Beyond the petrol bomb

As Pakistan’s government announces yet another hike in the prices of petrol and high-speed diesel (HSD), politicians, particularly from the opposition, have been quick to decry the move. Shazia Marri, spokesperson for the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), labeled the increase as a “petrol bomb,” an inflammatory phrase that reflects the ongoing practice of politicizing essential issues for quick point-scoring. However, in the context of rising fuel prices—an issue largely determined by global commodity markets—this rhetoric does little to foster meaningful political discourse. Instead, it detracts from the more nuanced conversation that is needed about how petroleum prices are regulated, taxed, and managed in Pakistan.

It is crucial to recognize that the price of petroleum products in Pakistan, like elsewhere in the world, is primarily influenced by international market fluctuations. Whether it’s oil prices set by OPEC or geopolitical tensions that affect global supply chains, the government's ability to control fuel prices is inherently limited. While it is true that governments can manage certain domestic factors—such as taxes and subsidies—by criticizing price hikes without considering the broader economic landscape, political figures risk ignoring the complexity of the issue.

The term “petrol bomb” is a perfect example of how a complex policy decision can be oversimplified into a soundbite that appeals to emotion rather than intellect. Such expressions, while attention-grabbing, fail to address the root causes of fuel price increases or propose viable solutions. This tendency to use rhetoric for short-term political gain often overshadows the more difficult, yet necessary, debates on domestic taxation and subsidies. Instead of scapegoating the price hike as an unwarranted attack on the public, lawmakers should engage in a more substantial debate about whether the government’s approach to petroleum levies is fair and sustainable in the long run.

At the heart of this debate is the need for a thoughtful discussion on how Pakistan manages its energy sector. Are the taxes on petroleum products justifiable? How effective are the existing subsidies in mitigating the burden on consumers, particularly the poor and middle class? These are the questions that deserve attention, rather than vague criticisms of price hikes. A more robust and evidence-based parliamentary dialogue could go a long way in improving public policy and offering real solutions to inflationary pressures.

Furthermore, it’s vital for politicians to acknowledge the contradictions in their own positions. On one hand, opposition parties decry the price hike as detrimental to citizens already struggling with high inflation. On the other hand, some of these same politicians have called for greater government spending on social programs and infrastructure, without offering concrete suggestions on how to finance such initiatives in an era of constrained budgets. If the political discourse is to move forward in a meaningful way, lawmakers must be prepared to acknowledge the limits of the state’s fiscal capacity and to discuss solutions that take into account both domestic priorities and global realities.