The Middle East War Shock!

 

A resilient world economy is being tested again by the war in the Middle East. The conflict has caused considerable hardship around the globe. This requires understanding the nature of the shock, the channels through which it affects the economy, the size of the impact, and the policies that can mitigate it. (This is an extract of a speech by the IMF Managing Director in Washington DC).

 

So what hit us? A supply shock that is large, global, and asymmetric:

 

·             It is large because the world’s daily oil flow cut by some 13 percent, and its LNG flow by some 20 percent;

·             It is global because all of us are now paying more for energy and with supply chains disrupted across the world;

·             And it is asymmetric because its impact depends on proximity to the conflict.

 

As always, a negative supply shock pushes prices up. As a point of reference, Brent jumped from $72 per barrel on the eve of hostilities to a peak of $120.

 

The supply interruptions have had—and will for some time continue to have—ripple effects, such as:

 

·             Oil refinery disruptions given the need to maintain minimum flow rates, with warning lights flashing red in many far-flung places;

 

·             Shortages of refined products including diesel and jet fuel, which have disrupted transportation, trade, and tourism in a world more interconnected than ever;

 

·         Food insecurity for another 45 million people given the transport issues—taking the total number of people in hunger to over 360 million—with the problem potentially worsening over time because of higher fertilizer prices;

·         And supply chain disruptions given industrial dependencies such as on sulfur, helium for silicon chipmaking and MRI imaging, and naphtha for plastics.

 

The second question is: how can this shock play out? Through three main channels:

 

·         First: the price impact and supply shortages. Higher prices for key inputs feed into many consumer goods, lifting inflation. This, coupled with shortages, reduces demand by brute force.

·         Second channel: inflation expectations. These can break anchor and ignite a costly inflation process.

·        Third channel: financial conditions.

 

We have been here before in the 1970s and earlier this decade.

How large is the growth impact? What we do know is that growth will be slower—even if the new peace is durable. And we also know there are significant variations across the world. Countries able to export oil and gas undisturbed are the least affected. In contrast, countries directly disrupted by the war—including oil and gas exporters who suffered the blockade—and countries relying on imported oil and gas, still bear the brunt of the impact.

 

How bad this impact will be will depend, in no small measure, on how much policy space countries have, including oil and gas reserves, given the five-week gap we have seen in tanker traffic from the Gulf.

 

The answer very much depends on whether the ceasefire holds and leads to lasting peace and how much damage the war leaves in its wake.

 

For Malaysia, the impact maybe subdued because we are net exporter of oil and gas. But inflation will remain elevated because non-subsidised fuel like diesel will increase transport costs which will then be passed onto consumers. Food imports may cost higher but contained if ringgit holds against the dollar. Supply chain disruptions may occur for those that need oil (from the Middle East) for their output of plastics, silicon chip making or MRI imaging.

 

The Government has a task force to monitor the impact and propose measures but it will be good if they do a weekly communication on pump price changes, subsidies provided (or increased) and how inflationary pressures are being addressed.

 

Reference:

Cushioning the Middle East War Shock (speech by IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva at the 2025 Spring Meetings in Washington, DC).

The Just War Theory and the Iran-US Conflict?

Just war theory is a doctrine of military ethics, rooted in the work of St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, that provides a framework to determine if a war is morally justifiable. It sets strict conditions—jus ad bellum (just reasons for war) and jus in bello (just conduct during war)—to limit destruction and prevent the unnecessary loss of life.

 

· Jus ad Bellum (Going to War):

o Just Cause: War must defend against an attack or prevent significant harm.

o Right Authority: War must be declared by a legitimate, sovereign government.

o Right Intention: The goal must be to secure a just peace, not vengeance or conquest.

o Last Resort: All diplomatic and peaceful options must be exhausted.

o Reasonable Hope: Success must be realistically achievable to prevent wasteful bloodshed.

o Proportionality: The good achieved by the war must outweigh the destruction it causes.

