Desperate, but…

tribune.com.pk/story/2421729/desperate-but

June 15, 2023

Current financing gap of $2 billion and the exchange-rate policy need to

be addressed on a war-footing basis

Pakistan’s one-point agenda to convince the IMF for a tranche is in

doldrums. With reserves slumping below $3 billion after having paid a
Chinese consortium with one billion dollars, it is poised on the verge of
bankruptcy. With efforts to revitalise the $6.5 billion loan programme
making no headway, as the June 30 deadline nears, the country is in a
desperate situation. The budget statistics are too unappealing to the
lenders, and the IMF has marked serious reservations on the non-tax
revenues, power subsidies and the misconstrued amnesty scheme.
This has literally brought to a naught disbursement of around $1.2
billion as a rescue package to keep the wheel of the economy moving.

To further compound the misery is the dilation from a renowned credit

rating agency, the Moody’s, which says that Pakistan is at an increased
risk of failing, and is inching towards a sovereign default. The likelihood
of not meeting repayment commitments has shot up to 80%, which
speaks of our poor handling of the economy. Last but not least, a
virtual meeting with the IMF has ended up inconclusive, piling pressure
on Pakistan at a time when bilateralism too, in the form of grants from
friendly states, is untenable. This fix will have its repercussions as
remittances have already taken a backseat and the rupee is
depreciating beyond proportions.

The current financing gap of $2 billion and the exchange-rate policy

need to be addressed on a war-footing basis. The minimum that could
be done is to curtail the non-developmental expenditures, reconsider
the size of a non-performing government machinery, and act instantly
against hoarders who are behind a price spiral with a vested agenda. It
is a must to come up with a doable strategy as we submit a requisition
with the donors for rescheduling our debt commitments. With a budget
deficit of Rs7 trillion and an unattainable growth projected at 3.5%,
there is an utter mismatch to realise the targets. Pakistan has no
recourse but to recast its potentials in non-economic horizons to reap
dividends.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2023.

COMMENTS

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-
topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

Azeri LNG relief

tribune.com.pk/story/2421731/azeri-lng-relief

June 15, 2023

Pakistan’s LNG imports actually fell almost 16% last year, largely due to
the unaffordably high import price

The government has renewed efforts to import liquefied natural gas

(LNG) with new spot tenders floated after almost a year. The move
comes just as a new agreement was reached with Azerbaijan to import
about one LNG shipment a month. Details about quantity and price
were not provided in the initial announcement, but the price is
reportedly “cheaper” than the current supply, which is almost all
coming from Qatar. The renewed interest in LNG comes as global
prices have begun to normalise after speculators pushed them to
inexplicable levels in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last
year. After peaking at over $70 per million British thermal units in
August 2022, prices are now below $10 for the same amount.
Incidentally, the highest price Pakistan ever accepted was $30.65 in a
November 2021 deal.
Pakistan is highly dependent on gas to operate power plants, fuel cars,
and for other industrial and domestic uses, and has been taking hits on
all these fronts due to gas shortages created by the price bomb and
the government’s disinclination to pay through the nose when prices
were peaking. Dependent on gas for power generation and running
short of foreign exchange to pay for imports, the country has struggled
to procure spot cargoes of LNG after global prices spiked last year
following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, leaving it to face widespread
power outages. In fact, despite the domestic gas shortages, Pakistan’s
LNG imports actually fell almost 16% last year, largely due to the
unaffordably high import price.

Pakistan has been unable to insulate itself against price volatility in the
international market for several reasons, including the cash crunch,
which keeps us — and sellers — from agreeing to long-term deals,
leaving us to gamble with the higher risk of spot tenders. While recent
deals such as the one with Azerbaijan have aimed to address this gap,
ensuring a steady supply of natural gas is going to be critical for the
country to ensure economic recovery.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2023.

