Explain what strategic importance does Pakistan have
Is Shahzad Chaudhry Right "On India"?
- Thread starter RiazHaq
- Start date
Explain what strategic importance does Pakistan have
#Pakistan and #Bollywood: A broken bond. Bollywood is now far too often a mouthpiece for #Modi's #BJP and its idea of #India. The Indian film industry’s lurch to the right has done what wars couldn’t — alienated millions of Pakistani fans. https://aje.io/9pv7kh via @AJEnglish
By Salman Zafar
Writer based in Vancouver, Canada
Muslim characters are either nonexistent in Bollywood films or are used to fan stereotypes of the community as villains or as closet Pakistan sympathisers.
Meanwhile, many leading figures within Bollywood have become enthusiastic cheerleaders of this toxicity. There are over-the-top supporters of the BJP government, such as Anupam Kher, Kangana Ranaut and Akshay Kumar. Actor Vivek Oberoi released a thinly veiled promotional movie on the life of Modi in 2019 to coincide with the general elections that year.
-------
At the same time, Pakistani actors and actresses have effectively been banned from the industry. Raees in 2017, featuring Mahira Khan opposite Shah Rukh, was the last major Bollywood movie to feature someone from Pakistan. Meanwhile, Pakistani movies face hurdles in being released in India. The Legend of Maula Jutt, already considered one of the biggest movies in Pakistan’s history, was set for a December 30, 2022 release in India, only for that to be postponed indefinitely.
----------
Unlike a lot of other Pakistanis, my interest in Bollywood developed much later in life. I was already in my late 20s when I took the time to watch a complete Bollywood movie. I initially watched Bollywood for the melodies of the master Indian playback singers from yesteryear, such as the great Kishore Kumar, Mohammad Rafi and Mukesh.
That morphed into an interest in old Bollywood movies — from the golden and classic ages of the industry, spanning a period from the late 1940s through the 80s. Watching these films was a regular weekend night affair for me.
This Bollywood was a melting pot of riveting stories and even better acting. Awaara (1951) carried socialist themes and became wildly popular in China and the former Soviet Union as well. The 1960s and 1970s had trend-setting movies such as the iconic Mughal-e-Azam and Ganga Jumna. Movies such as Kaala Pathar, Zanjeer and Deewar had superstar Amitabh Bachchan in his genre-defining angry young man persona, providing poignant commentary on the disillusionment within Indian society over corruption and inequality. Values — not wealth — were the virtues to aspire to. Then there was Mandi, which touched on themes of prostitution, offering biting political satire.
As the years passed by, Bollywood movies became more extravagant, reliant on glitz and glamour, exotic foreign locations and bombastic dance numbers. Stories revolving around average working-class issues are few and far between.
But with the rise of current Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), I have noticed another more sinister shift in storytelling towards the right.
From an industry that celebrated religious tolerance in films such as the cult classic Amar Akbar Anthony — where the three heroes are Hindu, Muslim and Christian — mainstream Bollywood is now far too often a mouthpiece for the BJP and its idea of India. The secular ideals of India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, are dead. The narrative is simple – India is Hindu, and other religions are foreign and responsible for the ravages suffered by the motherland.
This vision of India reflects in society and in Bollywood.
Moviemakers who do not subscribe to the narrative of this muscular, uber-nationalist Hindu India are at the receiving end of vicious criticism from the BJP’s support base. Actors Aamir Khan and Shah Rukh Khan raised concerns over growing intolerance in India in 2015. Since then, there are regular calls for their movies to be boycotted.
By Salman Zafar
Writer based in Vancouver, Canada
Muslim characters are either nonexistent in Bollywood films or are used to fan stereotypes of the community as villains or as closet Pakistan sympathisers.
Meanwhile, many leading figures within Bollywood have become enthusiastic cheerleaders of this toxicity. There are over-the-top supporters of the BJP government, such as Anupam Kher, Kangana Ranaut and Akshay Kumar. Actor Vivek Oberoi released a thinly veiled promotional movie on the life of Modi in 2019 to coincide with the general elections that year.
-------
At the same time, Pakistani actors and actresses have effectively been banned from the industry. Raees in 2017, featuring Mahira Khan opposite Shah Rukh, was the last major Bollywood movie to feature someone from Pakistan. Meanwhile, Pakistani movies face hurdles in being released in India. The Legend of Maula Jutt, already considered one of the biggest movies in Pakistan’s history, was set for a December 30, 2022 release in India, only for that to be postponed indefinitely.
----------
Unlike a lot of other Pakistanis, my interest in Bollywood developed much later in life. I was already in my late 20s when I took the time to watch a complete Bollywood movie. I initially watched Bollywood for the melodies of the master Indian playback singers from yesteryear, such as the great Kishore Kumar, Mohammad Rafi and Mukesh.
That morphed into an interest in old Bollywood movies — from the golden and classic ages of the industry, spanning a period from the late 1940s through the 80s. Watching these films was a regular weekend night affair for me.
