What's new

The importance of trade with India

Ignited Mind

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
1,772
Reaction score
0
The importance of trade with India

Not many Pakistanis know this, but India is one of Pakistan's most important trading partners. It has been so for many years now, despite wars, terrorist attacks like Mumbai 2008, Kargil, and a host of other diplomatic and military misadventures.

Pakistan's largest single trading partner, for the last three years, has been China, which has replaced the US, both for Pakistan's exports and for non-oil imports, although the European Union, as a bloc, is larger for both non-oil imports and exports. Almost 10 percent of all Pakistan's imports used to come from the US, a figure which has fallen in recent years, with China, by far, now the major non-oil import source for Pakistan.

The US continues to be the destination for approximately 18 to 20 percent of Pakistan's total exports. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE are Pakistan's main source of crude oil - where oil accounts for around 20 percent of total imports. Besides this, the UAE also used to act as a conduit for third-country - mainly Indian - imports in the 1990s when direct trade between India and Pakistan was restricted. Malaysia also continues to be high on the import list, mainly for edible oil. The Middle East is Pakistan's most important trading region because of oil imports, remittances and also since it's the destination for some of Pakistan's exports. China, which has emerged as the largest source for non-oil imports for Pakistan, is followed by Singapore. In terms of exports, after the US, it is Afghanistan, which is Pakistan's second biggest export market, followed by the UAE, China and then the UK.

While the trends in exports and imports mentioned above do not seem particularly striking, what is striking is that India is today Pakistan's eleventh largest trading partner. In terms of imports to Pakistan, India is Pakistan's seventh largest source for imports. This figure is even more interesting since, of the largest exporters to Pakistan, three are oil-exporting countries (Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait) and Malaysia, which exports mainly palm oil to Pakistan. Despite hostilities, wars and diplomatic breakdowns, the difficulties with visas and restricted communication between the two countries, Pakistan imported (based only on official figures, one must emphasise, which are perhaps 60 percent of actual volume) more from India than it did in from France, Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Turkey, Iran or even Thailand. Pakistan imports from India about the same value as it does from Japan. Prior to the 2008 Mumbai attacks, India was Pakistan's fourth largest source for non-oil imports - an amazing state given the political relations between the two countries.

In the last two decades, Pakistan has had a trade surplus with India in only one of these twenty years, importing far more than it exports. However, while many analysts point towards this imbalance of trade between India and Pakistan, the same imbalance exists with other trading partners as well. While Singapore might be Pakistan's second most important source of imports, Pakistan exports less to Singapore than it does to India. Similarly, Pakistan exports more to India than Malaysia and Kuwait combined. Clearly, the India-Pakistan trade imbalance has been on account of structural weaknesses in Pakistan's exporting capabilities and the absence of exportable commodities rather than anything else.

Most of Pakistan's exports to India have been in the 'food and related' category, rather than in raw materials, manufactured goods or intermediate products. India's exports to Pakistan (i.e. Pakistan's imports) have been distributed over the categories 'agricultural and allied products', manufactured goods and chemical and chemical-related products. Both Pakistan and India's imports have been heavily influenced by a single commodity, usually food items, although Pakistan is increasingly importing chemicals and tyre-related products.

Even under the existing curtailed and restrictive trading conditions, it is clear that India plays an important role in Pakistan's trade regime. However, if trade between both countries were to be 'normalised' and barriers and restrictions done away with, India and Pakistan might begin to enjoy the same trade terms as China and India do, which benefit both countries. The benefits of opening up trade with India will have a favourable impact on Pakistani consumers (more choice and lower prices), manufacturers (access to cheaper raw materials and inputs) and even government, since there will be more income from trade and sales taxes, especially once illegal trade is routed through legal channels. Although some specific industries in Pakistan will have to deal with increased competition and will suffer, there is little doubt that there will be considerable net gain on account of opening up trade between India and Pakistan.

One other area which will benefit is employment, especially in the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa belt. Once trade opens up, it will bring in greater employment opportunities in the retail, services and even manufacturing sectors. Over a longer time horizon, if trade is really normalised and investment also increases on account of increased trade, second-round impacts will also result in a multiplier effect on the economy. There seem to be very few, if any, arguments not to open up trade with India. Some specific industries will require some protection in the transition period but they will need to adapt to the idea of opening up trade and will need to diversify and modernise.

While these simple effects of trade will have consumer-enhancing and revenue-enhancing effects, the political economy nature of improved trade will also be positive. If more employment opportunities emerge, if India's consumer goods find a large market in Pakistan and Pakistani goods in India, the benefits and gains from trade will outweigh the benefits of hostilities between the two countries. With Army Inc such a dominant figure in Pakistan's economy, it too should look at increased trade as a means to making greater profits.

Trade might even lead to exchanges and alliances which today seem improbable. India and China have been adversaries for decades and are still involved in numerous border claims and disputes. However, China is today India's largest trading partner and has moved from almost zero trade a decade ago to $65 billion today. India and China continue to sabre rattle yet trade actively. Most importantly, since 2007, India and China, despite numerous differences, have held three joint military exercises. Can we look forward to some between India and Pakistan over the next few years?

The writer is a political economist.

The importance of trade with India - thenews.com.pk
 
For many, Kashmir is more important then Trade.
 
For many, Kashmir is more important then Trade.

India should not use military force in areas like Siachin, or build dams upstreams. These two things encourage hawks in Pakistan that India is not interested in trade, and instead worried more about a glacier.

Tali dono hathon say bajti hai yaar. Takes two to tango.

peace.
 
India should not use military force in areas like Siachin, or build dams upstreams. These two things encourage hawks in Pakistan that India is not interested in trade, and instead worried more about a glacier.

Tali dono hathon say bajti hai yaar. Takes two to tango.

peace.
Mate in similar manner you guy should stop sending your so called non state actors to India.
 
India should not use military force in areas like Siachin, or build dams upstreams. These two things encourage hawks in Pakistan that India is not interested in trade, and instead worried more about a glacier.

Tali dono hathon say bajti hai yaar. Takes two to tango.

peace.

india claims siachen. in fact india also claim gb and P0K. thats why we need soldiers there.
Dams built upsteram does not impact paksitan in anyway.
 
India should not use military force in areas like Siachin, or build dams upstreams. These two things encourage hawks in Pakistan that India is not interested in trade, and instead worried more about a glacier.

Tali dono hathon say bajti hai yaar. Takes two to tango.

peace.

why can't we produce electricity from these rivers.
 
india claims siachen. in fact india also claim gb and P0K. thats why we need soldiers there.
Dams built upsteram does not impact paksitan in anyway.


hence the comment:

--- Tali do haath say bajti hai. It takes two to tango.

Your comment relfects Indian Hawkism and thus contrary to "tradeism".


Hawkish posts like yours do not reflect bilateral respect and the realities of the world today. Thus it is no different than the $stupid statements made by JuD Mullahs on Pakistani side.

Hope you now understand both India and Pak are responsible for this mess.

peace.
 
hence the comment:

--- Tali do haath say bajti hai. It takes two to tango.

Your comment relfects Indian Hawkism and thus contrary to "tradeism".


Hawkish posts like yours do not reflect bilateral respect and the realities of the world today. Thus it is no different than the $stupid statements made by JuD Mullahs on Pakistani side.

Hope you now understand both India and Pak are responsible for this mess.

peace.

i agree do haath tali.....
but pak cannot say take out army from siachen. pak has to go the extra mile to prove that its serious, because they have been doing 2 decades of terror, iw ould like to see peace too. Pak should prove that its seriuos by giving up india;s most wanted and pledging that isi supported terror will not visit india again.
destroy JuD and LeT, send dawood, masood azhar, syed salahuddin, zargar etc. to show its serious.
Siachen is a small thing compared to those.
 
i agree do haath tali.....
......

Thank you.

but pak cannot say take out army from siachen.....

Pakistani hawks do not want Indian army to leave Siachen. They think India has to spend precious money (millions of dollars every month) to keep army there. Indians also help Pakistani hawks by giving them yet another slogan.

Pakistani traders on the other hand want Indian help in cooling things down.


......pak has to go the extra mile to prove that its serious, because they have been doing 2 decades of terror,......

That's yet another hawkish statement.

Traders do not ask for extra mile from the other party.
They instead want to give the extra service to other party.

If Pakistan has 2 decades of Mullah deployment against India
then
India too has 2+ decades of army deployment against Pak

Many Indian hawks are still living in 1960s
and so do majority Pakistani hawks.

And us Pakistani traders are begging both to cool down.

One good sign that Indians must realize "Kashmir militancy is down for many many years" and this has been possible by the trading lobby.

If Indian hawks are truly patriotic, they can bring back their army from Siachin quickly.

And you will seen a very quick depletion of Pakistani hawks.


Peace.
 
We want to start a new era in trade with India: Pakistan

LAHORE: Pakistan on Monday called for a "new era" in economic collaboration with India, as business leaders from the two countries met for a trade conference.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said the population of Pakistan's giant neighbour offered his country's exporters a "billion-plus market", adding normal trade relations were vital to Pakistan achieving its economic potential.

We want to start a new era in trade with India: Pakistan - The Times of India
 
I think most Pakistanis do not want trade with India.........just thinking....:pakistan:
 
Till Kiyani or army are in command in pakistan, there can not be a serious trade between the two countries.
IMO, Nawaz Sharif is the best bet for the peace and trade between the two countries.
 
What exactly do we trade?

i propose a revolutionary trade off, which i think will benefit both the countries.
Let's exchange Populations.

Like we can exchange People. we ll take your Liberal Fascists, Ahmedis, Shias, Hindus, Christians etc., if you take our wanna be wahabbis/salafis/would be mujahids.

Both sides will be happy. you can become Pure Islamic state and declare Khilafat and we ll happy with zero scope of communalism in future.
 
Till Kiyani or army are in command in pakistan, there can not be a serious trade....

You know dear. What you say is "Na no mun tail ho ga, na radha naachay gi" and putting Pakistan into a catch-22 situation.

If Indian army takes uni-lateral attacks, then how do you expect Pak army (doesn't matter if Kiyani is the Chief or someone esle) to sit quietly?

Should Pakistanis state that before we start any trade initiatives, Indian army must fire their Chief, quit doing exercises next to our border, and must vacate Siachin.

Will that be conducive to Indian-Pak trade?

Don't you even realize that Indian with bigger industrial base will benefit a lot more from any trade? (compared to Pakistan)?

It is high time we quit blaming the other party without looking under our own charpoy.


peace.

Peace.
 

Back
Top Bottom