:::: MENU ::::

Kaiser Bengali explains the Economic performance of Shaukat Aziz

Kaiser Bengali is currently working for Collective for Social Science Research, a research company based in Karachi, economist Bengali has also served as the managing director Social Policy Development Centre between 2001-2004. Here he talks with TNS about a range of issues and gives his own economic blueprint which is closely tied up with politics. Excerpts of the interview follow:

The News on Sunday (TNS): How do see the relationship between military regimes and economic progress?
Kaiser Bengali (KB): There is a myth about development and economic performance of military regimes. In Pakistan, Ayub Khan, Ziaul Haq and Musharraf have all received unprecedented support from IMF and World Bank. In the case of Musharraf, it was the rescheduling and, of course, money that was coming as rental from the United States for using our space.

There were four factors which contributed to the high growth during the Zia period, none of which can be located in Zia’s economic policy. The oil price shock hit the world in 1973 but it was 1975-77 when the first emigrants from Pakistan began to leave for Saudi Arabia and it was 1978 when the remittance inflow began and it peaked in 1982onwards. So the price of the oil price shock was borne by the Bhutto regime but the benefits were accrued by the Zia regime. This rate of remittance inflow gave the govt sufficient fiscal space.

Second, there were very large investments made during the Bhutto period that had long gestation periods. The Pakistan Steel Mills construction started in 1974, and it started commercial production in1982. Similarly there were Heavy Mechanical Complex, Indus Highway, Heavy Electrical Complex, Port Qasim and Ittehad Chemicals (chemical lindustry’s foundation was laid in 1970s and chemicals are a major input in a large number of consumer industries). So this investment in the 1970s began to fruit in the 1980s leading to large chunk of output increases.

Third, because of Afghan war Pakistan received enormous amount of foreign funding, almost unlimited.

And fourth, Zia resorted very heavily on borrowing and deficit financing. When he took over the debt-GDP ratio of the country was 24%and in 1988 when Zia left the scene, it was 48%. So if you get manna form heaven your performance will be good. However, the poor performance of Zia regime became apparent in the 1990s and till later.

TNS: What happened in the 1990s?
KB: In the 1990s the civilian governments had no fiscal space because all the resources they had were mobilized for repaying the dept which Zia had left them. You will recall in 1984, Mahboob ul Haq, Zia’s finance minister floated whitener bonds with a ten year maturity period. They matured in 1994. If you look at the budget of 1994, debt service rate went very high – almost 40% in nominal terms. Zia government had collected money and spent it [on defense], so in 1994Benazir government had to repay that money.

So, if you say 1990 were not an era of good economic performance, it was there were no resources. I once asked somebody very senior in Nawaz Sharif government as to why the ninth five year plan was not being prepared. His reply was that whenever the economic team met, all they discussed was when was the next installment due and where would the money come from. He said there was no point in discussing any thing else.

TNS: In this backdrop how do you look at the economic performance of Musharraf in the last eight years?
KB: GDP growth rate is an average of growth in its component sectors. So in the years that GDP growth rate was around 8%, in 2003 for instance, banking sector growth rate was 29% and the automobile sector growth rate was 45%. Now if you have some sectors where growth rate is so high, your average will go up, even if the variance is very high.

The banking sector growth rate was high because the government, or the State Bank rather, allowed consumer financing from 2002 onwards. The monetary was you could get a loan for a house, car, fridge, camera, if for nothing else, a vacation or a personal loan. Banks made enormous profits out of consumer credit and profits are a component of GDP. A lot of this credit was going in for buying cars so automobile production went up by 40-45%.

So basically it was a one legged growth and that one leg is consumer financing. You remove consumer financing, everything else collapses. You are only managing an economy for your numbers to look good, for headlines.

TNS: What is the other leg of the economy?
KB: Largely there are two legs of an economy, agriculture and manufacturing. The services sector is the body. If you look at the national accounts, more than 50% of growth of GDP is coming from services sector. Agriculture is stagnant, and so is manufacturing barring one or two sectors, like automobiles. Today we have an economy with weak legs and a bloated body. It is not sustainable.

