&w=3840&q=100)
Tensions with India may derail bailout scheme's goals: IMF warns Pakistan
In its first review of the over $1 billion bailout programme, the IMF noted the tensions between India and Pakistan following the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, in which 26 people were killed. The report said that so far, the market reaction in Pakistan had been modest, with the stock market retaining most of its recent gains and spreads widening moderately.
"The rising tensions between India and Pakistan, if sustained or deteriorate further, could heighten enterprise risks to the fiscal, external and reform goals of the program. Reputational risks could also come from any perceived lack of evenhanded or if there was a perceived misuse of fund disbursements," the report said.
The IMF report places Pakistan's defence allocation for the upcoming fiscal year at PKR 2.414 trillion, reflecting a 12 per cent increase or PKR 252 billion more than the previous year. In contrast, the government has signalled plans to allocate over PKR 2.5 trillion, marking an 18 per cent rise, following the recent escalation with India earlier this month.
IMF imposes fresh conditions on Pakistan
The IMF also slapped 11 new conditions on Pakistan for the release of the next tranche of its bailout programme. This takes the total conditions imposed on Pakistan to 50.
A key condition requires the parliamentary approval of the FY26 budget—projected at PKR 17.6 trillion, including PKR 1.07 trillion for development spending—by the end of June 2025, in line with IMF programme targets.
On the provincial side, the four federating units must implement new agricultural income tax laws, supported by digital platforms for taxpayer registration, return processing, and compliance measures, with a deadline of June 2025.
The IMF also expects Islamabad to publish a Governance Action Plan, based on findings from the Fund's Governance Diagnostic Assessment, to address persistent governance weaknesses. Pakistan must also unveil a post-2027 financial sector strategy, outlining long-term institutional and regulatory reforms from 2028 onwards.
In the energy sector, four conditions have been introduced to ensure cost recovery and reduce circular debt: the rebasing of electricity tariffs by July 1, 2025, a semi-annual gas tariff adjustment by February 15, 2026, legislation to make the captive power levy permanent, and the removal of the PKR 3.21/unit cap on the debt servicing surcharge—currently hindering full cost recovery.
The IMF has mandated Pakistan to draft a plan for phasing out incentives related to Special Technology Zones and other industrial parks by 2035, with the reform roadmap due by the end of this year. The Fund also wants the government to introduce legislation in Parliament by July 2025 to lift quantitative restrictions on importing used vehicles, initially for cars less than five years old—expanding the current limit set at three years.
IMF loan to Pakistan
On May 9, the IMF approved the immediate disbursement of about $1 billion to Pakistan under the ongoing Extended Fund Facility. The global lender said that Pakistan's 37-month EFF was approved on September 25, 2024, and "aims to build resilience and enable sustainable growth", with priorities including entrenching macroeconomic sustainability.
