Opinions

Suhail Warraiech

Who will have the last laugh?For now, the laughter has died down and the guffaws have ceased; those who initiated the conversation are dispirited, while the recipients are bewildered and anxious. Everyone is in a state of suspense. Recall that just a month ago, there were celebrations akin to the radiance of a full moon a honeymoon phase was in full swing yet the storm that had long been brewing beneath the festivities has finally erupted, dealing a shock to the government’s allies. Now, everyone is busy trying to absorb this shock and devise ways to neutralize its impact. Raising an issue, proposing a plan, or sounding a whistle may create a stir, but the direction the matter takes and its ultimate outcome are what truly matter; no matter how novel the initiative, the real issue hinges on the result. That is why the crucial question remains. “Who will have the last laugh?”
When the political climate is clear, it is easy for those in power to walk on dry ground however, amidst a storm of wind and rain, politicians must tread very carefully through the mud, relying on their experience to avoid slipping. The weather had been perfectly fine, yet suddenly from out of nowhere the rain has poured down. Now, within every political camp and faction, strategies are being deliberated on how to navigate the rain and mud. It appears that every party involved is interpreting the Urdu concept of “bhugat” (bearing the consequences) in its own way: the ruling coalition partners are already facing the fallout; the ‘Pipelay’ (PPP) are bracing themselves for the consequences; the ‘Noonies’ (PML-N) are intent on making others pay the price; and the ‘Insafis’ (PTI) are eager to make the initiators of this move as well as their political opponents suffer the repercussions.
President Zardari is a staunch Sindhi, yet he views Sindh and Pakistan as two parts of the same body, drawing on experience, he made a calculated decision to work in tandem with the power brokers. He may well be the last Sindhi leader to resist a decision made by the establishment. However, if his politics, leadership, or honour are at stake, he could easily shed the mantle of reconciliation and wear the suit of armour for defence. After all, one cannot endure eleven years of continuous imprisonment without a mindset of resistance. Embers of that resistance surely still smoulder within him, as Rana Sanaullah put it, the issue for the People’s Party is not one of ego but of survival so if pushed too far, the situation could escalate into open conflict born of desperation. The other major party to this issue is Nawaz Sharif. The ‘Noon’ camp is currently maintaining a strategic silence, yet they do not hesitate to reveal that they were repeatedly urged to initiate a dialogue on the creation of new provinces; however, they were unwilling to take the lead on this matter, which is why the issue was eventually raised from a platform other than theirs.
Historically, the leadership of the ‘Noon’ faction (PML-N) is considered the most experienced; while Nawaz Sharif has played a decisive role in foreign and economic affairs, he has also maintained working relationships with every successive head of the establishment since the era of General Zia-ul-Haq. Although these relationships have occasionally seen ups and downs, he generally formulates strategy in consultation with his brother, Shehbaz Sharif. Having moved past the bitterness of the past, he is now convinced that conflict between the establishment and the government harms the state; consequently, he is unlikely to take any rash or adventurous decisions, though fully aligning with the establishment on this specific issue might also prove difficult for him. Thanks to his brother serving as Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif commands enough stature within the system to ensure his views are heard attentively making it difficult for them to be outright dismissed.
Outside the government, two other political factions are significant regarding the issue of new provinces; for the supporters of ‘Prisoner No. 804,’ even the slightest rift between government allies and the establishment is a cause for optimism. Tehreek-e-Insaf has traditionally supported the creation of new provinces; should it align with the establishment on this issue at such a critical juncture, the ruling coalition parties would be weakened, potentially opening new avenues for the party and its leader. While the granting of “leeway” could ostensibly play a decisive role, the core issue remains that even if the matter is resolved by transferring ‘Prisoner No. 804’ to a hospital or granting minor amenities there appears to be absolutely no prospect of providing Imran Khan with major relief in the form of release or a return to active politics. The reason for this is that granting Imran extraordinary concessions could trigger the collapse of the entire existing system. The establishment would not want to create a threat to its own system for the sake of forming new provinces; this implies that Imran Khan might get a mere “toffee” in exchange for new provinces, rather than a lavish lunch or dinner. The question remains: will the Tehreek-e-Insaf be compelled to accept this weak deal, or will it persist in adamant resistance and wait for a more opportune moment?
Maulana Fazlur Rehman is a significant figure in both religious and parliamentary politics, yet he, too, does not currently support the creation of new provinces. Ostensibly, most politicians are reacting with hesitation and avoidance, whereas signals favouring priority and urgency are being received from the establishment; politicians, however, aim to strategically steer the matter toward postponement and delay. The situation has reached a point where, no matter how often the “Noonies” (PML-N) insist that “all is well” offering a kind of verbal opiate for temporary solace once the smoke begins to rise, failing to extinguish the spark spells disaster.
The creation of new provinces is currently the sole topic of discussion in every political gathering across the country. The reaction to the proposal of separating Karachi from Sindh mirrors the intense backlash seen in Sindh’s recent political history regarding the construction of the Kala bagh Dam and the six canals projects that had to be scrapped despite the pressure to proceed. Yet, during this year’s budget process, through reconciliation and dialogue, both Punjab and Sindh willingly handed over a substantial portion of their development budgets to the federal government.
This marked a departure from past attitudes; when the approach was cordial and a detailed dialogue took place regarding provincial concerns and priorities, both Sindh and Punjab unhesitatingly did what had not even been expected of them. Coercion does not resolve delicate and sensitive matters; instead, it exacerbates them.
The current system, in which the state and politics operate in tandem, resembles a wall, each brick reinforces the others, yet removing a single brick renders the entire structure hollow, making it vulnerable to collapse from even the slightest push. There is a risk that, in their attempts to bring about each other’s downfall, they might all ultimately face ruin. It must be remembered that internal discord is precisely what precipitates the system’s collapse.

