Imran Khan: IMF, Elections, Conspiracies, Economy and Hope

[VCheng]

@Ssan

If you take loans to pay back your old loans, the total loans actually increase by the aggregate of the interest bearing on your total debt. FYI.

Thanks. As a person who has worked as a debt analyst for 25 years, I am aware of that! The thing of course is that if you are taking loans to pay interest on loans (as opposed to taking loans to pay off the principal) you are already in a debt trap. The question then is why was Pakiland effectively in a debt trap in the IK era (again I am not blaming IK alone for it).

Ans surely you can see that the rate of growth in debt was highest in 2021.

Regards

Rather than arguing about figures, please consider this:

The house is on fire. The occupants of the house are arguing among themselves who set the house on fire. But no one is doing anything to put out the fire. There can be only one outcome, regardless of who set the house on fire. The house will burn down to the ground.

 

[FuturePAF]

I think you raise some good points.

Taliban will adapt the right attitude once revolutionary fervor burns out. We have seen in China that Chinese policymakers become pragmatic after old guard started to go in the background. I believe we will see something similar in Afghanistan.

Taliban leadership has roots in the society and will work for for the benefit of the country when militarist elements recede into the background. War fighting and running a country require different mindset and skillset. Ultimately, Taliban leadership will realize that it is to the benefit of both countries if they cooperate.

But while I agree with your analysis, Pakistan cannot be explicit in its support for Taliban. Statecraft and diplomacy is not conducted in glare of publicity. Best course for Pak is to run with the hare and hunt with the hound. This is the strategy Pak has used to great effect when Pak participated in Afgan Jehad and after Americans invaded Afghanistan when Pak acted against Al Qaeda while protecting Taliban leadership.

IK however wanted to be a revolutionary leader by trying to conduct in public, what should be private and therefore is paying a price for his foolishness.

I compare the Taliban to the Vietnamese communists at the end of the war with America. When their policies saw rice production drop, they had to accept the reality of allowing more freedom to the individuals to grow the rice and sell it to have their own incentivizes to grow as much as possible, this coupled with the collapse of their Soviet patrons in the early 90s saw a huge shift, and then opening up 15 years after the Americans left.

The Afghans have no foreign patrons, so I suspect their shift to a more pragmatic set of policies is I’ll come once Pakistan gets its act together and makes it worth their while. This is here I see IK can be of most utility to the Pakistani state. Using his cache with the Afghans to speed up the economic corridors and development of the mining sector, which can absorbs excess Afghan labor.

With a stronger Pakistani and Afghan economy, and better integration, we will be able to handle the movement of afghans back and forth across the border, and the Afghans will begrudgingly defacto accept the border of its is packaged as the border between Afghanistan and KPK.

Now that the rulers of Afghanistan are who they are, the Pakistani state just had to say it supports the “Afghan People” but is committed to dealing with threat of terrorism. Pakistan needs a strategy that doesn’t alienate our neighbors nor our international partners. So working with our international partners and the Afghans as an intermediary and integral partner to create corridors to Central Asia can be common cause and help bring the Afghans “in from the cold” (getting them international recognition) in exchange for them upholding the Doha agreement and implementing pragmatic policies towards work and education. This is also why Pakistan needs to get it economy right, so it can fully fund education and set the regional precedent, having all boys and girls in school, such as in KPK, and show it is not in conflict with Pashtun culture.

IK had to be a revolutionary leader because the system needs reform. He is a visionary leader; a big picture guy, but not well suited to day to day execution. That’s what his ministers and beaurocrats are suppose to be for. In political science, there is a role for “visionary” leaders and “maintainers”.

The inefficiencies (unproductive nepotism and corruption) in the system are holding the state back from achieving what a country its size should easily be possible to achieve. Pakistan should be in the economic league of Indonesia by population and proximity to natural resources.

I agree IK said things that should have either been said more diplomatically or not said at all. Everyone knew the score by September 2021, so it was the time to pivot a constructive future for Pakistan and all partners.

So the state needs IK at this junction, and IK needs the state, to achieve it other mutual goal. After one term, IK can oversee a transition to new leader that allows the PTI to outlive him, and the state shifts from a revolutionary leader to a PTI leader that can be a maintained and shrewd economist first.