India opposed the IMF's extension of fresh loans to Pakistan, saying they could be misused for financing state-sponsored cross-border terrorism. New Delhi also abstained from voting at the crucial IMF meeting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
30 minutes ago
- Indian Express
How BRICS is chipping away at the Western order
The recent 2025 BRICS summit, held in Brazil, did not appear dramatic on the surface. There were no loud declarations or confrontations. However, the agenda was quietly ambitious, and the message it sent was unmistakable – the West no longer has a monopoly on how the world should work. BRICS is quietly rewriting some of the rules of global politics. From de-dollarisation to alternative development models, it is increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order. One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government. Countries can agree on rules, but no one can force them to follow them. This is what some international relations scholars call an 'anarchic system,' not because it's disorderly, but because there is no overarching authority to enforce rules. Countries act in their own interests. Cooperation happens, but it's often fragile. Power matters. Strong states often do what they can. Weak ones suffer what they must (Recall the Melian Dialogue from Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War). Power is distributed unevenly, and when a few countries have more of it, they tend to shape the rules in their favour. The Western-led liberal international order grew out of this system after World War II. The US, along with its allies, built a network of institutions, like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO, that reflected its values and priorities. This order was based on free markets, democracy, and above all, the dominance of the US dollar in global finance. For a while, that order worked – at least for the West. But now, the rest of the world is starting to ask why a system created in 1945 should still define the rules of the 21st century. For a long time, emerging powers like Brazil, China, India, and South Africa largely accepted this structure. However, with the global economic landscape shifting and the world becoming more multipolar, they are pushing back. BRICS is the most visible platform for that push. One of the loudest messages from the BRICS summit in Brazil was about de-dollarisation. It sounds technical, but it's deeply political. This idea has been gaining ground for some years, but recent events, especially the weaponisation of financial systems through sanctions, have brought it to the forefront. The issue is that most global trade and finance depend on the US dollar. When India buys oil from Russia, it usually has to pay in dollars. When Brazil takes a loan, it often does so in dollars. When China invests abroad, the transaction typically moves through dollar-based systems like SWIFT. This gives the US not just financial influence but also political leverage. At the Brazil summit, countries once again floated the idea of a BRICS currency – not an immediate project, but a signal of intent. In the meantime, they are promoting trade in local currencies. Russia and China already conduct over 80 per cent of their trade in Roubles and Yuan. India has begun using rupees for some transactions with Iran and Sri Lanka. India and the UAE have begun settling some oil deals in rupees and dirhams. The New Development Bank, created by BRICS, is now issuing loans in local currencies to avoid dollar exposure. This is not just about saving on transaction costs. It's about creating freedom from a system that many in the Global South see as tilted against them. This is not going to be easy. The US dollar dominates because it is stable, widely accepted, and backed by a deep financial system. But the fact that BRICS countries keep returning to this topic shows how deep the frustration runs. De-dollarisation may not happen overnight, but the intent is clear – reduce exposure to a system controlled by Washington. BRICS claims to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed. The group presents itself as a voice for the Global South. It talks about fairer development, more inclusive trade rules, and reforms in global institutions. It also backs concrete alternatives. The NDB offers loans without the political strings often attached to IMF or World Bank funding. BRICS countries are exploring joint investments in infrastructure and clean energy. There's talk of creating a BRICS rating agency to counter the dominance of Western credit rating firms. BRICS also pushes for reforms in the UN Security Council and the World Bank's voting rules to give more voice to emerging powers. Here, Brazil, India, and South Africa play a bridging role. They are democracies with growing economies, often seen as more acceptable faces of BRICS to other developing countries. China brings deep pockets and strategic weight. Russia, increasingly isolated from the West, is strengthening its ties with non-Western partners. This effort to build new platforms and institutions reflects a shared frustration that the rules of the global system are often written elsewhere, by people who don't face the same challenges as those in the Global South. Together, BRICS is trying to change not just policies but also the narrative about what kind of development is legitimate and who should lead. Notably, international relations theory can help us understand why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why it matters. Realism Realism, one of the oldest schools of international