Atta Haq

Keep your heart positive, your intentions clean, and your goals clear.” These words may sound simple, but they contain three principles that can shape the way we approach success, relationships, leadership and life itself.
We live in an increasingly competitive world. People are constantly comparing achievements, careers, businesses, lifestyles and influence. In this race, it is easy to become distracted by negativity, jealousy or the opinions of others. Yet lasting success rarely comes from watching what everyone else is doing. It comes from understanding your own purpose and continuing to move towards it.
A positive heart does not mean pretending that difficulties do not exist. Life inevitably brings disappointment, criticism, setbacks and unexpected challenges. Positivity is the decision not to allow those experiences to define our future. It is the ability to learn from difficult moments while continuing to believe that something better can still be built.
The second principle is equally important: keep your intentions clean. Success achieved at the expense of others may bring temporary recognition, but it rarely brings genuine fulfilment. Whether we work in business, politics, charity, media or community service, our intentions matter. Are we trying only to promote ourselves, or are we also trying to make a meaningful difference?
Clean intentions mean treating people with respect, keeping our word, helping where we can and refusing to build our progress by pulling somebody else down. You do not need another person to fail in order for you to succeed.
The third principle is to keep your goals clear. Ambition without direction can quickly become wasted energy. Clear goals provide focus. They help us understand where we are going, what sacrifices are necessary and which distractions we must learn to ignore. When the destination is clear, temporary setbacks become part of the journey rather than reasons to abandon it.
These three qualities, positivity, integrity and clarity, are particularly important in leadership. A leader’s attitude influences the people around them. Their intentions determine whether others trust them, while their clarity of purpose determines whether people are willing to follow them.
True leadership should therefore be about more than position, recognition or personal achievement. It should create confidence, opportunity and hope for others. There will always be noise around us. Some people will support our journey, others will question it, and a few may even hope that we fail. We cannot control every opinion or reaction. What we can control is the condition of our own heart, the honesty of our intentions and the direction of our efforts.
At the end of the day, success is not simply about how far we travel. It is also about how we travelled, whom we helped along the way, and what kind of person we became during the journey.
So remain positive when circumstances become difficult. Keep your intentions clean even when nobody is watching. Keep your goals clear when distractions appear. A positive heart gives you strength. Clean intentions give you peace. Clear goals give you direction. Together, they create a powerful foundation for a meaningful and successful life.