TNS: What is wrong with consumer financing?
KB: What it did was that it increased money supply in the economy. In the first two years, inflation remained low because there was excess manufacturing capacity in the country. So factories which were operating at two shifts began to operate at three shifts and the supply increased. But once that capacity was reached demand continued to increase because people kept going to restaurants and kept paying out of credit cards. Once supply was constant and demand continued to increase inflation was the result. Sp today we have runaway inflation, nearly double digit and food inflation which is certainly more than12%.

Another things that has happened is that a lot of demand has been created for imported products. W are importing billion dollars worth of mobile phones. We are importing cars, because we only assemble cars here. And with cars come petroleum imports as well.

So we have created two problems: inflation that is out of control and a trade imbalance. Our imports have risen sharply while the exports are stagnant. And this is what the coming government is going to inherit. Just as Zia gave a debt mountain to the incoming government, the Musharraf regime is going to give the next government a massive foreign exchange crisis.

TNS: What about the outgoing government’s privatization policy?
KB: Our services deficit which has always been very small is rising sharply because of our privatization and foreign investment policy. All the large entities have been privatized to foreign companies. And the investment (FDI) has been in terms of telecommunications, mobile phones and food. All of these companies earn their profits in rupees but remit their profit in dollars. So there is dollar outflow in terms of profit remittance against which there is no dollar inflow. We have created a liability without creating a countervailing asset.

In 1999 total profit remittance outflow, which in monetary language is called reverse remittance, was 97 million dollars a year. Today it is close to a billion dollars and rising.

TNS: About PTCL, is there a justification for a profit-making enterprise?

KB: There was no real policy or principle involved. This is a neo-liberal government which believes it is not the business of the government to be in business. What they have done is that that have sold PTCL to a company which is a state enterprise. So de facto their policy was that is not the business of the Pakistani state to be in business in Pakistan but it can be the business of a foreign state to be in business in Pakistan.

TNS: There is a massive power and energy crisis n the country. Where did we go wrong?
KB: The last investment that was made in the power sector was in the Ghazi Barotha project, which was an achievement of the political governments of the 1990s. In 1988, the Benazir govt. saw a power crisis coming and they went ahead with establishing thermal power plants which takes about three years to build. If those power plants had not been setup, we would have seen the same situation in 1990sthat we have today. There would have been power outages for eight to ten hours.

Since 1999, the Musharraf regime has not invested n a single megawatt of power. In 2001, we had surplus power, today we are living with power shortage. When Benazir’s govt. contracted to buy power at 6cents per hour, there was excessive criticism. Today, for one project they are contracting at 11.5 cents per hour. Today, the world knows that we have a power crisis, it will increase its power knowing that Pakistan has no choice but to buy.

So it is mismanagement of the highest order of the economy. All the investment that they talk about is either portfolio investment, which is the stock market, equity markets or soft investments like telecommunications. These are all investments which do not require these companies to build any brick and mortar and steel structures. So if they have to leave at 24 hours notice, they don’t lose much. What do banks lose, furniture?

TNS: But they have paid huge licensing fees.
KB: That is peanuts compared to the kind of profits they have made. They have recovered several times their licensing fees.

TNS: So are big dams like Kalabagh the only solution to the energy crisis?
KB: Dams don’t produce water, they only store water and you don’t have water. Even now you cannot store water in Tarbela and Mangla to their full capacity.

TNS: You are a strong advocate of low GDP growth rates. Comment.
KB: For about ten years we need to run an economy where the finance minister and the prime minister have the courage not to get good headlines. We need to invest in infrastructure which has deteriorated to a point that we don’t have productive capacity.

When you are investing in infrastructure, and by that I also mean cities which are totally chaotic where no foreigners wants to come, and physical and human infrastructure, the results are going to come after a while. So you are not going to get any output and the GDP is going to be low. Ten years later when you have infrastructure in place then you can target double digit growth rates. That growth will be based on real sectors – on agriculture and manufacturing outputs, not an hot air balloon sectors like mobile phones. By doing so, you will have a massive boost in employment, income generation and poverty reduction.

As for inflation it will be controlled by switching expenditures from current heads to development heads – by abolishing concurrent list ministries and reducing defense expenditure.

TNS: In an idea economic model, what sort of a role do you see for the private and public sector.
KB: Private sector is good in producing those commodities, which are low technology and require small capital investments. We have seen that our private sector is unable to put together large outlays. We have no one in this country of the caliber of Tata or Ambani in India. These are areas where the state will invest.

