Superpower arrogance

Superpower arrogance


WHETHER it is a member of the ‘axis of evil’ or ‘a major non-Nato ally’, the Bush administration does not seem to miss an opportunity to flaunt its military prowess and the unilateralism that has been its characteristic. With the presidential election only a week away, American forces on Sunday raided a Syrian town and claimed killing eight people, including what a US military spokesman described as “one of the most prominent foreign fighter facilitators”. The raid would remind the world of the Sept 3 attack by American troops in Fata, the first to come in the wake of President Bush’s secret order, signed in July, authorising raids inside Pakistan, the ‘frontline state’ in the war on terror. The Sept 3 raid by American special forces that killed 20 people in Angoor Adda sent shock waves across Pakistan. Since then, even though an incursion by US troops has not taken place, the Pentagon has continued to launch missile attacks on suspected Taliban targets in Pakistan — 18 have been reported since September — with the casualties each time not necessarily being the militants.

Since the Iraqi invasion, American military planes have often violated Syria’s air space, and sometimes US troops have chased militants across the border. But Sunday’s raid by US commandos in four helicopters near the Syrian border city of Qaim is the first incident of its kind and must shock observers of the Middle Eastern scene. With the level of ‘Sunni insurgency’ in Iraq having come down considerably and ‘the flow’ of foreign militants from Syria to Iraq declining by America’s own reckoning, Iraq appears to be gradually returning to normality. Hence why the need for such a raid at a time when the US has almost decided to cut troop levels in Iraq and send more troops to Afghanistan’s killing fields? America has had no qualms about launching attacks on the tribal areas of Pakistan to target Al Qaeda terrorists but without consultation with Pakistan. Since after the first ground attack, the subsequent attacks have been from the air, the casualties have been massive with civilians also being killed.

It is felt that these raids — especially the Syrian one — could be the Republican administration’s last major bid to boost John McCain’s sagging electoral prospects. A renewed demonstration of the Bush administration’s ‘hard line’ to the extent of carrying out a raid on an Arab country is something the strong Zionist lobby would love, more so at a time when Israel is in the midst of a political crisis. As for Al Qaeda, any military campaigns undertaken by the US for destroying its operatives have won popular support for the presidency.

DAWN - Editorial; October 29, 2008

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Leadership not IMF is the issue

By Yousuf Nazar
PAKISTAN’S current economic meltdown is a crisis of competence if judged in light of the recent past. In the context of history, it represents a colossal failure of the establishment’s long-term foreign and economic policies.

Pakistan desperately needs $4-5bn to avoid default on its external obligations. The government is working on the multilateral institutions and the Friends of Pakistan to raise this sum within the next few weeks failing which it will go to the IMF.

The government does not want to borrow from the IMF to keep its hands relatively ‘free’ and avoid the likely political fallout from following the IMF’s prescriptions. Does Pakistan have an option? Unfortunately, no.

The World Bank has not disbursed any aid so far for this fiscal year. Its yearly aid to Pakistan is about $500-600m and is unlikely to come through now, that is, before the IMF puts its seal of approval on Pakistan’s economic plan.

The Friends of Pakistan group includes Saudi Arabia, China and the United States. Saudi Arabia has observed a meaningful silence for several months regarding Pakistan’s request to supply oil on credit. China’s commitment to help with specific projects is welcome but its ambivalence about outright cash loans is understandable given its own policy to channel foreign aid through project assistance. It did provide emergency loans to Pakistan in the past (in Dec 1996 and April 2008) but not to the tune of billions of dollars.

The People’s Party government took charge in April 2008 and put the privatisation programme on hold without making alternative funding arrangements. It did not act upon proposals from global banks to raise money from international markets at a time when market conditions were relatively stable. It kept hoping it would get the Saudi oil facility whilst the oil price shot up and the foreign exchange reserves evaporated. Capital flight ensued as the market confidence sank and business sentiment turned negative.

