Global climate jihad unless mankind can come together in intelligent,
Author: Ashraf Jehangir Qazi
Published in: Dawn Newspaper
Published on: May 11, 2019.
Existential challenges define the state of the world
today. They shall determine the global, regional
and national contexts in which all countries,
including Pakistan, will need to find appropriate
and sufficient responses to survive. They will
provide the indispensable context for all specific
policies, whether domestic or external. The 21st
century has already delivered this message.
Climate catastrophe is the greatest global challenge
today. The prospect of ultimate doom and death
has been part of mankind’s experience and
philosophical outlook (weltanschauung.) We are
born, we live, we die and our children and
descendants preserve the species into a distant
and unimaginable future, until a time comes
when mundane life comes to a natural end,
whether with a bang or a whimper.
Accordingly, the prospect of an eventual end to
our species is internalised without much anxiety.
Death is part of life and possibly a transition to
something eternal. But within the last decade
attitudes have begun to dramatically change.
There is not just an emerging anxiety. There is a
developing panic over the prospect of climate
calamity.
Until recently, scientists thought climate disaster
was still too distant a prospect for ordinary people
to personally or politically get concerned about.
Today, a near 100 per cent scientific consensus
regards climate change as an emerging global
catastrophe hurtling towards us at ever- increasing
speed. Once in a thousand or hundred
thousand-year climate events are now expected
to occur within decades, repeatedly, and sometimes
simultaneously. Climate change will no longer be
cyclical. It will be exponential. Nature will not just
become a stranger to mankind. It will be an
implacable and pitiless enemy. There is not just an
emerging anxiety. There is a developing panic over
the prospect of climate calamity.
Never in human history has such a prospect
threatened, except possibly for a while during the
Black Death of the 14th century. Moreover, climate
change is on the cusp of becoming irreversible —
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
innovative and institutionalised cooperation
which has also never happened before except —
to an important but limited extent — through
the UN system.
According to the Bulletin of Atomic Sciences, there
are three major existential challenges confronting
mankind today: climate change, nuclear conflict
and democratic governance (ie the exact opposite
of what passes for it today). Success with regard to
any of these challenges will make success on the
others more likely. But failure on one front will
ensure failure on the other two. This triple failure
will render organised human existence on the
planet increasingly difficult, and eventually
impossible. Moreover, climatologists now say
this can happen much sooner than what was
assumed as recently as a decade ago. These
forecasts could change yet again.
They could change for the better if at international,
regional and national levels a climate emergency is
declared and leaders and societies begin to do a
range of things recommended by the experts but
which have never been done before. Unfortunately,
it is far more likely that, with the available
leaderships, climate change will become
progressively worse — forever. If by the end of the
century the global temperature rises by more than
two degrees Celsius above what it was before the
Industrial Revolution, climatologists believe
irreversible damage to the global environment will
begin to increasingly exceed the capacity of human
society to either mitigate or adapt to. We are already
halfway there with the global temperature today
estimated at roughly 1°C above what it was 200
years ago, and rising faster and faster.
The window of opportunity to take the thousands
of measures needed to control and maybe reverse
this immensely complex process is fast closing. Most
scientists are convinced that if carbon emissions are
not effectively reduced to zero by 2030 — a mere
decade away — irreversible processes will ensure
global temperatures of 3°C or 4°C above the
pre-industrial baseline well before the end of the
century. This alone would have innumerable
calamitous consequences for human and other plant
and animal life-supporting ecologies on earth.
Irreversible climate change will inevitably limit
mitigation capacities and progressively render
adaptation strategies dysfunctional. Unimaginable
nightmare scenarios for our children and
grandchildren will unfold. In order not to
unforgivably betray them we must begin to do the
impossible, starting now. No other issue, however
critically important in itself, can be appropriately
addressed in any forum or even properly analysed
outside this overwhelming context.
Nuclear disaster, if it happens, will be sudden
and terminal. It will telescope extreme climate
catastrophe into a relative instant. Democratic
governance — not the phony stuff — provides
the essential context for a foreign policy that
can minimise the prospect for nuclear holocaust.
As suggested, it is also the political condition
for urgent, sustained and effective resistance
to climate death.
Democratic governance does not necessarily
equate to Western models of governance. They
are by and large no longer democratic in the West
largely due to the rise of populism and racism
on the one hand and the excesses of corporate
capitalism, militarism and extreme inequalities
on the other. The Chinese model, despite its many
obvious flaws, is more inclusive and participatory
and offers a better guide to transformational
governance and a better ordered world.
While it does not accept the norms of Western
governance it also rejects the wretched norms of
soft-state, corrupt, short-term and class warfare
governance that blight the prospects of so many
developing countries, including our own. Nor can
the world afford a psychologically challenged liar at
the global helm who knows, but publicly denies and
criminally ignores, the facts of climate catastrophe.
Unlike nuclear disaster, which can be avoided any
time before it actually occurs, climate change beyond
a rapidly approaching point insidiously becomes an
irreversibly fatal catastrophe. Similarly, genuine
democratic governance is always possible. However,
irreversible climate change, if not averted, will make
it impossible. This is why climate catastrophe is the
single most comprehensive, and now immediate,
existential threat.
The question beckons: are we human beings or
lemmings rushing to jump off the cliff? Only a
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
global climate jihad or climate crusade will
provide an answer.
A thaw in Pak-Russia relationship
Author: Masud Ahmed Khan
Published in: Daily Times
Published on: May 7, 2019
Soon after independence in 1947, government
leaders in the United States and the former Soviet
Union invited the Pakistani leadership to visit these
countries. Then prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan,
declined the Soviet invitation and paid an official
visit to the US. Pakistan later joined the South East
Asian Treaty Organisation and the Central Treaty
Organisation. This further damaged the relations
with Russia. From 1950 onwards Russia treated
India as an ally while Pakistan joined the US camp.
It was during Khrushchev’s tenure that the Soviet
Union decided to neutralize American influence in
the region. In 1980, a US spy plane taking off from
Badaber in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was shot down
by the Soviet Army. The incident further soured
relations between Pakistan and Russia. After the
1965 war, the Soviet Union hosted a peace
conference in Tashkent in 1966 and facilitated
the signing of the Tashkent Declaration.
In 1971, ties between the two countries deteriorated
further after Pakistan facilitated a secret visit to
China by Henry Kissinger. Russia played a key role
in the 1971 war, helping India in its support of
Mukhti Bahini and later the Indian attack on East
Pakistan by supplying weapons.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto visited Soviet Union twice
during his tenure and the Soviet Union agreed to
build a steel mill in Pakistan. However, Pakistan’s
relations with the Soviet Union deteriorated after
the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December
1979 in support of Noor Muhammad Taraki who
came to power after the Saur revolution.
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan changed the
dynamics of the entire region. The Soviet Union
thereafter continuously accused Pakistan of
interfering in Afghanistan’s internal affairs.
Pakistan, the West and Saudi Arabia supported
Afghan Mujahideen who were waging a war
against Soviets and Afghan forces.
Meanwhile, Russia maintained warm relations
with India. It supported India in its disputes with
Pakistan, especially on the Kashmir issue. Relations
with Pakistan improved only after the withdrawal
of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. Pakistan and
Russia granted each other the most favoured
nation status and signed a number of trade and
economic cooperation agreements. After Kosygin’s
visit to Pakistan in 1969, Mikhail Fradkov was
the first Russian prime minister to visit Pakistan
(on April 13, 2007).
In October 2012, Gen Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani, then
the chief of army staff, visited Moscow. This provided
an opportunity for interaction at military levels.
Today, Pakistan and Russia have strategic ties.
This is because of a shared interest in the emerging
threat in the region, specifically Afghanistan, from
non-state militants. Military-to-military cooperation
between Russian and Pakistan is increasing. In 2014,
the Pakistan-Russia Defence Agreement was signed
leading to an increase in defence cooperation and
intelligence cooperation. In 2017, a high-level
Russian military delegation visited the tribal areas
bordering Afghanistan and studied Pakistan’s
counter terrorism efforts.
In 2016, the two countries held their first joint
defence exercises and in 2017 the second. A Pakistan
Army contingent participated in a six-day exercise –
Peace Mission 2018. The exercise was hosted by
Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Chebarkul
town of Russia.
In 2016, Russia supplied MI-35 assault helicopters
worth $153 million to Pakistan. India lodged a
protest with Russia over its joint military exercises
with Pakistan. India resented these exercises and
Indian ambassador to Russia said these could create
problems and that the Russian approach was wrong.
Russia has shown clear signs of improving relations
with Pakistan based on trust and mutual cooperation.
Moscow is now backing a peace process in
Afghanistan and seeks to reconcile with the Taliban
and the Afghan government. Russia is also paying
attention to Eurasian economic integration with
China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Cargo from Europe
via rail will go through Russia, generating revenue
for Russia.
According to the Russian news agency, Pakistan has
shown interest in purchasing Russian military
hardware worth $9 billion. This will include jets, air
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
defence systems, tanks and combat helicopters.
This means that Pakistan’s reliance on US weapons
is decreasing. Never in the past has Pakistan
purchased so much military hardware. The deal is
expected to have a training component. The United
States has recently stopped inviting Pakistan’s
military officers to its training programmes. Russia
is likely to fill the gap. This implies that Russia will
no longer give preferential treatment to its India
vis a vis Pakistan.
Pakistan sees Russia as an ally in Afghanistan and
Central Asia. At the end of BRICS (Brazil, Russia,
India, China) summit, India was highly annoyed
because Russia did not support a statement pointing
a finger at Pakistan for terrorism in the region.
Times of India carried the headline “BRICS Summit:
China bulldozed India’s security concern as Russia
looked another way”. President Vladimir Putin was
requested to condemn the 2016 Uri attack. The
request was not honoured. Russian Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov said recently that Russia intended to
host peace talks between Pakistan and India.
Russian role and influence as an international
player in maintaining world order and peace as a
permanent member of the UNSC and also as a
player in Afghanistan cannot be ignored.
After the withdrawal of American troops from
Afghanistan, Russia will be an important player
for peace and stability in Afghanistan and the
region. Pakistan is of greater importance for Russia
due to Afghanistan and the CPEC, which will
provide it access to the Arabian Sea and beyond.
After the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan,
Russia and Pakistan are real stakeholders in peace
in Afghanistan.
Russia is worried that the so-called Islamic State in
Iraq and Syria is gaining a foothold in Afghanistan
and is trying to use Afghanistan to threaten Russian
regional security interest. Now Russia has become a
supreme balancing force in Afro-Eurasia. Pakistan
can help Russia bring peace to Afghanistan. Peace
and stability in the Central Asian States will thus
be assured. Pakistan and Russia must coordinate
their policies to prevent the outbreak of another
Afghan civil war following the US withdrawal.
Peace and stability in Afghanistan means peace
and stability in Central Asian States and Pakistan.
Now is the time for Pakistan to seize the opportunity
for close strategic, military and economic relations
with Russia. This should not annoy the US.
According to Pakistani media, Russian President
Vladimir Putin is expected to visit Pakistan in a
couple of months. The visit is expected to usher in
a new era of cooperation between the two countries
and to have a deep impact on the region.
The art of revolution
Author: Marwan Bishara
Published in: The News.
Published on: April 17, 2019.
So far, revolutionaries in Sudan and Algeria are
still firmly on the path of non-violence, a la Tunisia
and Egypt. Peaceful protest has proven the least
costly and the most constructive among all possible
strategies and scenarios, not only to confront
repression, but also to pave the way for democracy.
Indeed, non-violent revolutions are most capable
of splitting the regime’s rank and file and straining
its legitimacy.
If history is any guide, violent revolts tend to
coalesce and galvanise a dictatorship’s base,
making it harder to bring down. They also produce
alternative leadership that is no less violent than the
repressive regimes they aim to overthrow. Those
who fight and kill their opponents with enthusiasm
and determination are likely to turn against their
allies and people with equal vengeance.
But for civil disobedience, boycott, demonstrations
and other forms of non-violent strategies to work,
they require popular mobilisation. In Algeria and
Sudan, people of different ethnic and religious
backgrounds, young and old, women and men,
secular and religious came together in their
demand for freedom and better living.
Sudan’s leading popular voice, the Sudanese
Professionals Association, reflected this embrace
of inclusiveness rather brilliantly in its recent call
to put “Christ at the heart of the revolution”, asking
Christians and people of all other confessions to
participate in a day of civil disobedience and
worship for peace.
Such inclusion of different elements of society
prevents the regime from taking advantage of any
potential splits or feelings of alienation, as has
happened in both Syria and Egypt, in order to
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
discredit the revolution and justify repression
against its supporters.
Inclusion also means readiness to incorporate
segments of the old order into the movement for
change. Not only does this broaden the popular
base of the revolution, but it also diminishes the
regime’s authority and hastens its demise.
Autocrats depend on a system of political and
financial patronage that involves the participation
of certain segments of society mostly out of economic
necessity, not political loyalty. Condemning or
alienating those middle- and low-ranking bureaucrats
or government employees, including teachers and
policemen, is counterproductive and harmful;
attracting and incorporating them in the revolution
can contribute to its potential success. A greater
popular mobilisation behind the revolution ensures
greater participation in the ensuing democratic
process, which guarantees its long-term consolidation.
That may take time, lots of time.
A revolution is a thrilling, liberating rush of social
and political adrenaline, but even with broad
support, its long-term success depends on
consistency and perseverance. The pressure can’t
ease just because the despot is gone. What must
come next is a slow, tedious, and deliberate process
of organisation, negotiation and reconciliation.
Without it, any revolution ends in the dustbins of
history. For, if people return home to business-as-
usual after the fall of an autocrat, they allow the old
regime to reconstitute itself in one form or another.
Unlike totalitarian revolutions, such as Russia’s or
Iran’s, where change is swift, brutal and decisive,
democratic revolutions require time, discipline
and endurance. Historically, democracy comes
after big disruptions, and in long phases and stages;
it almost never evolves in a linear fashion. The
French Revolution, which took decades to realise
its potential, is a good example.
Changing an autocrat might be hard; changing the
system behind him is even harder. The important
question for all revolutions is not who but what
comes after. The Algerian and Sudanese people
seem well aware of that. They celebrated the
bloodless ouster of Bouteflika and al-Bashir, but
they did so knowing well that this was only the
beginning of a very long and fraught process.
The swift introduction of substitute leaders from
within the old system in both countries underlined
the need for more comprehensive thinking about
the way forward.
In both Algeria and Sudan, the protesters know
they need to get the military on their side and on
their terms, like in Tunisia, in order to avoid an
Egypt-like scenario. Tunisia’s experience also
teaches that protests must go on until a new
transparent system of accountability is in place.
This means knowing not only whom you oppose,
but also what you want both in the short and long
term. It’s rather easy to be against corrupt
repressive leaders, but much harder to articulate
and implement a vision for a better future.
This brings us to the old chicken-and-egg riddle:
What comes first, democracy or democrats? For
how is it possible to nurture democracy without
democrats, or democrats without democracy?
The simple answer is: They come in tandem. It takes
experience and courage to foster them. Democracy
is no panacea. It is a lot of work and results can be
mixed, sometimes undemocratic, even after decades
and centuries of democratic rule. Just look at the
rise of fascist anti-democratic right-wing parties
in a number of leading democracies. And in the
Arab world, liberal democracy, the truest form of
democracy, may indeed be seen as a controversial
idea or a foreign import by traditional and
conservative portions of society.
All of this means that there is a need for open
debate, for trial and error, which takes time - lots
of time. And that is why priority needs to be given
to a gradual transition over immediate elections -
something the revolutionaries of both Sudan and
Algeria seem to insist on. They demand a transition
into civilian, not military rule - one that prepares
the political and legal frameworks to hold free
and fair elections.
Rushing to the polls immediately is certain to
privilege older, more organised parties and fracture
the newly formed groups driving the revolution, as
they compete for power. Egypt is a good example
of how the ancien regime can exploit post-election
tensions between liberal secularist and conservative
Islamists to mount a coup d’etat against an elected
president. This does not mean open-ended transition
that drags on endlessly.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
As the new Sudanese Freedom and Change alliance,
a public committee representing the demands of
the protesters, proposes, a four-year period may
be suitable to stabilise the country politically and
economically and chart a new way forward.
Algeria seems to follow suit, as it has rejected the
announcement of presidential elections in July
under the same old rules. Now that Algerian judges
have decided to boycott supervising such premature
elections, the pressure is building up for their
postponement until the country is ready. Meanwhile,
another crucial process that has to take place is
managing expectations. Like their neighbours
before them, Algerians and Sudanese who have
risked a lot in the struggle for regime change, will
come to expect a lot. The Sudanese who revolted
against al-Bashir for the lack of bread and fuel, will
expect - indeed, demand - solutions not slogans
from the transitional government.
No doubt, many confuse democracy with prosperity
in the West. Democracy may facilitate creativity,
innovation and entrepreneurship, but it does not
guarantee a higher standard of living, at least not
in the short term. And in a heavily indebted,
underdeveloped nation with few national sources
of income, freedom and democracy may generate
more anger than wealth.
So far developments in Sudan and Algeria have
gone in the right direction, but there is also a lot
that can still go wrong, considering the road to
democracy is full of traps and pitfalls.
This article has been excerpted from: ‘The art of
revolution: What went right in Sudan and Algeria’.
Can the emerging economic
powers govern the globe?
Author: Uri Dadush
Published in: Bruegel.
Published on: 4 April, 2019.
What a difference ten years can make. It was
nearly ten years ago when, in a paper written with
Benn Stancil and titled “The World Order in
2050,” he and I predicted that by 2030 — in 11
years from now — five of the seven largest
economies of the world would be drawn from the
ranks of developing countries as defined by the
World Bank at the time of our writing.
As we believed then, only the United States as 1.
No. 2 and Japan as No. 4 would represent the
advanced countries among the new G7 (as
measured by their respective GDP), with Japan
dropping out of that group in 2050.
China, we predicted, would be the world’s
largest economy, and India would be No. 3. The
other countries in the new G-7 would be Brazil,
Mexico and Russia. Our 2030 forecast will
probably be proven wrong.
If I were revising the forecast today, Indonesia,
the Philippines or Nigeria might challenge Mexico,
Russia and Brazil for a slot in the new G7 in 2030.
However, the main message remains – the G7 in
2030 will bear little, if any, resemblance to the
old G7 composed only of advanced nations.
Population size = economic power
The projection that developing countries will
overtake the advanced countries in economic
importance is based on simple reasoning. Essentially,
developing economies are home to more than 80%
of the world’s people of working age. Their level
of productivity is only a fraction of that of the
advanced nations at the present time, but they’re
catching up. In most developing countries, this
catch-up will occur gradually, as they absorb
