I and many others feared that it would come to this, and we have been proven right. Our fear was that it might turn out to be business as usual, and the first few months of Imran Khan’s government are indeed proving to be that way. Especially disappointing is the way that economic management is being handled. If the present is any guide to the future, then the probability is that we are in for another disappointment.
Just like the PPP before them, the PML-N left a legacy of economic malaise and mismanagement which has left Pakistan’s economy teetering on the edge. This much was known even during the time of their reign. The policies that led to the present state of affairs were plain in sight. And the PTI was the most vocal in decrying those unproductive and destructive policies. Finance Minister Asad Umar, was at it almost daily, pointing out deficiencies and hitting the then government for their wrongdoings.
But now the PTI is in the government, and reality has met rhetoric. Both Asad Umar and Imran Khan have demonstrated little appetite for change. Rather, it is the same old day-to-day fire fighting that we had gotten so accustomed to.
Start with the disappointing fiasco of Atif Mian’s exit, followed by the exit of others from the Economic Advisory Council (EAC). A renowned professor of economics and author of the well-received House of Debt, the appointment of Atif Mian was a welcome reprieve from the pronounced intellectual paucity of a few known names in Pakistan’s economic policy making. Then came his sad exit, forced upon him by a medieval era mind-set that is more concerned with a person’s beliefs than his willingness to do good for the country. His exit was followed by the exit of others like Asim Khwaja, who found it morally and ethically repugnant to carry on under such circumstances. Out went Khan’s mantra of ‘change’ even before it began, succumbing to Khadim Rizvi type mentality.
The leftover EAC contains the same old faces, and don’t have much to say. Take, for example, Dr Ishfaq Hassan Khan, who again finds himself in an ‘advisory’ role. A few weeks ago, he gave a statement regarding ‘out-of-the-box solutions,’ which quickly became the butt of jokes world over. The proposal to ban cheese and ‘non-essentials’ was met with bewilderment, regret and bafflement. It was almost embarrassing to read what he had to say. People around the globe were left wondering whether a country already on the brink of economic disaster could afford such comi-tragedy?
Then there is the finance minister and his thoughts on economic management. Some of his proposed solutions, if not all, leave one scratching their heads in puzzlement. Take, for example, his stance on the loss making public sector entities. The combined debt of these entities stands at more than a trillion rupees, and they bleed more than Rs500 billion of taxpayer money annually with little to show. One does not need to be an economist or financial expert to conclude that getting rid of them, ASAP, is the only sane, long term solution. But the finance minister believes that these entities can be converted into profitable enterprises, to whom investors and buyers would come running and buy them on astronomical prices. He is either unaware of previous efforts to do just that, or choosing to ignore their failure at the hands of entrenched forces that will circumvent any efforts at improvement. If he had a good grasp of Pakistan’s economic management and its history, he would have taken a different stance.
What explains this intellectual mediocrity? Why can’t Pakistan get out of a self-imposed rut where the same old ideas are presented in recycled form over-and-over again? In term of economic management, why is it that we repeatedly keep hearing the same stuff? In a world where ideas and creativity rule the roost in all spheres of life, why is Pakistan’s economic management limited to trite discussions on a few macro indicators?
Two leading intellectuals of Pakistan have taken a brave step to change this trite discourse, and to introduce creative, engaging debate on issues that engulf Pakistan. These range from anthropology, sociology to economics. The initiative comes in the form of a podcast titled Soch Bichar, an invitation to discuss, debate and inform, initiated by D. Nadeem-ul-Haque and Dr Anjum Altaf.
The former is an outspoken critic of the way things have been (and are being) run in Pakistan. His hard-hitting critique and ideas for change have made him an outcast in Pakistan’s policy circles, especially in the eyes of bureaucracy and particularly its dominant group, the PAS. Yet he continues unperturbed. His FEG 2030, for example, was a refreshing escape from the stale world of Pakistan’s economic discussions, centred on a few macro indicators. The latter is perhaps Pakistan’s most under-rated intellectual who holds the distinction of serving on top positions in some of Pakistan’s leading institutes like LUMS. A genial person, his honest and principled stances did not sit well with many, and ultimately resulted in him retiring from professional commitments after he could find no interested party in Pakistan who could utilize his brilliant intellectual acumen. I first got a taste of his predilections for something different when he invited me to LUMS for a presentation related to a topic in economic history, something that’s not even taught in economic departments in Pakistan.
Their soch bichar podcasts cover a lot of ground, and offer its listeners a different perspective. Listeners get to listen to engaging discussions on topics that are new, and come across topics whose importance is rarely grasped within Pakistan’s policymaking circles. For example, how many in Pakistan have ever discussed the importance of research, what is the modus operandi of research in our higher education, or how anthropological discoveries shed light on past plus present economic behaviour?. What is policymaking, and how to go about it in the world of ‘big data’? Is Pakistan’s real problem electricity generation, or the colonial system that underpins that system? Listeners would find all these and more by taking out time to listen to these podcasts, which in itself present an enriching, different perspective.
Above all, Imran khan and Asad Umar need to immerse themselves in such discussions to understand the dynamics and workings of the country and its economy. Otherwise, things seem to be moving along the same old routine, which means that not much can be expected in the next five years. We need to change that, and in a hurry. Imran and his team need serious soch bichar to overcome the intellectual deficit inherent in Pakistan’s policymaking.