COMMENTS

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-
topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ



Youth unemployment
tribune.com.pk/story/2421735/youth-unemployment

June 15, 2023

One major reason for the high youth unemployment rates is low levels
of higher education attainment

Research conducted by Gallup Pakistan and Policy Research,

Innovation, Development and Education (PRIDE) revealed that the
highest youth unemployment rate in Sindh is in Karachi at 11.2% and
the lowest is 3.4% in Larkana. High rates of youth unemployment are
plaguing the entire country, but the figures for Karachi are particularly
alarming considering its status as the economic hub of the country.

One major reason for the high youth unemployment rates is low levels
of higher education attainment. The distribution of unemployed youth
by the level of education indicates that young men and women with an
educational level of matric but below intermediate make up the biggest
proportion of unemployed youth. The rate is the lowest for youth with
MPhil and PhD degrees. Many students and their families fail to
acknowledge the importance of higher education in building careers
and in turn resort to temporary jobs, which may appear lucrative or
marriage. HEC can lend the government a helping hand by introducing
incentives to draw students towards higher education, particularly
female students. Many countries around the world have widened the
scope of education and training for the youth, which has allowed the
youth to learn and adapt to new skills instead of going through the
traditional route of education. Therefore, Pakistan must also adopt
similar training and mentorship programmes with the help of its
industrial and business community.

In Karachi, urban dynamics may also be at play. For instance, there is

an oversupply of labour, limited public transport infrastructure, physical
and mental health concerns, poor law enforcement, etc. This coupled
with relatively comfortable home environments, especially among the
middle-income groups, often prevents the youth from seeking jobs. The
rising unemployment challenge needs to be addressed through a multi-
pronged approach — one that intensifies investments in both education
as well as skills development training programmes to expand
opportunities for the youth otherwise a bleak future awaits the country.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2023.

COMMENTS

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-
topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

Trump indictment
tribune.com.pk/story/2421721/trump-indictment

June 15, 2023

If in power in America one can get away with murder but one can’t get
away with keeping some secret documents

The writer is a political analyst. Email: [email protected] Twitter

@Imran_Jan

No one is above the law, except when you open your eyes. It is not
always the crime that triggers the law into action but rather the politics
that does most of the time. Trump is facing various charges at a Miami
court as I write this. I have not been a fan of Trump and have written
extensively in the past criticising him. But hating this man is not
enough to make him a criminal. I guess that is what the politics
triggering the law means. If those in a country who matter are upset
enough with someone popular, they trigger the law into action against
that person. Make no mistake, it is all driven by politics and sometimes
vendettas.
Many are saying that the prosecution of a former president is a
testament to the neutrality and greatness of the American justice
system. But the air leaves their argument like a fart as soon as they
finish that sentence. Where is the logic in that?

President Obama had killed American citizens without the due process
of law based on their speech. Sure, Anwar al Awlaki started saying
awful things and encouraged people in America to make attacks
against America, but a law abiding and a civilised society that America
likes to label itself would have arrested him and prosecuted him for his
crimes. Obama also killed his teenage son, who had committed no
crime and had not even said one word against America. He was only a
Playstation playing teenager who had gone to find his father in Yemen.
They killed him with a drone strike. When is the American justice
system prosecuting and jailing the hopey-changey former president?

President Bush invaded Iraq based on absolute lies. He sent American

soldiers in harm’s way looking for WMDs that weren’t there. More than
600 American soldiers inhaled harmful chemicals in Iraq, which were
leftover stashes from the time when the US had given them to Saddam
to be used against Iran. President Bush ensured that the sick and
wounded soldiers who had inhaled those chemicals would remain a
secret because it was going to hurt his re-election campaign. Toward
that end, the wounded warriors were even denied veterans healthcare.
When is the US justice system prosecuting the former cowboy
president?