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org

 

· Jus in Bello (Conduct in War):

o Discrimination/Non-combatant Immunity: Soldiers must avoid targeting civilians and minimize collateral damage.

o Proportionality: The force used should be proportionate to the objective and not cause excessive harm.

 

· Jus post Bellum (Justice After War): Covers the requirements for a just, lasting peace after the conflict, including the fair treatment of the defeated party.

The theory, which blends classical and theological traditions, aims to prevent war from becoming a "blank check for violence" and to guide decision-making in international conflicts. It serves as a moral, and often legal, framework—influencing international law—that tries to restrain war and distinguish it from murder or genocide.

 

Does Israel or the U.S. follow the above? No! J.D. Vance (a newborn Catholic) and Donald Trump think otherwise. Ignorance is bliss. They also wage war against the Pope. And Pope Leo XIV is a member of the Order of St. Augustine – the first from the Order to be elected Pope. He has degrees in Mathematics and Philosophy. And subsequently completed a doctorate.

 

Both Vance and Trump are out of depth, while Pete Hegseth conducts himself like a modern day crusader (righteous violence). Recently, he quoted from the movie "Pulp Fiction" and thought it was from the Bible. Fabricated from a real biblical verse!

 

Cardinal Robert McElroy of Washington DC said the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran had failed the just war criteria. For over 1,000 years the Catholic church has taught just-war theory. A nation can only take up the sword in self-defence and once all peace efforts have failed.

 

The U.S. administration has not made a coherent and acceptable case for the just war theory. It was the same in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Vietnam and many more! Stop the war now!

Easter is Against Empire!

 

The attempt to dress violence in the language of divine will is as old as empire – and just as morally bankrupt. The recent bombing of Iran ordered by US President Donald Trump, and the chorus of justification from self-styled Christian Zionists, is more than a geopolitical act. It is something far more dangerous: the fusion of racism, militarism and theological distortion into a single, combustible ideology. (This is an adaptation of an article by Kua Kia Soong in Aliran)

 

The bombing of a sovereign nation is not “God’s intention” to punish an “evil regime”. It is blasphemy. It reduces God to a tribal war deity, conveniently aligned with the strategic interests of one superpower. This is not Christianity. It is a propaganda as good as the Crusades!

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org

 

The Easter message delivered by Pope Leo XIV offers a stark moral contrast. Easter, at its core, is about sacrifice, redemption and the triumph of life over violence. It is a reminder that the Divine cannot be invoked to sanctify destruction. A God worthy of worship cannot be conscripted into bombing campaigns. In John 10:10, Jesus was explicit about the thief who comes to steal, kill and destroy. Isn’t it religious hypocrisy to preach love on Sunday and justify war on Monday?

 

What we are witnessing is not just hypocrisy. It is a deeply racialised worldview. Iran is cast as inherently “evil”, its people reduced to caricatures, its society flattened into a target. This is the same logic that has justified countless injustices across history: the dehumanisation of ‘the other’ as a precondition for violence (including the Holocaust). There is no rationality to racism. There never has been and ever will be.

 

The same irrationality underpins the demonisation of Iran. Entire populations are judged not as individuals but as embodiments of an abstract “evil”. Once that narrative takes hold, violence becomes easier to justify. Bombs fall more readily when those below are seen not as human beings, but as enemies of God.

 

It is worth remembering, too, the historical irony – indeed, the moral inversion – at play here. Today, some Christian Zionists present themselves as defenders of Jewish destiny, invoking biblical narratives to support modern political agendas. Yet history tells a different story. For centuries, Christians in Europe were among the worst oppressors of Jews – subjecting them to persecution, expulsion, forced conversion and massacre. The legacy of Christian antisemitism is long and brutal. It should instil humility, not self-righteousness.

 

To now claim divine authority in matters of war, while ignoring this history, is not just ahistorical – it is dangerous. It suggests that lessons have not been learnt that the machinery of exclusion and violence can simply be repurposed with a different target.

