World Headlines

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia on Friday signed an agreement to extend a $3 billion deposit from the Saudi Fund for Development (SFD). Saudi Arabia, earlier this week, pledged an additional $3 billion in deposits for Pakistan and extended its existing $5bn facility for a further three years. “The agreement, signed between the Saudi Fund for Development (SFD) and the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP), provides for the extension in the maturity of a USD 3 billion deposit placed by SFD with the State Bank of Pakistan,” said a post on X by the Ministry of Finance. The ministry said that the agreement was signed between SBP Governor Jameel Ahmed and Chief Executive Officer of the SFD Sultan bin Abdulrahman Al-Marshad. Minister for Finance and Muhammad Aurangzeb witnessed the signing of an important financial agreement in Washington, D.C., in the presence of Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States. The development took place on the sidelines of the World Bank-IMF Spring Meetings 2026. The ministry added that the extension of the deposit reflects “strong and longstanding economic partnership between Pakistan and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” and will support the country’s external sector stability. On Thursday, the Saudi Press Agency also reported that Saudi Arabia had extended the $5bn deposit with the central bank and announced an “additional $3bn deposit”. “This assistance aims at supporting Pakistan’s economy and strengthening its resilience amidst evolving global economic challenges, and comes in accordance with the leadership’s directives to strengthen the bonds of brotherhood between the two countries, affirming the kingdom’s commitment to fostering the economic growth of Pakistan, which is expected to reflect positively on the living conditions of Pakistani citizens,” it said. Pakistan will reportedly return a $3.5bn loan to the UAE this month, putting pressure on its reserves and risking breaches of its International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme targets. The development comes at a sensitive time for the country’s external account position, which is already under strain from rising global oil prices and economic spillovers linked to tensions in the Middle East. According to official figures, Pakistan’s foreign exchange reserves stood at $16.4bn as of March 27, sufficient to cover close to three months of imports. However, the repayment requirement from the UAE has added fresh pressure on the country’s external buffers. In March, Islamabad failed to secure an agreement with the UAE to roll over the $3.5bn facility, marking the first such failure in seven years and raising concerns about near-term financing gaps. Pakistan’s foreign exchange position, though under pressure, remains part of a broader stabilisation effort under IMF-supported reforms. Analysts say external financing risks remain a key vulnerability, particularly amid volatile energy prices and constrained global capital markets.

NEW DELHI: A crackdown on India’s performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) production — the biggest globally — is key to tackling the doping menace and protect the athletes, World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) chief Witold Banka told AFP on Thursday. Banka and his team have been in New Delhi as part of their push to build stronger ties with national law and order agencies including cyber crime cells to help uphold the credibility of professional sport. WADA has sought help from India’s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) — federal police — to curtail the initial supply chain of racketeers and agents who peddle drugs. “We see the problem of production of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs), India is the biggest producer of those illegal substances,” said Banka. “That’s why we collaborate with the CBI, with law enforcement, to try to destroy this market and to really protect the lives of athletes and the health of society,” added the 41-year-old Pole. WADA has been aggressive in curbing the doping crisis with their Global Anti-Doping Intelligence and Investigations Network (GAIIN) initiative since 2022. An INTERPOL-backed “operation upstream” has been a success for WADA with 250 raids around the world, 88 illicit labs dismantled and almost 90 tons of PEDs seized. “We are here because India is the biggest population (1.4 billion) and we see how important it is for the Indian authorities, and we see the need to strengthen the system here — it’s a common interest,” Gunter Younger, head of investigations for WADA, told AFP. “For now I see the appetite and willingness from the public authority side (in India) to work with us closely to address this issue. We know it’s not only about the doping of the athletes.” Younger, a former head of the Bavarian Police’s Cybercrime Division, said to strike a blow against the doping menace the focus should be shifted from athletes to the supplier of the PEDs. “We always focus on testing, and the whole infrastructure in the last 25 years the anti-doping community was focusing on testing, and it was okay in the beginning. But the criminal networks, they adjust, and they adjust quite quickly. The fact that we have, let’s say, under 1 per cent hits with testing shows for me we can do better in this way. “Therefore what we want to do with them is to strengthen their intelligence and investigations, working with the CBI, adopt a top-down strategy. “Go for the criminal networks, and look for the clients, and target the coaches, the doctors that are responsible for providing the PEDs to the athletes, and not do a bottom-up strategy.” Not only is India the leader in manufacturing PEDs it also has the unwanted tag of topping the list of global sports drug cheats for three years in a row, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) said in 2025. India’s National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) collected 7,113 urine and blood samples out of which 260 tested positive in 2024, according to a WADA report published in December 2025. Published in Dawn, April 17th, 2026

WITH the ceasefire still holding and further talks a distinct possibility, we can now reflect on the reasons why Iran was attacked and who wanted it to be attacked. It appears that a handful of people in the American administration believed that the idea of ‘Greater Israel’ needed to be supported as a religious obligation. The attack on Iran was part of a sequence to set the stage. Let’s analyse the doctrinal framework that creates the justification for going to war itself — not the conduct in war but the reasoning for carrying out an attack or resorting to force. This framework is called ‘jus ad bellum’. Since early civilisation, jus ad bellum or the argument for a just war has been based on multiple reasons — for instance, the ambition to expand one’s empire, or the desire to take revenge in cases of generational animosity. In certain instances, religion was also counted as a justification. A clear casus belli or justification for use of force recognised in all religions and civilisations is the one for self-defence. This is codified in the language of Article 51 of the UN Charter. All states — religious or secular — have ratified the Charter. The Charter’s biggest contribution to history was to oust thousands of years of the practice of wars of aggression; it declared, instead, that borders would enjoy sanctity and no war or use of force would be considered legitimate if it was intended to expand boundaries. Consequently, occupation for military purposes, no matter how long, would not give the occupying power the title of the territory. The Charter only allowed self-defence or use of force authorised by the UN as jus ad bellum or justification to use force. All other kinds of religious reasons and civilisational animosity, as justification for going to war, were ended once and for all. This is now also called the rules-based order. In the recent aggression against Iran, some members of the US administration shocked everyone with their reference to religious reasons and narratives to support a ‘Greater Israel’ and the war on Iran as a sequential step towards this goal. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, the US ambassador to Israel, and Senator Lindsey Graham led the campaign for attacking Iran. Divine reasoning was referred to and pastors prayed in the White House for President Donald Trump. In other words, religion was presented, by a handful, as jus ad bellum for going to war. There is strong opposition emerging within the US against the mischaracterisation of religion and the war. Not surprisingly, there is strong opposition emerging within the US against this mischaracterisation of religion and this war and also against the means and methods that the US military is made to adopt in the war theatre inside Iran. Apart from the main figures in the US administration, sidelined or retired American officials appear critical of the misuse of the religious narrative even within the US armed forces. A group of 100 leading US-based international lawyers, including professors, academicians and practitioners of the laws of war, have signed a petition wherein the use of force against Iran has been criticised. The secretary of war was grilled in a Senate hearing. Retired generals are openly stating that war crimes prosecution is staring those who ordered the attacking of civilian targets and sidelined the rules of engagement in the face. Regardless of the separation of church and state in the US, for a practising Christian or Jew, any treaty that they sign or ratify is read in the light of a divine obligation for which they are, as per the religious teachings of their respective faith, answerable to God. In other words, upholding the treaty and promise is actually a religious obligation for them. For millions of the followers of Christianity and Judaism, the treaties of the UN, WTO, IMO, ICAO, IAEA, and hundreds of others are promises they need to uphold as divine covenants, no less. The religious texts of all three Abrahamic religions mention fulfilling promises, whether embedded in contracts or treaties. In Islam, the Quran specifically tells believers to uphold whatever they commit to. It treats all treaties in this world as trilateral — the third party being God who will hold each believer to account in this respect. The reason for this is simple; all three religions are, by definition, anti-chaos. They direct believers to avoid dispute or conflict. They stand for giving dignity to every human being, whether or not a believer. They insist on social harmony, collective welfare and growth as a race. Each wants their followers to grow as responsible members of the citizenry. Upholding promises is an act of both responsible conduct and the epitome of human dignity. When a Christian or a Jew argues for rejecting an obligation stipulated in modern-day treaties, there is little doubt that they are violating the teachings of their faith. Religious jurists have viewed such violation as a sin. Why would a Jewish policymaker in Israel violate international law or a treaty that his state has signed? Why would a God-fearing Christian official in the US government act