In 1967, Israeli Air Force and Navy motor torpedo boats attacked the
US spy ship called Liberty, killing 34 US crew members onboard the
ship. Later, Israel merely apologised for the incident. Israel and the US
government concluded that the attack was a mistake but others
including the surviving members of the spy-ship had rejected that
conclusion and maintained that it was a deliberate attack. Israel paid
monetary damages to the family members of the deceased crew
members. Not much different than the blood money that was given to
the family members of those killed by Raymond Davis in Lahore. There
was no prosecution for the US president at the time, President Lyndon
B Johnson, for not punishing Israel for killing 34 Americans.
Remember, the al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen
in the year 2000 had killed half that number of US sailors. Would they
have accepted the same blood money from Bin Laden?

If in power in America one can get away with murder but one can’t get
away with keeping some secret documents. A piece of paper or the
secret information on it is deemed very sensible because the leaking of
that can result in the killing of Americans overseas. But that very actual
act of the killing of Americans overseas is actually not considered a
crime. That is why Obama is free and Trump is not.

The world may have progressed enormously. But even today, we reward
compliance and marching with popular beliefs. We punish disruptions,
differently thinking, recalcitrance, questioning the status quo, and
above all; speaking truth to power. Truth only works in science. In the
rest of human affairs, lies win the day. Everyday.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2023.

COMMENTS

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-
topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ



Let’s start living a life that serves others

tribune.com.pk/story/2421724/lets-start-living-a-life-that-serves-others

June 15, 2023

The writer is a senior analyst based in Hyderabad

Ivan Goncharov has said: “When you don’t know what you’re living for,
you don’t care how you live from one day to the next. You’re happy the
day has passed and the night has come, and in your sleep you bury the
tedious question of what you lived for that day and what you’re going to
live for tomorrow.”

All of us should first think about what last words we will say to our
children. But before that, let’s read the story of Stephen R Covery: “I
once went to meet a military commander who wanted to bring a
massive cultural change in his organization. His service was more than
thirty years. He was now a full colonel and was due to retire in the
same year. After training his organization for several months, he called
me for advice. I asked him why he wanted to take this step. ‘This step
is very big. Now you are about to retire that’s why stay calm. Go
through the retirement phase comfortably. Award Banquet will be held
in your honour. Your friends will want to praise you. Why do you get into
this ado?’ I advised.

“Hearing this, a deep seriousness appeared on his face. After a long

pause, he decided to tell me a very personal and respectful story. He
told me that his father had died recently; and when he was on his death
bed, he called me and my mother to say goodbye. ‘He was having a lot
of difficulty in speaking. My mother was crying continuously. I became
close to my father. He addressed me in a whispering voice. Son, don’t
live your life like I have lived. I have not treated you and your mother
well and couldn’t make a difference in your lives. Son, promise me that
you will not live the way I lived,’ he narrated.

“These were the last words the colonel heard from his father shortly
before he died. But these words stuck in the heart and mind of the
colonel. He considers them as this father’s greatest gift and legacy. He
made a promise to himself on the day of his father’s death that he
would make a difference in every area of his life. He further stated that
he had always taken the easy way till then. He heard his father’s last
words. And he had been playing the role of the protector of the tradition
of the past. He had chosen to live a modest and ordinary life, but after
the promise he made to his father, he committed to himself that unlike
the past he would live a great life, a life that truly serves others. A life
that is meaningful that really makes a difference.”

Each one of us can consciously decide that today we will leave behind
the ordinary life and start living structured and meaningful life. Such a
life will be lived everywhere, whether in the office, at the workplace or in
the community. It doesn’t matter what our circumstances are. This
greatness can be demonstrated in any way. Now we all have time to
say our last words. Everyone is fully empowered and independent to
live their own life. Let’s start living a meaningful life today.
According to Robert Greene: “See yourself as an explorer. With the gift
of consciousness, you stand before a vast and unknown universe that
we humans have just begun to investigate. Most people prefer to cling
to certain ideas and principles, many of them adopted early on in life.
You are returning to your childlike spirit and curiosity, from before you
had an ego and being right was more important than connecting to the
world. You explore all forms of knowledge, from all cultures and time
periods. You want to be challenged. By opening the mind in this way,
you will unleash unrealized creative powers, and you will give yourself
great mental pleasure. As part of this, be open to exploring the insights
that come from your own unconscious, as revealed in your dreams, in
moments of tiredness, and in the repressed desires that leak out in
certain moments. You have nothing to be afraid of or to repress there.
The unconscious is merely one more realm for you to freely explore.”