relations, sees power as the main force shaping global affairs. States act primarily in their own interest. Institutions and alliances matter only if they help countries protect or expand their power. From this perspective, BRICS is not a community of like-minded nations but a strategic arrangement – a balancing act against Western dominance. When Russia promotes de-dollarisation or China supports the NDB, they are not guided by ideals of fairness or cooperation. They are responding to the realities of power politics. A good example of this logic came after the US froze Russian central bank assets following the Ukraine war. Many countries saw how exposed they were if their reserves were held in dollars. The concern wasn't ethical. It was practical. It was about survival. Liber theory On the other hand, liberal theory, which posits that cooperation is possible and institutions matter, would argue that if the global order is unfair, countries will attempt to establish new institutions. That's exactly what BRICS is doing by creating alternatives to Western-run systems, not through war, but through investment, banking, and trade. It believes that the way to change the system is to create better alternatives within it. The NDB isn't just a protest against the World Bank. It's a real bank giving loans, financing projects, and developing regulations. That's classic liberal theory in action – solving global problems through cooperative institutions. Constructivism Constructivist theorists go a step further. They argue that power is not just about money or military strength, but about ideas. It's also about whose story is seen as legitimate. BRICS challenges the idea that Western liberal democracy is the only valid model of progress. It says there are many ways to grow and that the West doesn't have a moral monopoly. BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. When BRICS leaders speak of 'mutual respect' and 'non-interference,' they are offering a different political culture – one that appeals to countries tired of lectures from the West about democracy and governance. Whether this rhetoric matches reality is debatable, but the narrative matters. These theoretical perspectives are not mutually exclusive views. They all help explain why BRICS is doing what it's doing and why the West is starting to take it more seriously. However, none of this means that the Western-led order is collapsing. The US dollar still dominates global trade and finance. Western-led institutions still make the rules. The US still has unmatched military power. Western technology and capital continue to dominate global supply chains. At the same time, BRICS has its own internal differences. China and India are locked in border tensions. Russia is diplomatically isolated. Brazil and South Africa are wary of being seen as backing an anti-Western front. The NDB is still small compared to the World Bank. However, the system is no longer a one-way street. Something is shifting. The fact that major economies are even talking about bypassing the dollar or creating their own financial systems was unthinkable two decades ago. The fact that they are acting on it, even though cautiously, means the world is entering a new phase. This isn't about tearing down the West. It's about making space for the rest. The BRICS summit in Brazil didn't create headlines because it didn't need to. It was not designed to shock. It was designed to show that the world is no longer waiting for change from the West. It is building change elsewhere. One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government, prompting some international relations scholars to call the international system 'anarchic'. Comment. How is BRICS rewriting some of the rules of global politics, and increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order? BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. Evaluate. By claiming to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed, BRICS presents itself as a voice for the Global South. Do you agree? How do theoretical perspectives, realist, liberal, and constructivist, help explain why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why the West is starting to take it more seriously? (The author is a Professor at MMAJ Academy of International Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.) Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
India Today
4 hours ago
- India Today
AI may affect just 5% of jobs, not entire workforce: Nobel-winning MIT economist
At a time when headlines speak of artificial intelligence changing everything, Nobel Laureate and MIT economist Daron Acemoglu is urging caution. In a recent conversation with MIT, Acemoglu said the economic impact of current AI tools may be far more limited than popular claims suggest.A MODEST ESTIMATE: 5% JOBS, 1% GDP IMPACTAcemoglu estimates that AI may only affect about 5% of jobs and contribute around 1% to the global GDP. 'These are just guesses,' he said, 'but the prediction stands.' Unlike earlier technologies that reshaped production, like electricity or the internet, he argues AI has not yet produced tools that deeply transform how goods and services are to Acemoglu, most current AI tools perform best in routine environments: tasks such as basic accounting, cybersecurity monitoring, or standardised software functions. These do not cover the kind of work most people AI CAN AND CAN'T DO Much of human labour involves judgment, interpretation, and interaction. 'No real-world task is just repeating what is already known,' Acemoglu explained. 