In all honesty i dont think kashmir will be solved in our life time unless both nations suddenly decide to elect leaders willing to make concessions on the issue.kashmir?
Well said and it is BS article as usual.Cherry picking and distorted facts and he got 3 positive ratings for that
You didnt get it ,did you??
Very good response to this so called Half Baked Researcher from India. and their utter nonsense about Pakistan. This is nothing new century old Tactics, when you are on the brink of million problem (India in Case) Go on the propaganda offense or War/Invasion on your Next door Neibhours .Haq's Musings: Pakistan: Warrior State? Conspicuous Failure?
The Warrior State: Pakistan in the Contemporary World by Canada's McGill University Professor Thazha Varkey Paul, a graduate of India's Jawaharlal Nehru University, describes Pakistan as a "warrior state" and a "conspicuous failure". It is among a slew of recently published anti-Pakistan books by mainly Indian and western authors which paint Pakistan as a rogue state which deserves to be condemned, isolated and sanctioned by the international community.
As Pakistanis celebrate 74th anniversary of the 1940 Lahore Resolution calling for the partition of India, it is important to examine TV Paul's narrative about Pakistan and fact-check the assertions underlying his narrative.
Here's a point-by-point response to Paul's narrative:
1. Paul argues: Seemingly from its birth, Pakistan has teetered on the brink of becoming a failed state.
In 1947 at the time of independence, Pakistan was described as "nissen hut" by British Viceroy of India Lord Mountbatten in a conversation with Jawarhar Lal Nehru. However, Pakistan defied this expectation that it would not survive as an independent nation and the partition of India would be quickly reversed. Pakistan not only survived but thrived with itseconomic growth rate easily exceeding the "Hindu growth rate" in India for most of its history.
Agriculture Value Added Per Capita in 2000 US $. Source: World Bank
Even now when the economic growth rate has considerably slowed, Pakistan has lower levels of poverty and hunger than its neighbor India, according UNDP and IFPRI. The key reason for lower poverty in Pakistan is its per capita value added in agriculture which is twice that of India. Agriculture employs 40% of Pakistanis and 60% of Indians. The poor state of rural India can be gauged by the fact that an Indian farmer commits suicide every 30 minutes.
2. Paul: Its economy is as dysfunctional as its political system is corrupt; both rely heavily on international aid for their existence.
The fact is that foreign to aid to Pakistan has been declining as a percentage of its GDP since 1960s when it reached a peak of 11% of GDP in 1963. Today, foreign aid makes up less than 2% of its GDP of $240 billion.
Foreign Aid as Percentage of Pakistan GDP. Source: World Bank
3. Paul: Taliban forces occupy 30 percent of the country.
The Taliban "occupy" a small part of FATA called North Waziristan which is about 4,700 sq kilometers, about 0.5% of its 796,000 sq kilometers area. Talking about insurgents "occupying" territory, about 40% of Indian territory is held by Maoist insurgents in the "red corridor" in Central India, according to Indian security analyst Bharat Verma.
4. Paul: It possesses over a hundred nuclear weapons that could easily fall into terrorists' hands.
A recent assessment by Nuclear Threat Initiative ranked Pakistan above India on "Nuclear Materials Security Index".
5. Paul: Why, in an era when countries across the developing world are experiencing impressive economic growth and building democratic institutions, has Pakistan been such a conspicuous failure?
Pakistan's nominal GDP has quadrupled from $60 billion in 2000 to $240 billion now. Along with total GDP, Pakistan's GDP per capita has also grown significantly over the years, from about $500 in Year 2000 to $1000 per person in 2006 on President Musharraf's watch, elevating it from a low-income to a middle-income country in the last decade.I wouldn't call that a failure.
Pakistan Per Capita GDP 1960-2012. Source: World Bank
Goldman Sachs' Jim O'Neill, the economist who coined BRIC, has put Pakistan among the Next 11 group in terms of growth in the next several decades.