TNS: But then the state tends to over staff?
KB: There is no problem with that. This is where your economic and social values come in. Is the purpose of the state merely to fill the pockets of profit makers? Or is the state supposed to work for the welfare of the maximum number of people?

It’s a value judgement. When Shaukat Aziz went out for all out privatization, he made a value judgement. The welfare of the people of Pakistan didn’t matter, what mattered was the corporate profits and he made that decision accordingly. As a state we need to determine what are our values. Are we prepared to have a few people who can enjoy summer holidays in Switzerland and the rest of the people virtually starving? If that is acceptable, then fine. We should follow that policy.

TNS: And now to the most immediate issues. How do you look at the current food crisis?
KB: There was a mala fide intention to begin with. The Shaukat Aziz ministry (Finance) predetermined the growth rate they want to achieve. So when you increase the wheat output you increase the agricultural sector growth rate. When you do that GDP growth rate will go up.

There was something else that was suspect here. The estimate for the wheat crop is made after the rains, but this time they mad an announcement of a bumper crop before the winter rains and, based on that announcement, allowed certain part to export wheat to India, apparently half a million tones. After that transaction was complete, the rains came and news began to come in that we are going to have a normal crop. A normal crop means that you import two million tones of wheat which is a routine

Because they had earlier announced a bumper crop, they took time to admit that they were wrong. So the LC for import of wheat was also delayed. One wheat had been exported and we had a normal crop, the wheat market knew there was to be a shortage. Now stockists every wherein the world will behave like that that when they know there is a shortage and prices can go up, they withhold their stocks. They are not evil people. This is normal behavior and this is what a market economy will do if there is a shortage.

They made another mistake. Instead of placing an order for 2 million tonnes of wheat, they placed an order of 1.5 million tonnes of wheat first. Then they realised this mistake and placed another order for half a million tonnes of wheat. After their first order, the signal had already gone out in the market that shortage will remain. So they continued to withhold stocks. If they knew that wheat was arriving and prices will fall, they would have released stocks and that would have taken care of the shortage.

TNS: Prices of other commodities have doubled alongside?
KB: There are two components of economic management: fiscal policy and monetary policy. The State Bank is following a restrictive monetary policy while the finance ministry is following a liberal fiscal policy, one is contradicting the other and neither of them effective. The government is borrowing heavily from the State Bank for its expenditure. That means the money supply increases. On one hand, the State Bank is trying to restrict money supply by increasing interest rates, and on the other the government is raising the money supply. When money supply increases prices will rise.

There is another reason for increasing food prices. Our agricultural yield per acre is constant on declining for most crops because we are not investing in our land, in supporting agriculture. The government’s adhocism is causing problems. When the government suddenly imported tomatoes and prices crash. As a result the farmer will not grow tomato next year, shifting the crisis to the next year.

For eight years Shaukat Aziz has mismanaged the economy like no other finance minister. Because Shaukat Aziz knew he does not has to go back and ask people for votes, he couldn’t care less about what he did to the economy. All he had to show for was the stock market performance which is only hot air.


  • shahid husain

    Very revealing interview.

  • Maestro

    Could you talk a bit about Mr. Bengali’s background.

    I agree with a fair bit of analysis except for the part about the state running and owning businesses. I think one of the primary structural problems we have alway had is the amount of productive capacity in control of the state. So whoever controls the state, determines which economic direction we go in as a nation. And we have that game on for the last 60 years.

    In my limited an humble experience the private sector will always make more efficient choices and decisions. If it doesn’t have the capital or the capacity to support large scale projects, the state can certainly asist by providing capital and infrastructure. I think there is an inherent contradiction here that need to be clarified by Dr. Bengali.

  • sohna

    Very heart breaking analysis in the article. What ever Dr Bengali has said is, in layman terms, well known to all of us. The problem is every one does his notorious act and gets away…No body is going to get hold of the wrong doers..I pray that they do pay for what ever they have done to our beloved country. May be some day, some one will make them accountable..not this government ofcourse.