This Bollywood was a melting pot of riveting stories and even better acting. Awaara (1951) carried socialist themes and became wildly popular in China and the former Soviet Union as well. The 1960s and 1970s had trend-setting movies such as the iconic Mughal-e-Azam and Ganga Jumna. Movies such as Kaala Pathar, Zanjeer and Deewar had superstar Amitabh Bachchan in his genre-defining angry young man persona, providing poignant commentary on the disillusionment within Indian society over corruption and inequality. Values — not wealth — were the virtues to aspire to. Then there was Mandi, which touched on themes of prostitution, offering biting political satire.
As the years passed by, Bollywood movies became more extravagant, reliant on glitz and glamour, exotic foreign locations and bombastic dance numbers. Stories revolving around average working-class issues are few and far between.
But with the rise of current Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), I have noticed another more sinister shift in storytelling towards the right.
From an industry that celebrated religious tolerance in films such as the cult classic Amar Akbar Anthony — where the three heroes are Hindu, Muslim and Christian — mainstream Bollywood is now far too often a mouthpiece for the BJP and its idea of India. The secular ideals of India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, are dead. The narrative is simple – India is Hindu, and other religions are foreign and responsible for the ravages suffered by the motherland.
This vision of India reflects in society and in Bollywood.
Moviemakers who do not subscribe to the narrative of this muscular, uber-nationalist Hindu India are at the receiving end of vicious criticism from the BJP’s support base. Actors Aamir Khan and Shah Rukh Khan raised concerns over growing intolerance in India in 2015. Since then, there are regular calls for their movies to be boycotted.
Path-Finder
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2013
- Messages
- 24,393
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
If Pakistan 0 importance then why are you here?
If India is so bad according to you and all relationships should be suspended then what difference does it make if Pak actors act in Indian films?
#YogiAdityanath, Chief Minister of #Indian state of #UttarPradesh, a possible successor to Narendra #Modi, is having his #WEF party spoiled by #WarCrimes complaint filed with #Swiss federal prosecutor for false imprisonment, torture & murder of civilians https://www.politico.com/newsletters/global-insider/2023/01/19/davos-world-economic-forum-00078484
--------
International lawyers’ group files criminal complaint against UP CM Yogi Adityanath | The News Minute
https://www.thenewsminute.com/artic...l-complaint-against-cm-yogi-adityanath-172129
A criminal complaint has been filed against the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister (CM) Yogi Adityanath for committing crimes against humanity between December 2019 and January 2020 in the state of Uttar Pradesh, to suppress protests against the adoption of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in India. The move came during CM Yogi's visit to Davos to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, between January 16 and 20. The complaint was filed with the Office of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor, on Tuesday, January 17, by Guernica 37 Chambers, a specialist group of international criminal and human rights lawyers under the principle of universal jurisdiction as provided in Article 264 of the Swiss Criminal Code. Article 264 deals with ‘Genocide and Crimes against Humanity’.
The Founder of the Guernica 37 Group and Joint Head of G37 Chambers, Toby Cadman, in an email response, told TNM that both the contents of the criminal report and the details of victims, complainants and petitioners are being kept confidential for their own life and safety.
A statement by Guernica 37 Chambers says, “Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath is reported to have ordered the false imprisonment, torture and murder of civilians between December 2019 and January 2020 in the state of Uttar Pradesh to suppress protests against the adoption of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in India. As set out in the criminal report, these acts may amount to crimes against humanity as they are alleged to have been committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians, mostly the Muslim population in the country.”
Guernica 37 Chambers has also said that there is "sufficient basis" to believe that senior members of the UP government, including Chief Minister Yogi, "are responsible for ordering the UP police under their command”. The statement said, “The Chief Minister’s role in the escalation of police violence is particularly apparent in a speech given on December 19, 2019, calling on the police to take 'revenge' against protesters. Despite being an Indian State official, the Chief Minister does not enjoy diplomatic immunity for these crimes,” the statement reads.
After the Citizenship (Amendment) Act was passed in December 2019, many individuals, especially those belonging to Muslim community, took to the streets staging peaceful protests. Several of them were arrested and attacked by the police. “The UP police reportedly killed 22 protesters, at least 117 were tortured and 307 were arbitrarily detained,” Guernica 27 Chambers said and added that the criminal complaint states that Yogi Adityanath, who is the final executive authority over police in Uttar Pradesh, “failed to investigate and prosecute the alleged crimes”.
Further, stating that neither the domestic law, the international law, or the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court acceded to the individual complaints, they said that the "escalation of violence and impunity requires urgent actions to hold the perpetrators accountable."
“The opening of an investigation by the Swiss authorities will serve as official recognition and acknowledgement of the gravity of the alleged crimes and recognition of the status of the victims, that they have thus far failed to receive at the domestic or international levels, and it will further serve as evidence that the culture of impunity will not be tolerated,” Guernica 37 Chambers asserted.