6. Paul argues that the "geostrategic curse"--akin to the "resource curse" that plagues oil-rich autocracies--is at the root of Pakistan's unique inability to progress. Since its founding in 1947, Pakistan has been at the center of major geopolitical struggles: the US-Soviet rivalry, the conflict with India, and most recently the post 9/11 wars.
Pakistan is no more a warrior state that many others in the world. It spends no more than 3% of its GDP on defense, lower than most of the nations of the world.
7. Paul says: No matter how ineffective the regime is, massive foreign aid keeps pouring in from major powers and their allies with a stake in the region.The reliability of such aid defuses any pressure on political elites to launch the far-reaching domestic reforms necessary to promote sustained growth, higher standards of living, and more stable democratic institutions.
"Massive foreign aid" adds up to less than 1% of Pakistan's GDP. Pakistan's diaspora sends it over 5% of Pakistan's GDP in remittances.
8. Paul: Excessive war-making efforts have drained Pakistan's limited economic resources without making the country safer or more stable. Indeed, despite the regime's emphasis on security, the country continues to be beset by widespread violence and terrorism.
In spite of spending just 3% of its GDP which is average for its size, Pakistan has achieved strategic parity with India by developing nuclear weapons. It has since prevented India from invading Pakistan as it did in 1971 to break up the country. Pakistani military has shown in Swat in 2009 that it is quite capable of dealing with insurgents when ordered to do so by the civilian govt.
While it is true that Pakistan has not lived up to its potential when compared with other US Cold War allies in East and Southeast Asia, it is wrong to describe it as "conspicuous failure". Pakistan should be compared with other countries in South Asia region, not East Asia or Southeast Asia. Comparison with its South Asian neighbors India and Bangladesh shows that an average Pakistani is less poor, less hungry and more upwardly mobile, according to credible data from multiple independent sources.
Pakistan is neither a "warrior state" nor a "conspicuous failure" as argued by Professor TV Paul. To the contrary, it has been the victim of the invading Indian Army in 1971 which cut off its eastern wing. Pakistan has built a minimum nuclear deterrent in response to India's development of a nuclear arsenal. Pakistan has responded to the 1971 trauma by ensuring that such a tragedy does not happen again, particularly through a foreign invasion.
Today, Pakistan faces some of the toughest challenges of its existence. It has to deal with the Taliban insurgency and a weak economy. It has to solve its deepening energy crisis. It has to address growing water scarcity. While I believe Pakistanis are a very resilient and determined people, the difficult challenges they face will test them, particularly their leaders who have been falling short of their expectations in recent years.
Haq's Musings: Pakistan: Warrior State? Conspicuous Failure?
Well said and it is BS article as usual.Cherry picking and distorted facts and he got 3 positive ratings for that
You didnt get it ,did you??
The whole point of the article is to post some cherry picked graphs with distorted facts to show that Pakistan is ahead of India and feel good about it,nothing to do with the title of the article.
You are asking me for proofs when the graphs which he has posted are very old and irrelevant with respect to the title of the article
and compares it with Pakistan .Who is Bharat verma?? and why should i believe in what he says?? .
Haq's Musings: Pakistan: Warrior State? Conspicuous Failure?
The Warrior State: Pakistan in the Contemporary World by Canada's McGill University Professor Thazha Varkey Paul, a graduate of India's Jawaharlal Nehru University, describes Pakistan as a "warrior state" and a "conspicuous failure". It is among a slew of recently published anti-Pakistan books by mainly Indian and western authors which paint Pakistan as a rogue state which deserves to be condemned, isolated and sanctioned by the international community.
As Pakistanis celebrate 74th anniversary of the 1940 Lahore Resolution calling for the partition of India, it is important to examine TV Paul's narrative about Pakistan and fact-check the assertions underlying his narrative.
