ZAB's Nationalization of 1972 and the Pakistan Before That

[Meengla]

Recently I butted head with several PDF senior guys in a thread. In that thread, I asserted that if today's Pakistan even exists, it was because of the Ayub Khan era of 1958-1969. My argument was that the Pakistan of pre 1958, especially between 1951-1958 was in a dangerous downward spiral but Ayub not only stabilized the political environment but his contributions to the economy were huge. I believe Pakistan would have a different path forward--a very prosperous one had ZAB not nationalized major industries. Yes, there is the fabled '22 families controlling most wealth' blah blah but where was the wealth before that? Some member here even accused me of from a military background and I had to counter them--I am not.

If you want to know my background, then, without disclosing too much: It is Urdu speaking background, born and raised in Karachi. Both parents and their elders came from India after 1947 and both came with money and expertise to start textile businesses as did dozens of other relatives--yes, there were literally dozens of textile mills of various sizes in Karachi, started by my immigrant grandparents' generation. They were not feudal like most of the Pakistan was. Industries were established by them and workers were hired irrespective of their ethnic background. I will also add that mother's side of relative had established at least seven industrial units in Karachi.

All that changed with Bhutto's ill-advised nationalization of 1972. Here, a Punjabi Mujeeb ur Rehman Shami is giving credit to the generation of my immigrant grandparents, and also saying don't compare Pakistan with Bangladesh; I think he's hinting Pakistan has much more potential.

Needless to say, Mujeeb is endorsing the economic vitality in Pakistan due to the Ayub Khan era. This video is not only an affirmation of the role played by the Urdu speakers from India in Pakistan but also Mujeeb's advice to Pakistanis to stay positive! Mujeeb is at a very old age and he wants to speak the truth and be remembered for his words. I hope he, and journalists like him live long!

Pakistan Zindabad!

 

[TheSolution]

Ayub and Musharraf.

 

[K_Bin_W]

Agree about the 1972 nationalization it was/is the biggest blunder ever.

 

[SQ8]

How is the blunder of nationalization have anything to do with Pakistan survival due to Ayub Khan which you have not addressed?

Nor does bringing in some Punjabi have anything to do with actual on the ground realities or economics?

The reality is that Ayub’s “decade of development” while creating the illusion of growth actually self sabotaged itself:

1. Inequality: The economic policies under Ayub’s regime led to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, creating a class of powerful industrialists and landowners often referred to as the “22 families.” This unequal distribution of wealth exacerbated social tensions and eventually contributed to political instability - more on this below.

2. Dependency on Foreign Aid: The growth was heavily dependent on foreign aid and loans, particularly from the United States and other western countries. This dependence created a fragile economic structure prone to external shocks, as it was eventually influenced by changes in international relations and global economic conditions.

3. Agricultural Modernization Failures: While his “Green Revolution” increased productivity, it was largely adopted by the wealthier farmers who could afford the required technologies. Smaller and poorer farmers were left behind, leading to increased rural poverty and landlessness.

4. Neglect of Human Capital: The government didn’t invest adequately in areas like health and education. Over time, this neglect would limit Pakistan’s ability to maintain economic progress, as a healthy and educated workforce is crucial for long-term, sustainable development.

So, while Ayub Khan’s rule did lead to significant economic growth, the nature of this growth and the policy decisions made during his regime laid the groundwork for future economic and social problems. These factors rendered the economic boom potentially unsustainable.

 

[SaadH]

Ironic, since without Ayub, there won't be any ZAB.

ZAB was the original and most patronized of all sepoy's golden children. He was given such a free reign over the whole decade of 70's, that he ascended to the level of a civilian martial law administrator and became a true authoritarian dictator.

He alone called all the shots and took monumental decisions like Nationalization all by himself. He pocketed any and all aid money that came into Pakistan all under the auspices and blessings of the military.

 

[ziaulislam]

Recently I butted head with several PDF senior guys in a thread. In that thread, I asserted that if today's Pakistan even exists, it was because of the Ayub Khan era of 1958-1969. My argument was that the Pakistan of pre 1958, especially between 1951-1958 was in a dangerous downward spiral but Ayub not only stabilized the political environment but his contributions to the economy were huge. I believe Pakistan would have a different path forward--a very prosperous one had ZAB not nationalized major industries. Yes, there is the fabled '22 families controlling most wealth' blah blah but where was the wealth before that? Some member here even accused me of from a military background and I had to counter them--I am not.

