Following Bangladesh model: The truth is uncomfortable

[PadmaBridge]

To be honest, Pakistan cannot follow the BD model as it is not a single ethnic country like BD is.

Even India that has done better than Pakistan has been overtaken by BD in nominal per capita and we shall see the lead stretch out over time.

A multi-ethnic country will always spend too much energy trying to keep itself together rather than the fastest way to develop its economy.

Saying all this Pakistan should be doing better and it needs to start by getting the Army out of politics. Not sure how it will do that but it seems like the logical place to start.

And educating girls and getting women to work and boxing the mullahs.

 

[Bilal9]

BDians have slave mentality hence they went for a negotiated settlement with India (in other words accepted what India offered) . We may become a little poor due to our defence spending and fight with India but we will never compromise on Kashmir. Finally we are a nuke power while BD is not. BD will always be at the mercy of India.

We have already established that you are from India.

I don't know what to make of your post above.

 

[PadmaBridge]

We have already established that you are from India.

I don't know what to make of your post above.

Dalit troll impersonating a Pakistani?

 

[Bilal9]

Dalit troll impersonating a Pakistani?

Yes. A lot of his posts support Indian position over that of Pakistan's. Go through his posts, you will see.

 

[PadmaBridge]

Yes. A lot of his posts support Indian position over that of Pakistan's. Go through his posts, you will see.

My dog can smell a street shitter from a mile away.

I don’t need to read his smelly posts!

 

[my2cents]

We should not compare ourselves with nations such as Bangladesh nor India. We have far better rolemodels such as China, Germany, Israel that we can learn from. Israel has 1/22 the population yet higher GDP and x15 our tech exports…

Imagine if we can get even 10% of our population to be like Israelis. We will even be more powerful than russia.

The way things are in Pakistan it is more apt to compare it to Sri Lanka. Forget BD.

 

[EternalMortal]

It’s not complicated. Awami league might be corrupt but at least it cares enough about their country to make policies that would help it progress. On the other hand, PMLN & PPP are not only corrupt, they don’t care about the country either.
The reason of course is loyalty to the country’s ideology. For Bangladesh, it’s simple: progress of the Bengali ppl. Awami league is also Bengali so naturally they care about progress of Bengali ppl. For Pakistan it’s progress of an Islamic state. PMLN & PPP couldn’t care less about Islam & therefore they have no loyalty to the country. We saw these last 3.5 yrs what loyal leaders can accomplish. It might not be perfect but there’s noticeable progress.

 

[Maira La]

Imagine if we can get even 10% of our population to be like Israelis. We will even be more powerful than russia.

Imagine you get as much per capita foreign aid (mainly from US) as Israel does........... will transform you into a developed nation in no time.

 

[Wergeland]

It’s not complicated. Awami league might be corrupt but at least it cares enough about their country to make policies that would help it progress. On the other hand, PMLN & PPP are not only corrupt, they don’t care about the country either.
The reason of course is loyalty to the country’s ideology. For Bangladesh, it’s simple: progress of the Bengali ppl. Awami league is also Bengali so naturally they care about progress of Bengali ppl. For Pakistan it’s progress of an Islamic state. PMLN & PPP couldn’t care less about Islam & therefore they have no loyalty to the country. We saw these last 3.5 yrs what loyal leaders can accomplish. It might not be perfect but there’s noticeable progress.

A major difference is also existence of regionally dominant parties in Pakistan. BD has no eqivalent of PPP of PMLN whos main voting base is Sindh and Punjab respectively.

AL BNP and Jamat are far less regionally dominant than its Pakistani counterparts. When AL and BNP win or loose it usually result of national level voting trend and never because of of a single region.

What Pakistan need is political parties that are reasonably well supported by people in all provinces.

 

[EternalMortal]

A major difference is also existence of regionally fominant parties in Pakistan. BD has no eqivalent of PPP of PMLN whos main voting base is Sindh and Punjab respectively.