 

[VCheng]

So the state needs IK at this junction, and IK needs the state, to achieve it other mutual goal. After one term, IK can oversee a transition to new leader that allows the PTI to outlive him, and the state shifts from a revolutionary leader to a PTI leader that can be a maintained and shrewd economist first.

That sounds attractive, but greatly exaggerates the importance of IK, which may not be the reality of the situation.

 

[Burger_King]

I compare the Taliban to the Vietnamese communists at the end of the war with America. When their policies saw rice production drop, they had to accept the reality of allowing more freedom to the individuals to grow the rice and sell it to have their own incentivizes to grow as much as possible, this coupled with the collapse of their Soviet patrons in the early 90s saw a huge shift, and then opening up 15 years after the Americans left.

The Afghans have no foreign patrons, so I suspect their shift to a more pragmatic set of policies is I’ll come once Pakistan gets its act together and makes it worth their while. This is here I see IK can be of most utility to the Pakistani state. Using his cache with the Afghans to speed up the economic corridors and development of the mining sector, which can absorbs excess Afghan labor.

With a stronger Pakistani and Afghan economy, and better integration, we will be able to handle the movement of afghans back and forth across the border, and the Afghans will begrudgingly defacto accept the border of its is packaged as the border between Afghanistan and KPK.

Now that the rulers of Afghanistan are who they are, the Pakistani state just had to say it supports the “Afghan People” but is committed to dealing with threat of terrorism. Pakistan needs a strategy that doesn’t alienate our neighbors nor our international partners. So working with our international partners and the Afghans as an intermediary and integral partner to create corridors to Central Asia can be common cause and help bring the Afghans “in from the cold” (getting them international recognition) in exchange for them upholding the Doha agreement and implementing pragmatic policies towards work and education. This is also why Pakistan needs to get it economy right, so it can fully fund education and set the regional precedent, having all boys and girls in school, such as in KPK, and show it is not in conflict with Pashtun culture.

IK had to be a revolutionary leader because the system needs reform. He is a visionary leader; a big picture guy, but not well suited to day to day execution. That’s what his ministers and beaurocrats are suppose to be for. In political science, there is a role for “visionary” leaders and “maintainers”.

The inefficiencies (unproductive nepotism and corruption) in the system are holding the state back from achieving what a country its size should easily be possible to achieve. Pakistan should be in the economic league of Indonesia by population and proximity to natural resources.

I agree IK said things that should have either been said more diplomatically or not said at all. Everyone knew the score by September 2021, so it was the time to pivot a constructive future for Pakistan and all partners.

So the state needs IK at this junction, and IK needs the state, to achieve it other mutual goal. After one term, IK can oversee a transition to new leader that allows the PTI to outlive him, and the state shifts from a revolutionary leader to a PTI leader that can be a maintained and shrewd economist first.

Once again, some very good points and very insightful comparison between Vietcong and Taliban.

The sad fact is there are no forums in Pak (legislature, press, universities) where you see analysis like you have done on long term policy options for Pak and how to go about achieving them. Instead all we see is ghissa pitta repetition of what happened in the past and how Pakistan is doomed for eternity because of missteps done by Ayub, Zia, Musharraf et al. People seem to think past can be undone and no one maps out a strategy on how to deal with challenges other than letting the country turn into gora/Indian satellite.

I agree with your assessment on IK. I think he did a very good job given the hand he was dealt with and country would have made very good progress had he been allowed to complete his term as well as given a helping hand in winning the next. I honestly thought army was on the same page and developments of the last one year have come as a shock to me. I still cannot get over the fact that army generals can sell the country so cheaply. Last thing enemy wants in Pak is a leader who works for the interest of Pakistanis. It is sad that enemy was aided by army high command in achieving its nefarious aims. .

I also think awam deserves the blame because they so easily swallowed anti-IK propaganda. Leader best suited to handle Pak temperament was Zia. I was a kid when he was ruling and largely despised his tenure. Looking back and going through some his interviews, I recognize that he was smart as hell and treated the enemy in a manner that they deserved. IK on the otoh, was too trusting of "liberal" institutions like press and judiciary and got blindsided by their treachery. Zia would have never let things get to this point.