technologies, norms and institutions that the
advanced nations developed and adopted long ago.
This catch-up process is still dynamic enough to
give them a significant growth edge.
2.
In addition, all growth in the number of people
of working age occurs in developing countries.
Developing countries also boasts a higher rate of
savings and investment than advanced countries on
average. There, an increased share of the elderly and
the rising fiscal cost of pensions and health- care
contribute to reduced national savings. Due to these
factors, in a typical year developing countries now
account for about two-thirds of the total growth of
world GDP. That also means that international
businesses will likely see more new sales in
developing than advanced countries in 2019.
Global governance: In light of this tectonic shift,
it is important to ask: Can a G7 dominated by
developing nations provide the impulse to global
governance that did the old G7? The answer is no,
for three reasons.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
There is no clear leader. Starting 75 years ago,
led by the United States, the members of the old
G7 established the post-war liberal democratic
order. The United States and the UK created the
World Bank and the IMF in 1944. Much later, a
small group created the GATT system which
paved the way to the WTO. A host of other
international institutions that provide global
public goods were created under the old G7.
The United States had established its leadership
credentials as an enlightened victor in WW2
and a savior of France and the UK. There is no
historical legitimacy for a leader such as China.
True, China is already the largest economy on a
PPP basis, but the United States continues to be
the largest economy in terms of current dollars
— which are what matter most in international
purchasing power — as well as the richest and
the most advanced technologically. The United
States also remains the predominant military
power and, despite Trump’s many foibles, in
many ways a leader in values and norms. Yet, it
appears at present that the U.S. government, at
least under its current management, no longer
wants to lead on many global issues — except in
ways that are of immediate and direct interest
to the United States. In other words, the United
States continues to claim primacy and is
determined to preserve its primacy. The United
States may no longer want to lead, but it is
reluctant to allow others to lead.
Developing nations are facing daunting
challenges – namely development and poverty
reduction, and they do not always see
establishing global public goods as a priority.
You can argue that this is the wrong course to
pursue. After all, developing countries will
suffer most from, for example, climate change,
the collapse of the WTO, financial instability
and the exhaustion of fisheries. But the fact is
that these threats — although very real — are
less pressing than the imperative of fighting
hunger and disease, to provide heat and shelter,
to provide clean water and to build transport
infrastructure and invest in education. All of
those priorities are reflected in the politics of
developing countries. In addition, even if the
United States did not exist, it is far from clear
that nations would coalesce around an
 emerging leader such as China, nor that China
would eagerly take on the mantle.
3. The developing nations are a far more diverse
group than the leading advanced countries.
The per capita income gap between them can
be 10 or 20 to 1, compared to 2 to 1 in advanced
countries.Similarly, the absolute size difference
between China and nearly all others in the
rest of the developing group is far bigger than
that between the United States and the other
traditional G7.The members of the old G7 also
exhibit broadly similar economic structures.
The new G7 may include a market economy
such as Brazil and a state capitalist system
such as China. It may include resource-based
Russia and manufacturer Mexico. The new G7
notably also includes single party authoritarian
states such as China, quasi-autocracies such as
Russia and democratic Mexico, India and Brazil.
These differences translate into different
priorities, strategies and visions. This makes
coordination difficult and the spontaneous
emergence of a single leader unlikely.
A period of transition: The implication is that the
next 50 years will, at best, constitute a period of
transition in global governance. During this period,
the best hope is that today’s large developing
nations advance to be richer, more homogenous
and respond to their populations’ natural demands
for enfranchisement and for accountability.
During this long transition, the globe can only be
governed — if it can be governed at all — by a
condominium of powers, which includes, as a
minimum, the United States, China, India, Russia,
Japan and some form of European power, whether
in the shape of the largest European nations or a
more coordinated EU.
More needed than the “G2”: How this condominium
evolves is highly uncertain. What is clear is that it
will be impossible for global governance in any area
to advance without both consent and active
coordination between China and the United States.
That will be a necessary, not a sufficient condition
for global reforms.
Also essential will be the coopting, not coercing, of
the middle powers which form the remainder of
the condominium board members. This tension
is most evident today in the struggle of survival
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
of the WTO, the most important single institution
underpinning the present liberal economic order.
Is a new world order emerging to
replace US hegemony?
Author: Marco Carnelos.
Published in: Middle East Eye.
Published on: 26 April, 2019.
An increasingly multipolar, culturally diversified
world order, unhindered by Washington’s
leadership, seems to be finally emerging.
China’s global rise and Russia’s renewed
assertiveness are stimulating heated debate about
the endurance of the so-called liberal world order,
led by the United States.
This global confrontation has many facets: clashes
in the Middle East, Ukraine and the South China
Sea; US and EU sanctions against Russia; the trade
war against China; cyber-warfare, 5G and
telecommunications network security tensions;
the Venezuelan crisis; China’s Belt and Road
Initiative; and, last but not least, the search for
an alternative financial system to the Western
one and unhooked from the dollar.
There is a debate on the current international
rules - whether they should be changed, how and
by whom. After the 1945-1991 bipolar world
order, followed by the unipolar American one, is
an increasingly multipolar, culturally diversified
world order, unhindered by Washington’s
leadership, finally emerging?
The Iranian revolution
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s speech at the
2007 Munich Conference on Security Policy, the
2008 financial meltdown, Xi Jinping’s 2013 rise to
power in China and subsequent launch of the Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Belt and
Road project, and the European populist wave, are
considered crucial steps towards such a transition.
But longer before the emergence of these new
multipolar forces, it was Iran - through its 1979
revolution - that launched a systematic challenge
to the Western liberal world order.
The revolution launched a religious, political and
social model that was an affront to the Western,
secular political model. It combined two seemingly
irreconcilable elements: theocracy and democracy.
 The West never reconciled itself with
the notion that a popular revolution
could have produced a religious,
conservative government.
Ayatollah Khomeini conceived a government
legitimated both by God and by popular sovereignty
through a republican system. Iran’s subsequent
history, including its troubled relationship with the
West, has revolved around the tensions generated
by these two interacting, opposite poles, ultimately
creating an unbridgeable comprehension gap.
The West never reconciled itself with the notion
that a popular revolution in our contemporary and
secular world could have produced a religious,
conservative government.
All of a sudden, Iran began to challenge centuries
of enlightenment thought. Just as the Soviet Union
was entering in its final agony, leading to its collapse
a decade later, Iran introduced a new challenge to
Western liberal capitalism and secularism.
The problem of ‘Westoxification’: Iran’s society
and religious establishment have always nurtured a
powerful sensibility against foreign-imposed models.
Throughout the 20th century its independent
development was thwarted and undermined by
the West and its allies, strengthening this view of
Iran's relationship with the West as one based on
confrontation and hegemonic oppression.
This evolved into a national identity built upon
resistance against foreigners, especially Westerners,
known as gharbzadegi (a Farsi term meaning
"Westoxification"), which blames the fascination
with and dependence upon the West for harming
traditional, historical and cultural ties to Islam.
It advocates against indiscriminately imitating the
West, cited the alleged dangers of moral laxity,
social injustice, secularism, devaluation of religion
and obsession with money.
Forty years later, to a certain extent, some
constituencies of Americans, European populists,
and, most of all, Russian and Chinese leaders,
now share similar views about the Western
liberal system’s shortcomings.
Ultimately, the sunset of the 20th century and the
dawn of the 21st have been indelibly marked by
terrorism and its consequences. As eminent British
historian Michael Axworthy, who recently and
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
prematurely passed away, brilliantly argued:
“After 1979 we can no longer work on the
assumption that the history and culture of the
Middle East are irrelevant.”
A moral imperative
In the last four decades, Iran has become one of
the main challengers to US leadership, through
systematic opposition to Washington’s policies
and interests in the Middle East.
What the West purports to know about Iran is
often misleading or simply false, but Tehran’s
policies must be assessed in the proper framework
to avoid hasty or inaccurate stereotypes.
Iran’s nuclear ambitions and regional meddling
have been a constant source of concern for the US
and its European and Arab allies, while for
Tehran’s revolutionary leadership, this is a form of
forward defence against perceived regime-change
projects, apparently nurtured in Washington,
Jerusalem and Riyadh.
Western pundits have ignored or underestimated
the fact that Iran’s policies have also been
determined by religious duty, deriving from the
reinterpretation of Imam Hussein’s martyrdom at
Karbala in 680 CE and the subsequent
politicisation of Twelver Shiism promoted by Ali
Shariati and Ayatollah Khomeini.
In this framework, the Palestinian question and
the historical predicament of Shia communities in
many Arab and Islamic countries (Lebanon, Iraq,
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Yemen and Pakistan)
have been framed as forms of oppression and
injustice deserving of revolutionary mobilisation.
For Iran, opposition to the Western US-led model
and its related policies - considered the main
drivers of global oppression and injustice - has
become a sort of moral imperative.
So far, it has been surprisingly effective in fuelling
the perception of Washington’s decline, through a
relentless and successful challenge against the
latter’s plans in the Middle East.
 Role of media in 21st century
Author: Naveed Abbas Maitlo
Published in: The Nation
Published on: April 18, 2019.
The contemporary world of globalisation
witnessed both positive and negative roles of
media. However despite some lacunas, it is an
essential tool of information, entertainment and
above all the current knowledge. It is rightly said
that media is the mirror of a society. Its shows
the real face of society. Doubtlessly, media has
played a vital role to diffuse liberal norms. Like
democracy, respect of human rights value of
common people in economy, policies etc. It has
also worked excellently in times of crisis to settle
down the dispute peacefully. On the other hand,
it can be equally dangerous if it plays a negative
role. It was a reason behind the demise of the
greatest empires in past. It has potential to lead
the nation towards unimaginable wars. The 21st
century is remarkably the century of media. It
has confined this gigantic world to a global village.
It caused the death of distances and the end of
geography. It has left no room for single doubt
that vibrant, vigilant and vigorous role of media
is the need of day. None of the countries can sustain
and survive in this complex world of cut-throat
competition without media. Therefore, it is
extraordinary unwise to deny the paramount
importance of media due to its negative role. Though
there is satanic sway on media, yet its angelic role
trumps it. It is sane to see glass half full than glass
half empty.
The contemporary world of globalisation witnessed
both positive and negative roles of media. However
despite some lacunas, it is an essential tool of
information, entertainment and above all the
current knowledge. It is rightly said that media is the
mirror of a society. Its shows the real face of society.
Doubtlessly, media has played a vital role to diffuse
liberal norms. Like democracy, respect of human
rights value of common people in economy, policies
etc. It has also worked excellently in times of crisis
to settle down the dispute peacefully. On the other
hand, it can be equally dangerous if it plays a
negative role. It was a reason behind the demise of
the greatest empires in past. It has potential to lead
the nation towards unimaginable wars. The 21st
century is remarkably the century of media. It has
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
confined this gigantic world to a global village. It
caused the death of distances and the end of
geography. It has left no room for single doubt that
vibrant, vigilant and vigorous role of media is the
need of day. None of the countries can sustain and
survive in this complex world of cut-throat
competition without media. Therefore, it is
extraordinary unwise to deny the paramount
importance of media due to its negative role.
Though there is satanic sway on media, yet its
angelic role trumps it. It is sane to see glass half
full than glass half empty.
Moreover, media is an agent of peace and
compassion. It keeps different factions of a country
united. It works efficiently against the forces of
chasm and dichotomy. Either it is political spectrum
or religious sphere, media highlights the positive
events and episodes. It is pertinent to quote
Pakistan as an example. Pakistan’s media has
preserved integration of Pakistan. The all four
provinces are not administrative but ethnic units
in real sense. However, media has not let them be
divided on the ethnic lines. It has also played a
pivotal role to retain religious harmony. Thus, it is
unambiguously right that it propagates the
message of peace and love. Media also highlights
major issues and helps in policy making. It works
as a flag career of development and welfare of
people. Many talk show, articles, editorial and other
intellectual discourse pinpoint loopholes and tender,
suggestion for ameliorate of those flaws. Govt
officials, bureaucracy, diplomats etc., use media as
road map towards formulation of the first rate
policies. Recently, passed honour killing bill 2016
and anti-rape bill 2016 are fruits of media’s
successful campaign. It is rightly remarked that
media is the bible of the statesmen.
In addition to this, media preserves the cultural
identity of a nation. Every nation gives splendid
importance to its culture. This is why; Samuel P.
Huntington said that the next world war would
be among cultural entities. He warned the world
about clash of civilization. There is not an iota of
doubt that the fourth generation warfare is being
fought on media. Therefore, every country’s media
plays a great role to protect and promote the
culture of its own country. The culture propagation
is ‘soft power’ of any nation according to American
idealist Joseph Nye. Media’s role is laudable in this
regard.
Media has powered to make or break the fan
following of any individual, party or organization.
Probably, terrorists also shower honey-money
over media to get name and fame. Else, what can
the media achieve by glorifying them. The tragic
Army Public School incident proved as a catalyst
for the statute book and the nation sow a raft of
legislation to fight against terrorism. National
Action Plan (NAP) also surfaced as a counter-
terrorism strategy. This twenty point agenda
included a clause which narrates that glorification
of terrorists by media is one of the reasons
behind, their despicable activities.
Moreover, as discussed in previous paragraphs,
media protests culture identity of a nation. On
the other hand, it can also pose a serious threat
to culture identity. According to realistic paradigm
in International Relation (IR), the super power
country diffuses its own culture to retain its
hegemony around the world. Today, America
is a super power. The whole world speaks
English Language, wears jeans, eats fast food,
watches lunatic movies of Hollywood and listen
jazz music. Men follow Michel Jackson and women
follow Hillary Clinton or Miss America. Men are
clean shaven and women powder their faces with
American cosmetics. This culture has reached this
part of world through integrity of media.
Resultantly, nations have last their culture identity.
To conclude entire discussion that media plays
commendable role in the 21st century.
Notwithstanding, it is crying for many substantial
reforms and improvements. One thing is crystal and
clear that media has become an undefeatable power
today. All powerful forces have become powerless
before, the fourth pillar of state. However, there are
many obstacles that do not let media operate freely
and positively. The healthy racism has a permanent
role in construction of strong edifice. The negative
propaganda reduces that edifice to the ashes of
defeat. Through true information, awareness and
message of peace, love, harmony, media can put a
nation on cusp of glorious future. Whereas the
yellow journalism can be cancerous for a nation.
The 21st century is remarked with phenomenal
progress of media. Hopefully, media gets more
mature and makes the earth beautiful and peaceful.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
Presidential vs parliamentary
form of government
Author: Dr Aqeel Ahmed Bazmi
Published in: Daily Times
Published on: April 18, 2019
The constitutional structures of national govt take
a variety of forms. Broadly speaking, the democratic
systems can be divided between presidential and
parliamentary arrangements. The method of
electing and removing the head of government is
among the most important variables.
Chief executives in both presidential and
parliamentary systems can be removed from office
by the legislature. However, the way this is done
varies. In a parliamentary system, the political
party winning the majority of seats in the parliament
forms the government. It selects a person from
among its members to be the prime minister who
is the head of the government. In a presidential
system, the head of government, the president, is
elected by the voters, either directly or by means
of an electoral college.
In addition, in a presidential system the head of
government is elected for a fixed term of office.
For example, in the United States the president’s
term of office is for four years. Normally, the
president cannot be removed during the term of
office except by a specially prescribed, politically
exceptional process of impeachment. Under the
United States constitution, an impeachment can
occur only when the House of Representatives
votes to impeach a president for “high crimes and
misdemeanors” and the Senate votes to convict
the president of such delinquency. An impeachment
cannot occur simply as a result of political
disagreement.
In a parliamentary system, the head of govt as
well as the ministers can continue in their offices
for only as long as they enjoy the confidence of
the legislature. They can be removed from office
as a result of a no-confidence vote. Such a vote can
be premised on mere political disagreement with
the government. A prime minister thus depends
either on the support of his or her party (if it has a
majority in the legislature), or on the support of a
coalition of parties.
A change in the form of government is considered
a major shift. It is often undertaken in the course
of writing a constitution.
As the march of democracy gathered momentum
following the demise of the Soviet Union, several
nations struggled to identify themselves as
democracies. Some chose the parliamentary system
and others the more flexible presidential system.
Still others created hybrid governments they
believed would work best for them. Discussions of
presidential and parliamentary models frequently
include generalizations that need to be qualified
to be relevant.
Maurice Duverger (1917-2014), a French jurist,
sociologist and politician, pointed out that it is
possible for a government to have a popularly
elected president as well as a prime minister
responsible to the parliament. He referred to such
a system as “semi-presidential government”. He
identified the following countries as having such a
system: France after 1958, Finland, Austria, Ireland,
Iceland, Portugal, and the Weimar Republic from
1919 to 1933. He noted that the practice in some
of these countries was more parliamentary than
presidential in the sense that the president had
relatively little power. These nations included
Austria, Ireland, and Iceland. He argued that modem
France represented a strong presidential system.
However, he wrote before the experience of
1986-1988 when the president lost a majority in
the National Assembly and was required to
appoint his adversary to the office of premier.
Parliamentary critics of the constitutional structure
in the United States have emerged during many
periods of intense political debate. Thomas
Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924), an American
statesman, lawyer, and academician famously
developed the major arguments in the 1880s.” He
wrote that the United States government tended to
be fundamentally ineffective because power is
lodged in two competing political branches, the
legislature and the executive. He also argued that the
separation of powers fostered lack of accountability
in government. He favoured the parliamentary
system because it allows the removal of a
government over specific issues.
On the one hand, one must question the idea that
presidential government is in some sense inherently
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
stronger than parliamentary government. In fact,
the prime minister of Great Britain has more
power than the United States president. On the
other hand, one should question the broad
assertion that a presidential system with checks
and balances necessarily leads to debilitating
deadlock. In the United States, such an assertion
lacks empirical grounding. In fact, what will
happen will depend upon many factors other than
the constitutional structure, such as a nation’s
political culture, its party system, and its electoral
arrangement. Politics is much more complex and