The government’s team of economic managers and advisers lacked the experience in international financial markets to anticipate or manage what was about to hit the economy. This writer warned on these pages of Dawn (May 30, 2008): “If the economy continues its present slide, even the US may not be able to bail Pakistan out. Its own once mighty financial giants are being rescued by Chinese and Arab investors. Pakistan’s last resort would be the IMF with its usual conditionalities and the inevitable pain they would cause. For Pakistan, the most sensible course would be to put its house in order now”. But the government devoted almost its entire attention to the judges issue and power politics as the country headed towards its worst financial crisis in a decade.

The government continued Musharraf’s Washington-centric foreign policy. Yet, in the hour of its greatest need, the US not only ditched Pakistan but a third-ranking state department official publicly humiliated its ‘friend’ by saying that the Friends of Pakistan “wouldn’t throw money on the table”. This wasn’t surprising given Condoleezza Rice’s more subtle remarks earlier on Sept 26: “We are very engaged with Pakistan, through the international financial institutions, to help Pakistan as it takes the difficult decisions that it is and must take on economic reform.” Translated: Pakistan should go to the IMF and reform its economy.While the US pressure on Pakistan to go the IMF has political undertones, it is also true that Pakistani rulers’ historic tendency to indulge in profligate spending and corruption has left them with few sympathisers despite the much trumpeted ‘geostrategic’ importance of Pakistan.

The US has historically directed most of its ‘aid’ to make Pakistan fight its wars. The aid has been primarily used for military purposes (e.g. Pakistan’s arms purchase orders in 2006 alone totalled $5.1bn) but the indirect cost of the conflicts since 1980 has been catastrophic, although some people continue to believe in the ‘benefits’ of such ‘aid’.

The ‘aid syndrome’ stymied any serious effort to reform the economy. Infrastructure investments and tax reforms were neglected because the so-called austerity programmes advocated by the multilaterals hit subsidies but not the pockets of vested interests. Oil and food subsidies played a major role in Asia and the European Union respectively in keeping the prices low because the governments had fiscal space, of which Pakistan never had much. Cutting fat in defence and establishment expenditures and taxing the rich were not high on the multilaterals’ reform agenda as the focus was usually on indirect taxes (e.g. sales tax) that inevitably hit the lower-income groups.

But what is the point in complaining about the US’s ‘real agenda’ or the IMF’s ‘conditionalities’ when the country’s leaders are unwilling to tighten their belts and undertake necessary reforms and are known to own assets worth hundreds of millions of dollars abroad? Confidence and credibility are important issues and cannot be wished away.

Today, there is hardly a major country in Asia or the Middle East that owes any debt to the IMF except Turkey and Pakistan. Turkey is the largest borrower of the IMF and accounts for about 40 per cent of its $18.3bn total lending worldwide. Pakistan owes about $1.3bn.

Turkey went to the IMF in 2001 and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) came to power in 2002. During the last six years, Turkey’s inflation fell to single digits (though it has risen again due to higher energy and food prices) and foreign direct investment (FDI) rose, helping it to repay almost two-thirds of its loans from the IMF. Turkey still has issues (e.g. a persistent current account deficit) but AK’s economic record is one reason why it easily won the July 2007 elections.

India was nearly bankrupt in 1991 when a balance of payments crisis forced the country to pledge its gold by actually shipping 20 tonnes of it abroad. It was left with no choice but to approach the IMF. Its then finance minister Manmohan Singh recalled later: “There was a silver lining though. India launched the most sweeping economic reforms that year dismantling decades of licence raj, and didn’t ever look back although progress was fitful in the first few years.”

Pakistan can learn from the experiences of India and Turkey. They had serious problems, although their nature differed. However, their leaderships demonstrated sincerity and political acumen to undertake difficult reforms to enable their economies to recover. The reform process was led and executed by people who were highly respected for their integrity and competence. In Pakistan’s case, the real problem is not the IMF; it has been and continues to be the country’s leadership.

DAWN - Opinion; October 29, 2008

Blogged with the Flock Browser

HEC Affair

THE international scientific community is dismayed at the unfair criticism in some newspapers against the chairman of the Higher Education Commission, Prof (Dr) Attaur Rahman, for spending billions of rupees without any visible impact on quality and performance of universities and their graduates.

Those who have closely watched the development of higher education in Pakistan from outside and have been involved in the numerous programmes established by Prof Rahman in the past eight years can testify to the contrary:

the progress made was breath-taking and has put Pakistan ahead of comparable countries in numerous aspects.

