Islam & America: Through the Eyes of Imran Khan - Pakistan

PTI holds post-budget press briefing- Asad Umar, Jahangir Tareen point out dire fiscal crises

PTI holds post-budget press briefing- Asad Umar, Jahangir Tareen point out dire fiscal crises

PTI Press Release – Post Budget Briefing PTI Spokesperson has termed the annual budget exercise meaningless on the basis of the performance statistics released by the Government yesterday. The government has presented a budget each year and then proceeded to completely ignore it and end the year with no semblance to the original budget presented.  Starting the year with a budget that set a target of 4.7% of GDP as the fiscal deficit, by its own admission will end the year with a budget deficit of almost 7% (including circular debt) and which in reality will probably end up close to 8%. This massive deficit is not only devouring almost all available bank debt but is also resulting in heavy monetization of the deficit through recourse to huge borrowing from the state bank of Pakistan. These actions are directly leading to the misery of the citizens and businesses of the country. The heavy fiscal deficits and their monetization on the one hand are stoking inflation making life difficult for the citizens of the country, particularly the poor and vulnerable. On the other hand by crowding out the private sector borrowing and with the increasing energy crises starving industry and business of gas and electricity, investment has collapsed to its lowest level in the last fifty years of the country. This means that the economic growth seen by the country in the last four years, which is the lowest in the last fifty years for any four year period, is set to continue at an anemic level for the next few years unless fundamental reform decisions are taken. The budget presented by the government does not address any of the fundamental structural problems being faced by the country. There is nothing substantive in it which deals with the high rate of inflation, the increasing unemployment, the low savings and investment rates, the inadequate and unfair revenue base, the massive losses in the public sector enterprises, the huge unproductive expenditure of the government, the low investment in the welfare of the citizens of the country or making Pakistan more competitive globally to spur exports. It is also like the previous years a budget which is dead on arrival and grossly wrong in estimating the fiscal deficit. For example the 250 billion rupees, and growing, of overdue payables to the IPP’s are not accounted for anywhere in the budget. We are likely to end next year with another deficit exceeding 8% of the GDP and the economy sunk further in a debt trap. The budget reflects the same lack of vision and political will that has characterized the last four years and which in this period has left Pakistan behind almost all other developing economies in the pursuit of development and welfare of its citizens. Facts highlighted in the briefing are presented below: Economic performance of the current government Per capita debt doubled – reaching Rs.70,000 (per person) in the last 5 years Inflation (CPI) reached a high of 21% in FY 2009 GDP growth declined to 3.7% in FY 2012 Private investment declined to 7.9% of GDP in FY 2012 (from a high of 15.7% in FY 2006) Inflation and GDP growth moving in opposite directions – leading to stagflation Pakistan’s economy performing worse than Sub-Saharan Africa (known as the poorest region in the world) Budget 2012-13 fails to provide solutions to revamp the economy In FY 2012, the current expenditure to be increased to Rs.2.5 Billion and development expenditure to be reduced to Rs. 397 Million Approximately 64% of net revenues to be paid as interest payments in FY 2012 Fiscal deficit as a percentage of GDP to be increased from 6% in FY 2011 to 8.4% in FY 2012 This fiscal deficit to be financed mainly through bank borrowing worth Rs. 1 Trillion (leading to crowding out of private sector) and printing money worth Rs. 500 Billion (leading to further inflation) PTI estimate in comparison to Budget 2012-13 Non-tax revenue is budgeted to be Rs. 658 Billion in FY 2012 - PTI estimate Rs. 450 Billion Current expenditure budgeted to be Rs.2072 Billion in FY 2012 – PTI estimate Rs.2758 Billion Subsidies budgeted at Rs. 166 Billion – PTI estimate Rs. 325 Billion Consolidated fiscal deficit budgeted at Rs. 851 Billion in FY 2012 – PTI estimate Rs. 1,740 Billion Meaningless Budget exercise as the Government continues to miss targets by a wide margin The cumulative deficit of the Government in the last 4 years has been 61% greater than what was budgeted This despite the fact that in the last 4 years Government reduced its development expenditure by PKR 450 Billion v/s what was originally budgeted