multi-dimensional than a single-minded focus on
constitutional formalities acknowledges.
A decision to change the form of government in a
substantial way may be influenced by a variety of
considerations including dissatisfaction with current
arrangements and a perception that restructuring
could lead to improvement in stability, effectiveness
or representation. Such a change requires care in
design and implementation because it may have
consequences for the structure and operation of
politics that are difficult to predict.
Enlightenment and Islam
Author: Zafar Aziz Chaudhry
Published in: Daily Times
Published on: April 22, 2019
In the early part of this month, during my sojourn
to the Holy Land, the question which perplexed me
most was whether there was a real connection
between enlightenment and faith, and whether in
their genesis these two are all-embracing or
mutually exclusive. My deep reflections on various
texts of the Holy Quran, and some references
gathered from history did reaffirm my belief that
they are mutually inclusive and do not conflict
with each other. In fact for the future survival of
Muslim nations with grace and dignity in
competition with the rest of the world, it should be
clearly understood that there is no schism between
these two concepts. Rather an enlightened
world-view is likely to rub off the accumulated
centuries-old rust on the other-wise pristine
fabric of Islam.
The European intellectual movement of the late
17th and 18th centuries emphasized reason and
individualism rather than tradition. It was heavily
influenced by philosophers such as Descartes, Locke,
and Newton, and its prominent figures included
Kant, Goethe, Voltaire, Rousseau, and Adam Smith.
It was a revolt against Man’s self-imposed tendency
not to use his own understanding and only to follow
tradition. It stressed reason, logic, criticism, and
freedom of thought over dogma, blind faith, and
superstition. In a broader sense, Enlightenment
applied scientific reasoning to politics, science, and
religion. Its followers were typically humanists who
supported equality and human dignity, and it is
wrong to suppose that enlightenment is in any
manner opposed to religion. On the other hand, it
acts as a bulwark against superstition, intolerance,
and bigotry which have brought bad name to
religions.
Despite their different approaches, science and
religion are also complementary. It is said that
science can help you diagnose and treat your cancer,
but it cannot touch the despair and dismay and
terror you feel when you get the diagnosis, nor
can it help you to die well. For that people turn
to religion, which answers the deeper questions
of our human predicament. The survival of religion
in the 21st century, according to Karen Armstrong,
largely depends on its capacity to create compassion
for the fellow human beings which is the ultimate
object of religion.
But unfortunately religion is mostly misunderstood
in our time due to our inability to take historical
perspective of the social, cultural, intellectual, and
emotional settings that shaped people’s lives and
actions in the past. Such an understanding which
is often termed as “historical empathy” helps us to
understand the vast differences between us in the
present and those in the past. Compassion also
teaches us to transcend our limited world-view
and place ourselves in the cultural and social
environments of the past.
The Holy Prophet by his conduct and precepts
has been admittedly one of the greatest and most
influential personages in history and we Muslims
believe that the Holy Quran, his revealed message
to humanity, is a marvel of wisdom for the mankind.
But the fate of Muslims everywhere is most pathetic,
the responsibility for which can be traced in
Islamic history.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
The first shock after the death of the Holy Prophet
on the question of his succession resulted in the
tragic split between the Sunnies and Shias which
also in due course divided the Islamic countries
into two blocks.. The next significant setback
which reversed the Islamic clock occurred during
the Abbasid period when philosophers like
al-Ghazali (1058-1111 AD) fiercely opposed the
Mu’tazilites practice of subjecting Islamic theology
to rationalism which led the Abbasids to ban the
Mu’tazilites. Islam’s vitality and appeal was
gravely affected by the resurgence of literalist
interpretations of Sharia ( that treats man-made
laws as divine) and the worsening of sectarian
cleavages within Islam which has set in motion a
perpetual cycle of violence that directly endangers
the lives of ordinary Muslims everywhere.
Within a century of Holy Prophet’s death his
followers had built an empire that stretched
from Spanish Europe to Central Asia. The Rashidin
caliphate can be credited for military expansion,
but It was not until the Umayyad Dynasty-from
661 to 750-that Islamic and Arabic culture began
to truly spread. The Abbasid Dynasty-from 750
to 1258-intensified and solidified these cultural
changes.
The Golden period of knowledge in Islam began
during the reign of the Abbasid caliph Harun
al-Rashid (786 to 809) when he invited scholars
from various parts of the world with different
cultural backgrounds and mandated them to
gather and translate all of the world’s classical
knowledge into the Arabic language. This resulted
into an astonishing growth of philosophers and
scientists such as Ibne Rushd (translated Aristotle,
and wrote books on Islamic jurisprudence )
Al-Kindi (discovered rules of astronomy and
optics ) Khawarzmi ( Father of Algebra and
mathematics ) Ibne Sina (Father of Medicine,
astronomy and Logic ) who ushered in a golden
era of knowledge. Ironically the dark age of
Europe coincided with golden age of Islam. But it
was the most tragic turn in the history of Islam
that the fruits of hard labours of these
philosophers and scientists could not reach the
Islamic society because of the opposition to
rational thought by the jurists and clergymen of
the day and lack of wisdom and vision of their
rulers who opposed a rational underpinning of
Islam – analogous to St. Thomas Aquinas who lent
rationality to Christianity in the Middle Ages. The
theologians like Al-Ghazali and Ibne Tamayya
refused to accept scientific change and discoveries
and forced the Khalifa to ban Mu’tazilites who were
advocates of rational thought. It was contrary to the
teachings of the Quran and precepts of the Holy
Prophet who had made no such restrictions on the
acquisition of knowledge. According to the saying
of the Prophet, Muslims were to seek knowledge
even if they had to go to China.
The Islamic state also failed to patronize these
polymaths by refusing them enough funds for
their research etc under fear of reaction from the
reactionary forces. But most importantly , contrary
to the injunctions of the Holy Quran, the local
jurists divided the concept of knowledge into two
broad and disjunctive categories as “ilm ad-din”
(religious knowledge) and “ilm ad-dunya” (worldly
knowledge). Neither in the Quran nor in the
authentic books of Hadith was there any such
division allowed in the acquisition of knowledge.
Islamic sources declare knowledge as an
indivisible whole.
The Golden period of spread of knowledge ended
with the collapse of the Abbasid caliphate due to
Mongol invasions and the Siege of Baghdad in
1258 AD. Even during the Ottoman Empire,
nothing was done for promotion and development
of science and technology, perhaps because the
Emperors thought that it would be a threat to the
opulence of the monarchs. On the other hand, a
blunder was done through a wretched Fatwa,
which banned the printing press in the Empire
which remained in force for over 200 years. This
left Islamic world in the dark when West sailed
away with renaissance and enlightenment.
Thus there are enough grounds to believe that
for the survival of Islamic civilization, faith and
enlightenment should go hand in hand.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
Why did Bush go to war in Iraq?
Author: Ahsan I Butt
Published in: Al- Jazeera
Published on: March 20, 2019
No, it wasn't because of WMDs, democracy or Iraqi
oil. The real reason is much more sinister than that.
Sixteen years after the United States invaded
Iraq and left a trail of destruction and chaos in
the country and the region, one aspect of the
war remains criminally underexamined: why
was it fought in the first place? What did the
Bush administration hope to get out of the war?
The official, and widely-accepted, story remains
that Washington was motivated by Saddam
Hussein's weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
programme. His nuclear capabilities, especially,
were deemed sufficiently alarming to incite the
war. As then US Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice said, "We do not want the smoking gun to
be a mushroom cloud."
Despite Saddam not having an active WMD
programme, this explanation has found support
among some International Relations scholars, who
say that while the Bush administration was wrong
about Saddam's WMD capabilities, it was sincerely
wrong. Intelligence is a complicated, murky
enterprise, the argument goes, and given the
foreboding shadow of the 9/11 attacks, the US
government reasonably, if tragically, misread
the evidence on the dangers Saddam posed.
There is a major problem with this thesis: there
is no evidence for it, beyond the words of the
Bush officials themselves. And since we know
the administration was engaged in a widespread
campaign of deception and propaganda in the
run-up to the Iraq war, there is little reason to
believe them.
My investigation into the causes of the war finds
that it had little to do with fear of WMDs - or other
purported goals, such as a desire to "spread
democracy" or satisfy the oil or Israel lobbies.
Rather, the Bush administration invaded Iraq
for its demonstration effect.
A quick and decisive victory in the heart of the
Arab world would send a message to all countries,
especially to recalcitrant regimes such as Syria,
Libya, Iran, or North Korea, that American
hegemony was here to stay. Put simply, the Iraq
war was motivated by a desire to (re)establish
American standing as the world's leading power.
Indeed, even before 9/11, then-Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld saw Iraq through the
prism of status and reputation, variously arguing
in February and July 2001 that ousting Saddam
would "enhance US credibility and influence
throughout the region" and "demonstrate what
US policy is all about".
These hypotheticals were catalysed into reality
by September 11, when symbols of American
military and economic dominance were destroyed.
Driven by humiliation, the Bush administration
felt that the US needed to reassert its position
as an unchallengeable hegemon.
The only way to send a message so menacing was
a swashbuckling victory in war. Crucially, however,
Afghanistan was not enough: it was simply too
weak a state. As prison bullies know, a fearsome
reputation is not acquired by beating up the
weakest in the yard. Or as Rumsfeld put it on the
evening of 9/11, "We need to bomb something
else to prove that we're, you know, big and strong
and not going to be pushed around by these kinds
of attacks."
Moreover, Afghanistan was a "fair" war, a tit-for-tat
response to the Taliban's provision of sanctuary to
al-Qaeda's leadership. Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary
of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, and Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy Douglas Feith considered
restricting retaliation to Afghanistan dangerously
"limited", "meager", and "narrow". Doing so, they
alleged, "may be perceived as a sign of weakness
rather than strength" and prove to "embolden
rather than discourage regimes" opposed to the US.
They knew that sending a message of unbridled
hegemony entailed a disproportionate response to
9/11, one that had to extend beyond Afghanistan.
Iraq fit the bill both because it was more powerful
than Afghanistan and because it had been in
neoconservative crosshairs since George HW Bush
declined to press on to Baghdad in 1991. A regime
remaining defiant despite a military defeat was
barely tolerable before 9/11. Afterwards, however,
it became untenable.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
That Iraq was attacked for its demonstration
effect is attested to by several sources, not least
the principals themselves - in private. A senior
administration official told a reporter, off the record,
that "Iraq is not just about Iraq", rather "it was of a
type", including Iran, Syria, and North Korea.
In a memo issued on September 30, 2001, Rumsfeld
advised Bush that "the USG [US government] should
envision a goal along these lines: New regimes in
Afghanistan and another key State [or two] that
supports terrorism [to strengthen political and
military efforts to change policies elsewhere]".
Feith wrote to Rumsfeld in October 2001 that action
against Iraq would make it easier to "confront -
politically, militarily, or otherwise" Libya and Syria.
As for then-Vice President Dick Cheney, one close
adviser revealed that his thinking behind the war
was to show: "We are able and willing to strike at
someone. That sends a very powerful message."
In a 2002 column, Jonah Goldberg coined the
"Ledeen Doctrine", named after neoconservative
historian Michael Ledeen. The "doctrine" states:
"Every ten years or so, the United States needs to
pick up some small crappy little country and
throw it against the wall, just to show the world
we mean business."
It may be discomfiting to Americans to say nothing
of millions of Iraqis that the Bush administration
spent their blood and treasure for a war inspired
by the Ledeen Doctrine. Did the US really start
a war - one that cost trillions of dollars, killed
hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, destabilised the
region, and helped create the Islamic State of Iraq
and the Levant (ISIL) - just to prove a point?
More uncomfortable still is that the Bush
administration used WMDs as a cover, with equal
parts fearmongering and strategic
misrepresentation - lying - to exact the desired
political effect. Indeed, some US economists consider
the notion that the Bush administration deliberately
misled the country and the globe into war in Iraq to
be a "conspiracy theory", on par with beliefs that
President Barack Obama was born outside the
US or that the Holocaust did not occur.
But this, sadly, is no conspiracy theory. Even Bush
officials have sometimes dropped their guard. Feith
confessed in 2006 that "the rationale for the war
didn't hinge on the details of this intelligence even
though the details of the intelligence at times
became elements of the public presentation".
That the administration used the fear of WMDs and
terrorism to fight a war for hegemony should be
acknowledged by an American political establishment
eager to rehabilitate George W Bush amid the rule
of Donald Trump, not least because John Bolton,
Trump's national security adviser, seems eager to
employ similar methods to similar ends in Iran.
Reforms we need.
Author: Dr Ikramul Haq, Huzaima Bukhari
Published in: The News
Published on: April 21, 2019
In Pakistan, ironically, the less-privileged are
subjected to oppressive taxation to finance the
luxuries of elites who enjoy extraordinary tax-free
perks and perquisites, unprecedented benefits like
expensive cars, golf clubs, rest houses and awards
of free or concessional plots at prime locations.
The way the elites waste and plunder the taxpayers’
money is not a secret.
Since independence, no serious effort has ever
been made to reform the elitist apparatus that
has miserably failed to deliver. Pakistan has been
pushed to recurrent economic crises due to
perpetual failure of the elites. Our fiscal deficit is
now over Rs2.5 trillion and debt burden is over
600 percent of revenues. In coming days, the
government will have to borrow more and more
— externally and internally — just to pay interest
on old loans and meet day to day expenses.
The dire need in today’s Pakistan is to undertake
fundamental institutional and structural reforms. Our
biggest burden on economy is the huge unproductive
workforce comprising nearly four million people, in
various governments (federal, provincial, local and
corporations) and Public Sector Enterprises (PSEs),
who waste time and money, mostly create hurdles for
citizens and businesses rather than serving them.
Rightsizing of monstrous administrative machinery
and improving quality of public services should be
the top agenda of reforms. Less government should
be the rule. This can be done by transferring much
of the work to local governments, which should be
installed from the lowest level up. Health, education,
water and sanitation, local roads, local policing, local
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
property transfer, property and income tax etc
should all be handled by local elected authorities.
For making Pakistan a self-reliant economy, we
need to stop wasteful, unproductive expenses, cut
the size of cabinet and government machinery,
privatise or make government-owned corporations
profitable, accelerate industrialisation and increase
productivity, improve agriculture sector, reduce
inequalities through a policy of redistribution of
income and wealth.
It is high time that professionals and civil society
campaign against oppressive, anti-people policies
and work relentlessly for establishment of an
egalitarian state. We can make Pakistan a
self-reliant and prosperous country through fiscal
decentralisation and grass root taxation at local
government level.
It is high time that professionals and civil society
campaign against oppressive, anti-people policies.
We can make Pakistan self-reliant and prosperous
through fiscal decentralisation and grass root
taxation at local level.
Revenues worth trillions of rupees have been
sacrificed by the governments — civil and military
alike — since 1977 extending unprecedented
exemptions and concessions to the privileged
classes. Some of these are highlighted below:
Military rulers abolished all progressive taxes e.g.
Estate Duty, Gift Tax, Capital Gain Tax etc. Now
these are with provincial governments after the
Eighteenth Constitutional Amendment, but they
are also least interested in taxing the rich and
mighty. The historic decision of taxing “agricultural
income”, passed by Federal Parliament in the shape
of Finance Act, 1977, was thwarted by the military
regime of Ziaul Haq. Through this law, the
Parliament amended the definition of “agricultural
income” as obtaining in section 2(1) of the then
Income Tax Act, 1922 to tax big absentee landlords.
This was a revolutionary step to impose tax on
agricultural income at federal level for the first time
in the history of Pakistan, but this attempt was
successfully foiled by a military dictator.
During Zia’s 11 years rule and that of General
Musharraf for nearly 9 years, absentee land
owners (including mighty generals who received maneuverings; or was used to artificially enhance
state lands as gallantry awards or otherwise!) did the prices of property. With no wealth tax to pay,
not pay a single penny as agricultural income tax both these avenues helped to increase individual
or wealth tax. wealth but dreadfully stripped the entire nation of
its right to live in peace and economic prosperity.
Taxation of “agricultural income”, at present, is
the sole prerogative of provincial governments According to a conservative estimate, from 2003 to
under the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan. All the this date we have lost Rs300 to 500 billion worth of
four provinces have enacted laws to this effect, wealth tax that could have been imposed on
but total collection during the last five years was unaccounted/untaxed wealth amassed by those
less than Rs2 billion (share of agriculture in GDP already enjoying the privileges of a luxurious life.
on average was about 20 percent for this period). The wealthy should now be taxed at grass root level
Tax losses for not taxing speculative transactions through local governments according to the size of
houses they own. Tax on immovable property after
in real estate are to the extent of billions of rupees
the Eighteenth Constitutional Amendment is the sole
per annum. The definition of ‘business’ given in
prerogative of the provinces. By levying capital gain
the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 covers “adventure
in the nature of trade” and yet our tax machinery tax on disposal of urban immovable property, the
caused colossal loss to the national exchequer by provinces can generate sufficient resources rather
than look towards the federal government for
not bringing adventures in the nature of trade in
money all the time.
real estate into tax ambit.
Multi-national Companies (MNCs) through abusive Section 111(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
is abused by powerful segments, politicians,
transfer pricing mechanism, deprive Pakistan of
government officials and businessmen through
taxes of over Rs200 billion every year.
benami transactions. The loss caused due to this
Wealth Tax Act, 1963 was abolished through the provision alone for the last 20 years is estimated at
Finance Act 2003 on specific demand of Shaukat nearly Rs1500 billion.
Aziz before he took charge as finance minister of
The above are just a few areas showing how much
Pakistan. He was fully aware of the fact that by
tax loss we have been incurring perpetually since
virtue of his status as resident in Pakistan, his global
1977. Total loss of revenue through Statutory
assets would attract provisions of the Wealth Tax
Regulatory Orders (SROs) issued during the last 25
Act culminating into substantial tax liability on
years alone is estimated at about Rs3000 billion —
annual basis. The repeal of this progressive law,
unprecedented concessions to the rich made the
especially suitable to Pakistan where enormous
State poorer and the masses indebted enormously.
assets are created without disclosing income, was
We did not need any borrowing at all, if SROs were
shown to be justified despite substantial revenue
not issued and taxes had been collected fairly
losses, and the resultant misery inflicted on the
and justly.
majority of the people of Pakistan.
Tax revenues have a critical role in municipal
In 2003 before its abolition, wealth tax was the only
self-governance in all successful social democracies.
progressive tax left in Pakistan with tremendous
The power to levy and collect taxes is one of the
potential for growth, if exemptions given to the rich
cornerstones of municipal self-governance as it
absentee landlords were scrapped. This became
ensures that the municipalities can manage the
obvious immediately after its repeal when billions
functions that they have undertaken to execute or
of rupees (estimated at US$ 60 billion) started
those for which they are responsible for under the
pouring in from all over the world remitted by all
law. Take the example of Finland where the most
and sundry without any fear of being investigated,
important levy is municipal tax, which amounted to
courtesy amnesty given under section 111(4) of the
almost 44 billion Euros in 2018 — Pakistan collects
Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. Influx of enormous
less than 30 billion Euros as taxes both at federal
wealth was directed to the stock exchanges and
and provincial level!
real estate market where the sharks continued to
engulf small investors through unholy

Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)

If a country of 5.4 million people (Finland) can
achieve this level of taxation at municipal level
alone, then we a nation of over 210 million can
do much more, but only if there is the will. One
of the central constitutional principles regarding
municipal self-governance in Finland is that, when
allocating new functions to municipalities, the State
has also to ensure that they have the necessary
resources to carry them out. We have the resources
but system for self-governance as in vogue in
Finland and elsewhere in the world is non-existent
despite the clear command vide Article 140A of the
Constitution. Resultantly, power is not with the
people but in the hands of the privileged few.
Economic equality and prosperity, peace and social
tranquility can never be achieved unless taxation
system is reformed completely. It needs partial
decentralisation where taxes are collected for
education, healthcare and social welfare services
through municipalities working on the principle
of self-governance ensuring that revenues are
spent for the benefit of public and not the
powerful segments of society alone.
Economy is the key issue
Author: Dr Moonis Ahmar
Published in: The Express Tribune
Published on: April 19, 2019
In its ‘South Asia Economic Focus Report’
released the other day, the World Bank warned
that Pakistan’s economic growth will decelerate
to 3.4% in fiscal year 2019 and 2.7% in fiscal year
2020, as fiscal and monetary policies are tightened
to address macroeconomic imbalances.
The World Bank report stated the economic growth
rate is expected to recover to 4% in 2020-21 from
5.8% that was achieved during the last PML-N
government (2013-18). The shrinking of economy
to 50% in just last eight months is a disaster for
the country which is still reeling from low
exports, artificial foreign exchange reserves, sharp
depreciation of the rupee, money laundering worth
billions of dollars, enormous price hike, huge foreign
and domestic debts and a double-digit inflation.
If all the major indicators of economy — GDP,
foreign exchange reserves, balance of payments
and inflation — are discouraging, it means Pakistan
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
will not be able to put its own house in order in
the years to come.
Despite tall claims made by the PTI before coming
to power that it will fix the economy within 100
days and put the country on the path to progress,
the situation on the ground since August last year
when Imran Khan assumed the charge of Prime
Minister is quite dismal.
Why has the PTI’s expectation of overseas Pakistanis
extending all-possible help to lift the country’s
foreign exchange reserves by making enormous
investment not come true during the last eight
months? Why is the PTI government unable to bring
back what its leaders use to repeatedly refer to $200
billion worth of ill-gotten money kept in various
offshore banks? Why have the claims of adopting
austerity and eliminating the VVIP culture not been
fulfilled? These are the questions that are being
genuinely asked by people.
One can figure out four major realities which
tend to deepen Pakistan’s economic malaise with
each passing day. The successive regimes that
have assumed power in post-1971 Pakistan have
side- tracked these realities while blaming their
predecessors for passing an economic mess on
to them.
First, as pointed out by Barack Obama during his
days in the White House, “a nation should live
within its means”. This is a successful way of
dealing with a country’s economic predicament.
Isn’t it a reality that none of the governments in
Pakistan over the years — whether elected or
otherwise — concentrated on keeping a balance
between the income and expenditures? For the
fiscal ongoing year, the federal government had
estimated Rs4.43 trillion worth of tax collection,
but by June 30, 2019, a revenue shortfall of Rs400
billion has been forecasted.
According to PM Imran Khan, 80% of Pakistan’s
revenue income is spent on servicing debt and
meeting defence expenditures. How is it possible
then to run the country’s administration and carry
out development programmes with the rest of 20%?
Second, the reality that despite all efforts during
the last eight months — including depreciating the
rupee against the dollar by 20% since August 2018
— exports have risen to a mere 5%. And the trade
gap in the fiscal year 2018-19 is estimated to be
$23 billion.
The gap in the revenue and expenditures on the
one hand and imports and exports on the other has
deepened Pakistan’s economic crisis. Why has the
volume of exports not increased despite the firm
government claims and why is there only a marginal
decrease in the volume of imports? One needs to
be mindful of the fact that unless the country’s
economy is transformed from an import-oriented
one to an export-oriented, a breakthrough should
not be expected.
Enhancing exports would require innovation,
enterprise, meeting quality control, competition,
and uninterrupted supply of energy to production
units. Furthermore, a shift from exporting raw
materials which fetch meager amount, to exporting
technology, automobiles and industrial machinery
will quadruple Pakistan’s exports.
That is what was done by China, South Korea,
Singapore and Malaysia. Bangladesh is not a
cotton-growing county but exports $30 billion of
garments, whereas Pakistan is world’s fourth largest
cotton-producing country but earns only $5.5 billion
from garments export. Without an industrial and
technological revolution in Pakistan along with a
secure and work-oriented environment, Pakistan
will not be able to catch up even with its
counterparts in Asia as far as raising the quantum
of exports is concerned.
Third, a major source of income for a country that
wants to excel in the world of economy is foreign
investments. Unlike many countries in the region
— where billions of dollars of foreign direct
investment (FDI) has led to a great leap forward —
in Pakistan, despite the much-talked-about CPEC,
the FDI is expected to be around $3.7 billion during
the year 2018-19 as compared to $11 billion in
the UAE and $12 billion in Malaysia.
Likewise, income from remittances also strengthens
the economy. During the year 2018-19 with a
nominal enhancement, Pakistan’s remittances are
expected to be around $20 billion which provides a
valuable cushion for dealing with huge trade deficit.
Even then, income from remittances for Pakistan is
much less than in case of the Philippines which is
$30 billion and Mexico which is $26 billion.
Pakistan will have to tap opportunities which
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
exist in enhancing remittances from around 10
million overseas Pakistan.
Finally, Pakistan’s undocumented economy is 30%
where the government fails to get the required
revenue. Out of a population of more than 200
million, tax filers are less than 1.6 million. In that
situation, how can one expect the country’s
revenue to go up when those who are earning
billions of rupees through their businesses,
consultancy and other types of work are not
paying taxes?
Unfortunately, the PTI government is clueless
about governance, economy and foreign policy,
yet it expresses confidence that it will put the
house in order. If austerity and elimination of the
VVIP culture are the hallmarks of the PTI and its
chairman, Imran Khan, then why is there no
transparent investigation into projects,
particularly the Peshawar Metro Bus, about which
there have been allegations of embezzlement of
billions of rupees? The PTI government which
aspires to establish a Medina-like welfare state has
not even taken the first step in that direction. The
gap between the rich and the poor is widening, and
no effort has been made to reduce it. Instead of
following a policy of self-reliance, the government
is borrowing billions of dollars from friendly
countries and is ready to sign a bailout package
with the IMF to rescue the economy from further
damage. Prices of food, vegetables, fruits, gas and
fuel have escalated to alarming proportions.
Immediately after coming to power, the PTI had
constituted an Economic Advisory Council
composed of renowned economists in order to
stabilise the economy but during the last eight
months things have deteriorated.
The focus and energy of the PTI government is on
launching campaigns against the allegedly corrupt
PML-N and PPP and not on utilising its energies on
truly transforming Pakistan into a welfare state by
establishing the rule of law, putting a proper
justice system in place, abolishing the VVIP culture,
and carrying out across-the-board accountability.
 Needed: a democratic world order
Author: Abdul Sattar
Published in: The News
Published on: April 16, 2019.
Although many critics believe that the two
terrible world wars that killed more than eight
million people in the world were waged to capture
markets and colonies, the West claims they were
fought to protect democracy and for the sake of
an international order based on respect for
international law, promotion of human rights
and maintenance of peace in the global village.
However, that very West seems to be tearing down
this international order through its reckless policies
and flagrant violations of international laws.
The recent arrest of Julian Assange clearly indicates
that the West has no regard for international law,
democracy and freedom of expression. Assange
could be prosecuted in his native country if concrete
evidence is found against him regarding sexual
harassment or assault but punishing him for
exposing the heinous war crimes that the West
committed in Iraq and Afghanistan is a travesty of
justice. The democratic ruling elite of the West that
was clamouring for freedom of expression and
bashing the conservative kingdom of Saudi Arabia is
now planning to hand over the most respected voice
for this very right in the world to the henchmen of
Donald Trump. For many pacifists, Assange is a
hero who unearthed the obnoxious plans of Western
war-mongers that have been invading country after
country for their gargantuan appetite of natural
resources and their voracious greed for profit.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have proved to be
very disastrous, with catastrophic consequences for
the hapless citizens of the two countries. More than
2.5 million perished in Iraq because of the illegal
invasion that unleashed sectarian massacres
besides spawning the rise of Isis. The never-ending
war of Afghanistan has also pushed millions of
people towards death and destruction. Assange,
Bradley Manning, Snowden and hundreds of people
like them are the conscience of the West, fighting
to save its humanistic reputation that has been
dented by its unscrupulous leaders and their
Machiavellian policies.
They are the Kepler, Copernicus and Galileo of the
modern times. They have not only exposed the
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
death and destruction plans of the West but also
startled the world by revealing the
sanctimoniousness of the American ruling elite
that was not only involved in bugging its enemies
but spying on its allies as well – like the German
chancellor and ex-French president. Through their
sheer courage, these individuals helped the world
understand the mysterious spying system put in
place by the sole superpower to control the world.
This system is far more effective than the detective
network introduced by Hitler or any other ruthless
dictator.
It is strange that the governments in Berlin and
Paris are silent over the arrest of someone whose
audacity helped others come forward and expose
the plans of the American ruling elite not only
against its rivals but friends as well. The Western
corporate media that is quick at pointing out the
freedom of expression issues in Russia, China,
Saudi Arabia, Iran and elsewhere in the world
seems to be celebrating Assange’s capture. No
mainstream media outlet has openly condemned
this act of rapaciousness of the British ruling elite.
Assange was dragged out of the Ecuadorean
embassy as if he were the most wanted terrorist of
the world. The treatment meted out to him has
shamed the modern democratic world.
Assange’s arrest flies in the face of claims made by
Western democracies about freedom of expression,
democracy and respect for international law. It
seems the ruling elite of the West is encouraging
chaos and repression everywhere. They have
adopted a criminal silence over the brutal tactics
employed by the butcher of Gaza called Benjamin
Netanyahu against the hapless Palestinians. They
dare not challenge the ideology of hate by the
butcher of Gujarat who has turned Kashmir into
an open prison and is threatening to disregard all
international laws regarding the right of self-
determination. They turn a blind eye towards
Trump’s construction of the Mexico wall, his policy
of incarcerating immigrants and his reckless
attitude towards Iran and Venezuela.
This attitude of the West is encouraging rapacious
leaders to flout international law. Netanyahu,
who encouraged Jewish settlements on occupied
territories with complete contempt for
international law, is now planning to incorporate
the captured areas into the Israeli state. The
recognition of Israeli occupation of the Golan
Heights clearly indicates that the US-led world
does not have any respect for international law.
First Washington surrendered to Tel Aviv over the
issue of Jerusalem, and now it is again appeasing
the ultra-right wing leader of the Zionist state.
This reckless policy of the West is emboldening
far-right forces everywhere in the world who are
hell-bent on putting an end to democracy and
introducing majoritarianism everywhere. Such
forces are violating the rights of minorities and
other vulnerable groups across the globe. Indian
Prime Minister Modi and other hate-mongers of
the BJP are drumming up collective insanity in
India that has led to mob-lynching of terrified
Muslims. In the West, white supremacists are
scapegoating immigrant and other communities.
The National Front in France, the English Defense
League and British National Party in the UK, the
ruling parties in Hungary, Italy and Ukraine and
Trump’s supporters in the US are euphoric over the
rise of these forces. But the history of Europe and
the West tells us that such an attitude culminates
in the rise of fascism which does not threaten only
one society but region after region can possibly
be engulfed by the flames of xenophobia and
hate-mongering. This virulent ideology is not only
threatening a few million immigrants, it has the
potential to plunge the world into a devastating
conflict that could bring an even bigger disaster.
The West must avoid encouraging such forces.
Democracy does not mean legitimizing the reckless
policies of populist leaders. It does not mean
showing complete disregard for the rights of
minorities and other vulnerable groups of society.
Democracy is meant to advocate a system that is
based on rule of law and respect for all citizens of a
country. It seems that democratic leaders all over
the world are trying to appease far-right forces. In
order to gain votes, they are scapegoating minorities
and vulnerable groups of their societies. They are
also resorting to war-hysteria to drum up support
for elections. Netanyahu has done so in Israel; Modi
is doing it in India. Such use of war rhetoric, which
is against international law and all norms of
democracy, is very lethal. It will tear down the
international order that was put in place by Western
democracies. It will lead to the rise of fascist forces
that will not only pit one group against another in
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
their own states but one political entity against
another as well, which means first confrontation
between the various groups of a society and then a
contest of military muscles between the states.
The salvation of the world lies in a democratic
order that is not hypocritical. Such an order should
not be silent on human rights violations when they
happen in Palestine or Ukraine, and clamour when
such rights are suppressed in Russia, China, Iran,
Venezuela and other states that are not in the good
books of Western powers. Such a system should
not encourage the selective use of international
law, destroying Iraq for invading Kuwait but
ignoring American aggression against the same
country. This democratic order should not seek to
punish only war criminals sitting in Sudan or parts
of Rwanda; it should also hold accountable Tony
Blair and George W Bush for flouting international
law. The principles of this system should not
prompt us to point out only Russia and China’s
spying systems, it should also embolden us to
demand the elimination of the spy system put in
place by Western democracies to control their
own citizens.
Venezuela and the US
Author: Robert Koelher
Excerpted from: 'War on Venezuela?'.
Published in: Counterpunch.org
Mix a little socialism in with the oil and war may
be unavoidable. Thus, Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo, talking about Venezuela: “The president
has been crystal clear and incredibly consistent.
Military action is possible. If that’s what’s required,
that’s what the United States will do.”
He goes on, demonstrating how we lie about war
in the 21st century: “We’re trying to do everything
we can to avoid violence. We have asked all the
parties involved not to engage in that kind of
activity. We’d prefer a peaceful transition of
government there, where (President Nicolas)
Maduro leaves and a new election is held. But the
president has made clear, in the event that there
comes a moment..... he is prepared to do that, if
that’s what’s required.”
With our trillion dollar military budget,
threatening (and waging) war is pretty much the
only thing we know how to do as a nation, and by
“we” I mean the ones in control, publicly and/or
secretly – the ones whose egos have expanded to
the size of the nation, who mean themselves when
they say “that’s what the United States will do.”
There’s something about “becoming” a nation that
allows you to value your so-called interests far
more than you value life – a monstrous paradox
to which the whole planet is hostage.
So we have oil-rich, socialist Venezuela on the
verge of economic and social collapse, partly due
to the corruption and incompetence of the Maduro
government but very much helped along by the
sanctions the United States has imposed on the
country for the past two years, for the purpose of
ousting Maduro and regaining political and
corporate control over the defiant nation.
The sanctions are for the country’s own good, of
course, according to Trump, who lamented on Fox
(quoted on Democracy Now!): “It’s a terrible thing.
People are starving. People are dying. There’s no
food. There’s no water. It’s just a terrible situation...
And we’re doing everything we can do, short of,
you know, the ultimate.” Presumably “the ultimate”
is war – military invasion – but sanctions are a
form of war and they cause precisely the sort of
harm Trump anguished over in his fake spew of
empathy for the people of Venezuela.
According to a study by economists Mark Weisbrot
and Jeffrey Sachs, published in April by the Center
for Economic and Policy Research, the sanctions,
having reduced the availability of food, medicine
and other necessities of life, have so far caused an
estimated 40,000 deaths, with many more likely
to come.
“Venezuela’s economic crisis is routinely blamed
all on Venezuela,” Sachs said. “But it is much more
than that. American sanctions are deliberately
aiming to wreck Venezuela’s economy and thereby
lead to regime change.… causing grave harm to
the Venezuelan people.”
Too bad. US interests are at stake here. And if
sanctions don’t do the trick – which is to say,
produce a cooperative leader, “the ultimate” may be
necessary, whatever that may mean. Of course, the
US has pursued the ultimate throughout the Middle
East and Africa during the 21st century, virtually to
no apparent benefit even to its stated interests or
“mission,” which raises the possibility that the only
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
one really in control here is war itself, and war’s
silent, corporate beneficiaries. But we interrupt
these words for an important message. Maybe the
(eventual) war in Venezuela could be privatized!
According to Reuters: “Erik Prince – the founder
of the controversial private security firm
Blackwater and a prominent supporter of U.S.
President Donald Trump – has been pushing a
plan to deploy a private army to help topple
Venezuela’s socialist president.”
Its all about globalisation!
Author: Dan Corjsecu
The coming presidential election is not about
Trump. It‘s about the nation state vs globalization.
If the democrats don‘t get that; they will surely loose
no matter who becomes their eventual candidate.
The recent rise of populist leaders and their
nationalist agendas are surely the inevitable
political reaction to the neoliberalism of the last
thirty years. Globalization for globalization’s sake
was an ideological vision of perfect markets and
the alleged growth of individual freedoms mutually
supporting each other. It didn’t turn out that way.
Global flows of capital, technology, and to some
extent, labor proved far more destabilizing for the
majority of the planet who were less wealthy, less
educated, and less willing to let go of regional,
national, and local ties and traditions. Global elites,
whether in the shadows or upfront in the limelight,
were for far too long oblivious to the disconnect
between economic and, yes, cultural liberalization
and deregulation as opposed to the growing disquiet
about these global trends among the traditionally
situated citizenry of the nation-state. The global
financial crises of the 90s were, as it turned out, but
a foretaste of what was to come. The “Great
Recession” however was the ultimate comeuppance
for detrimental ideological bullying versus more
realistic assessments arguing for a more tempered
globalization, one that would not exacerbate the
living conditions of people necessarily tied to the
boundaries of the nation-state.
Thus, for all his negatives, Donald Trump gets it.
He gets the fears, frustrations, and animadversions
of the vast multitudes of this planet who still
inhabit and will continue to inhabit nation-states.
As a practical consequence of all this, he pursues
trade deals that favor America, especially in
relation to China. He gets, for example, that Chinese
undervaluing of their currency cannot be tolerated
anymore. He understands how politically explosive
would be an agreement to end or at least
significantly curtail such manipulation while
simultaneously strengthening the national economic
decision making powers of both countries as regards
finance and trade. Such a deal would not only
energize his base but would expand it.
If in private and for a long time, Trump was both
a practitioner and beneficiary of neoliberal policies
is not in question. For now, he presents and to a
large extent practices the politics of national
determination in economic, political, and cultural
matters. He knows what the people want and
what they fear most. In this sense, Trump is not
only populist but essentially expressing the
democratic will of millions.
The problem is of course is that he seeks to
regulate the inherent problems of globalization
in increasingly authoritarian and retrograde ways,
while perhaps even managing to unleash the forces
of an irrational kind of protectionism. Globalization,
it should be remembered, has many faces: economic,
technological, cultural, and political. In many ways,
particularly for national minorities and women
it has proven to be a net benefit and will likely
continue to be so.
The question for the future (and for the Democrats)
is not so much to extinguish the prolific and
polymorphous nature of globalization but how to
tame it so that it is more in harmony with the
imperatives of democratic publics who are still,
and for the foreseeable future, will continue to be
self-inscribed within the static boundaries of
nation-states. We must emphasize the good that is
in globalization while reducing the speed, impact,
and range of its more destabilizing effects.
This article was originally published as: ‘It‘s
Globalization, Stupid!’. Courtesy: Counterpunch.org.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
Humanity in crisis
Author: Ben Debney.
A couple of very useful quotes are attributed to
Einstein. The first is his definition of madness as
doing the same thing over and over and expecting
different results. The second is his observation
about the impossibility of solving problems using
the thinking that created them.
If we combine the two, we can see that human
society demonstrates an underlying madness in
perpetually trying to solve problems using the
thinking that created them – this apparently being
one of the primary ways in which we collectively
do the same thing over and over again while
expecting different results. Explanations for this
madness vary, though it would appear that a world
built on an outward colonisation of the Global
South for the benefit of the North has also required
an internal counterpart, such that, as Tyler Durden
pointed out in Fight Club, ‘the things you own, end
up owning you’ (cf. Fugazi’s Merchandise: ‘You are
not what you own’).
The colonisation of subjectivity implied by this
observation suggests something of the collective
psychosis wrought by our collective disconnect
from history, such that we keep trying to solve
problems using the thinking that created them
while expecting different results – all the more so
if historical amnesia can be considered a back door
into what Jung called the collective unconscious.
Judging by its fruits, this collective psychosis
would seem to represent fertile soil for mass
ideological brainwashing and obsessive-
compulsive consumerism rooted in addiction to
money and emotional dependence on authority
and the approval of others.
Trapped in the midst of this collective psychosis
rooted in a collective disconnect from history,
mass ideological brainwashing (apparently at the
hands of neoliberal corporate supremacism), and a
proclivity for throwing an endless torrent of
consumer durables into the bottomless pit of our
alienation, then, humanity appears collectively like
an Alzheimer’s patient wandering around lost in
the forest. If it is highly undesirable to have
Alzheimer’s and to suffer the loss of personal
identity attending the loss of the memories that
formed it, then it is only more undesirable to be in
that state and wandering around lost in the forest.
It is not only undesirable; it is dangerous; to torture
the metaphor a little further, we are not only
exposed to the elements, but we are deprived of
the faculties to be able to help ourselves also—just
as, collectively speaking, we are simultaneously
exposed to serious danger while being deprived of
the necessary tools to effectively negate the threat
in the case of the climate crisis.
To get around the dilemma raised by Einstein’s
prescient observations then, and find our way out
of the forest, we need to firstly to recognise that the
insanity that got us into the mind-bendingly colossal
fix of global warming isn’t going to get us out of it.
We must also therefore recognise the paramount
importance of acknowledging the root cause of the
thinking involved – not only then, in light of all the
comments above, of the climate crisis, but of the
dynamics that have rendered us powerless to deal
with it. If the root of global warming can be defined
as the mentality that the world is an infinite
resource and an infinite garbage dump, and if this
mentality can be traced to the era of colonialism
from the sixteenth century onwards, from whence
the modern world was wrought, then the root of the
mentality that the world is an infinite resource and
infinite garbage dump would appear to be the
predatory colonial gaze that views workers, women,
the peoples of the Global South, the flora and fauna
– and ultimately, of course, the planet itself – as
objects whose only value consists of their
exploitability for profit. The forgetting of this fact,
which has been true for the last 500 years, can
be considered primary example of the inward
colonisation of subjectivity by ideologically-
driven amnesia.
Another long-forgotten fact is the way this predatory
colonial gaze was expressed in a blame-shifting logic
that, in setting European civilisation above ‘nature’
conceived of as ‘wild,’ ‘savage,’ ‘chaotic’ and in need
of taming, was used to rationalise the innumerable
crimes against humanity committed in the process
of colonisation – from continent-wide land theft
and genocide to slavery, mass exploitation and
destruction of people, plants, animals and the land
itself. Despite having been forgotten by a colonised
humanity wandering around infantilised and
oblivious inside the cocoon of its own collective
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
psychosis, this process, ongoing since the sixteenth
century, reaches a climax in the current period with
the Holocene mass extinction, which to the extent
that the colonised imagination is even aware of it at
all, appears just as something that dropped out of
the sky. A curious feature the blame-shifting as a
general principle that drives this ideologically-
induced forgetting is the reversal of cause and effect
– the inability to adequately and effectively interpret
cause and effect also a characteristic feature of the
desperate futility associated with trying to fix the
madness that wrought the climate crisis by treating
it with the madness that wrought the climate crisis.
In the historical context of colonialism, this
madness takes the form of all that derives from the
predatory gaze driving private accumulation in
terms of the colonisation of human subjectivity,
not least in terms of the poisonous effect of
addiction to (and lust over) money and the power
associated with great fortunes. The fact that this
madness is normalised within the framework of a
collective psychosis does not make it one bit less
insane; mental illness is to the delusions of
individuals, after all, what normality is to the
delusions of groups. In the current context, this
means trying to fix the terminal crisis of human
civilisation created by the institutions that frame
the world we live in with the institutions that
frame the world we live in. In reality, however,
treating madness with madness just produces
greater madness, and trying to fix the terminal
crisis of human civilisation created by the
institutions that frame the world we live in with
the institutions that frame the world we live in
further entrenches the exploitative social relations
that cook the world in reducing it to an infinite
resource and infinite garbage dump.
If this follows, then in trying to recover enough
of our wits as Alzheimer’s sufferers to find our
way out of the proverbial forest, we can recognise
failures of cause and effect in acknowledging the
limitations of attaching a green label to the
madness that wrought the climate crisis – which
also means acknowledging the limitations of
attaching a green label to the institutions wrought