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2023.

COMMENTS

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-
topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

Systemic failure and the collapse of ANDSF

tribune.com.pk/story/2421726/systemic-failure-and-the-collapse-of-andsf

June 15, 2023

SIGAR Report identifies eight intertwined ‘Systemic Factors’

responsible for ANDSF’s collapse

The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International

Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at
[email protected] and tweets @20_Inam

We continue to explore the reasons behind the collapse of Afghan

National Defence and Security Forces (ANDSF) in August 2022, as
dilated in February 2023 report by SIGAR (Special Inspector General for
Afghanistan Reconstruction), a US government entity.

The US war in Afghanistan was the longest conflict that ‘spanned four
presidents (two Republicans, two Democrats), 10 ambassadors, seven
State and eight Secretaries of Defense, 12 Combined Security
Transition Command — Afghanistan (CSTC-A) commanders, eight US
Central Command (CENTCOM) commanders and 18 US/Coalition
(ISAF/Resolute Support) commanders.’ Such consistent turnovers over
two decades created political expediencies and resulted in ‘politically
driven timelines on critical security sector tasks’.

SIGAR Report identifies eight intertwined ‘Systemic Factors’

responsible for ANDSF’s collapse. These include US/Coalition’s
unrealistic time allocation and expectations for raising ANDSF; division
of responsibility among different countries affecting synergy; poor
quality of trainers and advisers; lack of interagency oversight and
assessment criterion; corruption in Afghan government and military
under US/NATO watch; inconsistency in the US training, logistics and
weapons procurement policies; ethnically imbalanced recruitment
policies by Tajik/Northern Alliance-dominated ANDSF leadership during
initial years excluding majority Pashtuns; and failure to develop an
effective police force (ANP) to complement the ANDSF.

First, time scaling ANDSF. The US/NATO never allowed the time
required for building Afghanistan’s Security Sector due to political
expediencies and tendency by military (USMIL)/trainers to ‘show’
progress by resorting to quick fixes. The US/NATO had credit-taking
propensities, disregarding cultural sensitivities and were indifferent to
the ‘relative’ illiteracy among Afghans. They were keener to hand over
security to ANDSF as per arbitrary calendar-based timelines in order to
get out of Afghanistan, due to unpopularity of Afghanistan mission and
domestic politics. These and other factors worked in unison.

America faced a dilemma — either to ‘show progress’ under

overwhelming political pressure, by focusing on short-term
achievements and accelerate raising and training; or take the time
needed to work through Afghan state and society to ensure sustainable
development of ANDSF institutions and infrastructure. They mostly
resorted to short-term achievements resorting to arbitrary and mostly
unrealistic timelines, ignoring complexity of the task. Raising an
Army/Police from scratch, following models alien to Afghanistan, was
a generational process for which the US did not have or wanted to have
the needed patience, resources and willingness. Throwing money at
the problem only aggravated it.

The US domestic compulsions ‘turned the 20-year reconstruction into

ten 2-year efforts’, where the USMIL never resolved the paradox of
‘imminent departure’ or ‘permanent presence’. This led to a
‘counterproductive cycle: Short-term goals generated short timelines,
which created new problems, which were then addressed by more
short-term goals.’ And when that approach failed, the US ‘resorted to
the ultimate quick fix: the immediate withdrawal of all troops. Even Gen
Mattis, Commander CENTCOM (2010-2013) and later Secretary
Defense (2017-2018) wondered about the “lack of political clarity”
regarding military presence, funding certainty and the ‘ends, ways, and
means.’

