Picture2

Pakistan has calculated its previous period GDP growth to have nearly touched 6%, which is a remarkable feat given the litany of international headwinds that have included Covid-19 and the imbalanced post-Covid recovery, with its supply chain disruptions and excessive inflationary pressures. Although this should be cause for jubilation, given that it reflects a growth economy in tough global conditions, there is a nuanced picture on the basis of the growth, which reflects acute cause for concern.

Pakistan’s GDP, when broken down by economic activities, reflects an unsustainable reliance on consumption to drive growth, which is characterized by hefty borrowing to fund recurrent deficits. Consumption has always acted as a primary driver of economic growth, but it must be weighed against the need for savings, exports and investment. What has long been commented on by economists and observers in Pakistan is that the savings rate is far too low for a country that must fund development projects.

At the same time, consumption does not cater for the structural challenges that await the next generation of Pakistanis, and yet these challenges require investments now to bear fruit over a longer horizon. For example, investing in water infrastructure and water conservation is required now for future generations to mitigate water scarcity. Similarly, investment in renewable energy adoption (particularly solar) is required for power self-sufficiency across the country at accessible and affordable prices. Most of all, the investment that is required in education, training, and healthcare (particularly nutrition) is necessary to boost human capital.

For all the SUVs parading around the major cities, there is an ocean of surplus children with deficient nutritional, pedagogical, and societal endowments being born every year. For a population of 220 million, a 3% growth rate signifies adding more than 60 lakh children per year every year. A 6% GDP growth rate would translate into a per capita income rise in excess of this 3% population growth for accounting purposes, but in practical terms consumption does not equate to investment in the future of this rampant demographic excess.

As such, it is better to grow through investment at 3% than consumption at 6%, particularly when this consumption relies on imports. This does not necessarily mean discouraging the import of capital goods for productive purposes, especially if these imports generate exports in turn. For a country of Pakistan’s size, its imports are quite low – but the problem is that the exports are far too low, almost inexplicably so. Whereas remittances were 1/5 of the size that exports were 20 years ago, they are at parity today at $3 billion each. The question then is: why must this labor go abroad in order to attain productivity?

Driving exports and investment, therefore, remain crucial priorities in GDP growth for us, but in a cultural milieu that prizes expensive cars and 4-story bungalows over hard-nosed factories, vibrant libraries and active laboratories, this is no mean feat. But those who drive the latest 6-seaters should remember: one does not import one’s way to prosperity. One deploys one’s productive endowments tirelessly to build a dynamic and inclusive society, and that should be at the core of our socio-economic ethos.

Dr Usman W. Chohan is the Director for Economic Affairs and National Development at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad Pakistan. He can be reached at [email protected].

Image Source:Ahmad, R. 2022, “Improved Industrial and Services Sector Helps Pak Economy to Jump 6%,” Tech Buraq, May 18, https://techburaq.com/2022/05/18/improved-industrial-and-service-sector-helps-pak-economy-to-jump-6.html


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 »