Newsweek on Pakistan....

Newsweek on Pakistan....
Promise in Pakistan
What's behind one of the world's most surprising economic success stories? In part, September 11.By Ron MoreauNewsweek InternationalMarch 27, 2006 issue -
In the late 1990s Lahore-based businessman Iqbal Ahmed was depressed. Pakistan was isolated internationally and in the grip of a deep recession, and his modest, liquefied-petroleum-gas operation didn't seem to be going anywhere. "I used to get up and say, 'What the hell, it's another day'," he recalls. "Now I can't wait for the day to begin. I see a very bright future."Ahmed has good reason to be optimistic. Two years ago he signed a deal with Houston's Hanover Energy Co. that has helped transform his LPG extraction plant into the largest and most efficient in Pakistan, with revenues last year of $130 million. Backed by several international investors, Ahmed has bid some $400 million to buy a controlling interest in Southern Sui Gas, one of two state-owned gas production and distribution companies that are being privatized. And he recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Excelerate Energy of Houston to import liquefied natural gas into Pakistan in supertankers. "We're enjoying a seachange in economic conditions and opportunities," says Ahmed, 60. "Pakistan is open for business."The proof is in the numbers. Last year the country's GDP growth rate hit 8.4 percent, the world's second highest behind China, following two years of solid 6 percent growth. This year the economy is predicted to expand by nearly 7 percent. After years of instability, with the government and military trying to distract people from their economic woes by waging jihad in Kashmir and railing against neighboring India, a true middle class is now developing. Economic reforms have given the government money to invest in health and education, and foreign investors are eying Pakistan for the first time. In many ways the country has become the world's most surprising economic success story.It's a heady turnaround for a nation that, in the late 1990s, was practically a failed state with near-zero GDP growth. Because of its headlong pursuit of nuclear weapons, Pakistan had become the world's most sanctioned nation after Libya. International aid had dried up. The government was forced to borrow at exorbitant short-term rates, burdening the country with a crushing $38 billion debt. "We were in a real soup when [Gen. Pervez] Musharraf took over," says Ziauddin (he uses only one name), the Islamabad editor of the Dawn newspaper.One of Musharraf's first and smartest moves after his 1999 coup was to appoint Shaukat Aziz, a dapper and urbane international banker, as his economic czar, and to give him a free hand to revive the economy. Butwhat really turned the country's fortunes around was September 11. "The 9/11 attack was the best thing that ever happened to Pakistan," says Lahore-based businessman Salmaan Taseer. The United States and Europe immediately lifted all sanctions; Washington gave Pakistan $600 million outright to meet urgent debt payments, and forgave another $1.5 billion in debt. Working with Aziz, America and other creditor nations also rescheduled Pakistan's heavy debt over a manageable 30 to 35 years. In 2004, the United States pledged $3 billion in economic and military assistance over the next five years, in addition to $100 million for education reform. The EU pitched in, lifting quota restrictions on Pakistan's main export, textiles.At the same time, Aziz, who is now prime minister, began enacting a series of common-sense economic reforms. They focused on boosting fiscal discipline, government transparency and accountability. He quickly cut the budget deficit from 8 percent to 4 percent by slashing spending, and lowered interest rates. Since 2002, he has increased tax revenues by 20 percent. He also instituted a sweeping privatization program that has won kudos from both domestic and foreign investors. State-owned companies in numerous industries—banking, cement, fertilizer, utilities—have been sold off, as has a chunk of the state's inefficient telecom giant, PTCL.The newly privatized and cash-flush banks have been on a lending spree, extending loans to capital-starved domestic businessmen and to the Pakistani middle class, which until 2002 had little access to consumer credit. People have snapped up credit cards, and are buying cars and