 

The real Easter message – the one worth holding onto – is not about vengeance or punishment. It is about the refusal to answer violence with violence, the insistence on the dignity of every human being, rejection of hatred in all its forms and the power of the Cross to redeem all lost souls. Nothing violent in that!

 

If faith is to mean anything in the modern world, it must stand against the weaponisation of religion. It must challenge the narratives that turn people into enemies and wars into holy missions. And it must remind us that there is nothing divine about dropping bombs on human beings.

 

What we are seeing is not the will of God. It is the failure of humanity, dressed up in the language of righteousness – but exposed, ultimately, as what it is: racism, power and the tragic refusal to learn from history.

 

Reference:

Easter against Empire: Why God cannot justify the bombing of Iran, Kua Kia Soong, Aliran, 5 April 2026

Trump’s Silly War!

 

Are we slipping into World War Three (WWIII)? After eight decades of relative, we are now in the throes of a four-year-old Ukrainian war and an escalating Israel-US-Iran conflict. 

In 1984, American historian Barbara Tuchman, famous for her analysis of WWI – “The Guns of August”, wrote “The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam” on how throughout history, governments pursued policies contrary to their own best interests, even though there are better alternatives. Governments make horrible mistakes when they are blinded by individual egos, excessive political shenanigans and lack of moral direction leading to outcomes that become catastrophic for everyone.

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org

Having bitterly lost in Vietnam, bogged down in the ruinous Iraq war, estimated to cost US$2.9 trillion, why should Trump repeat forever wars when he was elected as a president who will bring home the troops? Trump can blame Ukraine, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan or his predecessors but this Iranian war, which did not receive Congressional approval will be known either as Trump’s silly war or Trump’s dangerous war. 

Tuchman argued that folly thrives where few key advisers or experts have the moral courage to speak truth to power, because many succumb to personal ambition or fear of being outcast in an institutionalised groupthink.History never repeats itself unless we have not learned. And we are now sliding into a dangerous psychological phase of a looming nuclear WWIII. 

Barring how difficult it would be to negotiate peace after both sides have suffered seriously damaged infrastructure, including desalination plants, the only solution to a tenuous peace arrangement is the presence of a United Nations peace-keeping force that would inevitably include Russia, China, possibly India and Europe. No single power can again guarantee the strategic security arrangement in the region. 

America is fighting a war against a smaller enemy that it can afford less and less. The Pentagon has asked for another US$200bil to fight this war. The US Treasury Debt is already at a mind-boggling US$39 trillion, which according to monetarist Steve Hanke and Paul Walker (former comptroller of the currency) mean technical insolvency. If US off-balance sheet liabilities like unfunded pension liabilities are added to official off-balance sheet liabilities, “total federal obligations would now exceed US$136.2 trillion – roughly five times US annual gross domestic product.” 

The world marches to folly because there are no checks and balance back to rationality. The world’s institutions like the Security Council or the United Nations are all impotent or emasculated by Trump. There has to be a global, people movement to stop this march of evil!

 

Reference:

The folly of Trump’s war, Tan Sri Andrew Sheng, The Star, 04 Apr 2026

PMX Berates Bearers of Fake Fuel Price News!

 

In a special address on 1 April, PMX alluded to his conversations with leaders of Iran, Turkiye, Egypt, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states having pointed to one stark reality – the situation will get worse before it gets better. He further contended that the expenditure to cushion the impact of the global energy crisis has reached RM4 bil to date while PETRONAS has helped ensure there will be sufficient oil and gas supplies until at least May. There are steps, meanwhile, taken by the Government:

 

·         National Economic Action Council (MTEN) meetings to convene more frequently with the involvement of industry representatives, fishermen, farmers and related sectors to formulate follow-up actions;

·                 Cancellation of Federal-level Aidilfitri open houses as a cost-saving measure;

·                 Adjustment of BUDI95 quota to 200 litres/month as a temporary measure;

·                 Enforcement of subsidised diesel filling limits in Sabah, Sarawak and Labuan; and

·         Implementation of the (public sector) work from home (WFH) policy beginning April 15 to reduce fuel consumption.