If you want to know my background, then, without disclosing too much: It is Urdu speaking background, born and raised in Karachi. Both parents and their elders came from India after 1947 and both came with money and expertise to start textile businesses as did dozens of other relatives--yes, there were literally dozens of textile mills of various sizes in Karachi, started by my immigrant grandparents' generation. They were not feudal like most of the Pakistan was. Industries were established by them and workers were hired irrespective of their ethnic background. I will also add that mother's side of relative had established at least seven industrial units in Karachi.

All that changed with Bhutto's ill-advised nationalization of 1972. Here, a Punjabi Mujeeb ur Rehman Shami is giving credit to the generation of my immigrant grandparents, and also saying don't compare Pakistan with Bangladesh; I think he's hinting Pakistan has much more potential.

Needless to say, Mujeeb is endorsing the economic vitality in Pakistan due to the Ayub Khan era. This video is not only an affirmation of the role played by the Urdu speakers from India in Pakistan but also Mujeeb's advice to Pakistanis to stay positive! Mujeeb is at a very old age and he wants to speak the truth and be remembered for his words. I hope he, and journalists like him live long!

Pakistan Zindabad!

But question is did he nationalized because he wanted it or was it the military who wanted to do it?

Tough to know..
Regardless potential doesn't matter
Nigeria has unlimited oil one of the smartest people I know still poor !

Country as a whole is still confused..

still confused on whether to follow a consitution or not ..

still confused what system they want.....

still confused about capitalism vs socialism ...

still confused about corruption and rule of law..

 

[Meengla]

But question is did he nationalized because he wanted it or was it the military who wanted to do it?

He nationalized because it was part of the PPP Manifesto pre 1970 elections and that was the Zeitgeist of the 1960s globally: Counter-culturism, socialism, hippieism, and all kind of 'Leftist' ideas were globally present. Around the time the PPP was formed, in 1967, there was a powerful anti-Vietnam war movement in America and probably similar anti-war, Leftist dominant narrative, no doubt supported by the Soviets.

About the nationalization, ZAB did what he promised to do--that it turned out to be so disastrous for Pakistan is very unfortunate.

Pakistani military had almost certainly no role in Bhutto's policies: The military was defeated in 1971 and demoralized AND they asked ZAB to take power in the remaining Pakistan as a 'Civil Martial Law Administrator' because, technically, there was no 'Pakistan' left and whatever was left was under Yahya Khan's Martial Law.

How little people know as to why the military asked Bhutto to take power and how little they know as to why Bhutto had to be the Civil Martial Law Administrator.

 

[Meengla]

How is the blunder of nationalization have anything to do with Pakistan survival due to Ayub Khan which you have not addressed?

Nor does bringing in some Punjabi have anything to do with actual on the ground realities or economics?

The reality is that Ayub’s “decade of development” while creating the illusion of growth actually self sabotaged itself:

1. Inequality: The economic policies under Ayub’s regime led to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, creating a class of powerful industrialists and landowners often referred to as the “22 families.” This unequal distribution of wealth exacerbated social tensions and eventually contributed to political instability - more on this below.

2. Dependency on Foreign Aid: The growth was heavily dependent on foreign aid and loans, particularly from the United States and other western countries. This dependence created a fragile economic structure prone to external shocks, as it was eventually influenced by changes in international relations and global economic conditions.

3. Agricultural Modernization Failures: While his “Green Revolution” increased productivity, it was largely adopted by the wealthier farmers who could afford the required technologies. Smaller and poorer farmers were left behind, leading to increased rural poverty and landlessness.

4. Neglect of Human Capital: The government didn’t invest adequately in areas like health and education. Over time, this neglect would limit Pakistan’s ability to maintain economic progress, as a healthy and educated workforce is crucial for long-term, sustainable development.

So, while Ayub Khan’s rule did lead to significant economic growth, the nature of this growth and the policy decisions made during his regime laid the groundwork for future economic and social problems. These factors rendered the economic boom potentially unsustainable.

There are elements of truth in what you are saying. My main point has been, to be pro Ayub, is that if you compare what was before him--the era between 1951-1958 and the kind of 'leadership' was present, then Ayub was a huge improvement. One has to go back to the Pakistan of 1947 to realize where Pakistan was and the kind of threat it faced then and the feudal society it was.
Those who judge Ayub harshly don't take into factor what was before him and what followed him. American aid was given to others later but they squandered while Ayub did a lot for Pakistan.