I am less optimistic on future of Pak in comparison to Afghanistan. At a great cost, Afghanistan got rid of elements which had collaborated with foreign elements namely surkhas and liberals. Country is now at a stage where China, Vietnam and Iran found themselves after they got rid of ghadaars that infested their countries, The next few years proved to be difficult but eventually those countries got on the right track.

Pak power corridors are infested with ghadaars and I am unconvinced that country can progress without purging these people.

 

[Ssan]

Rather than arguing about figures, please consider this:

The house is on fire. The occupants of the house are arguing among themselves who set the house on fire. But no one is doing anything to put out the fire. There can be only one outcome, regardless of who set the house on fire. The house will burn down to the ground.

One cannot set the house in fine order without understanding what the root of the problem is. Because the fire that is burning down the house has its roots ultimately in political economy. And requires people to discuss the problem fairly and impartially, not post fictitious figures.

 

[VCheng]

One cannot set the house in fine order without understanding what the root of the problem is. Because the fire that is burning down the house has its roots ultimately in political economy. And requires people to discuss the problem fairly and impartially, not post fictitious figures.

Discussions are good, but they can wait. Actually putting out the fire is better. At least stop adding fuel to the fire by bickering over matters that do nothing to help the situation. The house turning into a mere heap of ash is not that far away.

 

[Ssan]

Discussions are good, but they can wait. Actually putting out the fire is better. At least stop adding fuel to the fire by bickering over matters that do nothing to help the situation. The house turning into a mere heap of ash is not that far away.

That’s just it. The fire is complex - it cannot be out just by throwing water on it. It requires you to actually understand the problem- which you cannot do if people post fictitious figures on the forum. Blaming PTI of a sin they did not commit will not help you out out the fire.

That’s just it. The fire is complex - it cannot be out just by throwing water on it. It requires you to actually understand the problem- which you cannot do if people post fictitious figures on the forum. Blaming PTI of a sin they did not commit will not help you out out the fire.

Neither will such tropes like everyone is to blame. No, they are not. And this will only make the fire into a conflagration.

 

[VCheng]

That’s just it. The fire is complex - it cannot be out just by throwing water on it. It requires you to actually understand the problem- which you cannot do if people post fictitious figures on the forum. Blaming PTI of a sin they did not commit will not help you out out the fire.


Neither will such tropes like everyone is to blame. No, they are not. And this will only make the fire into a conflagration.

The blame belongs to all of us, including ALL civilian and military rulers. ALL of them. No one is exempt. Pretending otherwise will never work.

 

[Ssan]

The blame belongs to all of us, including ALL civilian and military rulers. ALL of them. No one is exempt. Pretending otherwise will never work.

The blame does not belong with everyone equally. Some are to be blamed much more than others. The root cause is to be blamed on only certain parties. ie last ten months is a disaster to be blamed on two parties in particular.

 

[VCheng]

The blame does not belong with everyone equally. Some are to be blamed much more than others. The root cause is to be blamed on only certain parties. ie last ten months is a disaster to be blamed on two parties in particular.

Yes, the last ten months have been disastrous. Almost criminal in fact. But IK did not help by announcing the unaffordable energy subsidies when he knew he would lose the VoNC (plus many more damaging steps besides). That was as damaging as anything the present lot of criminals has done. IK is equally guilty. And if you want to go further back, they ALL have similar crimes to answer for.

 

[FuturePAF]

That sounds attractive, but greatly exaggerates the importance of IK, which may not be the reality of the situation.

It’s not about IK the man, but IK the idea. People respond to the idea of a selfless leader doing what is best for the national interest.

A deal should be made to allow IK to come back for one term, and hand off the reigns to a new generation he grooms and vets to takeover. If he can get the nation on track and the social spending in place to see out his vision, along with the other parties ditching their dynasties, he can be confident his political mission will have been accomplished, and retire with dignity, becoming an former leader sought for consultation.