other big-ticket products with easy-credit bank loans. "This is the best government we've had in the past 30 years," says prominent Lahore businessman Syed Babar Ali, who heads some of the country's biggest joint-venture companies, including Coca-Cola and Nestlé.Foreign investors have been flocking to Pakistan to bid on privatizations and on licenses in the newly opened telecom sector. The sale of two cellular-phone licenses (won by U.A.E. and Norwegian companies) netted the government nearly $600 million. It's a good investment as Pakistan, with 24 million cell-phone users, is now the world's fastest-growing wireless market after China. Indeed, Pakistan is expected to receive upwards of $3 billion in foreign investment this year, largely in telecom and gas and oil exploration. The Karachi Stock Exchange recently hit a record high.Bullish domestic investors, too, are snapping up telecom licenses and state assets. Businessman Taseer raised $40 million from Pakistani banks and $25 million from a U.S. venture-capital company in two months as part of his successful bid for a wireless license. He is also building a 350-room Hyatt hotel and shopping-mall complex in Lahore with $40 million in debt and equity that he organized from domestic banks and investors in just six weeks. "This would have been inconceivable before," says Taseer, 50, a cigar-smoking tycoon who publishes the Daily Times newspaper and is constructing Lahore's tallest office building. "Not long ago, we would have waited at least three years to get a loan from an international bank. In the last two years there has been more economic activity in Pakistan than in the past 50."Even Pakistan's nascent technology sector—dwarfed by India's—seems to be taking off. Salim Ghauri, the CEO of Lahore-based NetSol Technologies, says his company's software revenues this year are expected to jump to $19 million, compared with last year's $11 million. DaimlerChrysler uses Ghauri's LeaseSoft auto-leasing and financing software in its operations in eight Asian countries, and Toyota uses it in Thailand and China. "We are competing with the best in the world, and we are coming out on top," says Ghauri, 51, who set up NetSol in 1996 after he returned from working as an IT consultant in Australia.Still, all is not rosy. Pakistan must modernize its creaky infrastructure, further improve tax collection and, most important, normalize economic relations with India. Government critics say the current boom is not benefiting the country's poorest citizens, who make up more than one third of its 160 million people. "The rich have become very rich since 9/11, and the middle class is better off, but not the mass of Pakistanis," says Dawn's Ziauddin. Aziz counters that a recent government-sponsored survey indicates that the country's heady growth has reduced the number of Pakistanis living below the poverty line from one third to a quarter of the population (interview).Some bankers and economists warn that the economy is dangerously overheating, due to unsustainable consumer demand and easy credit to both industrialists and consumers. Aziz and the government dismiss the concern—but consumers and the private sector have borrowed more money from the banks in the past two years than they had in the previous 12. Critics argue that growth-spawned inflation, which hit a high of 11 percent one year ago and is running this year at 8.5 percent, is a big reason the poor are not benefiting from the boom. "Inflation is clearly eroding the purchasing power of the poor," says a foreign banker in Islamabad. This year the price of sugar is up by 26 percent; wheat and potatoes, by 15 percent.According to the foreign banker, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of his comments, "The government is running the [economy] like it's heading for elections." True: President Musharraf and Aziz are eying the crucial 2007 parliamentary elections. Organized political opposition to Musharraf is rising, and he and Aziz are hoping that an economic resurgence will persuade average voters to return them to power for another five years. That's what most businessmen are hoping for, too. But if the rewards of the boom don't start trickling down, the country's runaway growth could ironically prove to be the government's undoing.With Zahid Hussain© 2006 Newsweek, Inc.URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11902379/site/newsweek/
--

