Across the border in India, the situation unfolded in a markedly different manner. Even as global crude oil prices surged beyond $120 per barrel due to disruptions linked to the Strait of Hormuz and the wider West Asian conflict, petrol and diesel prices across major Indian cities remained largely stable. This contrast became more striking when compared with the sharp volatility seen in Pakistan, where fuel costs rose rapidly under similar global conditions.
The divergence was highlighted by Robert Kiyosaki, who pointed to inconsistencies in statements made by Pakistan’s Petroleum Minister Ali Pervaiz Malik. While the minister had earlier assured that fuel supplies in Pakistan were secure and stable, he later acknowledged that the country lacked even a single day’s worth of strategic petroleum reserves. This contradiction drew attention to the gap between official messaging and underlying realities in Pakistan’s energy preparedness.
Following the disruption of key oil routes, Pakistan experienced a sharp spike in fuel prices. Petrol costs rose significantly within a short span, while diesel prices saw an even steeper increase, leading to public unrest, economic strain, and concerns over supply chain disruptions. The rapid escalation in prices triggered protests and intensified criticism from opposition groups, who described the situation as a serious national challenge.
In contrast, India’s relative price stability was attributed to a combination of structural and policy factors. According to Kiyosaki, India has built up strategic petroleum reserves that can be deployed during emergencies, providing a buffer against sudden supply shocks. In addition, the country has diversified its crude oil sourcing by increasing imports from multiple suppliers, including Russia and Venezuela, thereby reducing dependence on any single route or region.
India’s status as a major refining hub also allowed it to absorb part of the global price shock internally, while policy measures such as adjusting export duties helped prioritise domestic supply. These combined strategies contributed to maintaining price stability despite external pressures that affected global energy markets.
By contrast, Pakistan’s heavy reliance on imported oil, limited foreign exchange reserves, and absence of significant strategic storage left it more exposed to disruptions. The government’s subsequent move to establish a task force to explore building strategic reserves reflects a recognition of these vulnerabilities, though such measures are still at an early stage.
Overall, the contrasting experiences of the two countries illustrate how differences in energy infrastructure, policy planning, and supply diversification can shape the impact of global shocks. While the international crisis created pressure for both nations, it also exposed underlying structural disparities in their ability to manage sudden disruptions in oil supply and pricing.