Wajahat Ali Khan

Ben Delo co-founder of cryptocurrency exchange BitMEX, donated £36 million and Christopher Harborne cryptocurrency entrepreneur/investor and a major previous Reform donor, also donated £36 million to Reform party. Now Reform is facing growing questions over its £72 million fund, with what was once hailed as a political windfall increasingly looking like a burden.
What should have been a symbol of Reform’s growing political muscle is threatening to become its biggest headache.
The £72 million fund was supposed to give the party the financial firepower to take on the political establishment. Instead, it is increasingly becoming a millstone around Reform’s neck, raising awkward questions over how the money is being managed, where it is going and whether the party can turn financial muscle into lasting political success.
For a party that has built its appeal around shaking up Westminster, the sheer scale of the fund creates its own uncomfortable scrutiny.
Every pound now invites questions. Every spending decision risks becoming a political row and every promise made using the money creates expectations that Reform must deliver.
Critics are likely to argue that the fund has transformed Reform from an insurgent movement into an organisation that must justify its decisions under the same unforgiving spotlight it has traditionally directed at the Conservatives and Labour.
The danger is obvious money can buy campaigning power, but it cannot automatically buy discipline, organisation or electoral success.
Reform has enjoyed considerable momentum, but converting that momentum into seats and long-term influence is a very different challenge.
The £72 million fund therefore presents the party with a paradox. It gives Reform resources on a scale that many emerging political movements could only dream of while simultaneously making mistakes more expensive, disputes more damaging and failures harder to explain away.
What was once a war chest could end up looking like an albatross and unless Reform can demonstrate that the money is being deployed effectively, the question will increasingly become not how much the party has, but what it has actually achieved with it.
For a party promising to overturn the old political order, that could prove an uncomfortable test. £72 million was meant to be Reform’s great advantage.
It may yet become its greatest liability.
The figure has raised concerns among officials and financial observers.
The liability includes outstanding financial obligations and related costs.
Officials are examining the reasons behind the increase.
The development could place additional pressure on the organisation’s finances.
Questions have also been raised about how the liability will be managed.
Reform representatives are expected to respond to the latest figures.

By Dr. Hamid Khan Al-Mashriqi (Int. Strategic Affairs Expert and Analyst)

The latest agreement involving Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland could prove to be a significant development in determining the future of the United Kingdom, according to journalist and strategic affairs expert Dr. Hamid Khan Al-Mashriqi.
Speaking from London, Al-Mashriqi said the development should not be viewed merely as a political declaration, but as a reflection of growing public sentiment in the devolved nations. He noted that many people in Scotland and Northern Ireland opposed Brexit and argued that concerns over political representation, resources and economic opportunities have continued to grow.
He said the UK is facing a weakened economy and an increasingly polarised society, while immigration and the rise of right-wing politics have added to domestic tensions. Westminster, he argued, should focus more closely on its internal challenges rather than becoming excessively involved in external conflicts and costly foreign engagements.
Al-Mashriqi pointed to the growing support for Scottish independence and said the political landscape indicated that Westminster could face serious constitutional challenges in the coming months and years.
He stressed that the issue was not simply about “divorcing” from the United Kingdom but about demands for greater sovereignty. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, he said, have expressed concerns that resources, employment opportunities and other economic benefits have not been distributed fairly compared with London and England.
According to Al-Mashriqi, the UK’s constitutional union has long faced questions over its historical foundations. If public sentiment continues moving towards greater autonomy or independence, politicians will increasingly be under pressure to respond.
He said a future referendum could produce a significantly different outcome from Scotland’s previous independence vote, arguing that the narrow margin in favour of remaining in the UK had diminished and that political sentiment was now shifting in the opposite direction.