Here's a point-by-point response to Paul's narrative:
1. Paul argues: Seemingly from its birth, Pakistan has teetered on the brink of becoming a failed state.
In 1947 at the time of independence, Pakistan was described as "nissen hut" by British Viceroy of India Lord Mountbatten in a conversation with Jawarhar Lal Nehru. However, Pakistan defied this expectation that it would not survive as an independent nation and the partition of India would be quickly reversed. Pakistan not only survived but thrived with itseconomic growth rate easily exceeding the "Hindu growth rate" in India for most of its history.
Agriculture Value Added Per Capita in 2000 US $. Source: World Bank
Even now when the economic growth rate has considerably slowed, Pakistan has lower levels of poverty and hunger than its neighbor India, according UNDP and IFPRI. The key reason for lower poverty in Pakistan is its per capita value added in agriculture which is twice that of India. Agriculture employs 40% of Pakistanis and 60% of Indians. The poor state of rural India can be gauged by the fact that an Indian farmer commits suicide every 30 minutes.
2. Paul: Its economy is as dysfunctional as its political system is corrupt; both rely heavily on international aid for their existence.
The fact is that foreign to aid to Pakistan has been declining as a percentage of its GDP since 1960s when it reached a peak of 11% of GDP in 1963. Today, foreign aid makes up less than 2% of its GDP of $240 billion.
Foreign Aid as Percentage of Pakistan GDP. Source: World Bank
3. Paul: Taliban forces occupy 30 percent of the country.
The Taliban "occupy" a small part of FATA called North Waziristan which is about 4,700 sq kilometers, about 0.5% of its 796,000 sq kilometers area. Talking about insurgents "occupying" territory, about 40% of Indian territory is held by Maoist insurgents in the "red corridor" in Central India, according to Indian security analyst Bharat Verma.
4. Paul: It possesses over a hundred nuclear weapons that could easily fall into terrorists' hands.
A recent assessment by Nuclear Threat Initiative ranked Pakistan above India on "Nuclear Materials Security Index".
5. Paul: Why, in an era when countries across the developing world are experiencing impressive economic growth and building democratic institutions, has Pakistan been such a conspicuous failure?
Pakistan's nominal GDP has quadrupled from $60 billion in 2000 to $240 billion now. Along with total GDP, Pakistan's GDP per capita has also grown significantly over the years, from about $500 in Year 2000 to $1000 per person in 2006 on President Musharraf's watch, elevating it from a low-income to a middle-income country in the last decade.I wouldn't call that a failure.
Pakistan Per Capita GDP 1960-2012. Source: World Bank
Goldman Sachs' Jim O'Neill, the economist who coined BRIC, has put Pakistan among the Next 11 group in terms of growth in the next several decades.
6. Paul argues that the "geostrategic curse"--akin to the "resource curse" that plagues oil-rich autocracies--is at the root of Pakistan's unique inability to progress. Since its founding in 1947, Pakistan has been at the center of major geopolitical struggles: the US-Soviet rivalry, the conflict with India, and most recently the post 9/11 wars.
Pakistan is no more a warrior state that many others in the world. It spends no more than 3% of its GDP on defense, lower than most of the nations of the world.
7. Paul says: No matter how ineffective the regime is, massive foreign aid keeps pouring in from major powers and their allies with a stake in the region.The reliability of such aid defuses any pressure on political elites to launch the far-reaching domestic reforms necessary to promote sustained growth, higher standards of living, and more stable democratic institutions.
"Massive foreign aid" adds up to less than 1% of Pakistan's GDP. Pakistan's diaspora sends it over 5% of Pakistan's GDP in remittances.
8. Paul: Excessive war-making efforts have drained Pakistan's limited economic resources without making the country safer or more stable. Indeed, despite the regime's emphasis on security, the country continues to be beset by widespread violence and terrorism.
