We received a large number of comments on this blog post. A reader asked "What does Shanta want us to take from this entry?" While I have personal views on the events of the last five days (accentuated by the fact that some personal friends were arrested), my views on the impact of the emergency on poverty reduction are mixed because the evidence is mixed. There is no question that the Pakistan economy grew rapidly during the Musharraf era, thanks to a combination of economic reforms and--as several readers pointed out--large inflows of foreign aid and other foreign exchange inflows. Stroke-of-the-pen reforms can be undertaken by authoritarian or democratic governments. But the deeper institutional reforms required to improve health, education and other basic services in Pakistan cannot be achieved without some form of popular participation. So my answer to MB's question, "Can there really be long-term gains against poverty in an environment in which the voice of the people is ignored?" is unambiguously no.
Several readers found the blog post useful to debate their views both on the current situation as well as on poverty reduction in Pakistan. Finally, a post on another blog compared the facts in my post with Musharraf's November 3rd statement.
Mariam Claeson
Thu, 11/08/2007 - 11:08
Now, the original question by Anon is layered because there is a wider global debate about what is progress and development?
It's true that the contemporary mind has a much different answer to this than the mind in 1950's or in 1980's had. Outdated economic policies and the obsession with symbols of luxury as a measure of "quality of life" are a problem unto themselves, and much of what has led to the dissatisfaction of the Pakistan people.
True, that other reasons are imperfect information (hence citizens aren't making use of the provisions available), poor education leading to lack of enterprise, socio-political and family structure, individual corruption, etc. Also some good decisions take a good deal of time to mature, while there is "temporary suffering." In that case, a clear national communication is needed.
However, the banker-led assembly of Pakistan has to examine the contemporary approaches to a "better life" and re-define its priorities. On the other hand, people of Pakistan have to take charge of their lives, and be responsible. That's the only way out of this vicious cycle of instability.
Thank you, Shanta, for providing this space for discussion. Now I ask you a question:
What can Pakistan learn from India - which has made great strides lately in creating services for the poor - in order to improve the general socio-economic condition? Where, in your opinion, is intervention needed at all, and who can be the active element?
Sat, 11/24/2007 - 09:20 Ramla: Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Since you asked me a question on this last comment, I thought I'd point you to my most recent post on the quality of service delivery in India. The fact is that India has not "made great strides lately in creating services for the poor." The reasons are not that different from other countries in South Asia--political resistance to reforms (by teachers and medical unions, for example) and a flight by the middle and upper classes to the private sector. I look forward to exploring with you and other readers how to solve this all-important problem.
Thu, 11/08/2007 - 10:59
As Pakistani people, we have to come to terms with certain things.
- We are not at par with the world, but still try to play the global hero in every matter we can potentially step in.
- We are trying to be heroic, and also play the victim at the same time. Well, we have to choose. Are we proactive? Or are we inactive? What is to be the strategy in either case?
- There are real threats and problems in the world today: sensitive global economy liable to wild swings, environmental disasters accelerated in the past 5 years, terrorism, migration, disease, etc.
- Direct threats to Pakistan. In this situation, we cannot invite trouble on our institutions from without, but dismantle them quietly from within. To my mind, the only way to do this is to replace the bad with good, with persistence. Also we need to negotiate on specifics with the erring establishment institutions. The stakes are too high for a confrontational approach, so a reconciliation will have to be found.
For instance, if someone has occupied agricultural/ farm land and turned it into a private ranch, then citizens ought not to try to punish them, because they can punish right back. A better approach would be to formulate options of what can be done with that land - such as creating schools and colleges, reverting the land to original use, etc. We have to negotiate, and not try to destroy our critical institutions. What will we do without those institutions?
Thu, 11/08/2007 - 10:54
RE: Anonymous' question:
What does President Musharaff's emergency decree and the reaction to it mean for the prospects for rapid growth?
This question has many layers.
The first thing that the Paksitan people can do is to assume a more emotionally mature mindset. Between action and reaction, there is choice. Choice cannot be demanded, we simply have to exercise it.
The meaning of the goings-on actually still largely rests with the Pakistani people. The fields of education, economy, and community are lying wide open for free intervention - even support by the government. Government itself has made several interventions which will yield results over the next couple of years and beyond. One example that I have got to learn of is saving of foreign exchange by cutting & polishing gems & stones in Pakistan, rather than exporting the raw stone - which was hurting the economy. A university each in Peshawar and Lahore is under way, and I have heard from people in Gilgit that they have sought new markets in China and beyond. Previously, stone mined in Gilgit was being exported to Jaipur (India) among other places for cutting & polishing.
I have also spoken with the very helpful and polite staff of Small & Medium Enterprise Development Authority (SMEDA) who are rather eager to help, but don't find many calls on their plentiful resources. Now, the government can only set up functions and advertise about them, it cannot drag citizens down to make use of the provisions.
Should the state have taken measures such as freezing the foreign currency accounts (a la Nawaz Sharif) could there be a solid argument against the Emergency. Media was free, too free for good sense, actually. The economy was horrific, true, but that's the last thing anyone has protested or cared about. Why? Because that correcting that will require work. Politicking require rhetoric, aggregating opinions, and passing them on.
It's not good to accuse, true, but being a Pakistani I know the kind of people we are and the intentions we have: purely selfish motives. The youth of Pakistan thinks somewhat diffrently and selflessly from the older generations, and therefore we must take our own constructive actions.
Thu, 11/08/2007 - 09:39
The World Bank's Country Assistance Strategy for Pakistan, 2006-2009, says:
"Prospects for rapid growth to be sustained over the next 3 years are good, provided that political and macroeconomic stability are maintained."
What does President Musharaff's emergency decree and the reaction to it mean for the prospects for rapid growth?