American planning was always with one foot out of the door.
Immediately after occupying Afghanistan, long-term reconstruction
was never a priority. Bush Administration abhorred nation-building.
Emphasis was on ‘basic food, medicine, and education programs’.
Focus remained on a ‘limited counterterrorism mission’. So,
Afghanistan was to have a small, light infantry force, rapidly deployable
for maintaining internal peace. It was to comprise one central army
corps with limited combat power to secure October 2004 presidential
elections and enable the US withdrawal from Afghanistan by end 2004.
The Corps was to be reliant upon the US/international forces for air
support and other advanced capabilities.

This initial construct came under revision in 2006, forced by a

resurgent Taliban, Karzai’s weak and corrupt central government and
the increasingly disorganised international reconstruction effort.
Despite spike in funding, between 2002 and 2005, the focus remained
on short-term gains and shortcuts ignoring capacity building within the
Afghan government. Overly optimistic ANDSF milestones resulted in
‘misguided and unrealistic timelines’. For example, CSTC-A Campaign
Plan (2006) expected ANDSF to assume security responsibility by
2009, in just three years, assuming to have built and developed
ministerial institutional capabilities, and having raised and developed
field forces. It was unrealistic tasking flowing from incorrect
assessments. Foreign forces were to begin withdrawing as early as
2006, completing pull-out between 2011 and 2012.

Then came Obama era 2009 Afghan War Strategic Review, resulting in
an 18-month counterinsurgency effort and military-civilian surge.
Obama claimed having consulted Secretary of Defense, Chairman Joint
Chiefs of Staff, and field commanders for this. However, General
Petraeus, the then Commander CENTCOM, denied such consultations.
President Obama continued his emphasis on condensed withdrawal
timeline, bringing it even closer by two years to summer 2011. Later in
2010, however, he was compelled by worsening security situation to
push the withdrawal deadline to 2014 (beginning 2011).

This specific exit timeline ushered an urgency to stabilise Afghanistan,

defeat the resurgent Taliban, and transition security to ANDSF. USMIL
was caught between speedy raising (and training) of ANDSF and an
impending withdrawal. Rosy assessments about ANDSF capabilities
meanwhile continued. General Joseph Dunford informed US Senate
Armed Services Committee in April 2013 that Afghan security forces
were ‘leading 80 percent conventional operations having secured over
87 percent Afghan population.’ In March 2014, he confessed before the
same committee that Afghan security would deteriorate as soon as
coalition troops withdrew, and that pace of such deterioration only was
arguable.
By 2015, foreign advisers were retained at ANDSF Corps and above
levels. Lower formations and units had no dedicated advisers they had
grown dependent upon. Degradation in consequent combat
performance forced USMIL to attend to immediate combat needs,
rather than ANDSF sustainment and professionalisation. This, in turn,
deepened ANDSF reliance on foreign forces. Acknowledging
deteriorating security conditions, President Obama was forced to
change timelines two more times, first to end 2015 and then to end
2016. He finally deferred withdrawal decision to the incoming Trump
Administration.

Under Trump Administration, the US, implemented a new South Asia

Strategy, negotiated an exit deal with the Taliban (2020) and left. Trump
had made Afghanistan withdrawal a pledge during 2016 election
campaign, calling the war ‘a complete waste’, Although in 2017 his
national security team briefly prevailed on him allowing a modest
troops’ increase to support ANDSF.

Despite wowing to link withdrawal to conditions on ground and not

calendar, President Trump acted differently. Doha Agreement in 2020
sealed the calendar, committing the US to pull out all troops and
contractors by June 2014 (within 14 months).

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2023.

