making it increasingly difficult for ordinary people to afford the essentials required for Sehr and Iftar.

One may question whether boycotting these overpriced goods would resolve the crisis. While temporary boycotts can create momentary price fluctuations, they are not a long-term solution. The real problem lies deeper—within a system plagued by unchecked profiteering, weak regulation, and a lack of accountability. Shopkeepers often justify the rising prices by blaming wholesalers, who, in turn, claim that they are simply responding to market trends and supplier rates. This chain of excuses exposes a fundamental question: Who exactly is responsible? Is there no authority to regulate these behind-the-scenes forces driving inflation during Ramadan? When will this recurring issue be permanently resolved?

Islam provides a clear framework regarding fair trade and market ethics. The Holy Qur’an warns against deceit in business transactions: “Woe to those who give less [than due], who, when they take a measure from people, take in full. But if they give by measure or by weight to them, they cause loss” (Surah Al-Mutaffifin 83:1-3). The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) also emphasized just dealings in trade, saying, “The merchants will be raised on the Day of Judgment as wicked except those who fear Allah, are honest, and speak the truth” (Tirmidhi). These teachings highlight that those who manipulate prices for personal gain, particularly during Ramadan, are engaging in a deeply unethical and un-Islamic practice. Islam not only discourages unfair pricing but also encourages honesty and compassion in business dealings, especially during times of religious significance.

If Islam is so explicit in condemning hoarding and price gouging, why does this practice persist in a country that claims to uphold Islamic principles? The failure to control artificial inflation during Ramadan is a collective moral and administrative failure. Administrative institutions responsible for price control either lack the enforcement capacity or are complicit in the problem. The business community, instead of embracing the spirit of generosity, sees the month as an opportunity for excessive profits. Consumers, though frustrated, often find themselves helpless, with no real alternatives.

This helplessness stems from several factors. First, there is a lack of stringent administrative oversight. Regulatory bodies often issue price control lists, but they remain ineffective due to poor enforcement and the influence of powerful business cartels. Second, the absence of consumer awareness and collective action allows this exploitation to continue. In countries where consumer rights are protected, price hikes of this nature would trigger investigations and penalties. However, in Pakistan, the common citizen rarely has the platform or resources to challenge such exploitation effectively. Additionally, the lack of coordination between government agencies, local administration, and market regulators creates loopholes that profiteers exploit without consequence.

The solution lies in a multi-pronged approach. The administration  must strengthen price control mechanisms and impose strict penalties on those who artificially inflate prices. Strict action should be taken against hoarders who withhold goods to create scarcity and drive up prices. At the same time, society must demand accountability, using consumer pressure and boycotts selectively against those businesses that engage in unethical practices. The role of religious leaders is also crucial; they should actively educate traders about their moral obligations in light of Islamic teachings and emphasize that exploiting consumers in Ramadan is not just an economic crime but a grave sin.

In addition, fostering a culture of corporate social responsibility is necessary. Businesses should be encouraged to adopt ethical pricing models and provide discounts during Ramadan rather than seeking excessive profits. The media can also play a pivotal role in exposing unjust market practices and pressuring policymakers to implement necessary reforms. Furthermore, Islamic banking and financial institutions can introduce interest-free micro-financing options to support small traders who struggle with high supplier costs, thereby reducing the need for excessive price hikes.

If Islamic values were truly upheld, the arrival of Ramadan in Pakistan would bring relief to the people rather than financial distress. Until there is a sincere effort to align economic practices with the ethical teachings of Islam, the cycle of price hikes and helplessness will continue. The question remains: When will we, as a society, rise above individual greed and embrace the true essence of Ramadan—a month of mercy, generosity, and communal well-being? Only through collective responsibility, strong governance, and adherence to Islamic principles can we hope to break free from this cycle of exploitation and create a just and equitable society for all.

By: Qamar Bashir

After Trump, Europe seemed like an abandoned child—lost without direction and stripped of the security it once enjoyed under U.S. protection. This perception stems from my ability to read and write French, which allows me to follow discussions among French journalists, thinkers, and analysts on LinkedIn. These discussions often center on how long-standing alliances, once thought unbreakable, have crumbled while new, unexpected partnerships are taking shape.

Observing the transformation of the U.S. under Trump, both domestically and internationally has been fascinating. It was widely believed that while a U.S. president wielded influence over other nations, they had little power to challenge the entrenched bureaucracy and military establishment that truly governed the country. Likewise, it was considered unthinkable that the U.S. and Europe could diverge so significantly on both domestic and international fronts.

Trump disproved both assumptions. In his second term, he successfully dismantled key elements of the civilian and military bureaucracy—institutions that had long exercised control over both the presidency and the nation’s political landscape. Once dominant, these institutions are now struggling to maintain relevance, no longer wielding the president as a mere pawn.

