economy

Here is what the reporters are saying: the people have come on to the streets, expressing their rage through marching, chanting, rioting, confronting the police, demanding an end to the current government’s corruption, and above all, and end to the austerity policies imposed by the IMF. The reporters say that “the city” has become a ground-zero for public agitation, and unanimous cries for an end to the tyranny of the IMF.

Which city are the reporters referring to: Santiago, Chile? Beirut, Lebanon? Quito, Ecuador? Port-au-Prince, Haiti? Algiers, Algeria? Baghdad, Iraq? Tegucigalpa, Honduras?

They are in fact referring to all of them.

A tide of discontent has now swept cities across the developing world, with [mostly young] people taking to the streets and mobilizing against the harsh realities of subjugation through economic instruments and policies that are either directly imposed or abetted by IMF.

The wretched of the earth, as the philosopher Fanon called them, today articulate their contempt for brutal austerity policies though civil disobedience. Security forces are struggling to dismount the public pressure, and many leaders are finding their careers on the line.

We are seeing the results of the public agitation in many ways. In Ecuador, the government has rescinded the austerity bill that the government had promulgated under the IMF’s auspices. In Chile, the President has fired his entire cabinet and promised all sorts of changes, but the million people on Santiago’s street want his head and nothing less. In Lebanon, every major street is blockaded and Beirut is in gridlock until the President and PM both resign.

The triggers, as usual, were trivial measures that were part of an austerity program. A small metro ticket hike in Chile, a tobacco and “Whatsapp tax” proposal in Lebanon, and some of other tax hike or public spending cut elsewhere. Yet the conflagrations grow wider and are being observed in great similitude around the world.

It is in fact a “humanitarian crisis” that the IMF wreaks upon the wretched of the earth, and that term is not being used lightly. The current head of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, actually expressed his vocal opposition to the IMF’s policies at the fund’s most recent meeting, reproaching the IMF for the miseries that its policies have wrought on the poor on the world.

Guteres urged world leaders “to listen to the real problems of real people,” and later told reporters that “disquiet in peoples’ lives” has sparked demonstrations around the world from the Middle East to Europe, Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean.

In other words, the man who usually speaks out for war crimes and breaches of the Geneva Convention articulated his concern about what the IMF does. In a sense, that is a very accurate message to send to the IMF. Their policies engender “structural violence” which tyrannizes the disenfranchised without firing a shot.

“Even where people are not protesting, they are hurting and want to be heard,” he told the IMF. This is pertinent for us to observe in the international uprising, because the very same policies have been imposed on Pakistan. The IMF swooped in early this year to throw down the gauntlet, for a paltry sum of $6 billion dollars, in exchange for heavy structural changes that are very unlikely to be addressed in so short a span.

There is indeed a concentration of protesting elements in the capital at this time, but a careful negotiation process and active engagement has meant that, for the moment, Pakistan looks nothing like other countries that otherwise seem economically much better off but are caught up in whirlwinds of agitation.

In the meantime, inflation is rising, job losses mounting, and a growing number of people (albeit proportionately still small, thankfully) are reporting an overall dissatisfaction with life. This is the disquiet that Guterres has warned the IMF of as a generalizable experience of the third world.

Indeed, there is too large a disquiet pervades people’s lives, and the sorts of spending cuts and austerity drives the IMF exacts from poor countries, often for paltry sum of lending in return, exemplifies the problems that not just our country, but the world must contend with.

The writer is the Director for Economics and National Affairs at the Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS). He can be reached at [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »