Inter Services Public Relations Relations documentary has won the first prize in the recently held International Film Festival "Eserciti-e-Popoli" (Army and People) held at Bracciano, Rome (Italy). The festival saw the participation of NATO and 24 Countries with 60 Films grouped into several categories: from ‘Institutional training information, from environmental protection to the humanitarian mission for peace. The films, produced by renowned film makers were evaluated by the international highly qualified and experienced jury.
Maintaining the tradition, Pakistan Army’s documentary "Glorious Resolve" received the Jury's Special award from the President of the Italian Senate with the citation "A technically outstanding and emotionally powerful dramatization of the story of the courageous soldiers under fire in a dire combat situation".. The award given by Gen. Giancarlo Fortuna, the President of the International Jury was received by a representative of the Pakistani Embassy in Roma.
Glorious Resolve was the joint venture of ISPR and Mindworks Media.Brigadier Syed Azmat Ali was the Executive Producer whereas Brig Syed Mujtaba Tirmizi was the Executive Director of the film. Lieutenant Colonel Irfan Aziz was the project director and the writer of this film which was amicably directed by Sarosh Kayani. Dr Hassan Waqas Rana of Mindworks Media was the producer whereas Bilal Lashari was the Director of Photography.
Based on a true operational account, Glorious Resolve highlights the epic of infantry soldiers, who fought against all odds even being heavily outnumbered when 1500 miscreants raided one of the section level outpost of an Infantry Battalion in South Waziristan Agency on the night of 29 May 2009. This documentary focuses not only on
the sacrifices and achievements of the Pakistan Army in War against Terrorism but also the Pakistan Army's glorious resolve to uproot the menace of terrorism from the land of the pure. It reenacts the sacrifice of jawans of 43 Punjab Regiment who laid their lives and the two Ghazis Sepoy Mashooq and Sepoy Muslim who held their positions till the reinforcements came.
ISPR’s Documentary that won Eserciti-e-Popoli award in flim festival held at Bracciano, Rome (Italy) – 27-11-2011 –
It's quite pathetic and sad that I'm forced to call you that, because the vast majority of this nation as well as myself don't regard you as a President let alone a sane human being fit to live in this world. How you got to where you are now was the... most disgusting display of corruption and heartlessness I have ever seen in my entire life, and I thought rigging polls were bad enough; you killed your own wife! Was that the only way you could have taken over Pakistan? By emotionally blackmailing people to voting for you and your corrupt party? It's hilarious to see you trying to compare yourself to the likes of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto or even Muhammad Ali Jinnah. You are in no way, shape or form even in the same universe as those people. As stuck up as Bhutto was, he did a lot for this nation and the youth responded to him. When he spoke of development and progress, they listened to him. When you speak, nobody gives a damn. Why? Because you're not really our President, you're just another guy who's filling up his Swiss Bank Account. Mister Ten Percent eh? More like Mister One Hundred Percent now. You promised us democracy, you failed. You promised us a stable economy, you failed. You promised us peace and security, you failed. You promised us a new age in politics, you failed. You promised to eradicate power outages, you failed. What good have you brought this nation? What Gunnah did the people of Pakistan commit to have you as the leader of this nation? Instead of doing what you promised, you have allowed American intelligence agencies to wreek havoc in Khyber Pakthunkhwa and now the rest of Pakistan sadly. And for what? So you can fill up your Swiss Bank Account with American dollars. How do you sleep every night? How do you sleep knowing that God is watching your every move? Do you have any shame? Don't you fear that one day what you have done you will be accountable for? I doesn't seem like it.I'm not criticizing you simply for the sake of it or because I belong to a rival party. Infact, all political parties in Pakistan are run by crooks and thieves be it Nawaz Sharif or any other. You all deserve to die...and die horrible deaths might I add.What I'm writing here is not only the sentiments of one person, but of an entire nation. Trust me on this one, you will pay for what you've done to Pakistan and if not in this life than in the next one surely. If you truly love Pakistan, which I honestly doubt you do, step down and admit to what you've done and what you are doing right now. But we all know it won't happen. You are not of that caliber as people like Quaid-e-Azam, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, Allama Iqbal, Abdul Sattar Edhi and countless others who have earned there way into the hearts of everyone in Pakistan. If you have no intention to change and help Pakistan and the people of this great country, then people like you belong in prison. They should rot there until they die, so then they can burn in hell for eternity after that, because that's where you're going - Hell. I'd start packing some ice if I were you. Do humanity a favour. Step down and get lost.
Thank You,
From The People of Pakistan
P.S: Take you retarded EMO son Bilawal Zardari with you
Dr. Ishrat Husain, a former World Bank senior official and an ex governor of the State Bank of Pakistan, wrote an article captioned "India, Pakistan: a comparison" at the end of the first five decades of two nations' existence as independent states. To my knowledge, Dr. Hussain has not done an update of his article since it was first published. Although about three years too late, this post is my attempt to present a comparison of the two South Asian nations after sixty years of independence.
Here is the opening paragraph from Dr. Husain's article from the late 1990s, which I believe still stands true today:
"India and Pakistan are completing five decades of their independence. Since the partition, the relationship between the two countries has been uneasy and characterized by a set of paradoxes. There is a mixture of love and hate, a tinge of envy and admiration, bouts of paranoia and longing for cooperation, and a fierce rivalry but a sense of proximity, too. The heavy emotional overtones have made it difficult to sift the facts from the myths and make an objective assessment. There are in fact only two extreme types of reactions on each side. Either there are those who always find that the grass is greener on the other side of the pasture or those who are totally dismissive of the accomplishments of the other side."