To name just a few, the establishment of a free access to scientific literature by high-speed Internet for all universities, the thousands of promising young scientists who were granted PhD studies at top universities abroad, the upgrade of research equipment accessible across the country and the programme of establishing new universities of science and technology, including technology parks attracting foreign investors, prove the efficiency and the long-term benefits for the country enabled by the HEC’s chairman.

His efforts have made Pakistan a respected partner for cooperation for many countries leading in research and development, and it has to be feared that without Prof Rahman this status will be lost.

The United Nations Commission on Science and Technology has closely monitored the development in Pakistan in the past years, coming to the unanimous conclusion that Prof Rahman’s policy and programme is a ‘best-practice’ example for developing countries aiming at building their human resources and establishing an innovative, technology-based economy.

Moreover, to poorly qualify the graduates of Pakistan universities is another unjustified blame: almost all of the thousands of young Pakistani university staff sent for doctorate studies to Europe’s and Asia’s top universities in the past five years have performed well at these foreign institutions, thus causing their academic supervisors to ask for further supply of PhD candidates from Pakistan.

Those who have completed their PhD and returned to Pakistan to share their knowledge with students at their home institutions are keeping close contacts to their former supervisors, creating valuable international research networks.

The impact of this programme, installed by Prof Rahman, will only be seen after some more years, and is expected to bring progress to the country, not only in terms of science and technology, but also in terms of economy. DR BERND MICHAEL RODE Chairman/European Coordinator of ASEA-UNINET

You can find this article at: 'Higher Education Commission affair'Dawn ePaper - Digital replica of Print Edition.

the international scientific com- munity is dismayed at the unfair criti- cism in some newspapers against the chairman of the higher education commission, prof (dr) attaur rahman, for spending billions of rupees without any visible impact on quality and per- formance of universities and their graduates. those who have closely watched the development of higher education in pakistan from outside and have been involved in the numerous programmes established by prof rahman in the past eight years can testify to the contrary: the progress made was breath-taking and has put pakistan ahead of compa- rable countries in numerous aspects. to name just a few, the establish- ment of a free access to scientific liter- ature by high-speed internet for all uni- versities, the thousands of promising young scientists who were granted phd studies at top universities abroad, the upgrade of research equipment acces- sible across the country and the pro- gramme of establishing new universi- ties of science and technology, includ- ing technology parks attracting foreign investors, prove the efficiency and the long-term benefits for the country ena- bled by the hec’s chairman. his efforts have made pakistan a re- spected partner for cooperation for many countries leading in research and development, and it has to be feared that without prof rahman this status will be lost. the united nations commission on science and technology has closely monitored the development in pakistan in the past years, coming to the unanimous conclusion that prof rahman’s policy and programme is a ‘best-practice’ example for developing countries aiming at building their hu- man resources and establishing an in- novative, technology-based economy. moreover, to poorly qualify the grad- uates of pakistan universities is anoth- er unjustified blame: almost all of the thousands of young pakistani universi- ty staff sent for doctorate studies to europe’s and asia’s top universities in the past five years have performed well at these foreign institutions, thus causing their academic supervisors to ask for further supply of phd candi- dates from pakistan. those who have completed their phd and returned to pakistan to share their knowledge with students at their home institutions are keeping close contacts to their former supervisors, creating valuable international re- search networks. the impact of this programme, in- stalled by prof rahman, will only be seen after some more years, and is ex- pected to bring progress to the country, not only in terms of science and tech- nology, but also in terms of economy. dr bernd michael rode chairman/european coordinator of asea-uninet

TOP

Prefering dunya over Fighting in Allah's Cause

9. Surah At-Taubah [The Repentance]

24. Say: If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your kindred, the wealth that you have gained, the commerce in which you fear a decline, and the dwellings in which you delight ... are dearer to you than Allâh and His Messenger, and striving hard and fighting in His Cause , then wait until Allâh brings about His Decision (torment). And Allâh guides not the people who are Al-Fâsiqûn (the rebellious, disobedient to Allâh).

Blogged with the Flock Browser