Stating that Article 264a of Swiss Criminal Code deals with Crimes against Humanity and it is under this provision that the complaint has been filed, Cadman also said that the course of action has been pursued “as there have been no meaningful attempts to hold the perpetrators accountable in India.”
The law firm had last year filed a similar submission with the United States government, asking for ‘targeted sanctions’ against CM Yogi. Cadman, regarding the submission, said that the request to the US Treasury was for the imposition of sanctions. “This is a process that takes some time and is not made public unless the US government makes public the imposition of sanctions,” he said and added that a similar request was made to the UK (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) FCDO as well.
--------
International lawyers’ group files criminal complaint against UP CM Yogi Adityanath | The News Minute
https://www.thenewsminute.com/artic...l-complaint-against-cm-yogi-adityanath-172129
A criminal complaint has been filed against the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister (CM) Yogi Adityanath for committing crimes against humanity between December 2019 and January 2020 in the state of Uttar Pradesh, to suppress protests against the adoption of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in India. The move came during CM Yogi's visit to Davos to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, between January 16 and 20. The complaint was filed with the Office of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor, on Tuesday, January 17, by Guernica 37 Chambers, a specialist group of international criminal and human rights lawyers under the principle of universal jurisdiction as provided in Article 264 of the Swiss Criminal Code. Article 264 deals with ‘Genocide and Crimes against Humanity’.
The Founder of the Guernica 37 Group and Joint Head of G37 Chambers, Toby Cadman, in an email response, told TNM that both the contents of the criminal report and the details of victims, complainants and petitioners are being kept confidential for their own life and safety.
A statement by Guernica 37 Chambers says, “Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath is reported to have ordered the false imprisonment, torture and murder of civilians between December 2019 and January 2020 in the state of Uttar Pradesh to suppress protests against the adoption of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in India. As set out in the criminal report, these acts may amount to crimes against humanity as they are alleged to have been committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians, mostly the Muslim population in the country.”
Guernica 37 Chambers has also said that there is "sufficient basis" to believe that senior members of the UP government, including Chief Minister Yogi, "are responsible for ordering the UP police under their command”. The statement said, “The Chief Minister’s role in the escalation of police violence is particularly apparent in a speech given on December 19, 2019, calling on the police to take 'revenge' against protesters. Despite being an Indian State official, the Chief Minister does not enjoy diplomatic immunity for these crimes,” the statement reads.
After the Citizenship (Amendment) Act was passed in December 2019, many individuals, especially those belonging to Muslim community, took to the streets staging peaceful protests. Several of them were arrested and attacked by the police. “The UP police reportedly killed 22 protesters, at least 117 were tortured and 307 were arbitrarily detained,” Guernica 27 Chambers said and added that the criminal complaint states that Yogi Adityanath, who is the final executive authority over police in Uttar Pradesh, “failed to investigate and prosecute the alleged crimes”.
Further, stating that neither the domestic law, the international law, or the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court acceded to the individual complaints, they said that the "escalation of violence and impunity requires urgent actions to hold the perpetrators accountable."
“The opening of an investigation by the Swiss authorities will serve as official recognition and acknowledgement of the gravity of the alleged crimes and recognition of the status of the victims, that they have thus far failed to receive at the domestic or international levels, and it will further serve as evidence that the culture of impunity will not be tolerated,” Guernica 37 Chambers asserted.
Stating that Article 264a of Swiss Criminal Code deals with Crimes against Humanity and it is under this provision that the complaint has been filed, Cadman also said that the course of action has been pursued “as there have been no meaningful attempts to hold the perpetrators accountable in India.”
The law firm had last year filed a similar submission with the United States government, asking for ‘targeted sanctions’ against CM Yogi. Cadman, regarding the submission, said that the request to the US Treasury was for the imposition of sanctions. “This is a process that takes some time and is not made public unless the US government makes public the imposition of sanctions,” he said and added that a similar request was made to the UK (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) FCDO as well.
airmarshal
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2010
- Messages
- 9,361
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
Pakistan need to stand up and it can. But with thieves facilitated by morally corrupt and bankrupt establishment, there is little hope.
Pakistan situation is one of hopelessness. Its a fertile ground for pessimistic peddlers like Shehzad Chaudhry. He was part of Amn ki Asha campaign which was the first attempt to accept India's hegemony.
If we dont strengthen our country by improving economy, making our country self reliant, these kinds of attacks will be launched - both from internal players and external players.
Pakistan situation is one of hopelessness. Its a fertile ground for pessimistic peddlers like Shehzad Chaudhry. He was part of Amn ki Asha campaign which was the first attempt to accept India's hegemony.
If we dont strengthen our country by improving economy, making our country self reliant, these kinds of attacks will be launched - both from internal players and external players.
VkdIndian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2021
- Messages
- 3,163
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Yes, you are right. Indian media as well as middle and low level leaders would take time to assimilate and work for the national policy. Which is to stop comparisons and reference to Paksiatn.