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org

 

Then PMX hit out as an “act of sabotage and betrayal to the country” those who spread fake news about the price of fuel and other related goods. 

Interestingly, just prior to PMX’s special message, the Finance Ministry (MOF) had unveiled another shocker to especially individual 4×4 pick-up truckers as retail price of diesel in Peninsular Malaysia continues its spiral by a further 50 sen to a record RM6.02/litre for the April 2-8 period. 

However, the retail price of non-subsidised RON97 petrol under the Automatic Pricing Mechanism (APM) will be reduced by 20 sen to RM4.95/litre while the retail price for RON95 petrol will remain at RM3.87/litre. 

Politically, not only is the price disparity between diesel price in Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah/Sarawak which continue to enjoy the subsidised RM2.15/litre rate widening, the more pressing concern among B40 and M40 groups is inflationary pressure with an eventual spike in cost of living. How could diesel prices jump by over 112% – from RM2.84 to RM6.02 – in just two months without any effort to slow the increase. At the same time, global LNG (liquefied natural gas) prices have surged much higher than oil prices with PETRONAS expected to enjoy huge profits, according to a former Barisan Nasional (BN) strategic communication deputy director. So the question is where is this windfall going and why isn’t it being used in part to slow or control diesel prices? 

It’s not that the rakyat don’t understand economics. But if prices rise too quickly without control, the impact will be felt on food, logistics and the cost of living. Enough with the excuses. The rakyat want action. (Believe it or not, this was said by the former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak) 

Reference:

PMX berates bearers of fake fuel price news as diesel pump price spiked to RM6.02/litre, FocusM, 2 April 2026

 

Norway – A Model for Oil Revenue?

 

On Christmas Eve 1969, deep beneath the freezing waters of the North Sea, drillers struck black gold. The Ekofisk field — one of the largest offshore oil discoveries in history was found. A small, quiet nation of fishermen and farmers was about to become unimaginably rich. 

What Norway did next is either the greatest financial decision in modern history… or the most boring story ever told. No victory parades. No palaces. No sudden checks raining down on citizens. While the oil money began pouring in, Norwegian politicians did something almost no government in history has managed: they resisted temptation. They had watched what happened to other oil-rich nations — Nigeria, Venezuela, Libya. They saw the “resource curse” in real time: easy money that brought corruption, inflation, inequality, and eventual collapse. Norway decided it would not become another cautionary tale.

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org

In 1990, the Norwegian Parliament passed a simple but revolutionary law. Every single krone of oil profit would go into a new Government Petroleum Fund — now known as the Oil Fund. The rules were strict and almost painfully disciplined: 

- All oil revenue goes into the fund. 

- The government can spend only a tiny percentage of the returns each year. 

- The rest stays invested. Forever. 

The first deposit in 1996 was modest, almost symbolic. Then came the hardest part: they kept the rules. 

Year after year, election after election, crisis after crisis, politicians who promised to raid the fund lost. Those who protected it won. For over three decades, across governments of every political stripe, one principle held firm: this money belongs to Norwegians who haven’t been born yet. 

The fund bought small stakes in thousands of companies worldwide — Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Nestlé, and countless others. It invested in real estate in Manhattan, London, Paris, and Tokyo. It didn’t gamble on hot trends. It simply bought a quiet piece of the global economy and waited. 

Today, Norway’s Oil Fund is worth nearly $2 trillion. For a country of just 5.6 million people, that’s roughly $340,000 for every man, woman, and child. No checks are mailed. The money belongs as much to future generations as to the present one. More than half of that wealth no longer comes from oil. It comes from investment returns. The fund now earns more from its global portfolio than Norway makes pumping oil out of the North Sea. They turned a finite resource into something close to infinite. 

Norway quietly became one of the largest investors on Earth — owning approximately 1.5% of every publicly traded company on the planet. Every time a major global business makes a profit, a tiny fraction quietly flows back to Norway’s children. 