Wealth, Success and Love

A woman came out of her house and saw 3 old men with long white beards sitting in her front yard. She did not recognize them. She said "I don't think I know you, but you must be hungry. Please come in and have something to eat."
"Is the man of the house home?", they asked.
"No", she said. "He's out."
"Then we cannot come in", they replied. In the evening when her husband came home, she told him what had happened.
"Go tell them I am home and invite them in!" The woman went out and invited the men in.
"We do not go into a House together," they replied.
"Why is that?" she wanted to know. One of the old men explained:
"His name is Wealth," he said pointing to one of his friends, and said pointing to another one,
"He is Success, and I am Love."
Then he added, "Now go in and discuss with your husband which one of us you want in your home."
The woman went in and told her husband what was said. Her husband was overjoyed. "How nice!!", he said. "Since that is the case, let us invite Wealth. Let him come and fill our home with wealth!"
His wife disagreed. "My dear, why don't we invite Success?"
Their daughter-in-law was listening from the other corner of the house. She jumped in with her own suggestion:
"Would it not be better to invite Love? Our home will then be filled with love!"
"Let us heed our daughter-in-law's advice," the husband said to his wife.
"Go out and invite Love to be our guest."
The woman went out and asked the 3 old men, "Which one of you is Love? Please come in and be our guest."
Love got up and started walking toward the house. The other 2 also got up and followed him. Surprised, the lady asked Wealth and Success:
"I only invited Love, Why are you coming in?"
The old men replied together: "If you had invited Wealth or Success, the other two of us would've stayed out, but since you invited Love, wherever He goes, we go with him. Wherever there is Love, there is also Wealth and Success!!!!!!" OUR WISH FOR YOU... Where there is pain, we wish you peace and mercy. Where there is self-doubting, we wish you a renewed confidence in Your Ability to work through them. Where there is tiredness, or exhaustion, we wish you understanding, patience, and renewed strength. Where there is fear, we wish you love, and courage.
Please send this on to your friends and loved ones to remind them of the importance of "love".

UK Magistrate's pronouncement 100 years ago...!!

"Two friends have weighed in with their views to this posting that I received today and I think u can add yours to the Magisterial oration and circulate for the benfit of the common humanity, particularly the obedient ones."

- "Ah for the days when men were allowed to be cowards and were honoured for so being!"

- "This verdict should be cast in pure gold, framed in a platinum and displayed at all public places, in the houses of parliament, outside women's rights organization offices (jumbo size), at all railway stations, airports, sea ports and toll plazas. Slides should be telecast on prime time on all TV channels around the world (during Oprah and all soap operas too). Judge Makinson be awarded (posthumously now) Nobel Prize, Victoria Cross, Medal of Honor, Legion d'Honneur, Nishan-e-Haider, Nishan-e-Pakistan, Padam Bhooshan and whatever other highest civil and military awards the world can bestow upon a judge with such an exceptional sense of justice and, valour. Also for his masterly articulateness."

An interesting Mail/Comment from a friend of mine on inaugorating my page

An interesting Mail/Comment from a friend of mine on inaugorating my page
My dear Rizwan Saheb: Ur site does not open. I will try it later. may be there is some local problem as everytime I click it the reply comes back that page was not available.Late Dr Taseer, (father of Salman Taseer Editor of Daily Times and owner of Business Plus TV channel) wrote half a century ago:Khat main likhey huay ranjish key piam aatey hainKis kiamat key yeh namey merey naam aatey hain.I use to write a column in an Urdu newspaper of Quetta in my early days of journalism. some body with a name similar to me advertised in the same newspaper for "Zaroorat-e-Rishta" and letters started pouring in that were delivered by the advertisement section to me as they had lost the address of the original advertiser. Some of the offers were tempting.So to explain the situation I captioned my next colum by changing the couplet slightly as under:Khat main likhey huay shaadi key piam aateyhainKiss kiamat key yeh naamey merey naam aatey hain.I hope you r not flooded by offers in respone to ur Mini Website. Or it is what prompted u to establish the site?I have seen ur mail asking me for something on H R. Do u mean HUman Rights. If that be so u can phone Mr Shujjah Ullah on 4445748. He is a former journalist and until two years ago the local representative of the Pakistan Human Rights Commission at ISB. He still has connections there and please convey my regards to him and ask him for any help or explanation that u require.My regards to your cousin who is in the FO and I met him during the last visit (I forget his name).Alsomy regards to Mr Mian Munir if u meet him at the Briefings. I have not talked to him since I left ISB. Even during my last visit I could not pin him down.Regards, Mehmud