AL BNP and Jamat are far less regionally dominant than its Pakistani counterparts. When AL and BNP win or loose it usually result of national level voting trend and never because of of a single region.

What Pakistan need is political parties that are reasonably well supported by people in all provinces.

Such a party can only arise if they’re loyal to the country‘s ideology.

IMO, PTI fulfills that requirement.

 

[mb444]

Following Bangladesh model: The truth is uncomfortable​

Opinion
Mosharraf Zaidi
June 30, 2022
The truth is uncomfortable and harder to articulate in a mainstream Pakistani newspaper
ShareNext Story >>>

Map of Pakistan and Bangladesh — Canva/file
A lot of people ask why Bangladesh has been able to manufacture over a decade of economic growth enabling political stability. Part of the answer casts the intensity and transformative nature of the Sheikh Hasina era in a light that is more sour grapes than it is truth. The truth is uncomfortable and harder to articulate in a mainstream Pakistani newspaper. But here goes.

First, to reiterate: yes. PM Hasina reduced civil liberties in order to sustain a popular, but hardly overwhelming mandate for the Awami League agenda in her country. She tarred and feathered the religious right wing in part to sustain her rule, and in part to fulfill a fugazi secular legacy that Bangladesh has deployed effectively for economic growth at home and consumption in New Delhi (it is fugazi because Bangladeshi nationalism is anchored as much in Muslim identity and symbolism as any Muslim majority place on the planet – Pakistanis do not have the monopoly on this). Bangladesh is less free today than it was a decade ago and the state has hounded and put away those that don’t toe the line.

But ask Arsalan Khan or Mudassir Naru’s wife and child about Pakistani civil liberties. Or ask Amina Masood Janjua or Matiullah Jan. Or an arrested serving member of the National Assembly. Ask these folks about civil liberties in Pakistan. Have their stories of suppressed dissent helped fix whatever is broken here?
Did taking journalists off the air help bring the TTP to the negotiating table? Has a reduced national stature for the leading news channel enabled improved foreign direct investment?

Have experiments in giving criminals indicted in other countries makeovers that convert them into leading Pakistani figures helped sell Pakistan’s narrative abroad? Are Russians in St Petersburg or Kaliningrad as dedicated to partnership with Pakistan as uncles and aunties across the DHA spectrum are to a partnership with Russia? Are more people watching more documentaries about how to start new businesses and secure easy financing from cash-rich banks because the state keeps manufacturing high-quality films?

Does hounding journalists to help empower parliamentary committees to find enough budget to commission Bain or Strategy Plus to do the research necessary to help inform better legislation on the best way forward for improved data protection laws, that will serve both the national security concerns of the deep state and the economic growth needs of a 19th-century economy and 15th century elite?

In short, less freedom in Bangladesh today than there was when it was an economic basket case can’t possibly be the driver of its economic transformation. Because similar inorganic constraints and obstacles to freedom in Pakistan have resulted in none of the things that would spur economic growth. Is the ‘reduced freedoms and civil liberties theory of economic growth’ a plausible proposition? The test results are already in on this one. Hard no.

From 2016 till now, Pakistanis have been treated to various doctrines and narratives about stability and the need for the country to make a big change toward focusing on the economy.

And, to be fair, some of the things necessary to make this transition possible have happened. Certainly, the actions necessary to help Pakistan become compliant with various international regimes, largely anchored in UNSC Resolution 1267 have taken place.

Yet, prior to this era of compliance, there was at least a decade and a half worth of advocacy by thinkers, writers, politicians, and various other activists for such compliance. Those voices were labelled traitorous and treasonous. From roughly 2011 onwards, those labels weren’t just organic reactions of overly sensitive natsec hawks within wider civil society. Those labels were generated, promoted, and aggressively marketed by unknown and unidentifiable sources to help tar and feather politicians like Nawaz Sharif. All this is in addition to the long-term project of tarring and feathering all politicians as both corrupt and stupid (none of this is to suggest that those politicians have not done more than their part in fulfilling the results frameworks for this long-term project).

