Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

^^ a PMA diploma surely cant make economist as they are there for warfare training. they certainly become skilled in their field. thats why they run the show using experts not themselves. I am not supporting them to be in government. if you compare, both Mushy and Zia while they have messed up things. economy and rupee stayed stable in both era. zia kept dollor under 22 rupees consistantly and mushy managed to keep it around 60 for many years.

given the generation of politicians how do they qualify to run office, surely most of them are thug graduates, as our intelligentsia stay away from politics.

we dont have real politicians just bunch of thugs that includes all parties baring few people who get sidelined when a party won the elections.

on the topic KSA will only help if US hasnt got any reservations and they are happy with the current govt in Pakistan. in current scenario its not true in both cases. hence they getting such responses from even friendly countries.

Pakistan should try to live within its own means. promote trade and cut down extra spending. a weaker Pak economy with positive outlook will attact people to invest without needing to get back to IMF, which we got rid in 2004 and was on way up.

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

the real quetsion is why does the economy under military rulers go south so quickly towards the end of their terms.

The answer is blindingly obvious the supposed boom was driven by poor fundamentals, and it was artifical created through outside help..wasted opportunities as always. The saudis and others are being cautious because they are scared their own economies will go belly up because of the drop in demand for oil what with the American recession .

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

Both UMREEKA and SA are NAAAZRAZ from AZ and NS coz they promised NOT TO TOPPLE Mush, but they did. I think they TOPPLED him without consulting with SA and UMREEKA and they are paying back ...

u can agree or disagree but thats my take on this :)

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

I think everyone on earth knows that handing out money to current Pakistani government is like handing out money to a monkey.. cannot expect a return. IMF loans on the other hand can externally manipulate local economy.

Our new democratically elected government is not serious about developing the country. Months have gone by and still no solid policy, reforms, or even plans, apart from begging others. One just cannot expect anything good rising out of their term in office.

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

2 things.

Firstly, the Saudis are not obligated to help. If they do, its a good thing, but we should expect it.

Secondly, this is the most incompetent leadership ever. I am alarmed that Pakistan's populace returned these apes to office in elections.

Pakistan needs to seriously work on internal development. We have had wrong priorities since the mid 70's. Military, war, jihad. We should minimize all expenditure that is not (1) related to human development and (2) not an obligatory overhead.

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

^ I agree with LBG above on the first point.

No country or government in the world is dutybound to help Pakistan. Everyone follows their self-interests, and Pakistan poses a serious default risk right now.

Second, regardless of how incompetent Zardari & Co are (and they are, make no mistake), its impossible to run a country to ground and be on brink of bankruptcy in just 6 months. What this tells me is that all the claims of unprecedented economic growth under Mushy unkil were just a load of bull and the house of cards has come crumbling down in short order. Ishaq Dar was on to something when he warned of impending financial doom on taking over as Minister (for a short period), when everyone else criticized him for spreading needless fear.

Not to mention, of course, that overall global economic crisis and erratic upsurge in price of oil may all have contributed to hasten the collapse.

Please list the variables of Musharraf's era that lead to the current economic disorder.

Also explain to me how the previous government rid itself of IMF's slave-like programs (in 2004), and why you term that as a load of bull?

The house of cards has come crumbling down, not because of the previous government, but because of incompetent policies of the current government, their will to do develop the country, and lack of financial knowledge. Why have they allowed a price floor to be imposed at the KSE? Why did SBP raise interest rates when banks seeked liquidity relief? Why is the bailout package being acquired from external agencies which can manipulate local economies?
You can't blame these decisions on the previous government. It is an act of stupidity.

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

^large budget deficits, large trade imbalances, a focus on service sector while ignoring power and education..are just a few of the points ..the following writer no relation to Faisal says much the same

Macro blues
By DR FAISAL BARI October 19, 2008
Macroeconomic issues have, in a relatively short period, become quite binding for the economy: to the extent that today people are talking about Pakistan defaulting on its international obligations, its banking system becoming unstable, while there have been mini runs on some of the banks and people have tried to move out of Pakistani rupee and into dollars, at the same time trying to get the dollars out of lockers and money out of the banking system at large. The stock market continues to be in doldrums. So, the entire situation looks pretty bleak, unstable and quite unpredictable.

It is interesting to note that it was only a year or less ago that the last government had been celebrating the many years of high growth that had been achieved in Pakistan. They had been declaring that Pakistan’s foreign debt, as a percentage of GDP, had come down substantially, local demand and production and hence growth were healthy and due to significant inflows, Pakistan was, according to them, doing quite well. More than that, they also claimed that since our ‘fundamentals’ had become much more sound and since the economic growth had become more robust, Pakistan was on a sustainable growth path and was on the verge of ‘takeoff’ and so on.