Just like the PPP before them, the PML-N left a legacy of economic malaise and mismanagement which has left Pakistan’s economy teetering on the edge. This much was known even during the time of their reign. The policies that led to the present state of affairs were plain in sight. And the PTI was the most vocal in decrying those unproductive and destructive policies. Finance Minister Asad Umar, was at it almost daily, pointing out deficiencies and hitting the then government for their wrongdoings.
But now the PTI is in the government, and reality has met rhetoric. Both Asad Umar and Imran Khan have demonstrated little appetite for change. Rather, it is the same old day-to-day fire fighting that we had gotten so accustomed to.
Start with the disappointing fiasco of Atif Mian’s exit, followed by the exit of others from the Economic Advisory Council (EAC). A renowned professor of economics and author of the well-received House of Debt, the appointment of Atif Mian was a welcome reprieve from the pronounced intellectual paucity of a few known names in Pakistan’s economic policy making. Then came his sad exit, forced upon him by a medieval era mind-set that is more concerned with a person’s beliefs than his willingness to do good for the country. His exit was followed by the exit of others like Asim Khwaja, who found it morally and ethically repugnant to carry on under such circumstances. Out went Khan’s mantra of ‘change’ even before it began, succumbing to Khadim Rizvi type mentality.
The leftover EAC contains the same old faces, and don’t have much to say. Take, for example, Dr Ishfaq Hassan Khan, who again finds himself in an ‘advisory’ role. A few weeks ago, he gave a statement regarding ‘out-of-the-box solutions,’ which quickly became the butt of jokes world over. The proposal to ban cheese and ‘non-essentials’ was met with bewilderment, regret and bafflement. It was almost embarrassing to read what he had to say. People around the globe were left wondering whether a country already on the brink of economic disaster could afford such comi-tragedy?
Then there is the finance minister and his thoughts on economic management. Some of his proposed solutions, if not all, leave one scratching their heads in puzzlement. Take, for example, his stance on the loss making public sector entities. The combined debt of these entities stands at more than a trillion rupees, and they bleed more than Rs500 billion of taxpayer money annually with little to show. One does not need to be an economist or financial expert to conclude that getting rid of them, ASAP, is the only sane, long term solution. But the finance minister believes that these entities can be converted into profitable enterprises, to whom investors and buyers would come running and buy them on astronomical prices. He is either unaware of previous efforts to do just that, or choosing to ignore their failure at the hands of entrenched forces that will circumvent any efforts at improvement. If he had a good grasp of Pakistan’s economic management and its history, he would have taken a different stance.
What explains this intellectual mediocrity? Why can’t Pakistan get out of a self-imposed rut where the same old ideas are presented in recycled form over-and-over again? In term of economic management, why is it that we repeatedly keep hearing the same stuff? In a world where ideas and creativity rule the roost in all spheres of life, why is Pakistan’s economic management limited to trite discussions on a few macro indicators?
Two leading intellectuals of Pakistan have taken a brave step to change this trite discourse, and to introduce creative, engaging debate on issues that engulf Pakistan. These range from anthropology, sociology to economics. The initiative comes in the form of a podcast titled Soch Bichar, an invitation to discuss, debate and inform, initiated by D. Nadeem-ul-Haque and Dr Anjum Altaf.
The former is an outspoken critic of the way things have been (and are being) run in Pakistan. His hard-hitting critique and ideas for change have made him an outcast in Pakistan’s policy circles, especially in the eyes of bureaucracy and particularly its dominant group, the PAS. Yet he continues unperturbed. His FEG 2030, for example, was a refreshing escape from the stale world of Pakistan’s economic discussions, centred on a few macro indicators. The latter is perhaps Pakistan’s most under-rated intellectual who holds the distinction of serving on top positions in some of Pakistan’s leading institutes like LUMS. A genial person, his honest and principled stances did not sit well with many, and ultimately resulted in him retiring from professional commitments after he could find no interested party in Pakistan who could utilize his brilliant intellectual acumen. I first got a taste of his predilections for something different when he invited me to LUMS for a presentation related to a topic in economic history, something that’s not even taught in economic departments in Pakistan.
Their soch bichar podcasts cover a lot of ground, and offer its listeners a different perspective. Listeners get to listen to engaging discussions on topics that are new, and come across topics whose importance is rarely grasped within Pakistan’s policymaking circles. For example, how many in Pakistan have ever discussed the importance of research, what is the modus operandi of research in our higher education, or how anthropological discoveries shed light on past plus present economic behaviour?. What is policymaking, and how to go about it in the world of ‘big data’? Is Pakistan’s real problem electricity generation, or the colonial system that underpins that system? Listeners would find all these and more by taking out time to listen to these podcasts, which in itself present an enriching, different perspective.
Above all, Imran khan and Asad Umar need to immerse themselves in such discussions to understand the dynamics and workings of the country and its economy. Otherwise, things seem to be moving along the same old routine, which means that not much can be expected in the next five years. We need to change that, and in a hurry. Imran and his team need serious soch bichar to overcome the intellectual deficit inherent in Pakistan’s policymaking.