Professor Masood Akhtar Hazarvi

The merchants lived and traded among the local populations. As relationships developed, intermarriages took place, giving rise to families and communities. At the same time, mosques were built to meet the religious needs of the people, and religious schools were established. Thus, the faith that had initially arrived with travelling caravans gradually became part of the lives of local communities. With the passage of time, Islam was no longer regarded as something foreign; it became the faith of ordinary households.
One particularly important fact deserves reflection: the conversion of a ruler to Islam and the conversion of an entire population are not the same thing. A ruler may sometimes embrace a religion for political or strategic reasons, but the hearts of ordinary people do not change overnight. People observe character. They examine relationships. They draw light from centres of knowledge, and gradually, generation after generation, a faith becomes embedded in their lives. The journey of Islam in West Africa was similarly a long and gradual process in which trade, education, religious preaching, spirituality and relationships with local societies all played their respective roles.
The history of ancient Ghana, Takrur, Mali and, later, the Songhai Empire bears witness to the fact that commercial and intellectual links between West Africa and the wider Muslim world were established many centuries ago. Then, in the fourteenth century, the pilgrimage to Makkah undertaken by the great ruler of Mali, Mansa Musa, became a remarkable symbol of this connection. His journey to Makkah gained extraordinary fame throughout the Islamic world and helped place Mali and Timbuktu even more prominently on the intellectual and cultural map of the Muslim world.
The name Timbuktu still reminds us that Africa has not merely been a land of gold, oil and minerals. It has also been a land of knowledge. The Qur’an was studied here. Hadith was taught. Books of Islamic jurisprudence were written. Religious schools flourished. Students travelled from distant regions to study. Scholars educated generations and passed their intellectual heritage from one generation to another.
Wherever Islam reached, it did not merely establish mosques; it also lit the lamps of knowledge. The very first revelation of the Qur’an directs humanity towards knowledge: “Read in the name of your Lord who created.” Perhaps this is why Islam in West Africa did not remain merely a religious identity; it profoundly influenced society, culture and everyday life.
In later centuries, Sufi orders such as the Qadiriyyah and Tijaniyyah deepened this spiritual journey even further. Scholars and Sufis lived among ordinary people and taught them the Qur’an and Sunnah. Gatherings of remembrance of Allah were held. Love for Allah was cultivated in hearts. The lamps of love for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ were illuminated. Religion was no longer confined to books; it gradually became woven into the lives of the people.
Islam reached the homes of farmers. It reached the tents of shepherds. It reached the marketplaces. It reached the mosques. It entered the arms of mothers and found its way onto the tongues of children. This is perhaps the greatest sign that a religion has truly become rooted in a society: it ceases to be merely a matter of belief and becomes an integral part of everyday life.
During these gatherings in Rabi‘ al-Awwal, when I see African young men reciting poetry in praise of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, my heart is filled with an indescribable emotion. The language is different, the accent is different, the clothing is different, and the colour of the skin is different. Yet when the words of blessings and salutations upon the Messenger ﷺ are recited, it feels as though all distances disappear. Tears come to the eyes. The voice trembles with emotion. One senses the same spiritual ecstasy that has been the treasured possession of lovers of the Messenger ﷺ for centuries.
Witnessing such scenes makes one realise that love has a language of its own. It requires no translation. It travels directly from one heart to another. Whether it is a young man from Senegal, a student from Nigeria, an elderly man from a village in Mali, or a mother living in a remote settlement, whenever the blessed name of Muhammad ﷺ is mentioned, the brightness on their faces and the emotions in their hearts seem remarkably alike.
This is one of the great realities of Islam. Geography may be different, but the direction of prayer is one. Languages may differ, but the Qur’an is one. Colours may differ, but faith is one. Cultures may differ, but the centre of love is one.
When a Muslim in Africa, thousands of miles away from the Arabian Peninsula, recites the Qur’an, or when his eyes fill with tears upon hearing the remembrance of the Prophet Mustafa ﷺ, it feels as though the distances have suddenly collapsed. On the map of the world, the roads may be long, but the path of the heart is remarkably short—and in that very moment, the heart seems to arrive in the streets of Madinah.
This is the Ummah of Muhammad ﷺ: an Ummah that neither colour has divided, nor race separated, nor language prevented, nor the distances between continents been able to keep apart. The love of Mustafa ﷺ has gathered all these distances within its embrace.
Yet another question has accompanied me throughout this journey. And perhaps this question is even more painful than the first. In a region blessed with gold, oil, gas, minerals, fertile lands and countless natural resources, why does the human being here still remain burdened by poverty?
Nature has bestowed immense treasures, but why has prosperity not followed? The land is capable of producing abundant agricultural resources, yet why do so many of its inhabitants still struggle for basic necessities? Where does this wealth go? And can natural resources alone change the destiny of a nation if education, justice, good governance and economic independence remain weak?
How the light of Islam reached this land is an extraordinary story. But why this region has failed to escape poverty despite possessing such immense treasures is an even more thought-provoking question.
I shall present some reflections on this subject in the next instalment.

