Foreign policy 'Hit'

Here's something for you Sarah Palin/Asif Zadari haters. The two met recently in New York and here's what happened:

On entering a room filled with several Pakistani officials this afternoon, Palin was immediately greeted by Sherry Rehman, the country's Information Minister.

"And how does one keep looking that good when one is that busy?," Rehman asked, drawing friendly laughter from the room when she complimented Palin.

"Oh, thank you," Palin said.

Pakistan's recently-elected president, Asif Ali Zardari, entered the room seconds later. Palin rose to shake his hand, saying she was “honored” to meet him.

Zardari then called her "gorgeous" and said: "Now I know why the whole of America is crazy about you."

"You are so nice," Palin said, smiling. "Thank you."

A handler from Zardari's entourage then told the two politicians to keep shaking hands for the cameras.

"If he's insisting, I might hug," Zardari said. Palin smiled politely.

I'm not going to even comment. I just think someone should make Zadari the admin of Sara Palin:VPILF group on facebook. He earned it. And what did Palin think of all this?

"It's going great," Palin said. "These meetings are very informative and helpful, and a lot of good people sharing appreciation for America." [link]

God Bless America. The whole thing is on youtube. I told you these Paks are horny.

[The story via Sepia Mutiny]

Honest about Inflation

Unlike his Sri Lankan counterpart (who, in his defence doesn't have a clue about these things) the finance minister of Pakistan, Sayed Naveed Qamar, has admited that government is responsible for inflation in that country, which stands about an "all time high" of 11% (Sri Lankan inflation is at about 26% under a supressed index). Here's an excerpt from his budget speech :

There was a phenomenal build‑up in subsidies in the budget, which are largely responsible for this huge deficit. These subsidies, totaling Rs. 407 billion include; petroleum Rs. 175 billion; electricity Rs. 133 billion; wheat Rs. 40 billion, and textiles and fertilizers Rs. 48 billion, of which only Rs. 114 billion were provided in the budget;

(6) Largely due to an exceptionally high fiscal deficit, balance of payments is facing unprecedented deficit as well. The current account deficit is projected at $ 11.9 billion or 7 % of GDP;

(7) Reserves have declined from a high of $ 16.5 billion in October, 2007 to less than $ 12.3 billion as at end April 2008. This has put pressure on the exchange rate which has depreciated by nearly 6.4 % during July 2007 to April 2008;

(8) Much of the deficit had to be financed from borrowing from the State Bank, which is like printing more money. As much as Rs. 551 billion (up to May 2008) have been borrowed from the central bank, which is unprecedented in country's history. It is not difficult to imagine what this printing of money means. With more money and no new production, only prices are likely to increase, which is what is happening. We have to stop this process otherwise the inflation will be running much higher than what it is at present, and as I noted it is already highest in country's history. [link] (emphasis mine)

Monetary policy, especially when there is no central bank indepdence (like in Sri Lanka, possibly even Pakistan) is inevitably linked to fiscal policy. At least Naveed Qamar has the good sense to admit that. Someone forgot to tell this to Sri Lankan policymakers.

[link via LBO]

Rudy Gulliani becomes Pakistan's Prime Minister

Oh, turns out it's Gilani, Yousaf Raza not Gulliani, Rudy. My bad.

On Pakistan

William Dalrymple, the historian and popular author has an insightful piece on the recent elections in Pakistan. He's quite optimistic about the country's future. Here's a relevant excerpt:

widespread publicity given to the [recent] crisis obscured the important changes that had quietly taken place in Pakistani society during Musharraf's eight years in power. Pakistan's economy is currently in difficulty, with fast-rising inflation and shortages of electricity and flour; but between 2002 and 2006 it had grown almost as strongly as India's. Until the beginning of 2007, Pakistan had a construction and consumer boom, with growth approaching 8 percent; for several years its stock market was the fastest-rising in Asia.

As you travel around Pakistan today you can see the effects of the boom everywhere: in vast new shopping malls and smart roadside filling stations, in the cranes of the building sites and the smokestacks of factories, in the expensive new cars jamming the roads and in the ubiquitous cell-phone stores. In 2003 the country had fewer than three million cell phones; today apparently there are 50 million, while car ownership has been increasing at roughly 40 percent a year since 2001. At the same time foreign direct investment has risen from $322 million in 2002 to $3.5 billion in 2006.

Pakistan's cities, in particular, are fast changing beyond recognition. As in India, there is a burgeoning Pakistani fashion scene full of ambitious gay designers and amazingly beautiful models. [link]

The trouble with International Media is that, it only reports the most compelling stories about places like Pakistan. The trouble with that is, the compelling stories are chaotic - a bomb, a shooting or something of the sort. So people develop this perception that Pakistan = chaos + Jihad+ bombs + kill. Which is not true for, well, much of the country.

Being Sri Lankan - another country which reminds people of all things Pakistan (minus jihad) - I kept getting ask by my non-Sri Lankan friends about the dreadful situation in the country. Now, the situation is dreadful and there are bombs, but I'm not exactly ducking bullets. I mean, when there is a bomb and you are not dead as a result of it, you kind of avoid that route and get on with life. That's kind of what Pakistan is. Dalrymple relates the story by analyzing the election results where most secular-democratic forces have secured victory over the mullah's and feudal leaders. Read the whole thing.

[link via Ajay Shah]

on Musharraf

I sort of like the guy. I've read his biography, and I think I can see where he's coming from. I mean so what' if he's a dictator, that's better than a dictator pretending to be a democrat (thats democrat as in democracy not democract as in party).

Supporters of President Musharraf say that he has brought the country rapid economic growth (this much is true), relative political stability (prior to recent incidents) and in some even argue a some form of democracy. As a Pakistani friend of mine once told me "we want development, not democracy".

My friend is not alone, In fact I think most people wouldn't outrightly reject the idea of a dictatorship. If somebody has a political agenda which he/she thinks would benefit everyone, and that someone can find a dictator to follow that course, then theoretically this should be a good thing. Of course some of us are more idealistic and thinks it would not be proper force someone what we think is "right". But for most people this would be a desirable outcome, and President Musharraf (and i know this personally) has his share of genuine supporters. However, What makes dictatorships a bad system is the fact that it's success depends good persons and this is where Musharraf has faltered in recent times, he's not been able to be good enough even for his adherent supporters.

This was triggered off by a rather funny post from on Musharraf at the Acron.