In spite of spending just 3% of its GDP which is average for its size, Pakistan has achieved strategic parity with India by developing nuclear weapons. It has since prevented India from invading Pakistan as it did in 1971 to break up the country. Pakistani military has shown in Swat in 2009 that it is quite capable of dealing with insurgents when ordered to do so by the civilian govt.
While it is true that Pakistan has not lived up to its potential when compared with other US Cold War allies in East and Southeast Asia, it is wrong to describe it as "conspicuous failure". Pakistan should be compared with other countries in South Asia region, not East Asia or Southeast Asia. Comparison with its South Asian neighbors India and Bangladesh shows that an average Pakistani is less poor, less hungry and more upwardly mobile, according to credible data from multiple independent sources.
Pakistan is neither a "warrior state" nor a "conspicuous failure" as argued by Professor TV Paul. To the contrary, it has been the victim of the invading Indian Army in 1971 which cut off its eastern wing. Pakistan has built a minimum nuclear deterrent in response to India's development of a nuclear arsenal. Pakistan has responded to the 1971 trauma by ensuring that such a tragedy does not happen again, particularly through a foreign invasion.
Today, Pakistan faces some of the toughest challenges of its existence. It has to deal with the Taliban insurgency and a weak economy. It has to solve its deepening energy crisis. It has to address growing water scarcity. While I believe Pakistanis are a very resilient and determined people, the difficult challenges they face will test them, particularly their leaders who have been falling short of their expectations in recent years.
Haq's Musings: Pakistan: Warrior State? Conspicuous Failure?
You are asking me for proofs when the graphs which he has posted are very old and irrelevant with respect to the title of the article
1-If Pakistan was ahead of India in the economic growth rate for most of the time then how come India overtook Pakistan in per capita income??.
2-He says that Pakistan is ahead of India in poverty rates to substansiate his claims but conveniently forgets that India is also ahead of Pakistan in 90% of the social indicators and not to mention that India is ahead of Pakistan in HDI also.It was not like India was already ahead of Pakistan since independence but India actually overtook Pakistan in these indicators.Also he forgets to write that poverty rates are higher India because of high population and and not because of the splendid policies of the Pakistani gov. and not to mention that Pakistani poverty figures are based on old data and there has been no census since 1998
3-He quotes Bharat vema saying that Maoists control 30% of Indian lands
Has India experienced terrorist attacks in one of its most secured military complexes,has India has been caught like OBL fiasco??and there are other accidents like this.Still if you have any doubt you can check and compare the casualty figures of last ten years in maoist attacks in India and terrorist attacks in Pakistan taking into account that India is 9 times more populated than Pakistan.
4-He gloats about increasing economy and per capita of Pakistan with time but hey wait!!! What happened to comparison between India and Pakistan?? Because he knows that India is ahead of Pakistan in per capita income
Also he forgots to mention that Pakistan is on the verge of Bankruptcy and is one of the countries with highest debt to GDP ratio and also with a mearge foreign reserves of less than 8 billlion dollars.
5-He says that Pakistan is in the misery because of US-Soviet rivalry but forgots to mention that it was Pakistan itself who chose to take part and chose one of the sides i.e. U.S. in that rivalry and not to forget that it received a lot of dollars from U.S in return which resulted in higher growth rates in 60's(more than India)
He mentions some of the achievements of Pakistan(proven wrong) but forgets other a lot of failures which i dont want to mention here.
At last but not the least what's the point of comparing Paksitan with India?? he could have written the same article without mentioning India that would have been really appreciated.The whole point of the article(like all other articles) as i said earlier is to cherry pick graphs with distorted facts which shows that Pakistan is ahead of India to satisfy his ego and feel good about it,In short the whole article is a joke.
What is more laughable is he got four positive ratings for this.
@chak de INDIA @Dem!god @levina @Indischer @madooxno9 @third eye @kurup @Vinod2070 @DRAY
@SpArK @scorpionx anything you want to add?
if kashmir was resolved u would have found some new issues to survive!!