Afridi leads Pakistan to series leveler victory

Afridi leads Pakistan to series leveler victory


Shahid Khan Afridi... The Greatest Khan

Pakistan Zindabad

Proud Hafeez Captian Pakistan

Brotherhood

Jubilent Pakistan

Jubilent Pakistan Team

Same Roared

Afridi Surprised with Happiness

Pakistan Zindabad

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid

Proud Pakistan - Proud Shahid Khan Afrid
  Uploaded by Fida Bhittani

Bad economy: not my fault

Bad economy: not my fault

The writer, a former chief economist of the Planning Commission, is at present based at Cambridge in the UK pervez.tahir@tribune.com.pk

Anticipating the destabilising tactics of the Opposition at the budget session of parliament, Finance Minister Hafeez Shaikh attempted to make the best of his opening remarks at the launch of the PakistanEconomic Survey 2011-12 on May 31. As for the ‘Ladies and Gentlemen of the press’, they were less noisy than last year, when they had to fight over the limited copies of the document.

The minister began with an assurance of a plentiful supply. This was all there was plenty of, given a low GDP growth of 3.7 per cent, a full percentage point of which resulted from twisting the arms of the ‘autonomous’ Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. It would have been higher, he lamented, had last year’s growth not been revised upwards to three per cent. Agricultural growth would be higher, had there been no floods. But for the misbehaving oil prices and energy demand, industrial growth would have brought overall growth into the desired range of 5-6 per cent. Had there been no National Finance Commission award, the federal government would have had enough resources to augment energy supply and keep it affordable. And if only the government departments were not stealing electricity and paid their bills!

Inflation, the minister said triumphantly, was on the decline: tight monetary policy and a 10 per cent reduction in civilian government expenditure had done it. The fact is that the non-debt and non-military current expenditure of the federal government is the smallest part of the pie. Government borrowing was twice the size compared to the previous year and the State Bank of Pakistan has been on the path of monetary easing. At 11.1 per cent, food inflation is higher than non-food inflation. A 25 per cent increase in tax collection was attributed to the great efforts made by the Federal Board of Revenue. Double-digit inflation, high prices of oil and the depreciation of the rupee to the extent of 3.2 per cent made no mean contribution to it. At any rate, the tax-to-GDP ratio remains stagnant. The minister blames it on the rich and the powerful refusing to pay their share of the tax.

He is no more talking about reforming the failing collectors or expanding the tax net.

It was amusing to see the re-elected senator, Minister Sheikh, maintain that the economy is a source of worry to all; and that this is not a political issue. He seems to have understood that political power will never be deployed to implement economic reform. The word ‘reform’ was uttered not even once. The new growth strategy of the Planning Commission downplays the role of investment and capital accumulation in achieving high growth. Its emphasis is on what it calls the ‘software’ of economic growth — issues of economic governance, institutions, incentives and human resources.

By giving up on reform, the finance minister has served a deathblow to the Planning Commission’s software of growth. On the other hand, the Commission has achieved the objective of dethroning investment. Fixed investment has made a negative contribution to growth since 2008-09. Not only is GDP growth low, its composition is worrisome too. In the overall growth of 3.7 per cent, 2.2 percentage points is contributed by the services sector. Within the services sector, the fastest-growing subsectors are finance, insurance and social and community services. In other words, growth is being driven by consumption. Investment is dead.

Long live the Planning Commission.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 3^rd, 2012

Think before we speak

Think before we speak

The writer works for Express News and is host of “To The Point”

Politics remains at the forefront in Pakistan — and at times for a huge price. Even issues related to the economy, national security and foreign policy, which should be kept above all politics, end up being politicised. The recent rift in Pakistan-US relations is another example of how politics is practised in Pakistan on issues related to national security and foreign policy.

In the aftermath of the Salala incident, most political parties found it convenient to get political mileage through making tall claims against the US. America was presented as a country whose defence capabilities in Afghanistan were solely dependent on Pakistan and it was argued that it would taste defeat if Pakistan did not restore the Nato supplies route. The government was caught between the options of infuriating the US and enraging its own public. However, it played it smart by handing the task of deciding how Pakistan should pursue its relations with the US to parliament. Yes, the same parliament that has not been able to conduct a single fruitful debate on national security in the last four years and which saw great sloganeering on national sovereignty after the Abbottabad raid but no policy framework that could act as a guideline for the future.

After the Salala incident, there had been reports that the US was ready to offer an apology in a meeting between Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and the US Foreign Secretary Hillary Clinton, but the latter was told to hold the apology until parliament submitted its recommendations.