Common man on the street doesn’t know what de-hyphenation is. They are still an audience for the media and low level politicians. To address the common man these entities would keep singing “Pakistan” song for some more time.
Actually de-hyphenation has taken place, but the full fruits of the same would take a little time to be visible.
VkdIndian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2021
- Messages
- 3,163
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
India has no intentions to absorb anyone. Few fools make such statements this side for few other fools who lap it up and few fools across too who take it seriously. Not calling you, but those who buy these bu## statements.
Turkey has always seen decent governance. That is the biggest difference between them and Paksiatn. Turkey is taken seriously because they have good industrial base and a strong economy. Look at the way they have developed their aviation industry.
Last edited:
Did I say Pakistan has zero importance ? Do not put words in my mouth.
My question was simple - What is the strategic importance of Pakistan ? I was asking it because some of you are claiming it
Darth Vader
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2011
- Messages
- 4,447
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Sadly those fools have alot of voting power in indian side.
Compare that with Pakistani voting, you wont see Pakistani leaders openly saying they will get IOK back might have been in 60s but that lost its charm, so now people dont care much, while its happening from top indian leaders so that shows it still gets attention from a specific large group.
Lets see what the future holds, personally i love to see and support a pan-asia or asian block working together as it has more than half of population in this region , for the benefit of its people not just corrupt leaders who are busy with looting.
PradoTLC
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 8,888
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Is Shahzad Chaudhry Right "On India"?
The Pakistan Air Force's Retired Air Vice Marshal Shahzad Chaudhry has recently penned an op-ed for The Express Tribune newspaper calling on...www.southasiainvestor.com
The Pakistan Air Force's Retired Air Vice Marshal Shahzad Chaudhry has recently penned an op-ed for The Express Tribune newspaper calling on his country to make peace with India. He argues that "India is relevant to the world", implying that Pakistan is not. Chaudhry believes that the "gap between Pakistan and India is now unbridgeable". Chaudhry concludes his piece with the following recommendation: "It is time to recalibrate our policy towards India and be bold enough to create a tri-nation consensus, along with China, focusing on Asia to be the spur for wider economic growth and benefit".
History of India-Pakistan Peace Talks:
While I completely support Chaudhry's call for Pakistan to make peace with India, I do wonder why India's Hindu Supremacist Prime Minister Narendra Modi would even seriously entertain such a thought if "India is relevant to the world" and Pakistan is not? And if Modi does agree to talks, what kind of peace would come out of such talks? Would it be similar to Bangladesh-India peace based on client-patron relationship? Retired senior India officials like Shyam Saran and AS Dulat have blamed Indian security establishment for past failures to reach a peace deal with Pakistan.
I also question Chaudhry's idea of creating "a tri-nation consensus" with India and China. Why would China agree to such an arrangement while both Asian giants are seeking to establish regional hegemony? Why wouldn't China pursue its own version of Monroe Doctrine in Asia?
Let me expand on the above two points about "relevance" of India and Pakistan and "tri-nation consensus" with China.
Pakistan's Global Relevance:
Chaudhry argues that "India is relevant to the world". So is Pakistan. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government has pursued a policy of internationally isolating Pakistan for the last 8 years. Indian diplomats and mainstream media have engaged in a concerted campaign to hurt Pakistan diplomatically and economically during this period. Even the sport of cricket has not been spared. All of the available evidence suggests that this Indian campaign has failed.
A prominent Indian journalist Shekhar Gupta has recently summarized the reasons for the Modi government's failure to achieve its objectives relative to Pakistan. Gupta argues that Pakistan is too important to be ignored or isolated by the international community. He says, "Pakistan is too big in terms of population, too powerful militarily, too Muslim, too nuclear and too well located to be isolated".
Pakistan PM Shahbaz Sharif with President and Mrs. Biden. Source: White House
Here are some of the key points Shekhar Gupta makes in episode 1093 of his show Cut The Clutter :
1.Pakistan is our most important neighbor. We must focus on Pakistan.
2, We can not ignore Pakistan in India because the world can not ignore Pakistan
3. The Western world has an intrinsic relationship with Pakistan which doesn't go away
4. The West does not see Pakistan as so useful to them today and yet Pakistan can not be isolated.
5. You can see all the indications that Pakistan is not isolated.
6. A lot of (Indian) TV channels say Pakistan is isolated but the evidence doesn't support it.
7. Pakistan FM visited Washington and met his counterpart Tony Blinken.
8. Pakistan Army Chief has received a warm welcome at the US Defense Dept and met US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. Bajwa matters more than the Pakistan Defense Minister. Nobody knows his name.
9. US Ambassador to Pakistan Donald Blome, a career diplomat, has visited "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir" and called it Azad Kashmir...Azad means free.
10. When the chips are down in the region Pakistan is the ally Americans reach out to.
11. The US does not want Pakistan to drift to China.
12. German foreign minister Annalena Baerbock has spoken about Kashmir...the K word. She has asked for the UN to help solve the Kashmir issue.