by and in that madness, and that frame the
doomed world in which we live. Environmental
sustainability is a fine ideal and a crucial one if
humanity is to survive the century; at the same
time, and if history is anything to go by, there is
no reason to imagine that fine ideals translate
into fine mean.
Excerpted from: ‘Crisis-Afflicted Humanity is
like an Alzheimer’s Patient Lost in the Forest’.
Courtesy: Counterpunch.org
The hanging sword of FATF
Author: Muhammad Ziauddin
Published in: The Express Tribune
Published on: May 11, 2019.
A face-to-face meeting between Asia Pacific Group
(APG) of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)
and Pakistan is scheduled later this month, to be
followed by the Task Force undertaking its
penultimate review of Pakistan’s progress early
next month. The sword of the FATF, it seems, will
continue to hang over our heads until after
September this year when we would know our
fate: whether we continue to remain in the grey list
or are taken out of it or consigned to the black list.
It is perhaps because of our entanglement with the
FATF that the IMF was seen to be dragging its feet
on the matter of finalising a programme that we
needed urgently as our foreign exchange reserves
of around nine billion dollars mobilised through
short-term loans from friendly countries have
already disappeared.
What is extremely worrying is the very governing
structure of the APG which is exceptionally
unfriendly. A very hostile US is the President of the
FATF represented by Marshall Billingslea, a serving
Assistant Secretary of US Treasury who also heads
the office of Terrorist Financing Crimes. Australia
which is part of the anti-China (read Pakistan as well)
Indo-Pacific alliance is the President of the APG and
India which has already vowed to isolate Pakistan
economically is the Co-chair of the APG. With such
a formidable combination of hostile forces sitting
on the review panel, one cannot rule out the
possibility of handing out a rigged judgment. The
only redeeming feature in the administrative set-up
is China which sits on the FATF as its Vice-President
represented by Liu Xiangmin, Director General of
the Legal Department at the People’s Bank of China.
Equally worrisome is the fact that the European
Commission (EC) has already placed Pakistan in
its list of inadequate jurisdiction on Anti-Money
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
Laundering and Counter Terror Financing regimes.
If in such a situation we are pushed into the ‘black
list’ by the FATF for no genuine fault of ours, it will
unleash serious economic and financial impact
down the stream causing immense damage to
Pakistan’s economy.
The most obvious result would be the cost of
doing a financial transaction through established
banking/ financial system, increased premium on
Pakistani instruments in the international capital
markets, and the multilateral financing
organisations would add risk premiums to any
money borrowed. Black listing will squeeze
Pakistan’s economy further and make it harder for
the country to meet its mounting foreign financing
needs, including potential future borrowings from
the IMF. And if we remain in the ‘grey list’ it could
lead to a downgrade in Pakistan’s debt ratings,
making it more difficult to tap into the
international bond markets. Further, it would lead
to the downgrading of Pakistan’s financial viability.
The situation becomes all the more critical when
seen in the context of the country’s current
economic data: exports $23 billion, imports $42
billion, remittances $19 billion, fiscal deficit 6%
of GDP, tax-to-GDP ratio 12% and inflation 8%.
And if this data is analysed against the projections
of GDP growth rate by the three major multilateral
aid agencies, we seem to be falling off the cliff
sooner than later. According to World Economic
Outlook report of the IMF, Pakistan’s GDP will
grow at 2.9% in FY 19 and 2.8% in FY20. Similar
preojections have been made by the World Bank
and the Asian Development Bank.
This would mean Pakistan’s GDP currently
estimated at $320 billion would shrink by 2020
to around $280 billion which would mean our
revenue collection ability would decline further
even with accelerated efforts to expand the tax
base ending next financial year with a fiscal deficit
much larger than the current estimate of an
unsustainable 6%.
In the meanwhile, the indirect costs like increase
in inflation, increase in the discount rates, decline
in industrial productivity, decline in exports,
deterioration in currency etc, and stagnant inflow
of FDI will adversely impact the overall economy.
 Social structure and
democracy in Pakistan
Author: Dr Raza Khan
Published in: The Express Tribune
Published on: May 9, 2019.
Even after more than 70 years of existence and
around 17 years of continuous rule by elected
governments, Pakistan could not attain the desirable
levels of political stability and economic growth.
The political and economic situation in the country
currently has become so adverse that nothing could
be forecast with certainty about the future of the
present government. The foremost reason for this
is the lack of political and economic stability in
Pakistan and the resultant social chaos has been
that democracy as a culture and institution has
failed to flourish and evolve in the country. Various
related factors have been responsible for the failure
of democracy to evolve as an institution in Pakistan.
These factors need to be identified, analysed and
documented by the policymakers so that a
sustainable political and economic stability can
be achieved.
At the outset it must be understood that the culture
of society determines the nature, structure and
functions of institutions of that society, including
the state. Looking at the institutions of democracy
from that standpoint reveals that the foremost and
underlying cause that a democratic culture has not
evolved in Pakistan has been the incompatibility
between the social structure of the country and the
essence and values of a democratic culture. The
nature of social structure, which comprises social
institutions, social values, social roles and social
statuses of Pakistan has fundamentally been
undemocratic in form. As democratic culture
primarily is based on the values of equality, equity,
justice, freedom and individualism (together
creating a culture of merit, inventiveness and
amity) these values have hardly been prevalent
in Pakistan’s social structure.
Pakistan’s social structure is profoundly and
extensively tribal, ultraconservative and thus
anti-change. The culture which such social
structure promotes hardly has any space for the
above-mentioned democratic ideals to be attained.
Such social structure is hierarchical in orientation
which functions primarily on the institutionalisation
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
and reverence of traditional figures of authorities
like tribal and clan chiefs and religious figures.
That is the fundamental reason that symbols of
traditional authorities like Khan, Malik, Chaudhry,
Wadera and Sardar on the one hand and maulvis
on the other hand have been dominating the
society through their societal power and influence
to the exclusion of the masses and their
consciously and freely-elected democratic and
liberal leaders. These symbols and figures of
traditional authorities have been colluding to
entrench their respective power base on the one
hand and to ricochet any challenge to it. As this
challenge could only come from liberal and
democratic figures, values and institutions under
the umbrella of democratic political structure,
tribal chieftains and clerical leadership have been
trying their utmost to prevent democracy evolve.
Many of the traditional figures also joined the
political system by appealing to the conservative
constituency to make it hostage to their vested
interests and in this way make it unviable.
Innumerable feudal lords and maulvis have joined
the political system of Pakistan over the decades
and their efforts to dominate it have seriously
compromised the vitality and functionality of the
system, whose biggest victim has been democracy.
The success of traditional authorities in this
connection has mainly been due to the strategy of
traditional power brokers to infiltrate and
dominate the institutions of democracy like
parliament, political parties and elected
governments. Therefore, it is no surprise that most
Pakistani political parties have evolved into
family-limited companies with politics being their
prime business. Traditional authorities have used
their power base to domineer the institutions and
values of democracy. Thus the very institutions
which could otherwise have been a guarantee of
flourishing democracy in Pakistan, have served as
stumbling blocks for evolution of democracy.
Institutions of a tribal culture intrinsically operate
on the principle of inequality and top-down flow
of power and authority. Therefore, the values of a
tribal culture, like that of Pakistan, are
incompatible rather in conflict with the values
of democracy. So in a society based on tribal
principles equality is hard to be attained.
Contrarily, democracy functions on the very
principle of equality to all members of society and
the state. For instance, every member of society
and citizen of the state, has only one vote to exercise
and is expected to have equal opportunity of social
and economic mobility. Although in theory the
Pakistani political system, which is outwardly
democratic but inwardly not, operates on the
principle of one-person-one-vote (universal
suffrage) but most of the people cannot use vote
freely either because of the pressure of the
respective traditional authorities or bonds or
because of their lack of education and information.
Resultantly, the government which gets elected is
based on what German political thinker-cum-
political sociologist Noelle Neumann called ‘loud
minority’ while the majority becomes ‘silent.’
Another very important aspect of the failure of
democracy to evolve in Pakistan is that the auxiliary
institutions, which otherwise ought to provide
support to Parliament, people and political
leadership to build their capacities of policymaking
and their execution by providing them education
and information have been working at cross
purposes. These institutions which include the
bureaucracy and all the government departments,
due to relatively good education and administrative
skills of their human resource, have been working
for personal and institutional benefits by taking
advantage of the ignorance of the masses. This is the
basic reason that bureaucrats and top civil servants
have been enjoying all kinds of perks and privileges
out of the taxpayers’ money while the very purpose
of good governance remains a pipedream in the
state of Pakistan. As the flourishing of true
democracy is thus against the interest of the
bigwigs of the government institutions, they
develop a natural affinity with members of
traditional authorities to stunt the growth of
democracy. Moreover, the institutions of the state
get their human resources mostly from among the
masses socialised into highly tribal and
ultraconservative social structures, therefore, they
do not have the capacity and comprehension of
how to support democracy. Principally and ideally
these state institutions must support democracy
and more importantly promote the values of
democracy: equality, equity, justice and freedom
by ensuring good governance through transparency,
accountability, rule of law and participation.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
However, this ideal has been unachievable because
the parliamentary political system has reinforced
the traditional and reactionary social structure
instead of overcoming its shortcomings.
A normal nuclear United States
Author: Sadam Hussain Shah
Published in: The Express Tribune
Published on: March 13, 2018
From trigger-happy generals to irrational leaders,
who should be trusted with the US nuclear button?
Let’s find out. For decades nuclear experts like Ash
Carter, and Peter D Fever have written about the
nuclear hair triggers. To their respected warnings,
I’ll add another. We all know that in the US, the
president has the legal and political authority to
order the launch of nuclear weapons. He requires
other people to carry out the order but not for
permission but to follow the procedures. This can
harm US national interests by initiating an
unintended nuclear war. Therefore, it is vital to
modify US presidential authority.
Theoretically, if the president wanted to attack
any country with nuclear weapons, no one could
stop him. But, what happens if he sends the launch
codes by mistake? Or, when he orders the launch
in unstable condition? This is quite dangerous.
During the Watergate scandal, US President
Richard Nixon was drinking heavily and
considered as unstable. Nixon told reporters
that “I can go back into my office and pick up the
telephone and in 25 minutes 70 million people will
be dead.” Likewise, US President Donald Trump
tweeted that “I too have a nuclear button, but it is
a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and
my button works.” This is risky as the president
may not be stable all the time.
To avoid the risks and provide realistic solutions
to modify US presidential authority, scientists have
suggested some essential measures. In their latest
communication, scientists agreed that “the United
States should modify its decision-making
procedures to require that one or more officials
concur with a presidential order to use nuclear
weapons before the military carries it out”. They
added that “implementing such a requirement is
readily accomplished using a tracking system
operated by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)”. Yet, I’ll add some more
apples in the basket.
Both FEMA and presidential authority are
unnecessary. FEMA tracks the presidential line
of succession and provides an early information
that can help the US leadership to manage an
escape before a nuclear weapon strikes its
territory. But things have never changed. Same
threat perception and old technical standpoints.
Russian Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles will take
approximately 30 minutes to reach Washington, DC.
Simply put 30 minutes are ‘enough time’ to survive
the president and his line of succession.
Furthermore, the early warning systems (EWS) —
the world’s most advanced technology — will
intimate folks sitting in nuclear weapon attack
proof houses and help the presidential line to
manage an early escape. However, FEMA can also
be hacked and wrongly reverted to order the
launch of a nuclear strike on the wrong country.
This is one drawback, there are many. The
development of FEMA with respect to command
and control will require the dedication of
necessary resources and manpower. Therefore,
I propose following strategies to modify American
presidential authority.
STRATEGY 1: I propose that the use of nuclear
weapons would require an order from the secretary
of state and secretary of defence, incubating
significant input from their respective departments.
The orders are Cc-ed to the president and then
passed to the military guys for launch. The order
still remains the political decision. Both office
holders understand international politics and
nuclear strategy better than the president. With
this strategy, you don’t have to worry about the
President’s state of mind, forget it.
STRATEGY 2: If the secretary of state, secretary
of defence and president are decapitated, then the
second layer should take charge. This layer should
comprise the highest ranking officials from the
scientific community, civil service and from the state
and defense departments. These individuals must
be present 24/7 on a rolling base at nuclear attack
proof houses. In addition, essentially designed
pocket device that would detect the secretary of
state, and secretary of defence’s decapitation, and
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
automatically inform the guys sitting in nuclear
attack proof houses is a necessary thing.
STRATEGY 3: Instead of FEMA, design such devices
that can support the early warning system from a
very great distance (from the country of attack
launch). For example, one such device placed in
Russia would send US early warning system a
message on the launch of nuclear weapons.
Nuclear weapons top the list of threats posed
to humanity. Turning a blind eye to nuclear
weapons of major powers would be just like a
scared pigeon that closes its eyes and wishes that
the cat will not eat it. Nuclear weapons have no
religion, no morals, whether it’s nuclear weapons
of small powers like North Korea, or whether
it’s of big powers like the United States. Yet as
shocking and overbearing it is, powerful states
escape the arms control efforts by virtue of their
powerful allies and small states are bound by
their commitments to non-proliferation.
However, the United States should modify its
presidential line of succession and also should
work indiscriminately to further arms control
efforts. This is how the US can achieve truly
normal status. And this is the only way to save
humanity from the risks of nuclear war.
If to do the justice with the subject, the global
nuclear threat should be discussed unbiasedly.
We have heard a million times that South Asia is
vulnerable to a nuclear war and particularly
fingers are pointed towards Pakistan. But ignoring
other nuclear dangers posed by major powers like
Russia and the US that holds the world’s largest
and ready nuclear arsenal would be naïve. This is
our moral and journalistic responsibility to
argue what is true, not what is popular.
 Women’s empowerment:
past and future
Author: Mian Muhammad Ahmed
Published in: The Nation (March 10, 2019).
Pakistan as a society remains male dominated,
whereas women constitute 49% of the population.
Women continue to suffer because of stereotypes,
and strict society norms. The day a girl is born her
decisions are already made for her. Not only
successive governments have failed to protect
women, many laws also work against them. The
culprits involved in women’s oppression take
benefit of such legislation. After the independence
of Pakistan, women’s groups and feminist
organisations formed by prominent leaders like
Fatima Jinnah worked to eliminate socio-economic
injustices against women in the country.
Before 1820s in the pre-industrial revolution
era, the families were considered to be the unit of
production where everyone, from husband to wife,
was involved, meaning females of the household
also worked. During the industrial revolution, the
males went out to work in the factories while the
women stayed at home to take care of their families
and took on the role of housewives. Up until World
War 1, females were pushed to take family-oriented
roles. From World War 1 onwards, women began
to return to employment as their legal rights were
also increasing. In our part of the world women
continued to be house makers until 20th century.
The sight of a female working was rare and not
acceptable religiously, culturally and socially.
As the wheels of time moved, it became more
acceptable by the society to have women working
side by side their men. The major reason for this
change was the way girls were brought up. The
society became more aware of the fact that females
can contribute positively. Various legislations were
passed by governments across the globe to augment
this inclusion. The equal pay act 1970 of the UK and
Sex Discrimination Act of 1975 of the UK laid the
foundation of legal protection for females in
workplaces. Very important matters of maternity
leave and maternity pay were brought to table
and tackled, as female workers would suffer loss
of income during those break months.
Pakistan from its inception saw women standing
side by side the founding fathers, like Madr-e-Millat
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
Fatimah Jinnah, stood by the Quaid-e-Azam. She
along with many great female leaders of Pakistan
became a role model for women. She contested
elections in 1958 although lost but it did lay the
foundation of females coming out of their homes
and joining mainstream politics in Pakistan. Then
came the day when Pakistan swore in the first
female prime minister of the Muslim world.
Benazir Bhutto became the 11th prime minister of
Pakistan and served two terms. Women in
Pakistan have joined the armed forces, become
pilots, doctors, engineers and excelled in every
field of life. It was a proud moment for our country
when Nobel Prize was awarded to Malala
Yousafzai, a girl who fought for education. Sima
Kamal was appointed first woman chief executive
officer of UBL. The list goes on as we enter the
next phase of renaissance.
Female education remains an area of concern and
does require focus as it would not be possible to
ensure women’s development without this.
Pakistan spends far less on education than is
recommended by the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco) in
its guidelines on education. With these constraints,
boys are preferred for educational opportunities to
girls. Whereas, if we see the academic results, top
performing students are usually girls. Many
families express concern about the quality of
education being imparted at government schools,
thus say it is so poor that there is no point in even
sending girls to school. Pakistan has to fix the
education system and ensure that girls have access
to quality education and safe environment.
With all the positive steps in the right direction,
still a lot needs to be done to ensure that female
empowerment is sustained in decades to come.
Fortunately, all political parties in Pakistan value
the role of women, and they recognize this as a
pressing issue. Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali
Jinnah rightly said: “There are two powers in the
world; one is the sword and the other is the pen.
There is a great competition and rivalry between
the two. There is a third power stronger than both,
that of the women.” To invest more in the third
power would ensure that Pakistan moves fast in
the right direction. Nothing can stop us from being
a stable, prosperous country if we are ready to
make this wise investment.
 Tax reforms and the future of the economy
Author: Dr Muhammad Irshad
Taxes and duties are collected by FBR in Pakistan
therefore these words have become synonyms with
FBR over time, and used collectively in common
parlance and drawing room discussions, even in
the policy echelons. Anything meant to reform the
tax system actually means to reform the FBR, its
structure, functions, and its legal Framework.
Reform is a process which must continue unabated
in each and every institution all the time and
throughout the life cycle of any organisation.
FBR is no exception, if history is any guide it has
not happened as per the above universally
accepted principle of change in an evolutionary
manner, catering to the needs as and when they
arose. It is the second big national institution after
army and has an equally important function to
perform. The job of this organisation is time
bound, with deadlines and also quantifiable at the
end of each financial year. This makes it distinct
than the others in the state structure of Pakistan.
The significance of the job that it does has its
direct implications on the national economy
particularly the fiscal deficit which always keep
it in the lime light.
When the job shows any slackness, it is measured
by only one parameter which is target, its bashing
starts from right, left and centre. The most common
critique is that it has failed to broaden the tax base,
issue wiry firry notices, squeezes and teases the
existing taxpayers and so on for achieving their
targets. These arguments generally degenerate
to outright and sweeping allegations on the
integrity of the organisation.
When the present govt took over, this attained
more speed and significance as the prime minister
publicly and particularly in his first speech to the
nation repeated these allegations more forcibly
specifying in a blunt and terse manner, making
everybody believe in it. And why not, when it came
from the chief executive of the state, under whose
executive authority it was to perform for five years.
The spat of these charges didn’t stop here, but
trickled down to the Finance Ministry, the political
tail enders, and the chambers of businesses.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
Published in: The News in May 2019.
Without going to the merits of this tirade, its
impact on the national revenue ‘up to around
expected 400 billion plus’ is more important and
biting the nation. The institution has come to a
standstill and is at a complete halt now. Obviously,
the officers are worried about their future and
career, and why not? After all it was none less than
the PM charging them as a mafia. The workforce
got demoralised, de-motivated and went on the
back foot.
In the same breath, the prime minister made a
public commitment of getting rid of this evil by
reforming it or doing it away altogether and
replacing it with a new tax collecting agency. The
commitment to fix it and reform it looks like a far
cry even today, even after the lapse of almost eight
long months. More worrisome is that there doesn’t
appear anything on the scene known to the
common man. A-team has been formed, consisting
of some past and new members, most of them
having no background knowledge of the working in
FBR. Anything done so far has been done behind
closed doors, without the participation of FBR, a
major stakeholder. Coming back to FBR reforms,
the history of reforms is important to take stock of.
It has been reformed on a number of occasions in
the past as well, as a project, by the government
of Pakistan and some financed by the multilateral
organisations.
To enumerate the important ones, 1990 to 1991
Resource Mobilisation and Tax Reform Commission
(RMTRC) was formed. In 1993 Structural
Adjustment Facility (SAF) was signed with
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and TARP
programme under the World Bank assistance.
Reforming the FBR is a buzz word again, and every
Pakistani wishes it to be fixed and reformed and
quickly. To my understanding, more than
everybody else, FBR officers themselves wish it to
be reformed. They also wish that action should
speak louder than the words and hollow rhetoric.
Nobody doubts the intention of the present
government for doing the same, but what is
doubted is the capacity of team doing it and ground
information available to them. The team derives it
spirit from the TARP reforms programme and the
recommendations of the tax reform commission in
the previous government. A good work was done
on both these occasions and most of the
ground towards success was covered.
This is a good idea to continue the effort as
huge money was spent on those reforms. Quite
a few of the recommendations made by TRC
were also enforced, particularly the legal one.
Since the present members of reform commission
include both the heads of these reforms’
programmes, we are confident they will contribute
by informing the new reform members as to where
these reforms were successful and where they
failed. Furthermore, the failures will be picked up
one by one and solutions found out. This is the way
forward rather than the disastrous path of undoing
FBR and making a new revenue setup. Referring
back to the history of reforms for guidance, there
is no denying the fact that the only meaningful
reforms made, were under the TARP programme,
as they were based on broad-based consultation of
all stakeholders, researchers, intellectuals and
international experts. These reforms made a
difference also. The present structure of RTOs and
LTUs is the product of those reforms. It changed
the age-old territorial system of administration to
functional, with universal self-assessment scheme.
Risk audit management system was introduced.
Technology was also introduced aiming at a
paperless environment. Centralisation of authority
occurred in administration. New income tax
ordinance 2001 was introduced as a modern legal
framework. Infrastructure changed to look like
corporate outfits. This was a paradigm shift.
There exists resentment against the Federal Board
of Revenue (FBR). Centralisation of authority
occurred in administration. New income tax
ordinance 2001 was introduced as a modern legal
framework. Infrastructure changed to look like
corporate outfits. This was a paradigm shift.
Unfortunately, it had some unintended
consequences, which incurred unanticipated
collateral damages to system resulting in the
present-day resentment. The very purpose was a
sweeping change and complete overhaul of the
system, dissociating itself away from the past
thought to be bad and unwanted as we feel today.
As unintended consequences, it developed gross
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
functional anomalies like shrinking of base rather
than broadening of base, deterioration of
compliances to the worst in the history, and tax
to GDP ratio had a free fall.
File movement on multiple desks, diluted the
officer’s authority and ultimately created
disciplinary issues. This became the major cause of
corruption rather than combating it. Worst load
shedding in the country at that time falsified the
dream of paperless environment. Transforming
taxpayer and tax collector relation to an interface
with a faceless machine evaporated.
The change created a new department of Inland
Revenue Services (IRS) and income tax, as service
was disbanded. The IRS got a sway over sales tax
and federal excise in addition to the income tax
for one window solutions and cross matching of
information, cross match and catch new taxpayers
and calculating income of existing taxpayers for
detecting concealments of incomes and assets.
However, the number of concealment cases fell
sharply as against the goal.
The change boosted the revenue to a trillion in
absolute terms for the, first time in the history of
FBR, hailed and used as a justification to continue
the change. Everyone, including myself celebrated,
but without knowing that the most authentic
parameter to gauge the success of reforms, tax to
GDP ratio was steeply falling. The salutary impact
in the beginning started phasing out with time. The
drop in the tax to GDP ratio was pointed out to the
bosses of that time, (privy to the discussion) and
was brushed aside as the initial teething problem
and adjustment phenomenon which was to be
corrected with time. However, it was never
corrected till today despite all efforts and we are
still way low on the table if compared with the
world and region. The number of amnesty schemes
brought after the change is the evidence that it has
failed to tap all domestic resources and even today,
we are back to square one. We may be repeating it
again tomorrow if not done as suggested.
Issues for consideration: There is no doubt in my
mind that the present reform committee will be
taking care of all the offshoots/ backlash of
aggressive reforms in the past. They are also
sensitive to the broadening of base and reducing
tax burden on existing tax payers.