Yet the apparent raison d’etre for the post-2016 era of stifled freedoms and restricted civil liberties was the need to rein in the wilder elements of the national discourse, protect the nation from the various sources of fifth-generation warfare, and help build national stability constructed on the back of an exciting, urban, middle-class set of assertions about the key problem set in Pakistan: corruption and economic incompetence. But did this era bring the country stability or an end to corruption?

Clearly, it did not. The PML-N ran an ‘Absolutely Not’ campaign against the 2018 election result to help free its leader from jail. The PTI is running a ‘Vote ko Izzat Do’ campaign because its leader was freed from the PM Office. Sugar, wheat, and real-estate mafias that began with buying up BPS 20 officers four decades ago now own the full spectrum of the great and the good.

China cannot muscle India into a BRICS Plus meeting invite for Pakistan but Iran gets a seat at the SCO table, the Afghanistan table, and the baby chair Narendra Modi has set up to nurse continued Persian duplicity in the region. These are the economic, strategic, and discourse fruits of the post-2016 ‘consensus’ or stability package that Pakistan has swallowed.

What is so different about Bangladesh that it has been able to chart a different path? Part of the answer may be in who PM Hasina is. She is the daughter of her country’s leading revolutionary freedom fighter. Her work is not informed solely by the need to hold power, but for that power to serve a wider, almost-messianic dedication to legacy and memory.

Notwithstanding how wealthy her relatives have become, notwithstanding how nasty Bangladesh may have become for her opponents, and no matter the working conditions in the factories that have fueled the GDP per capita rise in Dhaka and across the country. Political will in Bangladesh is borne of real, visceral conviction to be a great nation.

What is the mirror image of political will here in Pakistan? What motivated the post-2016 era of stability-seeking interventions in politics and the economy? This isn’t clear.

Certainly, peace in the country and the region is often cited as important. But this importance is not what Pakistani soldiers and citizens have experienced. The TTP has made a significant comeback. The separatist insurgents in parts of Balochistan are stronger today than they were then. The economy is getting rag-dolled as much by global commodity prices and contra-inflation measures as by turnover. Eight finance ministers in six years: Ishaq Dar, Miftah Ismail, Shamshad Akhtar, Asad Umar, Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, Hammad Azhar, Shaukat Tareen, Miftah Ismail.

And so here we are nearly six years since the beginning of this era. Many would argue this era’s primary defining feature has been instability. Pakistan has experienced backsliding in relations with Saudi Arabia, the UEA, China, and the United States. Three decades of empathy and understanding for the Taliban has helped secure a Mullah Yaqub in Kabul that is laying a red carpet for Afghanistan-India defence cooperation. Politicians that spent the 1990s asking the nation to make sacrifices are watching as their children ask the same nation, but with double, the number of people, to make what? That’s right: more sacrifices.

Sacrifice. Pakistani children are already among the least well-nourished, least educated, and least healthy on the planet. Pakistani women remain disconnected from the economy, from banking, finance, from savings and from investments. Pakistani minorities stare at the flag wondering at what the emptiness of colour on it means for their children. Those who can flee? Do.

Every one of Pakistan’s peer countries on the planet, including Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, and Thailand (the BRICS Plus invitees) were once trying to catch up with Pakistan – some until quite recently. Every single one, and especially Bangladesh, has surged far ahead.

There are lessons to be learned from the failures of the last six years. But can Pakistanis nurture the audacity to learn them?

The writer is an analyst and commentator.

Following Bangladesh model: The truth is uncomfortable

A lot of people ask why Bangladesh has been able to manufacture over a decade of economic growth enabling political stability. Part of the answer casts the intensity and transformative nature of the Sheikh Hasina era in a light that is more...

www.geo.tv

Read the article multiple times.... where is the analysis? Seems like political axe grinding to me...

Why do bangalis have to constantly invade every topic and spew venom against pakistan? This topic has 0 to do with bengal. Idk why mods allow such off rail discussion to take place.

