The United Nations’ Pakistan’s National Human Development Report 2020 (Power, People and Policy) makes startling revelations about Pakistan’s polity and society. It defines “power” as “privileged groups that make use of loopholes, networks and policies for their benefit”.”People” refer “the deeply embedded belief system that stimulates bias, inter alia, against “religion or caste”. It defines “policy” as “systems and strategies” that are either ineffective or at odds with principles of social justice”. The report is a scathing criticism of “not only inequality of income, but also inequality of opportunity in terms of access to services, works with dignity, and more”.
Major findings
The feudal aristocracy and industrial robber barons together enjoyed privileges of whopping Rs. 1094 billion. The feudal enjoyed Rs. 370 billion while the business tycoons enjoyed Rs. 724 billion. Being perched in Pakistan’s parliament they ensure that Pakistan’s taxation system remained regressive. The feudal elite of only 1.1 per cent of the population own 22 per cent of the country’s farm area.
The report depicts how miserable the lifestyle of the average Pakistani is in contrast with a high net worth household. The average income of a high net worth household is 600 times more than that of an average Pakistani household. Despite being filthy rich, the high-net-worth bracket evades taxes worth Rs. 168 billion.
The 20 per cent richest devoured 50 per cent of the country’s national income as compared to seven per cent which the poorest 20 per cent get. Instead of paying most taxes, the high net-worth individuals enjoy privileges amounting to Rs. 368 billion.
Disproportionate share in legislature
The report notes the rich have a disproportionately large share in federal and provincial legislatures. . This enables them to “safeguard” the tax benefits and special concessions. They are granted “favoured tax treatment for agricultural income and land revenues, low irrigation water charges despite Pakistan’s water-stressed status, preferential access to bank credit, and subsidies for fertilizers and the provision of electricity for tube wells.
Military expenditure
Besides criticising privileges of the civil elite groups, the report has commented on military privileges also. It states that the military was found “to receive $1.7bn in privileges, mainly in the form of preferential access to land, capital and infrastructure, as well as tax exemptions.
The report noted, also, that “Pakistan’s military is also “the largest conglomerate of business entities in Pakistan, besides being the country’s biggest urban real estate developer and manager, with wide-ranging involvement in the construction of public projects”. The views about the military appear to be wishy-washy of Ayesha Sideeqa’s Military Inc.
A bitter lesson of history is that only such states survived and were able to strike a balance between constraints of security and welfare. Garrison or warrior states vanished as if they never existed. Client states, living on doles from powerful states, ended up as banana republics. We should at least learn from the European security experience.
History shows some states collapsed suddenly while others decayed gradually. Just think of what great empires were like Austria-Hungary, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Sweden and Tsarist Russia (exposed to the 1917 revolution) and even the erstwhile USSR.
A common feature of all strong states had been that they had strong military and civil institutions, de jure capability to defend their territory and policies that favoured the citizenry rather than dominant classes — feudal lords, industrial robber barons and others.
India’s rising defence expenditure ratchets up Pakistan’s defence outlays. Unless India lowers its defence outlay it is difficult for Pakistan to reduce its defence expenditure. With India always at daggers drawn defence deserves to be a priority.
Concluding remarks
The report identified the economic malaise but omitted to pinpoint the major causative factor. Pakistan’s predicament is that it is unable to undertake radical land and capital reforms. It could not do away with the jagirs granted by the British raj to its “chiefs” and “chieftains” like India.Bhutto’s land reforms were annulled by majority decision of the Shariat Appellate Bench in Qizilbash Trust case.
Factors contributing to Pakistan’s economic malaise are obvious. However political will to grapple them is lacking. We need to learn from Ayub-era planning experience. We should activate the planning commission and the statistical offices. We should float fair global tenders to tap our mineral resources. China should launch turnkey projects to utilise our local resources and create jobs. Import –export policy should be bridled. Economic relations with Muslim world should be improved.