UN Reform: Challenges & Opportunities

Pakistan ObserverArticlesRabi us-Sani 24, 1426 AH, Thursday, June 02, 2005UN reform: challenges & opportunitiesAmer Rizwan KhattakWilsonaian idealism tampered by pre and post World War-II realism inspired the birth of United Nations Organisation in 1945. Earlier the sheer idealism had failed to pass the test of time, because the outbreak of World War-I had proved to be the last nail in the coffin of the League of Nations. United Nations can rightly claim to be more successful than its prototype, not only in keeping itself alive in the face of serious odds all-around, but also in being a relatively better and pertinent answer to political complexities of the modern world. The events of cold war, and superpower rivalry, at times, paralyzed it; those of post-cold war saw it being bypassed; the rigorous pulls of the international system subjected it to many tests, yet the very fact that it still exists is in itself a no less achievement to its credit. There might be innumerous failures to its credit yet its unparalleled score in the socio-economic nay political fields suffice it to be credited. It is no denying the fact that the geopolitical realities and the very nature of the world system has undergone a transformation since the inception of the UN in 1945, so theorists and analysts have long been demanding an overhauling of its organisational structure.Guided by these dictates and exigencies of time, in 2003, the UN Secretary General appointed a ‘High Level Panel’ on ‘Threats, Challenges & Opportunities’ to be chaired by former Thai Prime Minister Amend Panyarachun entrusting it with the task to finalize its report embodying recommendations on the UN Reform. Its task was to channelize the spadework done by a working group that had been carrying out its deliberations on the subject almost for a decade. Pakistan was represented by the former Executive Director of the UN Population Fund Dr Nafis Sadiq whereas India was represented by Mr Satish Nambiar.The report for the proposed transformation was submitted to the UN Secretary General in last December. Its major recommendations focus upon the subjects of non-intervention, terrorism, and enlarged Security Council. The president of the panel while transmitting his report said that recommendations had been submitted to the Secretary General, and that ultimate decision to that effect had to be taken by Heads of State and Government. So, this has to be very clearly understood that it has an intergovernmental character. It will then be subjected to a debate by UN members. Consequent to that the Secretary General is to submit his recommendations to the general membership. The aim and purpose would be to evolve a consensus on these recommendations. It is no denying the fact that these panelists have tried to propose a new vision of collective Security. For instance, two models for the expansion of UN Security Council have been suggested; Model ‘A’ recommending the creation of new permanent seats but without veto, while Model ‘B’ talking about quasi-permanent seats, or members who could be rotated or re-elected after four years term and so on. However, neither of the model favours giving veto power to more members or slashing the powers of P-5. Pakistan is the member of ‘Coffee Club’ that opposes expansion in the permanent category, and holds a position quite close to ‘Model B’The report also underscores the imperative to resolve some of the disputes that may threaten Collective Security, and that this should be done in accordance with the Charter. There is a Charter requirement to resolve long-standing disputes like Palestine and Kashmir, and the situation in the Korean Peninsula. And these panelists have demonstrated sagacity and statesmanship in pointing out the need for resolving these issues.However, it should be kept in view that the veto power enjoyed by P-5 has, so far, proved to be the main stumbling block in resolving the potentially volatile disputes. Therefore, it can be argued in a way that retention of veto power in itself, besides being antithetical to the principle of sovereign equality and the very system of Collective Security, would continue to blur the prospects of the vision of the panelists. Nevertheless, maintenance of international peace and security is traditionally considered to the responsibility of “big powers”. However, the compass of “big power” needs to be modified owing to the growth of new centres of power and the changed geopolitical realities of the new era. Yet the P- 5 would not let them be stripped of this mantle. We may say that looking into the latter option is in a way beyond the mandate of the panelists. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan hinted at this compulsion when he hinted at the fact that abolishing veto was almost impossible because the current permanent members were unlikely to give up their privileges. The report focus on economic and social development, interstate disputes, , the threats of terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction, and organized transnational crime as well. The UN can effectively cope with the challenges of the new dynamic world system, only when it is overhauled with the question of equality receiving proper attention. The recently submitted report by UN Secretary General entitled, “ In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All” points at the very same paradox. Let us hope that we may avail of this “historic opportunity in 2005”, and not only contribute to “strengthening the United Nations” but also give the humanity the priceless endowment of “freedom from want”, “freedom from fear”, and “freedom to live in dignity”.Interestingly, since very independence, India’s designs have been to release itself of the regional capsule, and establish its influence as a major global power. It has its own ‘Monroe Doctrine’ in so far as this region is concerned. Its efforts, however, received a serious set-back when it suffered to eat a humble pie in the 1962 Sino-Indian war. Again, owing to growing Sino-Soviet schism, Soviet Union started putting its eggs in Indian basket, so that it could be used as a counterpoise to the increasingly formidable People’s Republic of China. The latter itself could not afford to let India grow powerful to its detriment, and started closing ranks with Pakistan — being the potential counterpoise to India. Latter’s success in dismembering Pakistan in 1971 spurred its designs. In the aftermath of these events, India showed lukewarm response to the Soviet proposal of an Asian Collective Security System because it envisaged spearheading such an endeavour itself instead of allowing an outside power to step in and take the lead. The 1974 and 1998 nuclear tests by India were aimed at accentuating that status yet Pakistan’s ‘tit for tat’ tests didn’t let its designs realize to its full. The events following 9/11 gave India a unique opportunity to assert its position as a global democracy committed to combating the so-called ‘Islamic Terrorism’. Even Pakistan’s strategic somersault could not stop it from making a rich harvest from the aftermath of 9/11. The then Prime Minister of India Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru hinted at India’s right to become UNSC permanent member as early as in 1955 Bandung Conference. In 1992; India floated the idea in Security Council Summit. However, it formally announced its candidature in the 1994 General Assembly session.Of late, Panyarachun has submitted a report to UN Secretary General on ‘Threats, Challenges & Opportunities’. India was represented in the said panel by Mr Satish Nambiar. Roughly speaking on the most important point of Security Council enlargement, the panel has suggested two models: ‘Model A’ recommending the creation of new permanent seat but without veto, and “Model B’ talking about quasi-permanent seats or members who could be rotated or re-elected after two years’ term. It is interesting to note that both the proposed models, though envisaging increase in UNSC seats on regional bases, do not recommend veto status to new aspirants. There exists an understanding between Germany, Japan, Brazil and India ie G-4 for holding a united stance on the issue. There was a reported German move to introduce a resolution backing the first option. However, even ‘Model A’ does not warrant veto power to new UNSC members making it distasteful, particularly for India to accept the debilitated slot. Indian External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh was reported to have told Rajya Sabha on December 3, 2004, that India would not accept veto-less permanent membership. He reiterated India’s position time and again, particularly in an interview given to BBC World on 09 April 2005. India again rejected UN permanent membership sans veto power when its ambassador to UN Mr Nirupam Sen said both in terms of decision-making and in legal constitutional terms,As far as the P-5 are concerned, their policy statements on supporting either of the models and the stance held by G-4, or even vice versa, have not come to the fore so far. Meanwhile, former US Ambassador to India and former US Deputy Security Adviser Mr Robert Blackwell said, while addressing a meeting of the Confederation of Indian Industry that it was difficult for India to get permanent membership of the Security Council given its impression of a country “involved in huge oil and food scandles”. Mr Blackwell said if India was given the status, “other similar economies will also want the same, and the Security Council will end up becoming virtually non-functional.” Again, AFP reported on 12 April 2005 that according to an Indian government document, People’s Republic of China would support India’s candidacy for permanent membership of an expanded United Nations Security Council.