Clearly the speed with which the entire growth structure has unravelled and the way Pakistani economy has been brought on to its knees gives a lie to the claim that the growth was robust and the fundamentals were sound. But of course, there had been growth in those years. So, why did the growth not become robust and why did the fundamentals not get better? These actually might be the key questions for researchers to answer if they want to address the issue of sustainability of growth in Pakistan.

The answers to these questions will, most likely, come from a variety of areas. Though there had been growth it was not broad based, it was not based on sectors (agriculture, livestock, textile) where we seem to have lots of potential and lots of competitive advantages, it was based on high domestic consumer demand and with a hefty component for imported consumer items, it was not export led, and it did not have a high employment elasticity. Furthermore, though the growth was accompanied by significant foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows, they were mostly restricted to consumer related industries and for catering to domestic demand rather than for creating exports from Pakistan.

Another main failing of the last government occurred in a different area: at the time when the government had fiscal space due to increased remittance flows, FDI as well as increased foreign aid flows, while our loans had been rescheduled to give us more breathing space, the government failed to address the issue of institutional reforms almost completely. Banking was probably the only sector that had some serious reforms implemented. But other sectors and areas, equally important if not more so, were more or less ignored. There were no reforms, to speak of, in areas like judiciary, property rights regime, contract enforcement, police, regulatory environment, government administration and so on. And where reforms were introduced, like in local government, they were not sufficiently entrenched in the larger set-up to allow for smoother functioning

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

brain storming
could be that US does not wish to see a stabilized pakistan at this instanct and could be that they've made it pretty plain to saudis and could be that saudis are covering their hide rather than our own. after all we can hardly blame them we sold out on afghanistan like any thing even though we were one of the three nations that had accpeted taliban rule.

Zakk bro! These are good points. It only proves that blaming all the ills on one government while excusing the other is not a good idea.

However the issue of "ignoring" power and education should not be thrown around lightly.

Here are some questions for you.

  1. Power sector: Poewr in Pakistan comes from Hydel, thermal, and nuclear. Our needs are to have installed capacity of at least 15,000 MW. What do you think was a realistic breakdown of this need among Hydel, thermal, and nuclear? i.e. how many MW do you think should have come from Hydel, vs. thermal vs. nuclear?

  2. Education sector: What do you think should have been allocation of funds to higher education, vs. middle and primary levels of education. Which province and which region of that province should have been given more funds than the others.

Remember we have been in trouble because we just make blanket statements without much analysis. That's why the real practical solutions are hard to come by.

Good Points!

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

Pakistan should try to stand on its own feet...we do have talents...fertile land...some industrial/social infrastructure...some hidden resources like black economy which is the equivalent of our registered economy...every individual owning some 10 gr of gold...a stuck up capital...calculate it now... :D

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

Some very good points here especially about expansion in consumer related services and them comprising the majority of the economic growth. The term economic growth is such an illusion because there are so many things that contribute to it and its easy to fool people by showing the final numbers. Can someone post the figures related economic growth related to different sectors during Musharrafs rule? And what what service or sector has the major contribution to the economic growth.

One question looms though, where are those contributing factors now. Did someone put a check on them in the new government.

Pakistan should move some Nuclear Weapons/Missiles to KSA and in return KSA help Pakistan with economy so we don't have to depend on IMF.

The whole structure of growth was based on real state & cheap credit driven market. Nothing else. Musharraf did not added any industries & if anything, things got worse under his rule. There is loadshedding for up 18 hours per days. Also, maybe you haven't noticed yet, but whole world is in financial turmoil.

BTW, do explain what did Mushrraf do in his 8 years in power? Nothing, Noda, Zilch! Also, where are uncle Sam's billions of $$$ that he got? I suspect they might be in his Swiss account.

Re: Why Saudi Government is NOT supporting civilian government in Pakistan?

Additionally under the Musharraf regime no work was undertaken on lowering transport cost - the number one cost in making our exports cheaper. Frankly under Musharraf regime there was no infrastructure development which is the backbone of any economic development. Land trade still accounts for 60% of world wide trade.

Secondly the industrial sector was heavily taxed during Musharraf's regime. While we should be lowering the tax burden on our infant industries we were signing away bindings at the WTO on the automobile sector and opening up other sectors were we could be competitive if we give our local industries some help.

The economic backbone of the growth of the last 8 years was based on the agriculture sector. Any O Level economic student can tell you that, this is the stupidest method by which to develop. The Industrial sector provides by far the most job opportunities for unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled labour. India is a prime example of the proper industrial policy. While our economists emphasize agriculture, they spent time on their industrial and services sector.

Our economy is a mess because Musharraf had no clue about economics and those who did well, they were making money.