contrary to a treaty commitment? No religious preacher can or should stretch biblical text to induce their followers in decision-making positions in Israel or the US to act in violation of international treaties that these countries are a party to. The three religions have respect for basic battlefield rules whenever their followers go to war or face the threat of one. These principles are based on both religious texts and civilisational norms. These are called ‘jus in bello’ by legal experts, ie, the laws regulating the conduct of war itself. Their most recent codified versions are contained in the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions. In other words, in the area of the conduct of hostilities, one can clearly map what may be referred to as a ‘revelation to legislation’ journey. Perhaps it is necessary to connect institutionally with extreme religious orders in the US and elsewhere and help them understand that adhering to international treaties is not inconsistent with faith, religious beliefs or any divine scriptures. The writer is a former caretaker federal law minister and a public international law practitioner. Published in Dawn, April 17th, 2026

“Walking is man’s best medicine.” — Hippocrates MORE than two millennia ago, the father of modern medicine recognised something fundamental about human health: our bodies are designed to move. Yet modern civilisation seems to have forgotten this simple truth. Today, millions of people spend most of their waking hours sitting — in cars, at desks, in meetings, and increasingly in front of screens. A typical day for many in cities involves commuting while seated, working while seated, eating while seated and relaxing while seated. Public health experts describe this phenomenon as ‘sitting disease’ — a lifestyle pattern characterised by prolonged sedentary behaviour and insufficient physical activity. Unlike infectious diseases that generally affect us suddenly through infective organisms, this one does not cause immediate symptoms, but over time contributes to some of the most serious health conditions of our times. Physical inactivity has now emerged as one of the most important risk factors for non-communicable diseases (NCDs), also called chronic diseases. These include cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancers, chronic respiratory conditions and several mental health disorders. Global health research shows that insufficient physical activity significantly increases the risk of premature death. People who do not meet recommended activity levels face substantially higher risks of heart disease, stroke and metabolic disorders. Recognising this threat, the WHO recommends that adults engage in at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity per week, such as brisk walking, cycling, swimming or other similar activities. If you want to take Sunday off, then it makes 25 minutes daily, not a big deal, but with huge health benefits. Regular physical activity improves cardiovascular fitness, regulates blood sugar, strengthens muscles and bones, reduces obesity, enhances mental well-being and lowers the risk of several cancers. Equally important is the emerging science around sedentary behaviour. Long uninterrupted periods of sitting appear to have harmful metabolic effects independent of exercise levels. Even individuals who exercise regularly may face health risks if they remain sedentary for most of the day. In simple terms, both lack of exercise and too much sitting are harmful to health. Both lack of exercise and too much sitting are harmful to human health. Over the past few decades, Pakistan has been undergoing a health transition. Infectious diseases remain a challenge, but NCDs are rapidly becoming the dominant cause of illness and premature death. The top killer in Pakistan is ischemic heart disease. Cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, hypertension, obesity and certain cancers predominantly constitute the burden of disease. There are several contributing factors: demographic changes, urbanisation, dietary transitions, environmental stressors, and significantly, lifestyle behaviours. Among these, physical inactivity is a major yet often underestimated health determinant. Urban life encourages sedentary routines. Motorised transport replaces walking, office work replaces manual labour and digital technology absorbs hours of attention daily. Children spend less time playing outdoors while adults find fewer opportunities for physical movement in their daily schedules. This shift towards sedentary and unhealthy lifestyles is occurring quietly but rapidly. Health systems globally, including in Pakistan, are heavily oriented towards treating diseases after they occur. Hospitals, medicines and specialised clinical care are essential. But they address the consequences rather than the root causes of chronic diseases. Prevention, especially through healthier lifestyles, remains one of the most powerful, cost-effective public health strategy. Lifestyle medicine, or preventive medicine, helps promote, coach and monitor healthy lifestyle changes. Physical activity is a cornerstone of this preventive approach. Alongside healthy nutrition, ie, mainly plant-based food, adequate and restorative sleep, addiction control, stress management and healthy social connectedness, it forms the foundation of a healthy lifestyle. Encouraging regular physical activity across populations could significantly reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and obesity — conditions that place an enormous strain on families and healthcare systems. While global research on physical activity is extensive, Pakistan