But Ayub's gains were squandered by ZAB's nationalization. The video I quoted supports my assertion.

BTW, EVERYTHING in Pakistan has an ethnic angle! I, an Urdu speaker, praising a Pathan Ayub Khan, and my opinion of Ayub is supported, albeit indirectly, by a Punjabi have significance in a country where people are too prone to look through the prism of ethnic origin.

 

[Abdul Rehman Majeed]

Ayub and Musharraf.

Ayub, Zia and Musharaf's eras were the golden years of Pakistan.

 

[Meengla]

Ayub, Zia and Musharaf's eras were the golden years of Pakistan.

If you remove some of Zia's social policies, I'd have to say that as much as I hate Zia, his was an efficient economy compared with what followed him. Credit to be given when due.

Ayub and Musharraf were great. Not only they revived Pakistan and it's economy but they were also not socially backward.

Of course everything is relative! Compare those three with the civilians?? Having said that, I still believe most of Pakistan's problems are rooted in the untouchable Khakhis. That they may have ran efficient economies is bandaid, at best.

 

[S.Y.A]

1. Inequality: The economic policies under Ayub’s regime led to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, creating a class of powerful industrialists and landowners often referred to as the “22 families.” This unequal distribution of wealth exacerbated social tensions and eventually contributed to political instability - more on this below.

this point doesnt stand. most of the development in asian countries was done by a few families (samsung, hyundai, suzuki, honda, toyota, daewoo, mitusbishi, tata, birla, ambani etc).

the only reason this was an issue was because communism and socialism were on the rise, and it was in fashion to criticize and hate the rich. our so called intellectuals and all the newspapers used to have high praises for socialism, while shitting on the businessmen and industrialists. the labor will always be paid lower wages than the management staff, and the management staff will never be as rich as the owner. simple as that.

 

[S.Y.A]

But question is did he nationalized because he wanted it or was it the military who wanted to do it?

it was bhutto all the way. the military turned against him later. he had virtually complete control of the country post 1971.

 

[Jango]

Are you making a larger point that military governments bring more prosperity, or are only limiting to Ayub?

 

[S.Y.A]

Are you making a larger point that military governments bring more prosperity, or are only limiting to Ayub?

maybe only Ayub. could have done better in the field of economy.

Although a military dictator he wasnt a good military guy, he did indeed reformed it, improved training and merit etc. but failed in 1965 due to stupid decisions.

 

[Cash GK]

Recently I butted head with several PDF senior guys in a thread. In that thread, I asserted that if today's Pakistan even exists, it was because of the Ayub Khan era of 1958-1969. My argument was that the Pakistan of pre 1958, especially between 1951-1958 was in a dangerous downward spiral but Ayub not only stabilized the political environment but his contributions to the economy were huge. I believe Pakistan would have a different path forward--a very prosperous one had ZAB not nationalized major industries. Yes, there is the fabled '22 families controlling most wealth' blah blah but where was the wealth before that? Some member here even accused me of from a military background and I had to counter them--I am not.

If you want to know my background, then, without disclosing too much: It is Urdu speaking background, born and raised in Karachi. Both parents and their elders came from India after 1947 and both came with money and expertise to start textile businesses as did dozens of other relatives--yes, there were literally dozens of textile mills of various sizes in Karachi, started by my immigrant grandparents' generation. They were not feudal like most of the Pakistan was. Industries were established by them and workers were hired irrespective of their ethnic background. I will also add that mother's side of relative had established at least seven industrial units in Karachi.

All that changed with Bhutto's ill-advised nationalization of 1972. Here, a Punjabi Mujeeb ur Rehman Shami is giving credit to the generation of my immigrant grandparents, and also saying don't compare Pakistan with Bangladesh; I think he's hinting Pakistan has much more potential.

Needless to say, Mujeeb is endorsing the economic vitality in Pakistan due to the Ayub Khan era. This video is not only an affirmation of the role played by the Urdu speakers from India in Pakistan but also Mujeeb's advice to Pakistanis to stay positive! Mujeeb is at a very old age and he wants to speak the truth and be remembered for his words. I hope he, and journalists like him live long!

Pakistan Zindabad!

4 blenders in Pakistan history.
1 First 1971
2 Nationalization
3 1998 after atomic test frozen of Foreign Reserves
4 Removal of imran khan and turning people against its own army