If bangladesh is such a great place then why are millions of you beggars invading india? Why are there millions of illegal bangladeshis in pakistan karachi and punjab??? There are almost no pakistanis or indians risking their lives to go to your swampland but bengalis would risk almost anything to go to neighboring countries that are “poorer” than yours…. Whats a joke.

This is the aukat of your people-

Bangladeshis in India - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Bengalis in Pakistan - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

BD is always in top 5 of biggest foreign aid receivers-

Which Countries Provide and Receive the Most Foreign Aid?

The most basic foreign aid definition states that it is “resources given from one country to another.” These resources include money, materials, and manpower that are donated to developing countries around the world.

www.wristband.com

Please worry abt making sure your country doesnt sink into the ocean before worrying about pakistan. Close to 10% of your population are already swimming with fishes-

7 million in Bangladesh need aid after 'worst floods in memory,' Red Cross says

More than 7 million people in Bangladesh are in desperate need of shelter and emergency relief after what one aid agency has described as the worst flooding to hit South Asia in living memory.

amp.cnn.com

It would serve you and your countey better if you worried about yourselves. Maybe to to a bangladeshi forum and post there?

Mods please ban members who flamebait also why does it seem that half of new threads are bangladesh related? This is a Pakistani forum. Maybe mods should sell this forum away and rename it defence.BD

Article was written by a PK and posted in PK newspaper. I dont think any BD is trolling here.

Heres a tip.... you can simply ignore the treads you dont like.

 

[PadmaBridge]

A major difference is also existence of regionally dominant parties in Pakistan. BD has no eqivalent of PPP of PMLN whos main voting base is Sindh and Punjab respectively.

AL BNP and Jamat are far less regionally dominant than its Pakistani counterparts. When AL and BNP win or loose it usually result of national level voting trend and never because of of a single region.

What Pakistan need is political parties that are reasonably well supported by people in all provinces.

You are going to have regional parties in a non homogenous country.

Fact of life.

In US, democrats dominate the coastal areas. And Republicans dominate the interior. Have huge cultural differences and constantly fight culture wars. Also fought a bloody civil war.

In U.K., conservatives dominate England, Scottish nationalists have a monopoly in Scotland, Labour dominate Wales. And none of the “national parties” have a presence in Northern Ireland. U.K. WILL break up in this decade.

India is even more ungovernable! Hence Modi’s xenophobia towards Muslims as a desperate attempt to unite the “Hindus”. Which has put India towards the path of genocide. They had a dry run during covid!

Bangladesh has national parties because it’s a homogeneous country. Despite the corruption - things are super efficient - especially for businesses - because they don’t need to cater to local whims.

 

[bluesky]

BDians have slave mentality hence they went for a negotiated settlement with India (in other words accepted what India offered) . We may become a little poor due to our defence spending and fight with India but we will never compromise on Kashmir. Finally we are a nuke power while BD is not. BD will always be at the mercy of India.

And, Pakistanis have a Master mentality but lost all its wars against Hindu India. Please do something good to prove yourselves as a capable nation.

We are proving our worth, but then what are you doing except blaming other countries on false premise?

 

[PadmaBridge]

And, Pakistanis have Master mentality but lost all its wars again Hindu India. Please do something good to prove yourselves as a capable nation.

We are proving our worth, but then what are you doing except blaming other countries on false premise?

1965?

Albeit with significant support from Bengalis.

 

[bluesky]

1965?

Albeit with significant support from Bengalis.

Do you think Pakistan even with Bengali troops won the 1965 war against India? Tell me which part of India west Pakistan occupied? East Bengal Regiment troops only stopped the IA troops from occupying Lahore.

But, Pakistan lost the war and sued for peace that was signed in Tashkent, the USSR being the middleman. All the wars were started by the brave Pakistanis but, not a single win.

India wants it this way so that the economy of Pakistan remains shabby. Pakistan is getting the results for its macho culture and it wants to provoke us into thinking that we will follow their bad examples.

They want to liberate Kashmir and Kashmiris know what the Pakistani troops did with their women in 1948.