Between 2023-2028, institutions can be built to limit the power of all power brokers, and rebuild confidence in our economy, to draw investors, and grow out of this decades old mess. Institutions that stop politicians from making short sighted politically motivated decisions to gin up the public and sway the next election.

Then in 2028, we can have normal elections with all fresh faces and run on the issues, primarily the economy. PTI may win again based on the momentum, but by 2033 the PTI record will speak for itself and a reformed PML and PPP and all other parties will be able to compete on the issues.

 

[VCheng]

A deal should be made to allow IK to come back for one term, and hand off the reigns to a new generation he grooms and vets to takeover.

Do you see the contradiction inherent in that statement?

Who should IK make this deal with? Those he claims had him removed and he has pilloried endlessly since then? Or sell his so-called high moral standards and comes to a traditionally Pakistani muk mukao arrangement with them just like all the other politicians?

If so, then IK the idea - as you said - is no more than another used prophylactic used by them to eff the nation yet another time, not even a punching bag.

The rest of your post, attractive as it may seem, simply falls apart with its false foundation destroyed.

 

[FuturePAF]

Do you see the contradiction inherent in that statement?

Who should IK make this deal with? Those he claims had him removed and he has pilloried endlessly since then? Or sell his so-called high moral standards and comes to a traditionally Pakistani muk mukao arrangement with them just like all the other politicians?

If so, then IK the idea - as you said - is no more than another used prophylactic used by them to eff the nation yet another time, not even a punching bag.

The rest of your post, attractive as it may seem, simply falls apart with its false foundation destroyed.

I don’t believe it is a contradiction. It’s a popularly held belief that if he were allowed to contest elections this year, IK and his party would win an outright majority, possibly a 2/3 majority with the support of allies, especially if he appeals to left leaning voters.

IK rails against Bajwa and the PDM, not the current COAS.

There many vested interests, and unless you advocate a French or communist revolution style purge, finding a way to work with various power brokers (while finding a way to permanently and legally sideline specific others, individuals not parties) is the only pragmatic way forward.

IK himself said he would only come back if he was really allowed to carry out the reforms. So allowing him back wouldn’t be a hollow gesture. Which is why it is being opposed by many quarters in the country. Will it be everything he advocates for, I doubt it, but it will be more than legacy companies and governmental institutional will be comfortable with.

As for handing over power after a term, it is to a new generation of PTI leaders, so the truly national party lives on, and doesn’t fragment with the passing of IK in due time.

Furthermore, the nation has also sunk more than half its history dealing with the Afghan problem. IK is well situated to lead an amicable solution to this problem and expand the national prospects vis a vis the west, GCC, and central Asia. Even Erdogan has reached a reproachment with Biden, so IK is not beyond the pale and toxic for Pak-US relations if he is best suited to facilitate common goals.

If this opportunity to reset relations with the nation vis a vi IK is passed up, considering the polarization in the nation and Pakistan’s international relations, many fear the situation will likely get worse and the opportunities squandered.

 

[VCheng]

don’t believe it is a contradiction. It’s a popularly held belief that if he were allowed to contest elections this year, IK and his party would win an outright majority, possibly a 2/3 majority with the support of allies, especially if he appeals to left leaning voters.

Again, a false foundation. It is claimed by a distinct class of social media activists that IK has popular support that would give him "an outright majority, possibly a 2/3 majority with the support of allies", but that can only be judged when there is the next elections. We all can see what sort of electable allies he chose before, with disastrous outcomes.

Let him win the elections first, and then form the government with the numbers he has, if he wins. Then we can get to the reforms that he promises, but given his track record of his first term, it remains doubtful whether he would amount to much this time around either.

If this opportunity to reset relations with the nation vis a vi IK is passed up, considering the polarization in the nation and Pakistan’s international relations, many fear the situation will likely get worse and the opportunities squandered.

Again, a false foundation. Who are these "many" who fear the situation will get worse? Where are they? Merely twittering about it will never amount to anything. Let us see how many show up to "fill the jails" as IK has recently announced.






The evidence thus far clearly shows that IK was, is, and will likely remain a false messiah, destined to fade away, but I will keep looking for anything to the contrary other than empty claims and boasts.