  • Amin Haq

    Dr. Bengali presents only one side of the story. While President Musharrafs regime has made many mistakes, the fact remains that the broad economic performance of Pakistans economy under Musharraf has improved. I dont endorse dictatorships, particularly military ones, but we have seen that Pakistan has its improved foreign exchange reserves to nearly $ 15 Billion, reduced the ratio of foreign debt to GDP by nearly half (from 80% to 40%) and improved tax receipts by four-fold. Indeed we have seen that personal incomes of the educated middle class have been rising steadily. Young, urbane Pakistanis expect to receive robust annual salary increases and have plenty of opportunity to switch jobs (if not careers) if their professional goals arent realized. These are no mean achievements even if you vehemently oppose dictators. I also take exception to Dr. Bengalis analysis that the investment in the telecom sector is of little consequence. Surely, he doesnt want us to believe that in the information-age that we all live-in Pakistanis will somehow manage to not improve their productivity and stifle their creativity that arises from access to information? One only needs to visit the bustling bazaars and offices of Pakistan to witness the human enterprise at work. After all we are not like the Gulf States that import all their labor. Who is fabricating the cell phone towers? It is a Pakistani. Who is installing the cell sites, running them, managing the IT network, running the billing and data centers, repairing the cell phones? It is a Pakistani again. So lets give the devil his due. Where we need to get our act together is to stop taking an ideological position on religious matters and go back to the pre-Zia days where we were atleast somewhat secular. The governments job is not to provide jobs. But it does need to provide rule-of-law, security of life and property and access to education and health-care. Thats it. Based on the preceding criteria, both Pakistani politicians and dictators score a failing grade.

  • While I agree with Dr. Bengali’s analysis regarding Musharraf-Aziz administration’s mistakes in the areas of energy and wheat, I find his economic ideas rather strange. He seems to think that encouraging the consumer sector and consumer spending is a bad thing. He believes in mega-projects executed by a very inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy such as the ones undertaken under ZA Bhutto. He argues that the telecom infrastructure and build-out with base stations/towers, switches etc is not brick-and-mortar/plant investment, and contrary to the facts, he believes portfolio investments in Pakistan are larger than the FDI. It seems to me that he is a believer in the pre-reform economic policies of India which made it bankrupt in the early 80s. With Dr. Bengali’s ideas, we’d be looking backward rather than forward. I would rather have a Shaukat Aziz with all his flaws rather than a Dr. Bengali with all his antiquated “brilliance” guiding Pakistan’s economy.

  • Asif Panhwer

    I agree to Dr. Bengali on his over all comentry and criticism on Musharaf, Zia and Ayub regime but there are few positive factors which we must admit as mentioned by Mr. Riaz Haq. I am not in favor of regime or dictatorship and consider them the root cause of Pakistan’s development, as one govt come and try to do every reforms to make themselve clear and clean infront of people and international media but they don’t think for the long-term stabilty and prosperity of Pakistan. The main problem of Pakistan is the lack of vision and policy for long-term development, we are very eager to engage ourself into international political scene (like every govt did and musharaf is following the footsteps) but no one is considering the economic development of Pakistan. The real development needs of Pakistan are the Litrecy which will boost the employment, remetances, and growth. We are neglecting our economic back-bone agricultre and trying to gain quick short-term economic progress through other sectors. The authorities really need to think about it that they are trying to develop a structure on “weak roots”, it is better to strengthen the roots first and then go forward to develop the structure.