He also shattered the notion that U.S.-European relations were unshakable and that hostility toward China and Russia was as ingrained as the transatlantic partnership.

In his first month, Trump alarmed Europe with threats to take over Greenland and proposed cutting aid that was fueling the Ukraine-Russia war. He accused Europe of exploiting U.S. taxpayers to sustain NATO, while failing to make its fair contribution. Simultaneously, he engaged diplomatically with President Putin in Russia, pursued economic cooperation with China, and fostered a more conciliatory approach towards President Xi. His softer stance on Taiwan signaled a significant departure from previous U.S. policies.

Trump also blamed the Biden administration for igniting the Russia-Ukraine war, asserting that Europe’s push to bring Ukraine under NATO was illogical and provoked Russian military intervention. While Europe framed the war as a fight for its survival, Trump viewed it as unnecessary and avoidable. He condemned the loss of young soldiers and civilians on both sides as tragic and committed to ending the conflict through negotiations—bypassing Europe entirely by proposing Saudi Arabia as a mediator.

Trump is known for his unpredictability and maverick nature, often shifting from one conviction to its complete opposite. However, his current stance—consistently advocating against Europe while favoring China and Russia—signals a geopolitical shift unlike anything seen in the past two centuries.

He seems to have recognized that maintaining close ties with Europe, despite its wealth, has been costly for the U.S. He believes Europe has relied on American taxpayers while fueling unnecessary wars at America’s expense. He also sees Europe losing its edge in scientific discovery, declining in global market influence, lacking control over rare earth metals—now crucial for modern industries—and experiencing economic stagnation for decades.

In contrast, Trump views the future as belonging to China, Japan, Korea, India, Singapore, the Middle East, and other emerging economies that are steadily increasing their share in global trade, investment, and business.

As of 2024, U.S. trade patterns highlight a shift toward Asia and North America, with Mexico ($505B), China ($438B), and Canada ($412B) as its top exporters, while Germany ($160B) is the only European nation in the top ten, underscoring Europe’s diminishing role in U.S. imports.

On the export side, the U.S.’s largest trade partners are Canada ($349.4B), Mexico ($334.0B), China ($143.5B), Japan ($79.7B), and Germany ($75.6B), reinforcing North America’s strong economic ties with the U.S. Despite trade tensions, China remains a key trade partner.

Meanwhile, the largest holders of U.S. dollar reserves are China ($3.2T), Japan ($1.2T), Switzerland ($953B), India ($638B), and Russia ($621B), reflecting the dollar’s continued dominance in global finance, accounting for 59% of the world’s

These trends align with Trump’s push to reshape U.S.-Europe relations, criticizing Europe’s economic dependence while pivoting toward Asia and North America as the dominant trade and investment partners.

European analysts, journalists, and thinkers are deeply concerned about the United States’ strategic pivot away from Europe, instead forging closer ties with Russia and China. This shift marks a significant departure from traditional transatlantic alliances, prompting European leaders to push for increased defense spending and a more assertive foreign policy.

Germany’s newly elected chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has stressed the urgency of strengthening Europe’s security independence, acknowledging the changing geopolitical landscape.

Likewise, the European Union is actively enhancing its defense capabilities, recognizing the necessity of self-reliance as U.S. support becomes increasingly unpredictable.

European leaders, including UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron, have taken diplomatic steps to ensure continued support for Ukraine, advocating for increased defense spending and even the potential deployment of peacekeeping troops.

These initiatives reflect a decisive shift toward European self-reliance in defense, highlighting the continent’s determination to address security challenges independently in an evolving geopolitical environment.

The honeymoon period between the USA and Europe is over. Under Trump, besides blaming Europe to exploit the USA, he blamed European nations for straying from core principles of media and religious freedom while undermining democratic values—the very foundation of the U.S.-Europe alliance. In contrast, Trump’s administration has embraced China as its preferred partner for trade, investment, business, and cultural ties while also aligning with Russia’s position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

China and Russia are relieved as Trump’s “America First” philosophy begins to take shape. This policy can now be fully understood: alliances, no matter how old or strong, no longer define U.S. strategy. Instead, America’s own interests take precedence. This shift signifies that the U.S. has detached itself from historical commitments and burdens, repositioning itself as a free agent on the global stage.

In this recalibrated geopolitical posture, the U.S. sees its strategic interests better served through alliances with China, Russia, and other emerging powers—rather than Europe.

By: Qamar Bashir

 Press Secretary to the President (Rtd)

 Former Press Minister at Embassy of Pakistan to France

 Former MD, SRBC

 Macomb, Detroit, Michigan