13. Pakistan Army Chief General Bajwa is not a warmonger. He wants to normalize ties with India. He wants to trade with India. He doesn't want Faiz Hameed to succeed him. He used to be the ISI chief and took credit for the Taliban victory in Afghanistan. Do the Americans have leverage here?
14. Where does Pakistan's unique power come from? Why can't Pakistan be ignored? Why can't Pakistan be isolated?
15. The Indian public needs to understand it.
16. Pakistan is too big in terms of population, too powerful militarily, too Muslim, too nuclear and too well located to be isolated.
17. Pakistan has the 5th largest population and its population is growing fast. It could soon exceed Indonesia to become the largest Muslim nation in the world.
18. Pakistan has the 5th strongest military in the world.
19. In terms of nuclear weapons, Pakistan has the 4th largest nuclear arsenal in the world.
20. Pakistan is too well located to be isolated. It has a geo-strategic location. Pakistan is the western gateway to China. Pakistan opened China's ties with the US. And then helped the US defeat the Soviet Union.
21. The factors that made Pakistan such a strong ally to the US still exist. Don't blame the Pakistanis for it.
22. India is not willing to commit to an alliance with the US.
23. Imran Khan tried to change Pakistan's foreign policy to be more like India's but he failed.
Tri-nation Consensus:
Prime Minister Modi's revocation of Article 370 and annexation of Jammu and Kashmir as Indian union territories have angered not just Pakistan but also China. Modi's actions are not only an affront to the people of Jammu and Kashmir but also in clear violation of India's international and bilateral obligations under United Nations charter and the Simla Accord. China, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, lays claim to the Ladakh region. It has objected to India making it a union territory.
Since Modi's annexation of disputed territories of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, China has dramatically stepped up pressure on India in Ladakh. China has increased its troop presence, killed and injured dozens of Indian soldiers and taken at least a thousand kilometers of territory claimed by India. As a result, India has had to move troops from the line of control (LoC) with Pakistan to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.
Indian Congress Party leader Rahul Gandhi summarized the situation well when he said, "China has taken our land. They are beating out soldiers. The threat of China Is clear. And the government is hiding it, ignoring it. China is preparing for an offensive in Ladakh and Arunachal. And the government of India is sleeping".
India-Bangladesh Ties:
India's relations with Bangladesh are essentially patron-client relations. This fact became amply clear when Bangladeshi Prime Minister Shaikh Hasina recently visited New Delhi to seek political and economic assistance from the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Modi-Hasina Delhi summit was preceded by Bangladesh Foreign Minister Abdul Momen's trip to India where he said, "I've requested Modi government to do whatever is necessary to sustain Sheikh Hasina's government". Upon her return from India, Sheikh Hasina told the news media in Dhaka, "They (India) have shown much sincerity and I have not returned empty handed". It has long been an open secret that Indian intelligence agency RAW helped install Shaikh Hasina as Prime Minister of Bangladesh, and her Awami League party rely on New Delhi's support to stay in power. Bangladesh Foreign Minister Abdul Momen has described India-Bangladesh as one between husband and wife. In an interview with Indian newspaper 'Ajkal,' he said, "Relation between the both countries is very cordial. It's much like the relationship between husband and wife. Though some differences often arise, these are resolved quickly." Both Bangladeshi and Indian officials have reportedly said that Sheikh Hasina "has built a house of cards".
India-Pakistan Gap:
There's no question that Pakistan is in the midst of a major economic crisis. The country's economic performance is dismal right now. At the same time, it must be acknowledged that Pakistan, with its youngest population in Asia, has a bright future ahead if its leaders can resolve the internal political situation.
In fact, Goldman Sachs analysts Kevin Daly and Tadas Gedminas project Pakistan's economy to grow to become the world's sixth largest by 2075. In a research paper titled "The Path to 2075", the authors forecast Pakistan's GDP to rise to $12.7 trillion with per capita income of $27,100. India’s GDP in 2075 is projected at $52.5 trillion and per capita GDP at $31,300. Bangladesh is projected to be a $6.3 trillion economy with per capita income of $31,000. By 2075, China will be the top global economy, followed by India 2nd, US 3rd, Indonesia 4th, Nigeria 5th and Pakistan 6th. The forecast is based primarily on changes in the size of working age populations over the next 50 years.
Economic Impact of Slower Population Growth:
Daly and Gedminas argue that slowing population growth in the developed world is causing their economic growth to decelerate. At the same time, the economies of the developing countries are driven by their rising populations. Here are four key points made in the report:
1) Slower global potential growth, led by weaker population growth.
2) EM convergence remains intact, led by Asia’s powerhouses. Although real GDP growth has slowed in both developed and emerging economies, in relative terms EM growth continues to outstrip DM growth.
3) A decade of US exceptionalism that is unlikely to be repeated.
4) Less global inequality, more local inequality.
Demographic Dividend:
With rapidly aging populations and declining number of working age people in North America, Europe and East Asia, the demand for workers will increasingly be met by major labor exporting nations like Bangladesh, China, India, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia and Vietnam. Among these nations, Pakistan is the only major labor exporting country where the working age population is still rising faster than the birth rate.
