Pakistan's economic managers have accomplished what seemed almost impossible only a couple of years back. They have managed to retire this week a part of our costly debt amounting to $1.7 billion, saving in the process as much as $300 million in interest payment.
Under its debt management strategy evolved in recent years, the government is focusing all its fiscal efforts on getting rid of the high-cost debt at the earliest and, at the same time, borrowing for future needs on soft terms and without conditions attached.
This strategy, the government hopes, will enable it to restore the country's economic sovereignty and also allow it enough fiscal room to peruse the twin but inherently conflicting goals of growth and poverty alleviation. There is, indeed, a lot of logic and common sense in this approach.
Pakistan's chronic dependence on borrowed resources dates back to the 1950s when the country was getting all its defence equipment from the US almost free of cost and its wheat under PL480.
It was then that we ruined our agriculture and our taxation system by using the resources mobilized by selling the PL480 wheat in the open market to finance our annual budgets. As a result, from then onwards we needed to borrow hard currencies for food imports and from local banking sources to make up for the shortfalls in domestic savings. Most of the loans which we borrowed in this period and subsequently were, however, on very soft terms.
It was only in the 1990s - when we became the most sanctioned country in the world - that these soft loans dried up and we had to go around the world seeking commercial debt, thus putting an unbearable burden on our resources. Developments since 9/11 have proved to be a providential rescue for us from a hopeless economic situation.
So we have to be very careful this time while utilizing this wind-fall relief which perhaps would not last for long. However, continuing to keep a tight leash on public sector spending, especially in social sectors in order to be able to prepay loans of multilateral aid agencies like the ADB, is likely to prove counterproductive in the long run.
Controlling budgetary deficits is being prescribed as the panacea for all economic ills by the multilateral aid agencies and we seem to have blindly accepted the nostrum.
How does one explain then the fact that China's economy has been growing at a phenomenal rate year after year despite its very high budgetary deficits? Even India is maintaining a fairly high growth rate even while having very high budgetary deficits both at the centre and in the states.
One hopes the fiscal space gained as a result of generous debt rescheduling allowed to us in December 2001, the gradual accumulation of foreign exchange reserves since, and now with the beginning of the process of retirement of costly debts, is put to efficient use for the expansion of our socio-economic capacities in education, health and job generation without much loss of time. Incidentally, one always thought that the costly part of our debt related to our bilateral commercial borrowings in the 1990s. But to know that even the ADB was lending money to us on such harsh terms is rather shocking.