My experience of debating you has mostly been you running off and hiding behind smileys.
Nearly 10 years here and still have not run off Sir. The smileys are intended to keep things light instead of situations where lop-sided and selective rule enforcements ruin any fledgling debate that does not return the desired outcomes. We can try aagain, if you wish, without smileys from me.
Contrary to your thought Pakistan is very much in the cross hairs and is being/ will be mauled in the process. This investment that you talk about and social indexes are good to an extent but there are multiple factors not allowing this to happen. We have been in the neighbourhood of a war for the last 5 decades and 80000 souls and trillions of dollars in damages of various sorts testify to the ravages of this war on this country.
Pakistan's main existential threats continue to gain force from within it, and thus there is no need to snipe at it from the outside. The ravages of war that you describe were the result of the decisions made by the military, were they not?
You are absolutely right about our financial woes and all the factors which will improve this. The most important is peace in the region which is why we are trying to offer all help possible to resolve the Afghan issue. Till there is peace there will be no growth as no one will bring money in to invest into a country where people are being killed left right and centre on a weekly if not daily basis.
To be truthful, people are no longer being killed left and right as they once were as the law and order situation has indeed improved considerably. And yet the economic output and social development remain in the doldrums. The reasons, again, are all internal: misplaced priorities, siphoning off of resources by and entrenched exploitative elite. and an intentionally misguided and deprived population that is amenable to be molded as needed. Peace in Afghanistan cannot do much to change this basic milieu in any significant form, and is merely a red herring to blame for the time being, that is all.
There are many internal issues corruption topping them closely followed by mismanagement. When this mismanagement comes from the top in the form of Khardari and Ganja Shareef it adds to the woes of an already broken system. IK maybe a beginning but certainly no saviour or management genius and therein lies the problem.
Corruption and mismanagement are the favorite whipping entities for now, but the mechanisms with which Zardari, NS and IK were all given turns at being the figureheads remain exactly the same. What is decried as a broken system is actually a finely tuned system that continues to deliver exactly the intentioned results it is designed to achieve.
You state that there will be no war between US and China without realizing the war is already on. It is a war for supremacy of the world and yes it might not take a confrontation but then most modern wars are led by narrative which is what the US is trying to build. The aim to my inexpert eye appears to be to claw back market share from the Chinese but the ultimate aim is protection of the US dollar a run on which would bring the US down like a house of cards. It will maul China as well as it holds a couple of trillion dollars of US debt, as the rest of the world but the real thing to see is how far both are going to go to achieve their respective aims.
There is no open war, and indeed there is unlikely to be one. Economic supremacy is the name of the game China and USA remains each other's biggest trading partners for a reason. One side gets cheap goods and the other avoid social unrest by keeping tens of millions of new entrants into the job market occupied each year. That is why China buys up all the T-bond issues it can to help ensure there is no run on the dollar that will affect it greatly too. As for the rest of the world, the new Chinese camp can be larger than the one that USSR had at the height of the Cold War, and yet would still amount to the same - not very much, in the greater scheme of things. But we will have to wait and see how far each side is willing to go to further their respective aims.
You blow the US trumpet as usual but do not realize the world is fast moving away from the clutches of the US. Whether it is into the clutches of China remains to be seen as it is in the nature of world domination that you keep the reigns of nations in your hands. Will we be any better off again remains to be seen
Or may be the fable of the world moving away is just that - a fable? Although hypothetical at this point, China as an overlord will be a huge departure from what the gullible are expecting as an alternative fable. But, as you said, I agree, that it remains to be seen.
However while the fight is on going many nations will fall victim to the machinations of the 2 nations. This is where I think Pakistan is currently trying to keep a neutral position but will soon have to take sides. At what point and at what price and to what end is what needs to be seen.
Meanwhile all of us are in for a whirlwind of a ride with economies taking a hit from the movements and reallignments taking place. I dont see China losing out on this round but at what level of devastation will the Sino/US teams sit together and sort out a balance is something I cannot determine. The fear remains that a spark might lead to a skirmish which might lead to a full blown exchange. Once that happens it will be a free for all. There may be an element in the West which might want to see exactly that happenning. The outcome in that case will be total and uttef devastation.
A
Both China and USA, are only going to serve their own national interests, as always and just like all other nations. What you regard as Pakistan trying to keep a neutral position is clearly a firm entry into the Chinese camp for the past several years. What it is hoping for is a bidding war to improve its outcomes as a self-perceived fulcrum. I can predict that it will be sorely disappointed by both sides in this endeavor, but it is indeed welcome to try. The Chinese economic miracle is only a function of its open trade with the West, and its own internal market is not yet mature enough to keep it going independently. That may, of course, change in the future, buts its demographic changes in the coming two decades will make it unlikely. While you are right there might be skirmishes along the way,. I am quite confident that saner minds will continue to prevail in preventing a more widespread conflict.
As for Pakistan, its economic situation continues to go from hopeless to even worse day by day. While there might still be a reason to hope for a change it this steady decline, the fact that there is no inkling of any change in priorities or effort to improve the situation is reaffirmed by the same continuous rearranging of the face and deck chairs. The result remain entirely predictable. If there is any saving grace in this abysmal situation, it is that both China and USA agree that preventing sudden chaos in Pakistan is a shared goal. Hence, a steady decline that is manageable may be a desirable outcome.