However, the parliamentary recommendations turned out to becompletely unrealistic. They could not even address the basic question of whether the US and Pakistan have similar or conflicting objectives in the region. There was no mention of the limits of the cooperation that Pakistan could extend to the US so that it would result in positive outcomes for Pakistan while, at the same time, not putting it at odds with the rest of the world. A joint session of parliament was summoned for the sake of giving a new direction to foreign policy, but most of its sittings were taken up by domestic issues. It seemed that either parliament was not interested in dealing with national security and foreign policy issues or that these were beyond its comprehension.

We saw Pakistan boycotting the Bonn Conference and delaying the decision on the Nato supplies resumption. As US President Barack Obama signed a strategic agreement with Afghan president Hamid Karzai, Pakistan became the centre of criticism in the US Congress, with Ms Clinton also criticising it on the Hafiz Saeed issue and that too in India. So, what started as the US being upset with Pakistan, ended with much of the Western world being upset with Pakistan. We were gradually being pushed to a corner of isolation. The government that had made tall claims while boycotting the Bonn Conference was suddenly desperate for an invitation to the Chicago Summit.

Today, the US is not willing to apologise for the Salala incident, nor is it willing to pay the $5,000 per container for the Nato supplies that we are asking, should the route be restored. As reported, the US was willing to apologise a few months back, but now Pakistan is not only going to re-open the Nato supplies without receiving an apology, it is also going to look apologetic itself. As long as national security and foreign policy issues continue to be politicised, we will keep on witnessing embarrassing situations like this one. Maybe we need to learn to think before we speak.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 3^rd, 2012.

What did Husain Haqqani write?

What did Husain Haqqani write?

The writer is Director South Asian Media School, Lahore khaled.ahmed@tribune.com.pk

The army is offended with Husain Haqqani because he allegedly plotted against its leadership, while he was Pakistan’s ambassador in Washington. Some people thought that he even inserted the punitive anti-army conditionalities in the Kerry-Lugar Bill of 2009.

Did the Americans copy these caveats from Husain Haqqani’s bookPakistan: Between Mosque and Military (Carnegie Endowment 2005)? What did Haqqani write that was so offensive to the army? He is facing a trial for treason, which is likely to attract the death penalty. And the judges are surprisingly hostile to him because the judiciary, by accepting the case, might be conflating Pakistani nationalism with loyalty to Pakistan Army. It is not to blame; the Constitution itself does so.

The book highlights the pattern of army and Religious Organisations working in tandem. It also traces another doctrine — that of “strategic depth”, which came to grief with 9/11 — to early formulations of strategy. Because Pakistan did not have geographical depth when militarily confronted by a 1,000-mile deep India, the army posited “fusion of the defence of Afghanistan and Pakistan”.

Haqqani traces it, not to the timeline of Pakistan Army’s decision to support the Taliban, but to Aslam Siddiqi’s 1960 book Pakistan Seeks Security. Siddiqi leans on Sir William Kerr Fraser-Tytler’s suggestion that the two states be fused into one. Siddiqi’s typically military addendum to the theory was that since it cannot be done by force (“fusion will lead to confusion”), Islamic ideology may be put to use. I am sure that today, Siddiqi will admit that it is the ‘fusion’ of Talibanisation with Pakistan that has led to more ‘confusion’.

Haqqani says that the army’s cohabitation with the mosque came through the intermediation of Nawaz Sharif. Pressured by the ISI and Qazi Hussain Ahmad, Nawaz Sharif toed the line on Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. An actual attempt at an overthrow was led by a major general who was “allegedly” patronised by the ex-ISI chief General Javed Nasir of the Tablighi Jamaat. A “weak” army chief was also to be targeted by the coup-plotters together with Benazir Bhutto and her government.

Haqqani reveals that the heavily bearded ISI chief, Javed Nasir, authorised the 1993 attack — through the Indian underworld figure Daud Ibrahim — on the Bombay Stock Exchange, which killed 250 people as revenge for the destruction of the Babri Mosque by Hindu fanatics. Javed Nasir’s list of “enemies of Islam” at the ISI included “the United States, Hindu leadership of India and the Zionists”. The covert Kashmir policy swung out of control under Benazir in 1993 as Mast Gul, a Jamaat-e-Islami hero of Charar Sharif, was lionised by the ISI against her wishes!

In 1998, Nawaz Sharif was compelled to mend fences with the Lashkar-e-Taiba in Muridke, near Lahore, when the governor of Punjab and the federal information minister called on its leader and praised him and his terrorist forays into India.