  • Maqsood Karim

    Its always easy to speak loud in isolation. However, a health debate with positive criticism and without any personal liking and/or disliking could be more productive altogether.
    Dr Bengali depicted Pakistans economic history by highlighting some interesting stories, which seems catchy for a general reader and which is followed by some other interesting comments made by the readers who also have their own mindset.
    What I learnt from this discussion that these simple Pakistanis somehow or other defending thoughts of their political heroes. Dr Bengali seems highly impressed with the policies of PPP ideology and tried to defend the initiatives/acts of ZA/Benazir Buttos. Same is the case with the readers and they have soft corner (may be frightened) for the military generals and last political government.
    Unfortunately, we do not have leaders from the grassroots level that actually ever faced problems to get basic necessities of life, like food. Most of our political leaders have a strong family background with a countless wealth. There inborn hunger demands them to suck each and every resource of the country. They do maintain their foreign bank accounts for their personal future crisis but they never bothered to even think about any future surprising situation of Pakistan economy towards which they are pushing it together. Military generals always love to strengthen army only for the sustainability of their next generation and political leaders do have their similar mottos locally and internationally.
    Due to the global economic environment created by the lords, our illiterate public (you and I) does not have time to read these kinds of economic theories and analysis. They are only looking for a piece of meal before they go to bed. Due to this fact, common person have no interest in future infrastructure and policies or even the whole country is sold to the multi-national firms. They only know that the price of bread is rising every year, food oil is going out of purchasing power and they do not have rights to even think about luxurious life. The concept of middle class is fading drastically and very soon they have no other choice but to grab their children from so-called government schools and throw them to the fields to earn their loaf. We dont have time to protest and shout at lords sins. We dont even have time to think, how to become a nation but we are only hoping and waiting for a divine power which will pull us out of this dark hole.

  • Nasir

    We are a import dependent economy, where we had to import everything for the sake of 20% of population. If we had followed our neighbours such as China or for that matter India where the growth rates were very low in socialist economies (2% hindu growth rate) the situation could have been different.

    Both the economies are having nearly and exceeding double digit growth rate.

    As far as privatization is concerned I agree that whats the reason to sell the silver spoon, in case of PTCL the lines are dead not for days but for months and nobody is there to rectify the situation…previously people knew the line man but nowaay no body is there..

    People know how Habib Bank was sold at a throaway price just its Plaza could have fetched the same price leave alone its other assets..same was the case with steel mills luckily CJP intervened and stopped it altogether to the disappointment of corrupt PM and his equally incompetent and corrupt boss Musharraf.

  • Fahd Hashim

    Whilst I concur some of the facts that have been entertained by Mr. Bangali, in my humble perspective, I have a few alternate version to the events that are being foretold. One mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist; it all boils down to which ideology you subscribe to. Similarly I see a clear bias which leads me to believe that Mr Bangali if nothing is a pro Bhutto supporter. Apparently both the Bhuttos are being applauded as major drivers of growth in the Pakistani economy. The paradox that screams this predisposition stems from his example of Ittehad Chemicals, which at one instance is clouted as but one among many drivers that champions the senior Bhutto, and yet the same example leads us to the very quagmire that was nationalized by Bhutto. Given that this article seeks to establish that private sector is more efficient in regards to capital goods, and yet this notion is waved off in the ambiguity in the age of sensational journalism.
    Whilst I agree that most of the growth is paper growth and much of the growth is credited to rescheduling of debt. I would also like to establish that liquid assets in the face of foreign exchange reserves have posted a growth of 10 fold from the 97 balance. Granted most of the money is translated as compensation for the Pakistans participation in the war of terror, yet is this the first time that Pakistan has been in a position to be a beneficiary of such a grant? One such parallel was the afghan soviet war, which in hindsight sets this “dictatorial“regime at a level paranormal when compared to the performance of its earlier predecessor. Give credit where its due, granted there was many a fallacies in many an options that this regime has taken, yet there were some positives that could be set as a ground to future growth. The apparent notion being that the 90s were cushioned in as a recluse with the hands of many an elected governments were tied and hence no economic measures of notice could be undertaken, yet no measure is given to the channeling of money in the name of corruption. Is it a wonder that 100 percent of Mr. 10% net worth of 1.5 billion dollars is credited to the 90s? Or is it a wonder that Nawaz Shareefs growth as a business tycoon coincides with his tenure, when he dawned the cap also in the condemned time frame?. Is that to say the military is transparent? No, they have surely seeked out their piece of the pie but in retrospect we see more tangible growth in the last 10 years then 50 preceding it. Also true is that this regime has doubled the development budget from 8 billion dollars to 16 billion dollars for this year, which if nothing posts a model that defines growth. Yet this point was duly avoided.
    Today the power crisis is plaguing Pakistan, yet no one pinpoints to the reason why we have issues. We were told in the article that in 01 we had excess energy; which is a stone cold truth, also true, we were in a position to sell our excess energy. So the question that pops in the mind then is, did we have load shedding pre 01? And the answer is yes then why is it so? if BB was credited for the increase in power supply that almost led us into a position where in we could have exported energy and yet we had the same quandaries with the power supply that has plagued us since inception. The Wapda power grid distribution network had been a borne to our problems then and is a thorn now, yet this point was duly avoided. So what sense is it to increase the supply which would eventually be wasted in those ancient power grids?
    Today if the energy crisis is plaguing us, its owing to an increase demand by factories doing triple shifts and also the destruction to the distribution centers by the mob in the aftermath of Benazirs martyrdom. Destruction of public goods has consequences which are being borne by all, it is what it is you dance with the devil, the devil becomes you.
    One more glaring omission of the golden 90s was the steel mill performance. In an era where global economy was booming and the Asian tigers and the dot com bubble was on its way up, our steel mill profits were in the red? Also true was that banks like UBL and Muslim commercial bank were brought to their knees, also true is that media didnt have the same discretions as it has now, also true is more flyovers were built in the last 10 years then in any decade prior. Long story short the article above does present a version which is true on some regards and yet is blatant on the others. I could have easily dwelled on the Sui gas or the Hubco tariff issues, or the rise of the Gawadar port. But that defeats the purpose, the perspective lies not in living in the past but growing from it. I guess the point I am trying to drive home is, off the bat, this regime is the lesser of the evils that we as a nation have inherited ever since our existence.