Iqbal Latif

Look at the picture first. Vladimir Putin holding a selfie stick, 10 heads of government leaning into the frame, a Trump inset in the corner, and a caption in red: the BRICS alliance challenges the dollar’s global dominance as Russia reports that more than 90% of trade is settled in local currencies. It is a composite, not a photograph of the New Delhi summit, and Putin has never held a selfie stick in his life. The picture is fake and the number is real, and it is the real number that is doing the lying. Before the arithmetic, though, a question I was asked 36 years ago.
In 1990, when I drove out of Kuwait after the invasion and crossed Iran by road, I stopped in Tehran for a few days. The first question anyone asked a foreigner, in the street, at the hotel, at the exchange counter, was the title of this essay. Do you have dollars. Not rials, not rubbles, not gold. Dollars. The Islamic Republic has spent every year since as the fiercest enemy of the dollar on earth. Look at Tehran this week. The free-market rate was 2,351,000 rials to the dollar on 13 September, after a record 2,375,000 on 11 September, 47% worse than 6 months ago. The rial is not priced against a basket, or against the yuan, or against anything the declaration mentions. It is priced against the thing the state has spent 47 years denouncing. The Iranian rate trackers describe the dollar in their own words as the anchor currency of Iran’s free market, against which nearly every other currency, gold and many goods are priced. That is not my characterisation of a BRICS member’s economy. It is the description used by the people who run the counter.
The fiercest enemies of the dollar are its fiercest holders, because everything they must buy is quoted in it. Oil is quoted in dollars. Gold is quoted in dollars. Even the cryptocurrencies invented to abolish the fiat dollar are quoted in dollars, and the first thing anyone asks about one is what it is worth in dollars. You cannot escape a unit of account by trading in something else. I set this down in 1998 and called it the Denomination Paradox: anything priced in dollars cannot replace the dollar, because it borrows the dollar’s ruler to state its own value.
Now the caption. On 8 September 2026, 4 days before the summit, Dmitry Peskov told Indian journalists that 90% of Russia’s payments and transactions with BRICS countries are conducted in national currencies. Russia’s. Not the bloc’s. Putin used the same 90% in May 2024 for settlements between Russia and China alone. And Peskov said the opposite of what the caption claims: “It’s not because we are aiming for de-dollarisation, for getting rid of US dollars. No, no, to the contrary.” Russia is open to any acceptable method of payment. Asked about the Indian rupees its companies cannot spend, he said the problem is gradually being resolved and gave no figure. That is not a challenge to the dollar. It is a country describing its own cage to the journalists of the country holding the key.
And settling in national currencies does not remove the dollar from the trade. The price is still set in dollars and then converted. The oil is priced in dollars, the invoice is converted, the rupees pile up in Mumbai and Moscow asks Delhi what is for sale. The dollar left the receipt. It never left the price.
Set the true number beside the false one. In April 2025 the BIS found the dollar on 1 side of 89.2% of all foreign exchange trades, up from 88.4% in 2022, on turnover of $9.6 trillion a day. Up. Across the 3 years in which the dollar’s decline was announced weekly, its share rose. The yuan carries about 3% of the payments messaged through SWIFT. More than $10 trillion crosses JPMorgan’s payment rails every day. 1 American bank, in 1 day, moves more money than the whole Russian economy produces in 5 years at market prices. And behind the pipes stand the 2 questions that decide reserve status. Who arbitrates Hormuz, Suez, Bab al Mandab, the seabed cables and the clearing that settles the cargo? The United States, and nobody at the Delhi table. Whose debt does the world keep its savings in? The American Treasury market. I wrote 20 years ago that whoever holds the chokepoints holds the money, and in April 2024 that someone’s debt is someone else’s savings.
Last, the declaration the picture pretends to summarise. Clause 90 acknowledges a payment task force, notes work on interoperability, mentions local currency settlement while respecting national priorities, and records that there is no one size fits all approach. No common currency. No operator. No rail. No date. And on Saturday 12 September, after the summit closed, India’s own Secretary for Economic Relations, Sudhakar Dalela, told the briefing: “There is no proposal in the BRICS for a BRICS currency as of now.” The host said it from the podium on the day the meme began to travel.
De dollarisation consumes most of them. It fills the communiqués, the task forces, the 17 summits and the 140 paragraphs, and at the end of it the oil is still priced in dollars and the man in Tehran still asks for them by name. What a fake agreement. What a fake pursuit.