Haqqani also mentions the October 2001 attack by the Jaish-e-Muhammad on the Kashmir assembly in Srinagar. Then in December the same year, the Lashkar-e-Taiba attacked the Indian parliament, bringing the Indian Army eyeball-to-eyeball with the Pakistan Army on the borders. General (retd) Pervez Musharraf arrested Hafiz Saeedbut let him go after keeping him in safe custody for some time.

There is reference to Fazlur Rehman Khaleel of the Harkatul Mujahideen. Khaleel was the logistics man for Osama bin Laden and had co-signed the 1998 fatwa of death against the Americans with OBL. He has a ‘safe house’ in Islamabad.

What came first, the army-sponsored India policy or army-sponsored Islamic extremism? Haqqani says it was India-centrism that finally brought Pakistan to Islamic extremism. The myth of India not accepting Pakistan and attacking Pakistan lives on even after the acquisition of nuclear deterrence.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 3^rd, 2012.

Innovations in higher education teaching

Innovations in higher education teaching

The writer is associate professor in the departments of Biomedical Engineering and Medicine at Boston University

Discussion of innovation in higher education in Pakistan has become stale and myopic. It is focused on just a handful of areas, with little emphasis on out-of-the-box thinking. Unfortunately, it has also been limited only to research and development with not even lip service being paid to teaching. Yet, the very definition of education in any form requires an act of transmission of knowledge, usually through an active teaching and learning process. The value of education and educational endeavours in Pakistan has never been particularly high. The discussion on good practices in teaching has unfortunately remained focused on primary, secondary and occasionally post-secondary education. The political rhetoric on improving Pakistan’s capacity in science and technology has lacked a fundamental discussion on improving the quality of teaching at our higher education institutions. This, of course, has a feedback effect. We do not emphasise innovation in teaching in our higher education and as a result, few professors take the time out to learn innovative strategies in conveying their message and creating a sense of wonder, inquiry and pursuit of knowledge among our students.

Recently, I had the opportunity to spend some time with faculty from a reputable Pakistani engineering university. The discussion, first over coffee and then over dinner, turned to curriculum innovation and then teaching. Both the faculty members, despite being involved in teaching at this institution for over half a decade, had no input in setting the curriculum or had even thought about bringing innovative tools to their classrooms. Their target, set by their department head, was to give a certain number of quizzes on certain days, a fixed number of exams and in the end they had to finish all the chapters in the assigned book. There was little or no innovation in teaching, curriculum or pedagogy and little was done in terms of teaching quality assessment. Perhaps, as junior or mid-career faculty, they were still in the learning phase of teaching. Yet, what was problematic was that there was no incentive to be innovative in the delivery of the material in the classroom. Any discussion of innovation in teaching, as I found out, was met with scepticism from senior faculty and department administrators. Out-of-the-box styles were aggressively discouraged. While I can understand the necessity of conforming to certain guidelines, I am baffled and disappointed by active pressures to conform to teaching practices that are neither conducive to learning, nor are they creating innovative scholars.

Unfortunately, the experience of these two colleagues is neither unique nor limited to engineering institutions alone. In the higher education sector, we do not engage in innovative tools of pedagogy. For us, teaching a class is synonymous to finishing the curriculum, irrespective of how many students fully understand and appreciate the teaching and the material. Ongoing evaluations and assessments are rare and students, even in their written comments, are reluctant to criticise poor teaching. I am not advocating unnecessary or unfair criticism of teaching. I am simply arguing that we need to emphasise mechanisms that maximise student learning.

In the absence of a clear policy on teaching innovation, I recommend a four-pronged strategy for improving the quality of teaching at our higher education institutions. The first one being to simply celebrate good teaching through awards and recognition at the department, university, regional and national level. We need to give incentives to teachers to improve their quality and create a sense of wonder, inquiry and pursuit of knowledge in our students. Secondly, we need to give small grants to departments to create tutorials and mechanisms for teachers to learn new approaches, to incorporate best practices and implement innovative strategies in the classroom.

Third, the HEC and other national bodies need to create courses, seminars and national symposia on higher education teaching and teacher training workshops. While there is some activity at the primary and secondary level, little is being done at the higher education level. Finally, universities and departments need to take a serious look at their course evaluation forms and need to tailor them to get maximum amount of data that can give insights into student learning and teaching performance. This, along with other means, should give the departments a sense of the quality of teaching and necessary steps to improve them.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 4^th, 2012.