The oil will eventually run out. Geologists give it 30 to 50 years, maybe more. It doesn’t matter. By then, the fund’s returns alone are projected to cover healthcare, education, and pensions — perhaps forever. Norway didn’t discover more oil than anyone else. They didn’t have superior geology or technology. They had one thing most nations lack: the courage to say no. 

No to easy money. 

No to short-term thinking. 

No to politicians who swore they’d only spend “just this once.” 

No to a generation that could have lived richer today — at the expense of every generation that follows.

 

Most countries can’t do it. Most people can’t do it. We’re wired for now, not for later. Norway looked human nature — greed, impatience, shortsightedness — squarely in the eye and built a system specifically designed to defeat it. That’s wisdom.

Please Wean Off Protectionism!

 

For the past four decades, Malaysians have had to pay high prices because of huge import fees on automobiles to allow the national auto players to grow. The problem is after more than 40 years, Malaysians are still paying a substantial amount of fees to protect the car companies. When will that change? That is pertinent as the two largest expenses for the average Malaysian are the house they are living in and also the car they own. 

The national auto industry had its foundation on the Look East Policy. The industry did not follow the eventual path laid out by Japan, which started off having high protectionist barrier but those were dismantled over time. Japan, South Korea and China, which have established auto industries benefited from tariffs and non-tariff barriers to help the domestic industries grow, but these levies were removed in more recent times, especially in Japan and South Korea. 

Source: https://www.investopedia.com

Miti says national automakers, Proton-Geely and Perodua-Daihatsu, account for over 63% of local vehicle sales and there are more than 700,000 employees in the ecosystem. All together, the industry contributes about 4% of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) annually. After decades of investment, the statement says Perodua-Daihatsu maintains a localisation rate of over 75% on its mainstream models and Proton-Geely at 76% in 2025. 

Miti says the auto industry has developed new technologies through its localisation programme, which is the aim of the national car programme, and billions of ringgit had been chanelled through the vendor programme for the benefit of the small and medium enterprises and their employees. There is no doubt that there have been benefits as the national auto industry was a prelude towards the industrialisation of Malaysia. Boosting engineering levels was also an intent of the policy. But after decades, Malaysia’s commitment to research and development as a percentage of GDP is meagre. 

FDI as a means to drive the auto industry was executed by Thailand, which now sees its auto industry not only claim the moniker of Detroit of the East but also contributes about 10% of GDP and employs more people than the ecosystem in Malaysia. Indonesia, which once tried to have its own national car project but went the way of Thailand, has its auto industry ecosystem account for between 8% and 10% of GDP. But the Thailand auto industry model also led to a large share of exports as opposed to Malaysia. Thailand exported US$24bil worth of vehicles in 2024 compared with US$481mil in Malaysia. Indonesia exported US$6.23bil worth of vehicles in 2024. 

The government is to collect about RM11.6bil in auto-related taxes in 2026 which pales in comparison with the contribution the auto sector has on GDP. Malaysia’s auto sales are dependent on the local market because of the low level of exports. At around 800,000 vehicles per year, Malaysia’s auto sales are not small but they do not offer scale to drop the unit cost against countries with larger exports or heavy subsidies are allowed to achieve. 

But that does not mean protectionist policies must continue. The welfare loss from high taxes to protect the domestic industry can be large, but policy has to be tweaked to incorporate some withdrawal of protection for the benefit of consumers. For one, Malaysian manufacturers have to increase their exports significantly if there is to be a continuation of protectionist policies. That way, forcing companies to be more competitive will only mean longer term survival in a more open market place akin to Japan and South Korea.  

Forty years of protectionism is enough! If a child remains a child at 40, the fault lies with the parents not the child. And parents should know when to let go. Why can’t the Government over a period let go these two kids – Proton and Perodua – and face market forces? 

Reference:

Time to wean off protectionism, Jagdev Singh Sidhu, The Star, 4 Apr 2026