Mahmood Khan

The British economy remains one of the world’s largest and most influential economies, supported by a strong financial sector, world-class universities, advanced services, respected institutions and a global trading network. However, Britain faces serious economic challenges. Slow growth, high living costs, weak productivity, pressure on public finances, housing shortages, labour-market problems and global uncertainty are affecting both households and businesses.
The central challenge is no longer simply avoiding recession; it is creating sustainable economic growth that raises productivity, wages and living standards.
Cost of Living
The cost-of-living crisis remains one of Britain’s most immediate problems. Although inflation has fallen considerably from its previous peaks, the prices of food, energy, housing and transport remain much higher than they were several years ago. Falling inflation does not mean that prices have returned to their previous levels.
Many families therefore continue to struggle with household budgets. Higher rents and mortgage payments have particularly affected younger people, while pensioners and low-income households face difficulties meeting essential expenses. Reduced consumer spending can also weaken economic growth.
Weak Productivity
Britain’s deeper structural problem is low productivity. Sustainable increases in wages and living standards depend on producing more economic value from each hour of work.
The UK needs greater investment in technology, artificial intelligence, research, infrastructure and modern manufacturing. Businesses also require a stable economic environment in which they can make long-term investment decisions.
Britain cannot depend indefinitely on financial services and consumer spending. It needs to strengthen manufacturing, technology, life sciences, green industries, engineering and other high-value sectors.
Public Finances and Taxation
The government faces enormous pressure to finance the NHS, social care, pensions, education, defence and infrastructure while controlling borrowing and national debt.
At the same time, taxpayers are concerned about the level of taxation. The government therefore faces a difficult balance. Excessive taxation can discourage investment and entrepreneurship, while excessive borrowing increases debt and future interest costs.
The solution requires more efficient public spending, economic growth and reforms that improve productivity rather than simply increasing taxes.
Employment and Skills
Britain also faces challenges in its labour market. Unemployment, economic inactivity and declining vacancies indicate that many people are not fully participating in the economy.
The country needs a stronger skills strategy. Vocational education, apprenticeships, engineering, digital technology and artificial-intelligence training should become national priorities. Universities and colleges should work more closely with businesses so that education reflects the needs of the modern economy.
Housing Crisis
Housing has become both a social and economic problem. A shortage of affordable homes has pushed up rents and property prices, making home ownership increasingly difficult for younger generations.
Britain needs faster planning processes, greater housebuilding and more affordable housing. Housing development should be linked to transport, employment and infrastructure. A stronger housing supply would not only help families but also improve labour mobility and economic productivity.
Brexit and Global Uncertainty
Britain’s departure from the European Union has changed its trading environment. Businesses have had to adapt to new customs procedures and regulatory arrangements. At the same time, global conflicts, energy-price volatility, geopolitical tensions and supply-chain disruptions have created additional uncertainty.
Britain should maintain strong economic relations with Europe while expanding trade with the United States, Commonwealth, Gulf states and rapidly growing Asian economies.
The Way Forward
Britain needs a long-term economic strategy rather than short-term political solutions.
First, productivity should become the centre of economic policy. The government should encourage business investment through predictable taxation and regulation while investing in infrastructure, research and technology.
Second, Britain must develop a highly skilled workforce. Apprenticeships, technical education, vocational training and digital skills should receive greater priority.
Third, the housing shortage must be tackled through increased construction, planning reform and affordable housing programmes.
Fourth, public services need reform as well as funding. Greater efficiency, digitalisation and preventive healthcare can help improve services while controlling long-term costs.
Fifth, Britain should pursue an ambitious international trade strategy, maintaining strong European relationships while developing new markets across the world.
Finally, political and economic stability is essential. Businesses need confidence that taxation, regulation and economic policies will remain predictable.
Britain is not an economy in collapse. It remains a wealthy, innovative and globally influential country with considerable strengths. But its potential is greater than its current economic performance.
The way forward is to increase productivity, encourage investment, develop skills, build affordable homes, reform public services and expand international trade.
Britain’s economic future will depend not simply on how much the government spends or taxes, but on how effectively the country creates wealth, supports enterprise and prepares its people for the economy of tomorrow. With political stability, sound economic management and long-term investment, Britain can overcome its present difficulties and build a stronger, more productive and prosperous economy.