still lacks comprehensive national data linking sedentary lifestyles with disease outcomes. Large-scale studies examining patterns of physical activity, occupational sitting time, urban design, commuting behaviour and recreational exercise are limited. We should establish a ‘national behavioural risk factor surveillance system’, which conducts regular national surveys that generate national data about our lifestyles. Such data is essential for informed policymaking. Understanding the behavioural and environmental determinants of physical inactivity in Pakistan can help design targeted public health interventions. Ministries of health, universities and public health institutes should collaborate to generate this evidence base. Combating sitting disease does not require sophisticated technologies or expensive infrastructure. The most effective interventions are often the simplest. Walking remains one of the safest, cheapest and most accessible forms of exercise. A brisk walk of 25-30 minutes a day can significantly improve cardiovascular health and metabolic function. Similarly, small changes in daily routines can make a meaningful difference. Taking the stairs instead of the lift, walking short distances instead of driving, cycling for local errands, engaging in sports or recreational activities, and even standing or stretching periodically during work hours can reduce sedentary time. Addressing sitting disease needs individual responsibility and supportive environments. Individuals must consciously incorporate physical activity into their daily lives; policymakers, urban planners, educators and employers should help create conditions that make active living easier and attractive. Schools and universities can emphasise sports and outdoor play. Workplaces can encourage active breaks and healthier working environments. Working at WHO in Geneva, I remember many colleagues going for a walk during lunch break. Some went for a jog or cycling. We also had a gym in the building. We need to stand up against sitting disease. The NCDs epidemic in Pakistan is a major component of the prevailing public health crises. Every fourth adult above 20 years is Type II diabetic and every third adult of around 40 years has elevated blood pressure. Yet one of the most powerful preventive tools is available to everyone, regardless of income or geography. It doesn’t need a prescription, a hospital visit or advanced technology. It simply requires that we stand up and start moving. Perhaps Hippocrates understood what modern life has forgotten — the human body thrives when it is in motion. The writer is a former SAPM on health with ministerial status, adjunct professor of health systems and president of the Pakistan Association of Lifestyle Medicine. Published in Dawn, April 17th, 2026

PAKISTAN’S top civil and military leaders are currently engaged in hectic shuttle diplomacy, crisscrossing capitals in order to prevent the US-Iran ceasefire from collapsing, while hoping to bring both foes back to the table to seal a workable deal. Most of the international community is closely watching these efforts, hoping for a breakthrough that would allow calm to return to the Middle East, and prevent a global economic meltdown due to the war’s impact on world trade. The prime minister was in Qatar on Thursday after visiting Saudi Arabia a day earlier, and will head to Turkiye from Doha. Meanwhile, the chief of defence forces was in Iran, meeting top officials. The Americans are obviously in the loop, as Pakistan’s leadership has reportedly been relaying messages between Washington and Tehran, while keeping key Arab and other Muslim capitals briefed on discussions. Although US President Donald Trump had indicated that the next round of talks was imminent, the Foreign Office spokesman has said that no dates had been finalised. The fact that US and Iranian delegations met last week in Islamabad is no small feat. Pakistan’s deft diplomacy has been appreciated across the spectrum, with the UN, the US, Iran and other foreign powers all hailing its sincere efforts to end this devastating conflict. The White House press secretary, in fact, called Pakistan “incredible mediators”. It is a testament to Pakistan’s diplomatic skills and foreign policy expertise that all sides involved have a significant level of trust in the country’s abilities. The Iranians feel comfortable with Pakistan, while the US president has often expressed his appreciation for its civil and military leadership. Moreover, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and most other Arab states on the front lines of the conflict have very close relations with Pakistan, and realise that Islamabad will keep their views in mind. However, despite Pakistan’s best efforts, the ultimate end to this war will rely on decisions taken in Washington and Tehran, with the onus on the US — as the instigator of this conflict — to bring it to a swift close. Despite the positive vibes, mistrust remains high between the US and Iran, while Israel will undoubtedly make every effort to scuttle a lasting deal. Before Mr Trump announced a 10-day truce yesterday, Israel had been pounding Lebanon mercilessly. Iran had insisted that the truce cover Lebanon as well; seemingly the move indicates Washington’s seriousness to take the process forward and keep the Iranians on board. Yet continued threats, such as those delivered by the US war secretary to Iran on Thursday, will hardly create optimal conditions for dialogue. There are great expectations that the proposed second meeting in Islamabad will deliver a peace deal. The opportunity must not be lost. Published in Dawn, April 17th, 2026