The separation of policy board was an act in the
right direction, but it was enacted in the FBR in
the previous reforms. Frankly policy always
remained with the Finance Ministry. The FBR
was only the secretariat for doing the spade
work for them so it was just a cosmetic change.
The team must analyse the malaise and ailments
of the institution by diagnosing them one by one
and then curing in a scientific manner based on
data, home-grown solutions and experience on
the ground. It is necessary, as ecology of
administration is a full-fledged subject taught in
all management schools in the world. The fact of
the matter is that the tax base is very narrow,
and taxpayers on record are overburdened.
The best system of taxation is more people
paying and lesser rate of taxes. Therefore, the
urgency of the reforms should be the treatment
of this important symptom of the illness, resulting
from low/no outreach of the department on one
hand and policy changes on the other.
Tax culture in the country has also not developed
and paying taxes are not considered a matter of
pride, rather the other way round. It is considered
fine to hide tax, considered as penalties by the
state. Nobody is named and shamed on the basis
of tax evasion. Such culture is linked to the
luxurious spending, misuse of their money, cars,
bungalows and overbearing lifestyle of the
political and bureaucratic elite. Moreover, taxes
are not providing security, education, health and
other social services.
They are considered as tax-saving and not tax
evasion creating a moral base for evasion. The
attitude of some officers and departmental
processes, discretion of the taxmen and strong-arm
tactics create resistance in taking the taxpayer
away from paying taxes. Most of these are because
of lack of training in public dealing and exposure
embargo on tax officers to move horizontally in the
provinces and other departments of the federation.
Trust deficit between the taxpayer and collector,
due to chasing wildly fixed targets, mostly not
based on available tax and supporting resources
with the officer, must be considered.
The physical absence of taxmen thus finishes the
writ of the service. The universal principle of
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
visibility of taxmen to taxpayer for more tax has
been disregarded. Moreover, the territorial concept
of administration is also a problem. Broadening of
tax base is a true challenge for the success of any
form of future taxation system in Pakistan. The
economy of Pakistan consists of around 45 percent
as an informal cash economy. This makes this
challenge more formidable. Documentation is
fundamentally a government job outside the
preview of the FBR, and it consists of a number of
actions required to be taken by the government.
Since bashing the FBR has become a fashion all
over the country at political rallies, by traders, in
the media etc, the FBR has been pushed on the back
foot. Whenever one department starts using the
authority of others, the job remains undone, only
the unscrupulous start growing in such a situation.
The stark reality is that anti-smuggling role has
been taken over by the police, FC, rangers, coast
guards; their own jobs remain to be done, by
whom nobody knows.
The custom department was left with nothing
more than the blame of corruption which in most
of the case was done by the encroachers.
Today the customs service is in a log jam with no
authority, but it is getting bashed everywhere. The
officers have no support staff to raid even a petty
vendor, what to say of powerful smugglers.
It is only the nation that suffers not the Federal
Board of Revenue (FBR) if one considers the
statistics of ice and heroine dealers and victim in
schools and colleges. The outcome is frightening.
We all have statistics of the country’s literacy,
health and poverty rate, but the narcotics
consumption rate, source, carriage and storage
is not on record, primarily because of a powerless
custom department.
There was an effort made between 2016 and
2017 to remedy these pitfalls. New LTU and two
corporate RTOs were created in Lahore and
Karachi, with corporate zones all over the country.
The territorial RTOs were to be separated and
rearranged based on their jurisdictions. That
package is a way forward and must be deliberated.
The key of those efforts are briefly given below.
Philosophically, a hybrid system was in mind,
taking care of all ills mentioned above as well as
consolidating the gains made, without costing a
penny to the state. This had approval of the
department after wide consultations in house.
Member ops gave a detailed presentation to the
TRC and the finance minister, who was charmed
to the extent that ordered its enforcement there
and then. Less money and no donor support are
required, with readiness for use at any time the
government wishes.
The result will be instant and to the satisfaction
of everybody, as it targets the ills and treats it one
by one. Any experience of new setup will uproot
the gains so far made and create new problems
and more confusion and further loss of taxes.
1. School of finance, taxation and customs
An important part of these ideas was doing away
with Directorates of Training (DOT) and making
new schools. The school was to be affiliated with
other schools in developed countries with
exchange of trainee officers on reciprocal basis.
The whole curriculum and syllabus of the DOTS,
was mulled to be rewritten, as the one taught
there was obsolete and has no relevance to the
future knowledge and skill needs of the officers.
The subject of ethics and sensitivity to the public
grievances, including grooming in public dealing
was going to make a difference in the future of
the FBR.
A few international institutions had agreed at that
time to send their officers to our schools for two
weeks and vice versa. Even the custom and the IRS
probationers needed to stay in each others’ schools
for 15 days to learn cross jurisdictional concepts
for broader understanding and coordination in
future. In addition to our officers, Pakistan could
be a hub of training the officers of other countries,
and earn revenue as well.
This was to give the officers international exposure,
broader vision, integrity support, and preparation
to catch complicated cases, which DOT arguably,
has failed to provide. The initiative of the young
and talented tax officer was killed by the system
in vogue in DOT, as they were called the glorified
clerks at the outset, paralysing their initiative in
all future discourse.
On the custom side an international school of
custom on the same lines and creation of at least
two anti-smuggling collectorates across the
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
country with the borders force for supporting
these outfits could have yielded salutary results.
Paperwork on these concepts in the shape of
projects has been completed and available with
custom wings of FBR.
2. District taxation officer
District taxation offices were to be established and
district taxation officers were to be posted in each
district without exception on the pattern of DCOs
and DPOs. This idea was not merely sending
officers to the district, but it covered all the gaps
created by the previous efforts of reforms.
Brief guidelines are as under:
The DTO will have permanent establishment like
DPO, DCO as district tax house and tax payer
facilitation centre for all taxes and taxpayers,
with tehsil as assistant DTO having an assessment
authority on all cases except corporate cases in
his tehsil.
DTO to have ‘revisional’ authority to reconsider
any order passed by TTO, pointed by the aggrieved
party, or take a suo moto notice if any wrong has
been done to the taxpayer or revenue both, thus
facilitating taxpayers within his districts limits
rather than to far away stations for redressal of the
grievances where RTO’s are located.
DTO to be administratively competent to recruit
his staff and transfer it as he deems fit for his setup.
He will ensure that each business/sale/income is
registered on his record, (massive BTB) and
documentation of economy.
DTOs to be financially competent to spend money
allocated to him like petrol, vehicle hiring etc. Will
have designated vehicle and support staff both
technical and non-technical to enforce the writ.
The DTO to be a composite tax authority for federal
provincial and even municipal taxes. His office will
be common tax house of the district where all taxes
including provincial, municipal and vehicle taxes
will be collected. The revenue collected will go
directly in respective government accounts
through a coded challan.
This will be in consonance with ease of doing
business as taxpayers will be going to one place
for all taxes. It will reduce the support staff load
on all three tiers of government. Above all the
constitutional right of provincial government to
collect their taxes will not be violated. The concept
of one authority by federation may be resisted by
the provinces and create bad blood which can be
avoided by win-win situation of DTO. Investment
is needed if not in lump sum at least on incremental
basis in IT infrastructure, logistics and physical
infrastructure to provide a decent working place
for each officer. Let me state, based on my personal
experience that the rate of return on investment in
FBR will be highest in the world and sustained for
many more decades to come. It is worth it and let
us go for it, we cannot afford more wastage and
surrender to the status quo and inertia.
This will enable govt to select the successful DTO
as future departmental leaders, by training them
further and placing him on future executive
positions. Further test of them will make it easy
to select the future members and even chairman,
on merit and not on discretion bases as is in
vogue today.
3. Growth of officers in hierarchy
For any successful taxation system to be in place
on ground the most critical factor is an organised
well trained, dedicated, honest and hardworking
officers/officials. For all the above to happen,
motivation is one big critical factor and works like
fuel for the engine. Motivation will only come
when officers are convinced of the protection of
their rights, posting, growth in the hierarchy, and
recognition of performance. The hybrid system
which has been discussed at length automatically
cares and fits into all the pits.
The system of taxation will not only consolidate
the grounds of previous reforms but also cater to
its weakness for more revenues. In the centre of
this thought there is an inbuilt hierarchy of officers
of the inland revenue, which is essential to give
force and impart efficiency and effectiveness to
the system of taxation which so emerges. The
young officers from the training school will join
in a salary setup as beginners to start testing skills
and knowledge that they learnt in the training
school. The application of their initial knowhow
will make them suitable to be moved to the minor
commercial and major commercial units, one
after the other.
In around five six years of such exposure, the
officers will then be fit to be moved to the
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
corporate sector in the corporate RTO and later
on to LTUs. This will establish a system of merit
as well as a grooming on the job of the officers.
The same round will be repeated when they go to
the senior grades like additional commissioner
and commissioner. The officer having completed
the round from salary to LTU will be a qualified
resource for being posted as DTO and to be tested
on ground for future leadership.
4. Integrity and performance management
Integrity of the FBR and its officers is measured
every day and at every place. It is essential to
place systematically organised, methodical and
scientific measures for integrity management in
place. The already available mechanism like
internal audit and directorate general I&I, both
are virtually dysfunctional. The functional overlap
of I&I and field formations and audit directorate
needs to be carefully studied and removed for
clarity of work and efficiency.
Collective responsibility is nobody’s responsibility
at all. Any of these setups needs to be geared and
mandated with sweeping powers, to take action
against any departmental functionary on account
of corruption, tax losses etc on the pattern of NAB.
The present PER measurement is out dated
therefore needs to replaced by third party
performance audit through universally accepted
parameters.
5. Mending the legal framework
To do the least, we need to immediately enforce
the system of value-added taxation in the sales tax
to document and tap the wholesalers and retailers.
The general sales tax has not delivered over a
period of more than 20 years of its life in practice.
It is the real need of the hour and true test of the
government’s resolve if they are serious and
sincere in going for a change. There will be
resistance from the market consisting of these
two very important and crucial components of
the value/supply chain, as they have successful
experienced in the past on this account.
The reason to argue in favour of value-added tax vs
GST is that it is levied at the level of manufacturing
and imports as its starting point. It trickles down
along the supply chain/value, but at the level of
wholesaler/retailer the chain is broken. The
consumer, who actually is the taxpayer, pays the
tax but it does not reach the treasury and is stuck
in one of these two places.
The government will have to take all the provincial
governments and trade bodies into confidence
for the change, and collect data of all businesses
across the country by compulsory registration.
Unfortunately, there is no shortcut to this mode
of taxation, and its successful implementation
will document trade, broaden the base, and also
enable the government to reduce the rate of
taxation to even single digit. After sometime,
this job will be well done by the DTOs. The
present tax system is based on the universal
self-assessment scheme primarily designed to
facilitate the taxpayer, believing him as honest
and removing discretionary powers of the tax
officers, allegedly corrupt.
Regrettably, this assumption did not prove by
the experiment. Immediately after the enforcement
of this doctrine, the taxpayer started declaring
less and less by each passing year, to the extent
that his income as per his statement fell below
the taxable level, resultantly being a BLT, he
stopped filing a return as he thought it was not
required. The logical conclusion of this exercise
was reduction in the number of tax filers,
creating a gigantic challenge for the government
to tackle this monster.
Broadening of tax becomes a far cry on the face
of the fact that the government machinery becomes
ineffective by even enforcing return on the
registered taxpayers. Today, less than 50 percent
of the registered taxpayers in all the streams of
revenue are filling their return and the remaining
are thus non filers.
As a compensatory response to the above
situation, the government has been moving to
the levy of withholding taxation. It is a disparate
move to compensate for the loss they made due
to the USAS and its gross misuse by the existing
taxpayers. It further deteriorated to an
embarrassing level of transactional taxation, as
a covering up of tax losses. Income taxation has
virtually been replaced with withholding tax and
a transactional tax system.
Though withholding tax is a direct tax being
indirectly collected, it is a glaring admission of
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
the state that it has lost its writ in the matter of
taxing its citizens in a straight and direct manner.
This has killed the age-old philosophy of direct
taxation, proportionate to the capacity to pay
(more income more taxes, no income no taxes),
thus burying the universal principal of taxation.
If you carefully study the pie of revenue, the share
of direct taxes has gradually gone down. The
withholding tax/transaction/tax/sales tax/FED are
the major revenue spinners pushing out the direct
tax into a marginalised level, looking like indirect,
regressive and unrealistic.
Through this step, the government defended its
short-term interest, revenue in absolute terms for
a short period of time but with steep fall in
tax-to-GDP ratio, and above all, rapidly consumed
the space of expansion or any growth in future.
Thus, a state of stagnation and stalemate in
revenue has arrived. Taxation is a strong economic
tool of social justice, reducing income inequality,
and economic development. None of this is being
achieved and this is the major reason why the rich
are getting richer and the poor becoming poorer.
It can be hoped that the present government has a
solution to this. This system of taxation definitely
needs a change, but a home-grown one, and with
the ownership of applying machinery.
The FBR manpower and its satisfaction in terms
of infrastructural and logistical support coupled
with monetary rewards will play a critical role in
enforcing the writ of the state, for collecting due
taxes. FBR hierarchy needs to be consoled rather
than bashed, which always proved counter-
productive. FBR is state machinery, and state has
full authority to mend it the way it wishes to, but
treating them as opponents is costing more to
the state in terms of losses than gains.
The mechanism of accountability of the
delinquents, unruly and corrupt officers/officials
is a prerequisite for the success of the change. To
make the change permanent, all these steps need
to be institutionalised rather than done in a rash,
emotional and irrational manner to save it from
failure as has been done in the past. In the present
system, there are taxpayers who have no tax
officers and conversely there are officers who
have no taxpayers to tax.
It is essential to place district taxation officers
with full legal, administrative and financial
competence as mini chief commissioners, for
broadening of tax base. Stricter compliance to
the tax laws must be ensured as well. The school
of finance and taxation and international school
of custom are essential, for creating human
capital that matches international standards.
Legal framework needs to be re-visited to wash
it out from the anomalies and encroachments
on the custom and IRS authority for any fair
and transparent accountability in future.
The application of value-added tax vs GST is
essential for broadening of tax base, and to
avoid any future amnesty on the request of
the traders who actually are opposing the VAT.
The present amnesty may be used as a trade off
with traders for accepting the VAT against the
GST. It is for the government to see for itself as
what is best for national revenue interest in
future. It they listen to sane voices they are
going to benefit more than anyone else.
Jallianwalla Bagh tragedy and
our historical narrative
Author: Tahir Kamran
Published in: The News
Published on: April 28, 2019.
The centenary of Jallianwalla Bagh tragedy in
Amritsar was commemorated with an uncanny
sense of ownership on April 13. To my reckoning,
the incident is important, as the action of Brigadier
General Reginald Dyer signified diffidence and lack
of self-assurance of the British raj. The downhill
slide of the British in India began soon after the
Bagh tragedy because actions like the promulgation
of the draconian Rowlatt Act, followed by the
killings at Jallianwalla Bagh, are always
perpetrated by the terrified and the weak.
In our national narrative, articulated through our
textbooks and Urdu media, the Jallianwalla Bagh
tragedy makes a passing reference. It will be
interesting to dig out evidence on any purported
action to completely excise this event from
textbooks of Pakistan Studies and History during
the Ziaul Haq era. I am asserting this because the
event did not fit well into the ideological frame
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
of the state-sponsored discourse on Pakistan
History enforced strictly by Zia in 1980s. That
frame necessitated highlighting events which
established centrality of the two-nation theory
where Hindus (read non-Muslims) were
constructed as the ‘other’.
The pluralistic composition of the rally held in
Jallianwalla Bagh provides veracity to the
two-nation theory. I am not aware of any numerical
details of those killed in that gory incident worked
out in communally segregated terms. Even Udham
Singh represented plural ethos when he told the
court his name was Ram Muhammad Singh Azad
and he took oath on Waris Shah’s Heer
Ranjha, instead of any religious text. Sadly, the
plural character of the incident relegated it to
insignificance in the educational circles.
One may argue that people had congregated in the
Bagh at the behest of Indian National Congress.
They were agitating against the arrests of Dr Satya
Pal and Saifuddin Kitchlew under the Rowlatt Act.
But same can be said about the Khilafat Movement,
which at one time was led by M.K. Gandhi. Yet the
Khilafat Movement forms an integral part of our
historical discourse. Another extraordinary point is
that this statist narrative showed considerable
nonchalance to events where the Muslims were
pitted against the colonial power. Perhaps the
Khilafat Movement is the sole exception in the
whole chain of events.
Up until quite recently, categories like colonial,
colonialism or imperialism were denunciated as
misleading if not absolutely sinful expressions
mostly deployed by leftists and Marxists. Ironically
these expressions have entered the lexicon of
Pakistan’s religious right in the last 15 to 20 years,
and are used to undercut liberal, western cultural
and strategic interests.
Therefore, the response to 100 years of the
Jallianwalla Bagh tragedy came as a surprise.
An upsurge of young social science academics has
left a pervasive effect on the intellectual landscape
of the country in the last 10 years. Many of them
have the benefit of foreign exposure.
An upsurge of young social science academics has
left a pervasive effect on the intellectual landscape
of the country in the last 10 years. Many of them
have the benefit of foreign exposure and their
academic training warrants them to have more
inclusive and far wider approach, while drawing
conclusions or constructing arguments. They are
equipped to transcend nationalistic confines
imposed by the state.
That change is particularly visible in private
universities that have greater space to maneuver
than public ones. They have broadened the
contours of our historical narrative. Young teachers
and academics have greater opportunities to rub
shoulders with international scholars who now
visit Pakistan with more frequency than ever
before. Such interactions have broadened the
scope of their analysis. Themes like Pakistani left,
religious minorities, women rights and
marginalised groups are being investigated by
aspiring academics. The peripheral characters
and events have moved centre stage and have
punctured the state-ordained narrative.
Having said all that, I am not sure how much space
scholars and writers have accorded to Udham
Singh, born as Sher Singh on December 26, 1899
at Sunam in the Sangrur district of Punjab. Some
scholars sometimes refer to him as
Shaheed-i-Azam Sardar Udham Singh. A district
Udham Singh Nagar in Indian State of Uttarakhand
was named after him to pay homage in October
1995 by the then Mayawati government.
I personally find him fascinating, even more than
Bhagat Singh. His zeal and conviction in the
plurality that Punjab epitomised in its pristine
tradition makes him extraordinary. Such figures
ought to be publicised more in India than in
Pakistan, where Narendra Modi and Amit Shah
have unleashed a tirade against the minorities.
The radical nature of Udham Singh’s role in
history deserves special attention.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
Inverted reading of 18th Amendment
Author: Tahir Kamran
Published in: The News
Published on: April 14, 2019
Provincial autonomy and 18th Amendment that
enshrines the former is yet again a centre of
political controversy. Audible murmurs in favour
of ‘Islamic Presidential system’ with a strong
centre are being frowned at by many analysts
and political leaders. Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)
is the most conspicuous among the condemners
of this arrangement. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari even
went to the extent of delivering a ‘delicate’ kick
to the PTI government with the hope that it would
suffice for the current incumbent’s final undoing.
For the PPP, with its ever-shrinking electoral base,
any such arrangement that calls for a strong centre
is a political nemesis.
This column is an attempt to problematise the
simplistic prescription of provincial autonomy
as the ultimate panacea of all the ills of our
socio-political landscape. Before delving deep
into conceptual framework of provincial autonomy,
it will be pertinent to give a background of the
18th Amendment with particular reference to
provincial autonomy.
The 18th Amendment in the constitution of
Pakistan was passed on April 8, 2010 by the
National Assembly. 292 of the 342 members of
the National Assembly voted in favour of the
amendment, a rare moment of consensual
camaraderie among Pakistani legislators. That
act of unanimity amazed many because such an
amendment ostensibly did not mean to serve the
interests of any individual or a faction. 18th
Amendment got Senate’s approval on April 15,
2010, and it became an act of parliament when
Asif Ali Zardari, the then President of Pakistan
put his signature on the bill on April 19, 2010.
The package was intended to undo the sweeping/
discretionary powers concentrated in the
Presidency under former Presidents General
Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, Ghulam Ishaq Khan and
General Pervez Musharraf and to ease political
instability in Pakistan. The bill reversed many
infringements on the Constitution of Pakistan over
several decades by its rulers, both military and
civilian, with autocratic inclinations and motives.
The amendment turned the president into a
ceremonial head of state and transferred power
to the prime minister, and also removed the limit
on a prime minister serving more than two terms.
The North-West Frontier Province was renamed
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, in accordance with the
wishes of its Pashtun-majority population.
However, the renaming of North West Frontier
Province sent tremors of discomfort among the
Hindko speaking people who felt left out while
that exercise of renaming of the province was
carried out.
Among other changes, courts were debarred
from endorsing suspensions of the constitution,
a judicial commission was to be set up to appoint
judges, and the power to appoint the head of the
Election Commission no longer rested with the
president. The bill also enhanced provincial
autonomy. The president would no longer be
able to declare emergency rule in any province
unilaterally. The devolution plan projected
through the 18th Amendment brought about
radical re-orientation in almost 15 ministries
which had been controlled by the centre prior to
the passage of the amendment. These ministries
were either transferred to the provinces or their
scope of action was tangibly altered, and new
nomenclature was given to several of them.
Rasul Bakhsh Rais’ analysis was balanced and
pithy when he said, “after decades of being run
from Islamabad, provinces will eventually have
the right to legislate, to control their own
education programs and significantly more of
their finances, among other things, a difficult
retooling that could lead to even more instability
if it is not handled delicately.” Equally important
was the fact concerning the capacity of the
provincial government to address issues of
gargantuan proportions. Managing Karachi by
the government of Sindh on its own, without
Islamabad’s support, appears to be quite an
untenable proposition. Similarly, can the merger
of FATA with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa materialise
unless the centre deploys its resources to see the
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
merger take effect. The menace of religious
militancy and sectarian antagonism can hardly
be mitigated if left to the provincial governments.
Undoubtedly, the provincial autonomy is vital
for a country like Pakistan, which is extremely
diverse but equally important is the issue of
integration. Balochistan and Gilgat Baltistan are
the areas which should be properly integrated
into the federation before according them
autonomous status. All this can only happen at
the behest of the central government. Otherwise,
Pakistan as a nation state will wither away.
I am saying all this because among all these
diverse regions and cultural units, no points of
commonality have yet been worked out. At least
all the stakeholders within the federation must
come together and agree on some common
denominators. Faisal Bari underlined two areas
as problematic that have thereby become a thorn
in the flesh of those speaking for the federation.
In Faisal’s own words “One has to do with
devolution and the other, related but separate,
to do with fund-sharing arrangements between
the federation and the provinces: the vertical
part of the National Finance Commission formula.”
One cannot dispute these areas of contention
between the federation and the provinces.
However, considering the question of ‘class’ of
vital importance, I will argue that distribution of
resources, without undertaking radical/ equitable
social reforms will just be an act of appeasement
of the provincial elite. With no bourgeoisie in most
of the regions, equitable distribution of resources
through provincial government comprising elite,
will be counter-productive. Provincial autonomy
in regions where tribalism and feudal values are
all pervasive will be detrimental in every way. In
such situations even trickle-down effect takes
ages to happen. Besides class, the ethnic and
cultural diversity cuts across different provinces,
There is Baloch community living in Sindh and
Punjab, Pakhtuns residing in Balochistan and Sindh;
that the extremely complex social fabric will be
sustained through according provincial autonomy
raises far more questions than suggesting tenable
answers. We must consider all these factors in a
dispassionate manner.
 bad and whether it should be zero. The answer is
no. Most economists today only consider inflation
above high single digits to be bad. Moderate
inflation, in the 3pc to 6pc range is generally
considered desirable, and inflation below 3pc can
actually be risky. Why? Moderate inflation can
serve as a useful signal of demand pressures in
Inflation in Pakistan: multiple causes normal times, and also lends flexibility to an
Author: Nadir Cheema economy adjusting to adverse shocks: if inflation is
Published in: Dawn Newspaper near zero, disinflation must involve nominal wage
Published on: March 11, 2019. cuts, which are politically difficult.
Inflation is once again the news, having risen
further to 8.2 per cent in February. That inflation
comes with costs is not news. For the poor, a rise
in the prices of essential items (if it exceeds
income growth) can be a death knell, both literally
(for subsistence households), and indirectly, due
to the inability to afford needed medical and
health spending. It can also force parents to
choose between whether their child goes to
school or works. Importantly, inflation is a tax
that erodes the purchasing power of the currency.
Thus, the poor, who hold much of their assets in
cash, bear this tax disproportionately, while the
rich can partly evade it by holding assets that
are return-bearing (like bonds), increasing in
value (like land), or in a stable foreign currency
(like the dollar).
Then, by raising uncertainty about the future,
inflation discourages investment in projects
that raise the economy’s productive capacity.
Businesses start focusing on projects with
short-term returns, or transactions in foreign
currency. Insofar as inflation erodes trust in the
national currency as a store of value, it also
erodes the associated national pride, and this is
felt by all citizens. In Pakistan, this erosion has
been significant: by the mid-1970s, the Pakistani
rupee had lost half of the purchasing power it had
in 1956; and by the early 1990s, it had lost 90pc. For much of Pakistan’s history, inflation has
Large as it seems, it is a much less dramatic been moderate, with two noticeable exceptions:
decline than witnessed by Turkey, Egypt and
1972-76 and 2008-14, both of which coincided
Morocco. And a comparison starting in 1980, with record-high international oil prices; and
and excluding rich countries, suggests Pakistan followed/ accompanied public or private spending
has done no worse than its South Asian neighbours. booms. Although inflation has picked up in the
Although inflation has picked up in the past past few months and is now in the upper single
few months, its level is still low by recent digits, its level is still low by recent historical
historical standards. Next, we ask if all inflation is standards.

Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)


Given this, the key policy issues for inflation
management are: avoiding the big spikes (that
take inflation above the desirable range); and
ensuring that the poor are well protected
against inflation. On the former, we note that
there are several (not one) drivers of inflation:
The first is money growth. For a fixed supply
of goods, more money in circulation means
higher prices. Monetary loosening can happen
due to structural factors like fiscal dominance,
where the central bank is forced to print money
to finance fiscal deficits; and/ or cyclical surges
in capital inflows, and the accompanying credit/
real estate booms.
Fiscal dominance has been a perennial problem
in Pakistan, as evinced by the strong co-movement
of inflation and State Bank credit to government
over the past 15 years (only Egypt is worse in
this regard). Two things can help fix it: a rise in
the tax-to-GDP ratio so that there is a buffer in
public finances; and greater de jure and de facto
independence for the State Bank (progression
on this has been quite uneven).
Capital inflow booms have been rarer but equally
impactful, eg the mid-2000s real estate boom
financed by Gulf money, which ended badly for
the economy. With the government trying to lure
investments from China and the Gulf, care would
have to be taken to ensure the resource inflow
expands the productive capacity of the economy,
and does not just fuel prices.
The second is factors that affect import prices.
As a heavily oil-reliant importer, and with no real
foreign exchange or fiscal buffers to limit pass-
through to domestic prices, a part of Pakistani
inflation is simply determined by global oil price
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
movements. At one level, a government neither
deserves credit for lower inflation when oil prices
fall (as they did from 2014-16), nor the blame
for higher inflation when they rise (as they
sporadically did in 2017-18). However, to be
constantly at the mercy of a known exogenous
quantity is not pardonable: Pakistan must make
a concerted effort to diversify its energy reliance
away from oil and towards hydro, solar,
nuclear, clean coal.
Currency depreciations affect inflation similarly,
except that they raise the domestic price of all
imported goods, not just oil. Depreciations are
needed to fix balance-of-payments problems which
can arise due to unsustainable spending booms
(as in the aftermath of the mid-2000s, as well as
2014-17); adverse terms of trade shocks (like oil
price rises); or weakening global demand for
Pakistani goods and services (as occurred during
the 2008 global financial crisis). Governments
cannot do much to avoid depreciations when
they are needed, but they can make them less
dramatic by allowing a more flexible exchange
rate regime.
The third is domestic supply shocks. Floods,
droughts, crop pests can all raise the price of
domestic goods, and often goods that are essential
to the poor. While governments cannot wish these
shocks away, it can and must invest in resilience
mechanisms, as these are likely to benefit the
poor most.
In sum, inflation is a multi-source problem. It
has been high, but manageable, in Pakistan. But
because it affects the poor disproportionately,
the government must continue to take structural
measures to keep it low, and to compensate the
poor via lifeline tariffs and cash transfers for
any temporary surges.
Geopolitics and the BRI
Author: Zamir Akram
Published in: The Express Tribune
Published on: May 4, 2019.
The second Summit on China’s Belt and Road
Initiative (BRI), held in Beijing on April 26-27
and attended by several world leaders from
more than 150 countries, provided an opportunity
to showcase China’s mega project aimed at
promoting global growth and prosperity.
But critics, led by the US, used the occasion to
castigate the BRI as a manifestation of China’s
“geo-political ambitions” that would force
developing countries into a “debt trap”. At the
heart of this controversy is whether the BRI is a
benign Chinese endeavour to promote greater
international connectivity for shared economic
development or a tool to dominate Asian, African
and Latin American countries. This issue is of
paramount importance for Pakistan since CPEC
is the flagship project of the BRI and an example
to be emulated by other developing countries.
Therefore, the BRI needs to be placed in its
true context.
Unveiled by President Xi in 2013, “as a foreign
policy priority”, the BRI seeks to “revive and
reinvigorate the ancient Silk Roads that connected
China with Eurasia. To actualise this initiative,
China set up development oriented financial
institutions and planning mechanisms to accelerate
the construction of infrastructure connecting
China with neighbouring regions and build a “Silk
Road Economic Belt and a Maritime Silk road to
form a new pattern of all-around opportunities”.
The China Development Bank alone earmarked
nearly one trillion US dollars by 2015 for over 900
projects involving transportation, infrastructure
and energy. The Chinese Export-Import Bank
pledged financing for more than 1,000 projects
in 49 countries as part of the BRI. The total Chinese
financial outlay is estimated at about three trillion
dollars. Today over 80 countries are directly part
of this initiative while scores of others, including
several members of the EU, are also involved.
Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)
These countries spread from and across Asia,
Europe, Africa and Latin America — a total of
around 63 per cent of the world’s population
with a collective total of over 21 trillion dollars
of global output.
Guided by China’s policy of “harmonious rise” to
superpower status and “win-win cooperation” with
partnering countries, President Xi has maintained
that “exchange will replace estrangement”; “mutual
learning will replace clashes” and “coexistence
will replace a sense of superiority”. More pointedly
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated that
“the BRI is not a geo-political tool but a platform
for cooperation”.
The BRI grand design is unprecedented in scale
but not unique. Such linkages have been suggested
before. In the aftermath of the Iraq invasion,
American officials spoke of their goal to “revive
ancient ties between South and Central Asia… to
create new links in the areas of trade, transport,
democracy, energy and communications”.
Later, in 2011, then Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton proposed creating a “new Silk Road —
an international network of economic and transit
connections”. But these proved to be mere
statements of intent rather than substantive
policies backed up by financial commitments.
More recently, Trump’s Secretary of State Pompeo
announced an enhanced US regional role in the
“Indo-Pacific” as “one of the greatest engines of
the global economy” for which he announced 113
million dollars in new initiatives, a minuscule
amount compared to China’s trillion dollars
investments.
The reality is that a declining US, and under
Trump an unreliable partner to boot, does not
carry the same influence as a rising China. Unable
to compete in the global marketplace, the US has
resorted to building pressure against China.
Instead of accepting China (and Russia) as equal
partners to evolve a new stable international order,
the US has resorted to building military alliances
and trade wars to contain and confront China. A
key part of this strategy is to demonise China as a
“predatory state” that is using the BRI to entrap
poor countries through increasing their debt
burden. American-dominated international
financial institutions like the IMF and the World America’s own vulnerabilities in a changing
Bank are being used to spread such allegations. world order.
But this canard has been exposed by objective
Americans themselves. For example, of the
overall debt for African countries, estimated by
the China-Africa Research Initiative at Johns
Hopkins University amounting to 143 billion
dollars, the majority of this debt is owed to
non-Chinese lenders mainly Western banks.
The total debt of Latin American countries,
according to the Global Development Policy
Centre, “financing from China alone did not appear
to be driving borrowers above the IMF’s debt
sustainability threshold”. Similarly, the controversy
generated about Sri Lanka’s Hambantota Port
which was allegedly surrendered to China due
to non-payable debts of 46 billion dollars, it was
revealed that actually only 10 per cent of the debt
is owed to China. In short, according to these
analysts, as reported in The New York Times of
April 27, “fears that China is deliberately preying Current Affairs Pointers for FPSC Tests,
on countries in need are unfounded”. covering important events of 2018
Pakistan’s own example is a case in point. While up-to-date May 2019. You can contact us
Secretary Pompeo fulminated that the US will not here: www.facebook.com/CSSExamPoint.
allow the IMF to bail out Pakistan so that it could
pay off its Chinese loans, the fact remains that over
80 per cent of Pakistan’s debt is owed to Western
lenders including the US and IMF, not to China.
Aside from the debt burden argument, America
has resorted to a massive disinformation and
destabilisation campaign within Pakistan
through its proxies and touts to mislead Pakistanis
about CPEC. It has also enlisted its Indian acolytes
to oppose CPEC, by promoting terrorism through
the BLA and the TTP, such as attacks on Chinese
workers and the Chinese Consulate in Karachi.
In this effort, the Gwadar port has also been
projected as a Chinese naval base rather than
what it actually is — a commercial port for
trading and trans-shipment purposes.
Undoubtedly, in any project the size of the
BRI, there will be shortcomings which President
Xi acknowledged at the recent Summit, calling
for transparency and zero tolerance for
corruption. But to argue that the BRI is a
geo-political power grab by China to challenge
the US belies its real purpose and exposes

