country of the future

Whenever the pundits herald the economic potential of “emerging markets”, their discourse often belies a sense of despondency that looms closely behind in the psyche and in the lived experience of citizens in the developing world.

The interplay between external exuberance and inner malaise is steeped in the confrontation of Third World societies against post-colonial realities of economic life: worsening inequality, material excesses, inflation, congestion, and degradations of both society and the environment.

Because of this dichotomy, the “emerging markets” have been characterized by hard swings in the business cycle: a decade of high growth here, another of stagnation there, only to bounce back momentarily, before slumping yet again.

This pattern of cyclicality is stark across the developing world, including in Pakistan. Over here, several years of CPEC-related exuberance were followed by a shock to the system and a 40% devaluation in early 2019; and yet Pakistan’s stock market was the world’s best performer for eight consecutive days this month!

Such rapid swings blur the lines between what is cyclical and what is structural in the economy’s deficiencies. For example, noting the most recent indicators of the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP), PM Imran Khan rejoiced that his administration had managed to reduce the country’s current account deficit to a $99 million net positive figure, the first time this had occurred in four years.

According to SBP data, the reduced deficit was attributable to a sharp decrease in imports, which fell from $19bn to $14.65bn, while exports increased more modestly from $7.9bn to $8.22bn. While much of this import reduction was on discretionary items, a valid concern has been raised about capital goods, in that they too might have been curtailed.

Reducing the imports of capital goods, which are used to generate further economic activity, often hamper longer-term economic activity and hence the growth rate of GDP. This caution aside, such figures are nonetheless a healthy indication of some payback for the initiation of difficult reforms, which have made the cost of living dearer for many ordinary Pakistanis.

Indeed, recent survey data from Ipsos Pakistan suggests that Pakistanis overall have become more pessimistic about their employment & consumption prospects, and so any indications of green shoots are welcome at this time.

Yet what is important now is to see these reforms to the end, executed in full and led to materialize in a sustainable form. This is particularly true for policies such as minimizing discretionary imports, growing the tax base, formalizing the economy, and increasing financial inclusion.

A bitter pill was swallowed to initiate economic belt-tightening, whether in discretionary imports, revenue collection, or public spending. And while there are very serious concerns about the ideology of austerity that IMF imposes from-on-high in Pakistan and elsewhere, there is often a sliver of truth in the economic deficiencies they detect.

Seeing the current reforms through to the end requires political will, because there is always the political temptation to ease off before reform programs are pursued to maturity. This is in fact what lies at the heart of Pakistan’s IMF-dependency: reforms are not properly concluded and so the causes fester without being addressed in a sustained fashion.

As such, any political break that impedes wholehearted and far-reaching reforms will result in future dependencies on the IMF and on external interventions. The antibiotics course must be administered until the end, so that it remedies structural issues rather than mere cyclical ones.

Of course, such problems of political will are by no means confined to Pakistan alone, but rather characterize developing countries as a cohort. Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Nigeria, Indonesia, Panama, Haiti, Philippines, Congo, Egypt, Ecuador: a litany of emerging market names can be allow a pattern to be discerned – structural problems can and do persist, even across generations, while parties and personalities come and go.

There is a famously cynical quip that is oft-repeated in the bureaus of Sao Paolo: “Brazil is the country of the future… and it always will be,” hinting at the unrealized potential of the country in not having addressed the fundamentals of economic dysfunction and disenfranchisement on so many occasions.

The country of the future is one that can generate systemic patterns of economic activity that address financial inclusion, inequality, growth, sustainability, and dynamism. Otherwise, jumping from one international bailout to another, the countries of the Third World will transmit their cynicism across generations, knowing that they might be “a country of the future,” but resigning themselves to disillusion that they always will be.

The writer is the Director for Economics and National Affairs at the Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS). This article was first published in Daily NHT Newspaper. He can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »