‘Muslim leaders who managed Pakistan in the early years were all highly educated, with many of them having spent time at institutions abroad. In contrast, Mao Zedong did not even have a degree equivalent to matriculation. Our leaders should have known far more than the less educated Chinese, but that was not the case,’ regrets Ghulam Kibria

GHULAM KIBRIA likes to describe himself as a development consultant. His seven books look at the way countries have developed over the years. They also examine closely how some less fortunate countries, such as Pakistan, muffed opportunities that would have led to development. And yet, he is not an armchair analyst. He has hands-on experience of enabling communities, in the katchi abadis of Karachi and the hills of the NWFP, to become independent of the government by following what in today’s lingo is known as the unconventional mode of governance. In a recent interview with Dawn Magazine, he spoke at length about how Pakistan has fared in terms of overall development. Here are the excerpts:

Q: What is the unconventional way of achieving development?

A: I think I should first explain what I believe is the conventional way of achieving development. Most countries getting independence after World War II were underdeveloped, some more than the others. In order to develop, they begged the developed Western nations, especially the US, for ‘aid’. This actually consisted of loans for development along with investment as well as ‘transfer of technology’. The countries seeking aid included Pakistan.

The United States obliged Pakistan by providing loans, though no so-called ‘transfer of technology’ took place. Half-a-century on, Pakistan is still under-developed. Besides, it has accumulated a lot of debt which it is in no position to pay back. Even for debt-servicing, Pakistan has to borrow money. Let us keep in mind that Pakistan was debt-free in 1947. Because of its inability to repay its debts, Pakistan has had to mortgage its independence to the United States. It has also had to carry out American orders even if they have gone against vital national interests.

On the other hand, China never allowed itself to become dependent on foreign aid. Today, it is the world’s fifth-largest economy. The Chinese economy is growing so fast that economists in the US fear that by the year 2020 it would probably overtake the American economy.

At the time of independence in October 1949, China was a totally devastated country after twenty years of savage international and civil wars. It inherited a collapsed law and order situation and whatever poor human resources and social and economic infrastructure — railways, roads, teaching institutions, administrative setup, judiciary and economy — it had before the wars, was very badly, and, in many cases, irreparably damaged by the wars. Pakistan’s inheritance was far superior to whatever China had before the wars.

Let it also be kept in mind that China, having been reborn as a communist country, became America’s enemy. American fleets blockaded the whole Chinese coast with the intention of ensuring the country’s quick economic collapse. China’s sole source of help was the erstwhile USSR, which was itself a devastated country, and couldn’t help much. In less than 10 years, whatever little help it could offer stopped after its row with China over the interpretation and practice of communism. China, which has achieved so much economic prosperity, never begged for American aid and ‘transfer of technology’.
 

Q. What factors are responsible for China’s rapid development?

A. The Chinese leadership that sprang from amongst the people knew its needs and capacity very well. Having deeply studied the philosophy and mechanics of development, the leaders knew that a strong foundation for effective development is a society’s social and intellectual strength as is the creation of stakes for the people in the development of their country.
 

Q. You said Pakistan had inherited a better infrastructure at the time of its creation than China. Could you tell us about the assets that Pakistan had in 1947?

A. What I am going to submit here is based on highly reliable documents, mainly official papers and other equally dependable books. The assets inherited by Pakistan at the time of its creation were in the public sector as well as in the private sector. The human resources were highly qualified, and included experienced engineers with an equally experienced supporting staff consisting of contractors, workmen and technicians. Material sources included flourishing agriculture and machinery to manufacture engineering goods. Intellectual resources comprized a chain of schools and colleges and three universities with research facilities and experienced teachers and professors.

Let us look at the public sector first. There were highly experienced engineers with the capability to design, and with the help of contractors, dig canals, construct roads and lay railway lines along with connected infrastructure like dams, barrages, bridges, tunnels, etc.

The railway engineers had the capability to design and manufacture railway rolling stock locomotives, carriages and other things with the help of workmen and technicians, numbering at least 20,000.

Material resources included the world’s largest canal network, as well as an extensive railway and road network, which was better and bigger than that of India. Because of the canal network, the western and bigger half of Punjab, which was dubbed as the ‘granary of India’, grew extremely large quantities of food grains. Sindh and the Bahawalpur state produced enough cotton to feed more than half the Indian textile mills.

Material resources in the public sector included the Mughulpura Railway Workshop, one of the largest workshops in India, which had the finest machinery in India capable of not only producing railway rolling stock, but also various types of plants.

Coming to the private sector, its human resources included hundreds of highly-trained technicians who could manufacture many types of machinery and plants, and entrepreneurs who were running dozens of manufacturing units, with whatever little they, their families and friends could muster.

Material resources in the private sector were machine tools, and some precision tools, in scores of industrial units manufacturing diesel engines, electric fans, cinema projectors, ice plants, soda water plants, small flour mills, oil expellers, and small rice husking mills. They could manufacture other plants and machinery on special orders, like a 200-ton hydraulic press, components of a plywood factory, etc.

Intellectual resources included a chain of schools and colleges spread across the country. There was one university in East Pakistan and two in West Pakistan. They all had experienced teachers and professors, some of them had great research expertise.

I would like to emphasize that the intellectual resources, being of paramount importance, required drastic expansion on a top priority basis. This, sadly, did not happen.
 

Q. How do you think the leadership of Pakistan has utilized what you call the rich resources of the country after Partition?

A. Muslim leaders who led Pakistan before and after 1947 were all highly educated. Many of them were educated at well-known seats of learning in the United Kingdom, the United States and other European countries. They should have known far more than the less-educated Chinese leaders. For instance, Mao Zedong, the top Chinese leader, did not even have a degree equivalent to matriculation.

What was needed was making education compulsory, which is also an Islamic necessity, for every Pakistani. For adult illiterates, night schools should have been established all over the country with simultaneous and rapid increase in the number of all types of educational institutions, specially research organizations. Equally important were fast societal changes and introduction of equality in society. This is especially essential as in an Islamic society all human beings are equal. It would mean erasing the caste system, the confiscation of land from absentee landowners, many of whom possessed thousands of acres of land, and the equitable distribution of land among the real cultivators, the peasants.

Then there were the services of engineers and contractors with their connected staff to be exported to so many countries that had acquired freedom around the same time, most importantly China and Indonesia, which required railways and roads and some, like China, also a canal network. It would not only have been a source of considerable foreign exchange, but would also have earned friends for Pakistan.

The next important source, also in the public sector, for earning foreign exchange was railway rolling stock. This, too, could have started very early on after Partition by motivating railway workshop engineers and technicians by employing them and ensuring their fullest participation.
 

Q. It is often argued that Pakistan’s dependence on foreign aid has robbed it of its sovereignty and ability to follow an economic policy which is in the national interest. What do you think?

A. It is a great pity that on October 7, 1947, the government of Pakistan sent a special envoy to the United Stares with a begging bowl and a humble request for two billion dollars. Those who don’t believe me would do well to refer to the sixth page of the American State Department’s internal memo No 845-F-51/10-2747 dated October 8, 1947, which available in the department’s archives. Or if they believe a Pakistani, they could refer to the book, titled America Pakistan Relations, Vol I, that has been edited by K. Arif (P5, Vanguard).

The loan was begged for “primarily defence, and secondly economic development ... The country [Pakistan] would also need assistance of the large American oil interests to develop and exploit its immense oil resources”.

I would humbly request the readers to note that Pakistan’s leadership made ‘defence’ and ‘economic development’ subservient to the American government, and Pakistan’s ‘immense oil resources’ were mortgaged to ‘the large American interests’. But, hold your breath, the final sentence in the request is, “What is needed is finance, and more than that, a regular source of finance”. Those who knew Americans then and know them now, are aware that in the American lexicon there are no free lunches. Even today Pakistan continues to pay for that ‘lunch’ apart from surrendering its independence.

But let me add that in spite of the hurdles put in their way by bureaucrats, feudals, crony capitalists and generals, Pakistan’s common people — its labourers, technicians, small factory owners — continue to be enterprising. Had this not been the case, the multinationals would not have been able to have their plants fabricated in Pakistan.
 

Q. All the ills that ail Pakistani society are often laid at the door of dictatorship. But a lot of people believe that Pakistan made a great deal of progress during Ayub Khan’s rule. Your comments?

A. As far as I am concerned, the Decade of Development was nothing but decayed development. But more important is the fact that political parties are supposed to provide people with awareness. Sadly, this job was not done properly by the All India Muslim League, which is credited with the creation of Pakistan. It was established by the nawabs and the elite. It was headed by the moneyed people who were out of touch with the masses.

Those who took over the party in 1937 continued to be in office till 1947. No elections for office-bearers of the All India Muslim League were held. It was not a democratic political party. The reason why Pakistan did not inherit a strong tradition of democracy after 1947 was that the All India Muslim League was not a democratic political party.