Prof. Fatima Zaman

Her courage today becomes another girl’s confidence tomorrow.” These words capture the true meaning of women’s empowerment. Every time a woman finds the courage to challenge a barrier, speak up, pursue an ambition or step into leadership, she does more than change her own life. She makes the journey a little easier for the women and girls who follow.
Courage is rarely about being fearless. It is about moving forward despite uncertainty, criticism and obstacles. For generations, women have demonstrated this courage in their homes, workplaces, communities and public life. They have entered professions once considered beyond their reach, built businesses, led organisations, contributed to healthcare and education, and taken their rightful place in politics and decision-making.
Yet the importance of these achievements extends far beyond individual success.
When a young girl sees a woman becoming a doctor, entrepreneur, councillor, scientist, lawyer, teacher or community leader, something important happens: possibility becomes visible. She begins to understand that leadership is not reserved for someone else. She can imagine herself occupying that space too.
Representation therefore matters enormously. We cannot simply tell girls that they can achieve anything; they must also be able to see women achieving, leading and succeeding around them.
But empowerment must go beyond inspirational words. Women need genuine opportunities, access to education, mentoring, professional networks and fair representation. Workplaces must recognise talent without prejudice, communities must encourage ambition rather than restrict it, and institutions must ensure that women have meaningful opportunities to participate in leadership.
We must also recognise that not every courageous woman stands on a public stage. Courage belongs to the mother returning to education after raising her family; the woman establishing her first business; the young professional speaking confidently in a room where she feels underrepresented; and the community volunteer quietly helping vulnerable families without seeking recognition.
Each example can inspire another woman. This creates a powerful chain reaction. One woman breaks a barrier, another sees what is possible, and a younger generation develops the confidence to go further. Progress therefore becomes something we pass from one generation to the next.
Men also have an important role in this journey. Women’s empowerment should never be treated as an issue for women alone. Fathers, husbands, brothers, colleagues, employers and community leaders must help create environments in which women and girls are respected, encouraged and given equal opportunities to flourish.
Ultimately, a society cannot reach its full potential while half its population faces unnecessary barriers to ambition. That is why courage matters. One courageous decision may appear personal today, but its influence can travel much further than we imagine.
A woman who refuses to surrender her ambition can become someone else’s role model. A woman who speaks today may give another girl the confidence to speak tomorrow. And a woman who opens one door can inspire an entire generation to walk through it.
Her courage is not only her strength. It can become another girl’s confidence, another woman’s opportunity and the beginning of lasting change.