    But again is the ground reality that this present government is the be all and end all of all of what we can hope for? No, this government also has its fallacies, the high levels of inflation, the deteriorating law and order situation, civil war in the north east and the rise of the hippy culture.. Ground reality is that today we are furthest from the dream that our founding fathers envisioned for us. Ultimately its all about choosing your poison.

  • Pingback: A couple of interesting articles on Pakistan’s Economy « Anti-Climax()

  • Asad

    Where is the electricity??? every well said but ….i would like to respond to your comment but OUR LIGHT WILL GO OUT any moment…..because that our previous govt made a lot of money and improved the economy of Pakistan.

  • Arif Saeed

    If any one said that the economy of Pakistan is improved, i am not agreed with his statement, either he is not taking in consideration the economy of Pakistan.
    I have heard the KB, in my institute, ICMAP..I m totally agreed with his statement.
    If PAKISTAN has economically improved, so where is electricity, gas, food etc..why inflation..
    if u have improved, so why don’t you provide them subsidy, so that they will not increase prices.
    How it is possible, because the problem creators are in the government, if u said that PK is improved, where are the jobs,… the government has no answers for these questions. According to one person wordings regarding privatization of Pakistan..
    “FIRST WE HAVE HEN , AND WE GET INCOME TO SELL IT’S EGG,
    NOW WE HAVE SOLD THE HEN, NOW FROM WHERE WE GOT THE EGG TO SELL IT.”
    I use to say that “The era of Musharraf have sent again Pakistan in the stone age, or the time of 1947.”
    from where we have to start to read the book again.”

    simply..THOSE WHO DON’T GET THE LESSON FROM IT’S PAST,
    THEY WILL GO THROUGH THE PAST AGAIN”

  • Arif Saeed

    MAY BE YOU DISAGREE WITH MY ANALYSIS,
    BUT THIS IS THAT WHICH I HAVE SEEN., AND I HAVE ANALYZED.

    BECAUSE WE HAVE LOST THE REAL POLITICIAN “Mr. Z.A.Bhutto”
    by there MILITANTS.
    the person who have really give something to Pakistan…

  • Mr. Shaukat Aziz should be taken to the task. He was a great “PAPER TIGER” who did every harm to this country.
    Was he a Pakistani???? I donot belive for a moment he was an imported item with no sympathy for Pakistan.