Current Affairs Notes (Compiled & Collected by Aamir Mahar)

Nuclear Power Can Save the World
Expanding the technology is the fastest way to slash greenhouse
gas emissions and decarbonize the economy.

By Joshua S. Goldstein, Staffan A. Qvist and Steven Pinker

Drs. Goldstein and Qvist are the authors of “A Bright Future: How Some
Countries Have Solved Climate Change and the Rest Can Follow.” Dr.
Pinker is a psychology professor at Harvard.

April 6, 2019, Published in NYTimes.com

As young people rightly demand real solutions to climate change,
the question is not what to do — eliminate fossil fuels by 2050
— but how. Beyond decarbonizing today’s electric grid, we must
use clean electricity to replace fossil fuels in transportation,
industry and heating. We must provide for the fast-growing
energy needs of poorer countries and extend the grid to a billion
people who now lack electricity. And still more electricity will
be needed to remove excess carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere by midcentury.

Where will this gargantuan amount of carbon-free energy come

from? The popular answer is renewables alone, but this is a
fantasy. Wind and solar power are becoming cheaper, but they
are not available around the clock, rain or shine, and batteries
that could power entire cities for days or weeks show no sign of
materializing any time soon. Today, renewables work only with
fossil-fuel backup.

Germany, which went all-in for renewables, has seen little

reduction in carbon emissions, and, according to our
calculations, at Germany’s rate of adding clean energy relative to
gross domestic product, it would take the world more than a
century to decarbonize, even if the country wasn’t also retiring
nuclear plants early. A few lucky countries with abundant
hydroelectricity, like Norway and New Zealand, have
decarbonized their electric grids, but their success cannot be
scaled up elsewhere: The world’s best hydro sites are already
dammed.

Small wonder that a growing response to these intimidating

facts is, “We’re cooked.”

But we actually have proven models for rapid decarbonization

with economic and energy growth: France and Sweden. They
decarbonized their grids decades ago and now emit less than a
tenth of the world average of carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour.
They remain among the world’s most pleasant places to live and
enjoy much cheaper electricity than Germany to boot.

They did this with nuclear power. And they did it fast, taking
advantage of nuclear power’s intense concentration of energy
per pound of fuel. France replaced almost all of its fossil-fueled
electricity with nuclear power nationwide in just 15 years;
Sweden, in about 20 years. In fact, most of the fastest additions
of clean electricity historically are countries rolling out nuclear
power.

This is a realistic solution to humanity’s greatest

problem. Plants built 30 years ago in America, as in France,
produce cheap, clean electricity, and nuclear power is the
cheapest source in South Korea. The 98 U.S. reactors today
provide nearly 20 percent of the nation’s electricity generation.
So why don’t the United States and other countries expand their
nuclear capacity? The reasons are economics and fear.

New nuclear power plants are hugely expensive to build in the

United States today. This is why so few are being built. But they
don’t need to be so costly. The key to recovering our lost ability
to build affordable nuclear plants is standardization and
repetition. The first product off any assembly line is expensive
— it cost more than $150 million to develop the first iPhone —
but costs plunge as they are built in quantity and production
kinks are worked out.

Yet as a former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission put it, while France has two types of reactors and
hundreds of types of cheese, in the United States it’s the other
way around. In recent decades, the United States and some
European countries have created ever more complicated
reactors, with ever more safety features in response to public
fears. New, one-of-a-kind designs, shifting regulations,
supply-chain and construction snafus and a lost generation of
experts (during the decades when new construction stopped)
have driven costs to absurd heights.

These economic problems are solvable. China and South Korea

can build reactors at one-sixth the current cost in the United
States. With the political will, China could replace coal without
sacrificing economic growth, reducing world carbon emissions
by more than 10 percent. In the longer term, dozens of
American start-ups are developing “fourth generation” reactors
that can be mass-produced, potentially generating electricity at
lower cost than fossil fuels. If American activists, politicians and
regulators allow it, these reactors could be exported to the
world in the 2030s and ’40s, slaking poorer countries’ growing
thirst for energy while creating well-paying American jobs.
Currently, fourth-generation nuclear power receives rare
bipartisan agreement in Congress, making it a particularly
appealing American policy to address climate change. Congress
recently passed the Nuclear Energy Innovation and
Modernization Act by big margins. Both parties love innovation,
entrepreneurship, exports and jobs.

This approach will need a sensible regulatory framework.

Currently, as M.I.T.’s Richard Lester, a nuclear engineer, has
written, a company proposing a new reactor design faces “the
prospect of having to spend a billion dollars or more on an
open-​ ended, all- or- nothing licensing process without any
certainty of outcomes.” We need government on the side of this
clean-energy transformation, with supportive regulation,
streamlined approval, investment in research and incentives
that tilt producers and consumers away from carbon.

All this, however, depends on overcoming an irrational dread

among the public and many activists. The reality is that nuclear
power is the safest form of energy humanity has ever
used. Mining accidents, hydroelectric dam failures, natural gas
explosions and oil train crashes all kill people, sometimes in
large numbers, and smoke from coal-burning kills them in
enormous numbers, more than half a million per year.

By contrast, in 60 years of nuclear power, only three accidents

have raised public alarm: Three Mile Island in 1979, which
killed no one; Fukushima in 2011, which killed no one (many
deaths resulted from the tsunami and some from a panicked
evacuation near the plant); and Chernobyl in 1986, the result of
extraordinary Soviet bungling, which killed 31 in the accident
and perhaps several thousand from cancer, around the same
number killed by coal emissions every day. (Even if we
accepted recent claims that Soviet and international authorities
covered up tens of thousands of Chernobyl deaths, the death toll
from 60 years of nuclear power would still equal about one
month of coal-related deaths.)

Nuclear power plants cannot explode like nuclear bombs, and

they have not contributed to weapons proliferation, thanks to
robust international controls: 24 countries have nuclear power
but not weapons, while Israel and North Korea have nuclear
weapons but not power.

Nuclear waste is compact — America’s total from 60 years

would fit in a Walmart — and is safely stored in concrete casks
and pools, becoming less radioactive over time. After we have
solved the more pressing challenge of climate change, we can
either burn the waste as fuel in new types of reactors or bury it
deep underground. It’s a far easier environmental challenge
than the world’s enormous coal waste, routinely dumped near
poor communities and often laden with toxic arsenic, mercury
and lead that can last forever.

Despite its demonstrable safety, nuclear power presses several

psychological buttons. First, people estimate risk according to
how readily anecdotes like well-publicized nuclear accidents
pop into mind. Second, the thought of radiation activates the
mind-set of disgust, in which any trace of contaminant fouls
whatever it contacts, despite the reality that we all live in a soup
of natural radiation. Third, people feel better about eliminating
a single tiny risk entirely than minimizing risk from all hazards
combined. For all these reasons, nuclear power is dreaded while
fossil fuels are tolerated, just as flying is scary even though
driving is more dangerous.

Opinions are also driven by our cultural and political tribes.

Since the late 1970s, when No Nukes became a signature cause
of the Green movement, sympathy to nuclear power became,
among many environmentalists, a sign of disloyalty if not
treason.

Despite these challenges, psychology and politics can change

quickly. As the enormity of the climate crisis sinks in and the
hoped-for carbon savings from renewables don’t add up,
nuclear can become the new green. Protecting the environment
and lifting the developing world out of poverty are progressive
causes. And the millennials and Gen Z’s might rethink the sacred
values their boomer parents have left unexamined since the
Doobie Brothers sang at the 1979 No Nukes concert.

If the American public and politicians can face real threats and
overcome unfounded fears, we can solve humanity’s most
pressing challenge and leave our grandchildren a bright future
of climate stability and abundant energy. We can dispatch, once
and for all, the self-fulfilling prophesy that we’re cooked.

Joshua S. Goldstein, professor emeritus of international relations

at American University, and Staffan A. Qvist, a Swedish energy
engineer, are the authors of “A Bright Future: How Some
Countries Have Solved Climate Change and the Rest Can
Follow.” Steven Pinker is a professor of psychology at Harvard
University and is the author of “Enlightenment Now.”