Tahir Maqsood Chheena
Pakistan’s decision to import 350,000 tonnes of sugar mere months after approving the export of nearly double that quantity is not just a policy blunder — it is a reflection of a deeply entrenched pattern of governance where private interests routinely trump public good. While this may not surprise those familiar with the workings of Pakistan’s economic and political landscape, the implications are devastating for the average citizen who continues to bear the brunt of such short-sighted and self-serving decisions.
At the heart of this crisis lies the sugar lobby, a powerful group that includes some of the country’s wealthiest industrialists and influential politicians. Over the years, this lobby has established a formidable presence in both government and opposition benches, allowing it to steer policies in its favour regardless of which party is in power. The latest episode — where sugar was exported despite credible warnings of impending domestic shortages — exemplifies how policymaking in Pakistan is often held hostage by narrow corporate interests.
This is not the first time Pakistan has found itself in this conundrum. Similar cycles of exporting vital commodities like wheat, cotton, and sugar — only to reimport them at higher prices — have occurred repeatedly over the years. Such moves not only burden the national treasury but also expose ordinary citizens to sharp price shocks. The cost of these policy reversals is not just financial; it is moral and institutional. They reveal a state apparatus more attuned to serving the rich than safeguarding the poor.
The sugar industry, in particular, has long operated like a cartel. This is not mere conjecture — the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has previously found and penalised sugar mill owners for collusive practices that distort market prices. Despite this, the same millers were allowed to export sugar recently, a move that many economists and civil society actors warned would lead to domestic scarcity and price escalation. Their warnings were accurate. Today, sugar prices in various parts of the country have soared to as high as Rs200 per kilo, making it unaffordable for a large portion of the population.
The government, far from acting in time to protect consumers, has now been forced into damage control. The food security minister’s statement that sugar imports are necessary to “stabilise domestic prices and ensure availability” confirms that the earlier export decision was flawed. However, what it does not acknowledge is why such a decision was made in the first place and who benefited from it. The answers, though unspoken, are clear: sugar millers profited massively from exports and are now profiting again from inflated domestic prices.
Even the agreed retail price of Rs164 per kilo — 13% higher than the cap set during the export period — raises serious concerns. It signals not just price manipulation but also a troubling complicity between government regulators and industrial stakeholders. When millers are allowed to dictate both export and domestic pricing frameworks, the idea of a competitive and fair market becomes a farce.
This is not just about sugar. It is about a governance structure that lacks foresight, discipline, and most importantly, integrity. Time and again, governments in Pakistan — irrespective of their political stripe — have demonstrated a tendency to cave in to the pressures of wealthy elites. Whether it is awarding subsidies, delaying regulations, or reversing decisions, the common thread is the systematic sacrifice of public welfare for private gain.
What’s particularly disheartening is the absence of accountability. Despite the repeated manipulation of commodity markets and the billions lost to the exchequer and households alike, very few within the government or industry are ever held responsible. There are no inquiries that lead to meaningful consequences, no policy audits that result in reform, and no political will to challenge the status quo.
The sugar crisis is, therefore, symptomatic of a much deeper malaise — a broken trade and economic policy system driven by short-termism and elite capture. If left unaddressed, this cycle will continue, not just with sugar, but with every essential commodity that enters the crosshairs of profit-hungry lobbies.
Please, subscribe to the YouTube channel of republicpolicy.com
To break this pattern, systemic reform is imperative. First, there must be legal and institutional safeguards to prevent conflict of interest in policymaking. Politicians and public office holders with direct stakes in industries must be barred from participating in decisions that affect their business interests. Second, transparency mechanisms must be enhanced. All decisions regarding export and import of essential commodities should be subjected to independent review and made public. Third, enforcement agencies like the CCP must be empowered and depoliticised so they can act against cartelisation without fear or favour.
Moreover, Pakistan must develop a coherent, data-driven trade policy that is insulated from political interference. Export approvals must be conditional upon rigorous domestic supply assessments, and any violations of supply projections should trigger automatic reviews. Subsidies and tax incentives for industries like sugar should be made performance-based and tied to consumer welfare indicators, not corporate profits.
Until these measures are adopted, sugar will remain more than just a food item — it will be a symbol of the systemic failures that plague Pakistan’s political economy. The bitter taste it leaves is not just due to its price, but because it represents betrayal: a betrayal of trust, governance, and the promise of equitable development.
Pakistan’s policymakers must decide: will they continue to serve the narrow interests of the few, or will they reform a system that has for too long punished the many? The answer to that question will determine not just the price of sugar — but the moral and economic trajectory of the country.