COMMENTS

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-
topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

Public participation in climate governance

tribune.com.pk/story/2421728/public-participation-in-climate-governance

June 15, 2023

The writer is a public policy analyst based in Lahore. She tweets

@durdananajam

Climate change is about each one of us. If an industrialist is adding to

the carbon concentration in the atmosphere by using fossil fuel, a
woman somewhere in the interior of Africa might be doing the same
when she burns wood in her kitchen to cook a meal for her children and
family. An agriculturist and a farmer are equally responsible for
polluting the environment when they burn stubble to clear their field for
a fresh harvest. When we throw plastic into the sea while enjoying on
the beaches and ignore recycling instructions on packaging or take for
granted disposal guidance for domestic or hospital waste, we are all
putting our share in loading the atmosphere with greenhouse gasses
leading to climate change. Contaminated water, polluted air,
overflowing sewerage, stubble burning, dark fumes from a broken
engine or coal-fired power plants or trash sitting on streets are all
affecting the climate leading to devastating outcomes — torrential
rains, heatwaves, flooding, long summers, melting glaciers, rise in sea
level, etc.

In this background, we need an all-hands-on-deck approach. We must

change how we interact with nature and understand the issue’s
sensitivity. We all need awareness about climate change, proper
information about environmental pollutants, and the right to
information about government’s actions on climate change. In 1992
the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, recognising the
importance of public participation in climate governance, incorporated
Principle 10 , which says: “Environmental issues are best handled with
participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the
national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to
information concerning the environment that is held by public
authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities
in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-
making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public
awareness and participation by making information widely available.”

This argument was carried forward by other international

environmental institutions, such as the UNEP Bali Guidelines,
International Human Rights Institutions and Agenda 2030. The Aarhus
Convention in 1998 and the Escazu Agreement in 2017 also
emphasised the principle of public participation in environmental
decision-making. Both instruments viewed climate change in the
context of the human rights of the individuals and communities being
directly impacted by environmental decisions.

Given the increasing importance of a participatory approach to combat

climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in its
1.5 Celsius Special Report, stated: “Civil society is to a great extent the
only reliable motor for driving institutions to change at the pace
required.”

Article 12 , of the Agreement further says: “Taking measures to

enhance climate change education, training, public awareness, public
participation and public access to information, recognising the
importance of these steps with respect to enhancing actions under this
Agreement.”

Article 6 of the United Nations Convention on Climate Change seeks to

mitigate the impact of climate change by making society part of the
solution. It says: “Initiatives that are diverse, innovative and resource-
efficient. They can include practical action in formal and informal
education and training. These initiatives may cut across different types
of learning, from preschooler classes and seminar rooms of
universities, to vocational training and lifelong learning.”

For the last several decades, the discussion has shifted from
government to governance. The former denoted a system involving a
few institutions with a defined work methodology. Its limited scope did
not allow the system to use the knowledge, experience and skills of
relevant institutions, actors and people outside the government
framework. Governance, on the other hand, is a process of decision-
making that involves diverse people, institutions and actors.
Governance talks about the rights and privileges of every segment. It is
about power-sharing. Everyone becomes relevant in decision-making,
from the leader sitting atop the party structure to the common man in
the street. Governance gives citizens autonomy of actions,
independence of thought and a process for collective action through
civic engagement.
Participation is a broad term. Some scholars talk about participation in
the context of the public only. For others, participation refers to
stakeholders or some particular communities and organisations.
Normally stakeholder is used when referring to a specific field. The
term public, on the other hand, is used in the context of democratic
participation as a fundamental right (general public). Nevertheless,
both terms are used in the climate change discussion because of
overlapping.

The consideration that climate governance is best dealt with a

participatory approach is not new. In fact, stakeholder engagement has
been part of every national and international agreement on climate
change.

However, public engagement in due course became a cliche devoid of

spirit and rigour. Upon close observation, it revealed that instead of
rehabilitating the state of living of those most hurt by climate change,
such as the marginalised and poor people, they were instead used as
fodder by those with the ambition to milk climate funds that run in
billions of dollars. For genuine participation, people should have an
overwhelming presence in the accountability process to ensure that
policies are implemented on target.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2023.

COMMENTS

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-
topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