Over 10 million Pakistanis are currently working/living overseas, according to the Bureau of Emigration. Before the COVID19 pandemic hit in 2020, more than 600,000 Pakistanis left the country to work overseas in 2019. Nearly 700,000 Pakistanis have already migrated in this calendar year as of October, 2022. The average yearly outflow of Pakistani workers to OECD countries (mainly UK and US) and the Middle East was over half a million in the last decade.
World's 7th Largest Consumer Market:
Pakistan's share of the working age population (15-64 years) is growing as the country's birth rate declines, a phenomenon called demographic dividend. With its rising population of this working age group, Pakistan is projected by the World Economic Forum to become the world's 7th largest consumer market by 2030. Nearly 60 million Pakistanis will join the consumer class (consumers spending more than $11 per day) to raise the country's consumer market rank from 15 to 7 by 2030. WEF forecasts the world's top 10 consumer markets of 2030 to be as follows: China, India, the United States, Indonesia, Russia, Brazil, Pakistan, Japan, Egypt and Mexico. Global investors chasing bigger returns will almost certainly shift more of their attention and money to the biggest movers among the top 10 consumer markets, including Pakistan. Already, the year 2021 has been a banner year for investments in Pakistani technology startups.
India's Kautilya Doctrine:
“Every neighboring state is an enemy and the neighboring state's neighbor is a friend.”
― Kautilya, The Arthashastra
The name of Kautilya, meaning crooked, is invoked by former Indian foreign secretary Shyam Saran's book “How India Sees the World: Kautilya to the 21st Century”. This invocation of Kautilya in the title of the book makes the above quote about "neighboring state is an enemy" particularly relevant to how Indian policymakers like Shyam Saran see Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Kautilya presented a theory of international relations called the “circle of states,” or Rajamandala. It says hostile states are those that border the ruler’s state, forming a circle around it. In turn, states that surround this set of hostile states form another circle around the circle of hostile states. This second circle of states can be considered the natural allies of the ruler’s state against the hostile states that lie between them. Put more succinctly, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
Pakistanis like AVM Shahzad Chaudhry must understand that India's foreign policy has always been and continues to be guided by the Kautilya Doctrine.
Related Links:
Haq's Musings
South Asia Investor Review
Ex Indian Diplomat Sabharwal on Pakistan's "Resilience", "Strategic" CPEC
Modi's Size Illusion
Modi's Kashmir Blunder
Who's to Blame For Prior Failures to Reach India-Pakistan Peace Deal?
Why Has Modi Failed to Isolate Pakistan?
Pakistan Projected to Become World's 6th Largest Economy by 2075
Pakistan Projected to Be 7th Largest Consumer Market By 2030
Ambassador Kishore Mahbubani: America Does Not Respect India
US Brackets Modi With Murderous Dictators
Obama: Quickest Route to Indian Unity is Expressing Hostility Toward Pakistan
Riaz Haq's Youtube Channel
PakAlumni: Pakistani Social Network
Is Shahzad Chaudhry Right "On India"?
The Pakistan Air Force's Retired Air Vice Marshal Shahzad Chaudhry has recently penned an op-ed for The Express Tribune newspaper calling on...
Peace with Nazi hindus is impossible.
Path-Finder
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2013
- Messages
- 24,393
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Okay, since you are in yankee doodle'ville. the yanks have the biggest embassy in the world located in Pakistan. unless I am mistaken.
Strategic importance due to the location. now you get no prizes for opening a map and seeing what countries Pakistan shares a border with!
lastly every time the yanks walk away discarding Pakistan. they return for some reason. cant understand why that is.
On India… revisited
Initial responses from across the border to the piece were steadied, cautiously praiseful, and deliberate
By Shahzad Chaudhry
tribune.com.pk
Why do we write such pieces in difficult sociocultural environments? This one was based on globally acknowledged facts and carried little of my own proclivity except for framing it into a larger argument for invoking a different paradigm of engagement between three conjoined nations, not two. These make for forty percent of the global population. Naysayers and those corroded of thought soon suggested why it wasn’t possible. Most Indians wanted Pakistan to submit before Indian exclusivity. Even success needs character. The past though haunted most. They had too much invested in their past bridling them to it. In comparison, none should have a past more invested than mine in how one has looked at India. I led a service and its operations imbued with just one objective in mind — to beat India in the air with operational readiness, innovation borne out of professional excellence, and passionate devotion. Nothing of that changes even when we investigate the possibility of another paradigm which could instead usher better return to forty percent of humanity. Modi has a past too, as does the Indian nation, but shall we be held back by recriminations or hold the courage to spawn promise and hope?