  • Abdullah Jamil

    Its like reading a novel that never ends but we could actually devise it by start realising our national responsibility and thinking over what we’ve done to the betterment of our land and what are we expecting to gain from; trying and finding out our cost-benefit-quotient score. Moving towards collective-responses-not-individual, establishing an inner feeling of being part of one family, one nation!
    We have precedents like Nipponese’ response to postwar period; faced up every possible earthly problem, and look at them now! It was and it is all because of collective responses to…

  • Pappu

    Shaukaet Aziz is my hero……..
    Musharraf was my hero……
    Asif Zardari is a criminal….
    Nawaz Sharif is a lahori……

  • As indicated earlier, I strongly disagree with Dr. Bengali on the main thrust of his criticism of Shaukat Aziz.
    For a detailed review of Shaukat Aziz’s economic legacy, I invite you to please take a look at: http://southasiainvestor.blogspot.com/2008/07/assessing-shaukat-azizs-economic.html

  • Mr Bengali should not distort facts & figures! Shaukat Aziz is being appreciated WORLD-WIDE for his performance of turning around Pakistan Economy! http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=14816

    Pakistan’s economy grew by 100% — to become $ 160 billion
    Revenue grew by 100% — to become $ 11.4 billion
    Per Capita Income grew by 100% — to become $ 925
    Foreign Reserves grew by 500% — to become $ 17 billion
    Exports grew by 100% — to become $ 18.5 billion
    Textile exports grew by 100% — to become $ 11.2 billion
    Karachi Stock Exchange grew by 500% — to become $ 75 billion
    Foreign Direct Investment grew by 500% — to become $ 8 billion
    Annual Debt servicing decreased by 35% — to become 26%
    Poverty decreased by 10% — to become 24%
    literacy rate grew by 10% — to become 54%
    Public development Funds grew by 100% — to become Rs 520 billion

    Our Leader – Musharraf!

    http://presidentmusharraf.wordpress.com/

    • awara

      Mirza Rohail,

      You forgot to metion one more export

      Export of Muslim blood 10000000%

  • LATEST : A refuttal —> “Ayesha Siddiqa’s MILITARY INC: A Deflective and Derogatory Book”

    Dr Ayesha Siddiqa’s ‘The Military Inc.’ is a book deflective of reality, highly derogatory and against the very notion of sovereignty. Dr Ayesha Siddiqa launches the book by giving the impression that her intention is to cover the entrepreneurial activities of military worldwide. . The publication of Dr Ayesha Siddiqa’s own book ‘Military Inc’ in 2007, in President Musharraf’s era, Dr Ayesha Siddiqa wrote a whole book, to malign a system (MILBUS) whose worth does not exceed 0.8% of Pakistan’s free market economy.

    PASS THE WORD: http://presidentmusharraf.wordpress.com/

  • FACTS ARE FACTS

    sometime its remain difficult to say something about FACTS,while our thoughts at a level jumped into oceanic and we loose our thinking i can say only BEST because we have nothing more than this.

  • Muhammad Nasir

    I do agree with Dr. Bangali. First about foreign investment, he is write that it is in service sector which leave the country within hours. In addition the outflow of foreign exchage due to profit remittace is massive leading to deteriation of BOP. Secondly I really dont agree with the privatization of national assets. If there is inefficecy in the system then remove the inefficency, why selling the valuable assets. Thirdly, the improvements in foreign exchange in Musharraf era was not due to the sound economic policies of Shockat Aziz. Rather it was due to the foreign inflow becasue of the 9/11 attacks when people in foreign countries considered their moncy unsafe. there are also some other events beyond the efforts of Finance Ministry that contributed to positive economic growth. and offcourse the magic values.

  • Habib Khan

    I disagree with Dr. Bangali as the whole business community was behind Shaukat Aziz at that time. When he left then the successor tried the malign the previous govt just to hide their inefficiency. In his era, people were having buying power and hope. Now everything has gone and people are in agony.

  • ThinkTank Pakistan

    Mirza Sb, Ever heard of artificial economy ! Read confessions of an economic hitman by john perkins. you will understand how easy it is to manipulate 3rd world! and thats what happened – "make it look sexy even if its not right" is the name of the game …

    As far as the article Riaz Haq sb wrote on Shaukat Aziz, he factually tried to give a very rosy picture but again having talented DOES NOT mean that somebody has a spine as well. Shaukat Aziz created a way forward for LOOTERS to fetch as much as they can and fill in their reserves. Dont forget the artificial property boom, dont forget the steel mills scandal and there are number of other counter examples … in the nutshell … please don't equate genius with sincerity! He just fled away silently when everything was getting out of hand !

  • Pingback: Aid agencies condemn Pakistan's plans to export wheat()

  • Pingback: US panel calls for Pakistan membership of G-20 - Page 5()