WHY do some states progress rapidly while others like Pakistan stagnate? The role of natural, physical, financial and human capital in this regard
is clear. However, many analysts assign a key role to social capital too even if it is tougher to define, measure and show its links to national progress. Most define it as reservoirs of shared values, trust, cooperation, and reciprocity in society. Such reservoirs
help reduce the costs of social, economic and political interaction among people and groups, enhance predictability and reduce the loss of resources in friction…..
All this leads to greater national productivity and hence faster progress. But their absence creates societal conflict and makes it tough to even accumulate physical, financial and human capital or benefit fully from natural
Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and India have done better than Afghanistan, Nepal and Pakistan due to their fewer vertical and horizontal
cleavages. Bangladesh comes closest in SAARC to being a nation-state. These three states also undertook land reforms. Finally, they have seen greater democratic rule than other SAARC states. This has helped them build bridges of trust and cooperation
across their natural cleavages…
If Pakistan has to have any hopes of making even limited progress like the three better-off SAARC states,
it will first have to reduce their heavy political boot prints. The resulting political arena consisting of even mere procedural democracy, free polls and civilian sway will help Pakistan first accumulate social and then the other forms of capital needed to
ensure progress. All grand plans to attract investment and build human and physical capital will keep floundering if social capital and political stability are not developed…
All about political U-Turns and sucking up to Armed forces. If one thing is sure, it is that the Armed Forces will be the ‘State’. Politicians will continue begging the Establishment
for survival. If politicians think that they can dare to dream otherwise, they will be turned into beggars.