It by no means only aims at changing one side’s view. If indeed a recalibration is the call it shall fall upon each to do their bit. India is no angel. Far from it. Reams have been written on how India has manipulated and exploited its relative freedom of action for more insidious motives. Kashmiris and minorities in India are a living proof of how India denies humanity its dignity. China is in focus for similar reasons in the western press. Yet, the new politics and the new economics call for newer avenues of engagement which can serve to achieve a nation’s interest. If the engagement is mutually beneficial it becomes interdependence. Diplomacy as a servant of strategy must then evaluate planks for maximum gains. At times immediate returns are shelved for long-term, sustainable goals. Anachronism (tarz-e-kuhan) will have to give way to fresher approaches (fikr-e-nau) to make it work.
Initial responses from across the border to the piece were steadied, cautiously praiseful, and deliberate
By Shahzad Chaudhry
On India… revisited | The Express Tribune
Initial responses from across the border to the piece were steadied, cautiously praiseful, and deliberate
Why do we write such pieces in difficult sociocultural environments? This one was based on globally acknowledged facts and carried little of my own proclivity except for framing it into a larger argument for invoking a different paradigm of engagement between three conjoined nations, not two. These make for forty percent of the global population. Naysayers and those corroded of thought soon suggested why it wasn’t possible. Most Indians wanted Pakistan to submit before Indian exclusivity. Even success needs character. The past though haunted most. They had too much invested in their past bridling them to it. In comparison, none should have a past more invested than mine in how one has looked at India. I led a service and its operations imbued with just one objective in mind — to beat India in the air with operational readiness, innovation borne out of professional excellence, and passionate devotion. Nothing of that changes even when we investigate the possibility of another paradigm which could instead usher better return to forty percent of humanity. Modi has a past too, as does the Indian nation, but shall we be held back by recriminations or hold the courage to spawn promise and hope?
It by no means only aims at changing one side’s view. If indeed a recalibration is the call it shall fall upon each to do their bit. India is no angel. Far from it. Reams have been written on how India has manipulated and exploited its relative freedom of action for more insidious motives. Kashmiris and minorities in India are a living proof of how India denies humanity its dignity. China is in focus for similar reasons in the western press. Yet, the new politics and the new economics call for newer avenues of engagement which can serve to achieve a nation’s interest. If the engagement is mutually beneficial it becomes interdependence. Diplomacy as a servant of strategy must then evaluate planks for maximum gains. At times immediate returns are shelved for long-term, sustainable goals. Anachronism (tarz-e-kuhan) will have to give way to fresher approaches (fikr-e-nau) to make it work.
If de-hyphenation had already taken place as you claim, Jaishankar wouldn't be going around the world obsessing over Pakistan.
US-Pakistan F-16 Deal: Indian EAM Jaishankar Throws a Tantrum
News, analysis and opinions about India, Pakistan, US, Canada, Europe, Mid East, South Asia, Silicon Valley, High Technology, Economy, Politics, World
“You’re not fooling anybody by saying these things," said Indian External Affairs Minister Subramanian Jaishankar to his American hosts in Washington. He was lashing out at the United States for the State Department's explanation for the $450 million F-16 "sustainment" package sale to Pakistan. Earlier, the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said in an announcement:
“This proposed sale ($450 million F-16 package) will support the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by allowing Pakistan to retain interoperability with US and partner forces in ongoing counter-terrorism efforts and in preparation for future contingency operations.” The US State Department spokesman Ned Price talked about "shared values" and "shared interests" of his country with both India and Pakistan. He also recommended that "these two neighbors have relations with one another that are as constructive as can be possible".
Responding to Jaishankar's outburst, the US State Department spokesman Ned Price said, “We don’t view our relationship with Pakistan, and … our relationship with India as in relation to one another. These are both partners of ours with different points of emphasis in each. We look at both as partners, because we do have in many cases shared values. We do have in many cases shared interests. And the relationship we have with India stands on its own. The relationship we have with Pakistan stands on its own. We also want to do everything we can to see to it that these neighbors have relations with one another that are as constructive as can be possible. And so that’s another point of emphasis.”
#India says no ‘conducive atmosphere’ for talks with Pakistan. Last week, #Pakistan PM Sharif had said: “I will give my word that we will talk to India with sincerity, but it takes two to tango” #Modi #Hindutva #Islamophobia #BJP @shazchy09 https://aje.io/1e0z90 via @AJEnglish
Days after Pakistan offered to hold talks with archrival India, New Delhi says the atmosphere for dialogue is not conducive yet.
“India’s position has remained clear and consistent. We desire normal neighbourly relations with Pakistan in a conducive atmosphere that is free of terror, hostility, and violence,” Indian foreign ministry spokesman Arindam Bagchi said during a news briefing on Thursday.
Earlier this week, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif called for talks with India to discuss “burning issues such as Kashmir”, the Himalayan territory claimed in full by the two nuclear powers, who have ruled over parts of it since 1947.
The South Asian rivals have fought two of their three full-scale wars over the disputed territory.
“I will give my word that we will talk to India with sincerity, but it takes two to tango,” Sharif said during an interview with Al Arabiya news channel aired on Tuesday.