Dr Shahzad Qureshi

True leadership begins when personal success becomes a pathway for others to rise.” This powerful thought captures an important truth about leadership: achievement has its greatest value when it creates opportunities for others.
Success is often measured through titles, wealth, professional recognition or personal influence. These achievements deserve respect, particularly when they are built through years of discipline and sacrifice. But leadership demands something more. It asks a simple question: once you have climbed the ladder, are you prepared to help someone else climb it too?
The strongest leaders understand that success should never end with the individual. Knowledge should be shared, opportunities should be opened, and experience should be used to guide those who are still finding their way.
This principle is especially important in business, healthcare, education and community service. A successful professional can mentor a young person. An established entrepreneur can support a new business. A senior doctor can inspire the next generation of healthcare professionals. Someone with influence can give a voice to those who are too often unheard.
These actions may appear small, but collectively they can transform lives.
Leadership is therefore not simply about occupying a position of authority. Some people hold impressive titles without truly leading, while others possess no formal title yet influence hundreds of lives through compassion, encouragement and service. Leadership is demonstrated through what we enable others to become.
Our communities need this approach more than ever. Young people require mentors and role models who are willing to invest time in them. Families facing hardship need people prepared to turn concern into practical action. Talented individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds need doors opened that might otherwise remain closed.
The responsibility becomes even greater for those who have already achieved professional or financial success. Experience creates an opportunity to give back, not necessarily through money alone, but through time, knowledge, introductions, guidance and encouragement.
There is also something deeply human about helping another person succeed. Personal achievements can provide satisfaction, but contributing to someone else’s journey creates a legacy. Buildings, businesses and titles may change over time, but the people we empower can continue carrying forward the values and opportunities they received.
This is how leadership becomes generational. A young person who receives support today may become the mentor of another tomorrow. An entrepreneur given an opportunity may eventually employ hundreds. A student encouraged at the right moment may become a doctor, teacher, scientist or community leader who serves thousands.
The measure of leadership, therefore, should not simply be “How successful did I become?” It should also be “How many people became stronger because I succeeded?”
That is the difference between achievement and impact. Personal success can build a reputation. But when that success becomes a platform from which others are encouraged, supported and empowered to rise, it builds something far greater: a legacy.

Sana Kardar

History rarely announces which assumptions future generations will find absurd. Ideas that once appeared immutable, from restricting the franchise to denying workers basic protections, survived partly because societies became accustomed to them. One of the greatest barriers to progress therefore emerges when the limitations of the present become confused with the boundaries of what might be possible.
British political history provides compelling evidence of societies refusing to accept such limitations. The expansion of the franchise, the struggle for women’s suffrage and the rise of organised labour challenged arrangements long defended as natural, necessary or too entrenched to change. Progress was neither automatic nor inevitable but depended upon people possessing the imagination to conceive an alternative and the persistence to transform aspiration into political reality.
Labour’s history offers an especially powerful illustration. When Clement Attlee entered government in 1945, Britain was emerging from war economically exhausted,
heavily indebted and facing enormous reconstruction. Conventional caution might have encouraged retrenchment until more prosperous circumstances emerged.
Instead, his government established much of the modern welfare state, while Aneurin Bevan oversaw the creation of the National Health Service in 1948.
The enduring significance of 1945 lies not in believing its policies should be reproduced unquestioningly, but in understanding the political imagination that made
them conceivable under profoundly difficult circumstances. Nostalgia is a poor substitute for political thought; history becomes valuable when it helps us understand
how previous generations confronted uncertainty and expanded the boundaries of possibility.
Such lessons have particular relevance for my generation. Young people have come of age amid financial instability, Brexit, a pandemic, unaffordable housing and
technological disruption. Artificial intelligence promises remarkable advances while raising difficult questions about employment, skills and the distribution of economic gains, while climate change and demographic pressures demand thinking beyond a single electoral cycle. Against this backdrop, pessimism can gradually acquire the appearance of realism. When a generation regards home ownership as inherently unattainable, insecurity as the unavoidable price of employment, or politics as incapable of altering either, expectations begin to accommodate circumstances rather than challenge them. The greater danger lies not merely in expecting less from politics, but in losing the capacity to imagine what society should expect from it.
Political possibility, however, should never be confused with unquestioning optimism. Meaningful progress requires evidence, intellectual discipline and a willingness to scrutinise our own assumptions as rigorously as those of our opponents. For Young Labour, history should therefore serve neither as a museum nor a manual. Previous generations deserve study not because their answers can be transplanted into the Sana Kardar 2 present, but because understanding how they challenged the supposedly impossible can sharpen our response to contemporary problems.
The future will not resemble 1945, and our solutions should not either. A new generation carries the responsibility not of preserving the past unchanged, but of
understanding it sufficiently well to build beyond it. History provides no guarantee of progress. It provides something equally valuable: evidence that the boundaries of political possibility have never been permanently fixed, and that the limitations accepted by one age need not become the inheritance of the next.