'Most jobs rely on context, tacit knowledge, and decisions that machines still find difficult.'He also pointed out that today's AI models work by imitating human decision-making using historical data. But imitation, he said, has its limits. 'If you mimic a human decision-maker, you won't outperform them.'CHALLENGING THE AGI HYPEAcemoglu is sceptical of claims that general-purpose AI, or AGI, will soon replace large swathes of cognitive work. 'If you're a professor, a CEO, or a construction worker, your job is not disappearing in five years,' he said. 'If you believe in AGI, then you should be able to list jobs that will completely vanish soon. I don't see that happening.'His comments contrast sharply with a 2024 International Monetary Fund (IMF) report that warned 40% of jobs globally might be affected by AI, particularly in wealthier economies where white-collar work is called for a more thoughtful direction in AI development, one that complements human skills rather than replacing them. 'The best way forward is pro-human,' he said. 'We should be designing tools that help people do better, not push them aside.'His advice to business leaders was clear: 'Don't fall for the hype. Focus on how to use your most important resource, your people, better.'- Ends
Economic Times
6 hours ago
- Economic Times
Pakistan Cricket Board could face severe hit in revenue if Asia Cup is cancelled
ANI The Pakistan cricket team The Asia Cup hangs in uncertainty as tension escalated between India and Pakistan following the terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam that took the lives of 26 civilians. Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) could face a severe hit in its revenue if the tournament stands cancelled. The fresh concerns rise following Indian players' withdrawal from the India vs Pakistan clash in the World Champions League on Sunday. The PCB is expecting to earn approximately PKR 880 crore this year from its share of revenue from the International Cricket Council (ICC) and the Asian Cricket Council (ACC), PTI reported citing Board sources. According to PTI sources, the PCB is expecting $25.9 million (approximately PKR 770 crore) in this fiscal year from its share from the ICC. Further, the board is hopeful of earning PKR 116 crore from the Asia Cup and PKR 77 lakh through other international cricket events."The revenues from these two major sources (ICC and Asia Cup) is very important for the financial health of Pakistan cricket," an insider told PTI. The uncertainty over Asia Cup has increased as PCB and ACC Chairman Mohsin Naqvi did not travel to Singapore for the ICC meetings last weekend. He took part in the meeting virtually. According to the insider, PCB CEO Sumair Ahmed, who was present in the ICC meeting "didn't get positive responses" from either the BCCI or the boards of Sri Lanka, and Afghanistan over attending the ACC meeting called on July 24 in Dhaka to finalise the Asia Cup arrangements."The PCB met with plenty of resistance to the ACC scheduling the meeting in Dhaka. India, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Oman and few other associate member boards were adamant about not travelling to Dhaka," the source said. This year, India is scheduled to host the Asia Cup in September but due to the existing situation, the chances of the regional event being moved to UAE are claimed to have earned about $10 million (PKR 300 crore) from the Champions Trophy held in February and March this year. PCB spokesperson, Aamir Mir and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Javed Murtaza quashed the rumours about the board facing losses by hosting the ODI tournament and spending enormous amounts on upgrading stadiums in Karachi, Lahore and Rawalpindi for the event.'All expenses for the tournament were covered by the ICC,' Mir said adding that the PCB generated revenue through gate money and ticket sales. 'Additionally, after the audit, we expect to receive another Rs 3 billion from the ICC,' he further claimed that PCB had initially targeted PKR 200 crore in earnings from the Champions Trophy, but they surpassed this also claimed that the board's total revenue for the 2023-24 fiscal year reached PKR 1,000 crore, which was a 40% increase from the previous year.'With this financial strength, PCB now ranks among the top three richest cricket boards in the world,' Mir add to PCB's financial woes, an audit report found financial irregularities to the tune of more than PKR 6 billion ($21 million) and governance issues dating back two years. The Auditor General of Pakistan's report for the 2023-24 financial year was published in The News and highlighted the non-recovery of outstanding sponsorship worth PKR 530 crore ($18.6 million) as the major discrepancy report also questioned the PKR 6.33 core ($220,000) the board spent on meals for police and law enforcement personnel assigned for the security of foreign teams during international matches in auditors said providing security was the responsibility of governments, and disagreed with the PCB's explanation that visiting international teams were given extra safety guarantees that required heavy police audit report also flagged the hiring of three junior regional coaches who didn't meet the eligibility criteria and the appointment of a media director outside the proper paid to cover utility charges, fuel and accommodation for the PCB chairman between February and June of last year was also highlighted as unauthorized because Navqi received that as part of his government auditors rejected the cricket board's response that the PCB chairman "is authorized for utility expense as per bylaws".