“My message to the Indian leadership and Prime Minister Narendra Modi is that let us sit down on the table and have serious and sincere talks to resolve our burning issues like Kashmir,” he added.
The Pakistani leader made the remarks during a visit to the United Arab Emirates, which he said could play a role in resolving the differences between the two neighbours.
Relations between India and Pakistan worsened in 2019 when Modi’s Hindu nationalist government revoked Article 370 of the Indian constitution, which granted Indian-administered Kashmir partial autonomy.
New Delhi accuses Islamabad of providing logistical and financial support to the armed rebels fighting either for independence or for the merger of Indian-administered Kashmir with Pakistan.
Islamabad denies the allegations, saying it only provides diplomatic support to the region’s struggle for the right to self-determination.
Jalil Abbas Jilani, Pakistan’s former foreign secretary, told Al Jazeera that Sharif’s statements on the resumption of ties with India appeared to be “genuine” and that Pakistan would like to have peace and stability in the region.
“Pakistan wants to resolve all disputes peacefully. The tension that exists between the two nations is not in either’s interests,” he said.
Jilani said “terrorism” is a matter of concern for both countries equally and “only once the two sit together, they can amicably resolve the matter”.
However, the former high commissioner of Pakistan to India, Abdul Basit, believes any headway in the relations between the two nations looks unlikely.
“Pakistan-India relations are in a cul-de-sac. Breaking deadlock and talks for the sake of talks will be more of the same,” he told Al Jazeera.
In February 2021, the two countries renewed a two-decade-old ceasefire pact along the 725km (450 miles) Line of Control, the de facto border that divides Kashmir between the two nations. But bilateral talks have stalled since India’s Kashmir move.
Vivek Katju, a former Indian ambassador, said Sharif’s interview made it appear as if Pakistan was ready to engage with India without caveats before a change in sentiment as shown by the PM office clarification.
“India’s position has remained consistent on relationship with Pakistan,” Katju told Al Jazeera.
“What struck me was that whatever the Pakistani prime minister said in his interview, it was all nullified by the subsequent statement from his office, putting the condition of reversal of Article 370.”
Days after Pakistan offered to hold talks with archrival India, New Delhi says the atmosphere for dialogue is not conducive yet.
“India’s position has remained clear and consistent. We desire normal neighbourly relations with Pakistan in a conducive atmosphere that is free of terror, hostility, and violence,” Indian foreign ministry spokesman Arindam Bagchi said during a news briefing on Thursday.
Earlier this week, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif called for talks with India to discuss “burning issues such as Kashmir”, the Himalayan territory claimed in full by the two nuclear powers, who have ruled over parts of it since 1947.
The South Asian rivals have fought two of their three full-scale wars over the disputed territory.
“I will give my word that we will talk to India with sincerity, but it takes two to tango,” Sharif said during an interview with Al Arabiya news channel aired on Tuesday.
“My message to the Indian leadership and Prime Minister Narendra Modi is that let us sit down on the table and have serious and sincere talks to resolve our burning issues like Kashmir,” he added.
The Pakistani leader made the remarks during a visit to the United Arab Emirates, which he said could play a role in resolving the differences between the two neighbours.
Relations between India and Pakistan worsened in 2019 when Modi’s Hindu nationalist government revoked Article 370 of the Indian constitution, which granted Indian-administered Kashmir partial autonomy.
New Delhi accuses Islamabad of providing logistical and financial support to the armed rebels fighting either for independence or for the merger of Indian-administered Kashmir with Pakistan.
Islamabad denies the allegations, saying it only provides diplomatic support to the region’s struggle for the right to self-determination.
Jalil Abbas Jilani, Pakistan’s former foreign secretary, told Al Jazeera that Sharif’s statements on the resumption of ties with India appeared to be “genuine” and that Pakistan would like to have peace and stability in the region.
“Pakistan wants to resolve all disputes peacefully. The tension that exists between the two nations is not in either’s interests,” he said.
Jilani said “terrorism” is a matter of concern for both countries equally and “only once the two sit together, they can amicably resolve the matter”.
However, the former high commissioner of Pakistan to India, Abdul Basit, believes any headway in the relations between the two nations looks unlikely.
“Pakistan-India relations are in a cul-de-sac. Breaking deadlock and talks for the sake of talks will be more of the same,” he told Al Jazeera.
In February 2021, the two countries renewed a two-decade-old ceasefire pact along the 725km (450 miles) Line of Control, the de facto border that divides Kashmir between the two nations. But bilateral talks have stalled since India’s Kashmir move.
Vivek Katju, a former Indian ambassador, said Sharif’s interview made it appear as if Pakistan was ready to engage with India without caveats before a change in sentiment as shown by the PM office clarification.
“India’s position has remained consistent on relationship with Pakistan,” Katju told Al Jazeera.
“What struck me was that whatever the Pakistani prime minister said in his interview, it was all nullified by the subsequent statement from his office, putting the condition of reversal of Article 370.”