Not much has changed in the last ten years as far as the above paragraph is concerned. The relationship between the two nations remains as emotionally charged as ever.
Then Dr. Husain's essay talked about what he saw as the common successes of the two nations in the first fifty years:
1. Despite the prophets of gloom and doom on both sides of the fence, both India and Pakistan have succeeded in more than doubling their per capita incomes. This is a remarkable feat considering that the population has increased fourfold in case of Pakistan and threefold in India. Leaving aside the countries in East Asia and China, very few large countries have been able to reach this milestone.
2. The incidence of poverty (defined as $1 per day) has also been reduced significantly although the number of absolute poor remains astoundingly high. However, the level of poverty is lower in Pakistan.
3. Food production has not only kept pace with the rise in population but has surpassed it. Both countries, leaving aside annual fluctuations due to weather conditions, are self-sufficient in food. (Pakistan exports its surplus rice but imports small volumes of wheat).
4. Food self-sufficiency has been accompanied by improved nutritional status. Daily caloric and protein intake per capita has risen by almost one-third but malnourishment among children is still high.
5. The cracks in the dualistic nature of the economy -- a well-developed modern sector and a backward traditional sector -- are appearing fast in both the countries. A buoyant middle class is emerging. The use of modern inputs and mechanization of agriculture has been a leveling influence in this direction. But public policies have not always been consistent or supportive.
Here is the update to the above assessment:
1. Per capita incomes in both nations have more than doubled in the last ten years, in spite of significant increases in population. The most recent and detailed real per capita income data was calculated and reported by Asian Development Bank based on a detailed study of a list of around 800 household and nonhousehold products in 2005 and early 2006 to compare real purchasing power for ADB's trans-national income comparison program (ICP). The ABD ICP concluded that Pakistan had the highest per capita income at HK$ 13,528 (US $1,745) among the largest nations in South Asia. ADB reported India’s per capita as HK $12,090 (US $1,560). Nominal per capita GDP estimates for Pakistan range from US $1000 to US $1022, while the range for India is from US $ 1017 to US $ 1100. Purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita GDP estimates for Pakistan from various sources range from $2500 to $2644, while the same sources put the range for India's per capita GDP from $2780 to $2972. 2. The incidence of poverty (defined as $1.25 per day) has also come down in both nations, although the number of poor in South Asia still remains very high. According to the 2009 UN Human and Income Poverty Report, the people living under $1.25 a day in India is 41.6 percent, about twice as much as Pakistan's 22.6 percent. The most recent estimates by UNDP in Pakistan for 2007-2008 indicate poverty level at 17.2%.
3. Food production has barely kept pace with the rise of population, particularly in Pakistan. There have been higher food prices and shortages of various commodities such as wheat and sugar. There is widespread hunger and malnutrition in all parts of India. India ranks 66th on the 2008 Global Hunger Index of 88 countries while Pakistan is slightly better at 61 and Bangladesh slightly worse at 70. The first India State Hunger Index (Ishi) report in 2008 found that Madhya Pradesh had the most severe level of hunger in India, comparable to Chad and Ethiopia. Four states — Punjab, Kerala, Haryana and Assam — fell in the 'serious' category. "Affluent" Gujarat, 13th on the Indian list is below Haiti, ranked 69. The authors said India's poor performance was primarily due to its relatively high levels of child malnutrition and under-nourishment resulting from calorie deficient diets.
4. Though the nutritional status has improved in both nations, there are still very high levels of malnutrition, particularly among children. In spite of the fact that there is about 22% malnutrition in Pakistan and the child malnutrition being much higher at 40% (versus India's 46%), the average per capita calorie intake of about 2500 calories is within normal range. But the nutritional balance necessary for good health appears to be lacking in Pakistanis' dietary habits. Senior Indian official Syeda Hameed has acknowledged that Pakistan and Bangladesh have done better than India in meeting the nutritional needs of their populations.
5. India's economy has grown more rapidly than Pakistan's in the last ten years. However, both nations have accepted and implemented significant economic reforms that have opened up their economies and brought about rapid growth, more than doubling the size of each economy in the last ten years.
Dr. Husain's paper went on to talk about the common failures of the two countries in their first fifty years as follows:
The relatively inward-looking economic policies and high protection to domestic industry did not allow them to reap the benefits of integration with the fast-expanding and much larger world economy. This has changed particularly since 1991 but the control mind-set of the politicians and the bureaucrats has not changed. The centrally planned allocation of resources and "license raj" has given rise to an inefficient private sector that thrive more on contacts, bribes, loans from public financial institutions, lobbying, tax evasion and rent-seeking rather than on competitive behavior. Unless both the control mind-set of the government and the parasitic behavior of the private industrial entrepreneurs do not change drastically, the potential of an efficient economy would be hard to achieve. This can be accomplished by promoting domestic and international competition, reducing tariff and non-tariff barriers and removing constraints to entry for newcomers.
The weaknesses in governance in the legal and judicial system, poor enforcement of private property rights and contracts, preponderance of discretionary government rules and regulations and lack of transparency in decision making act as brakes on broad-based participation and sharing of benefits by the majority of the population.
In terms of fiscal management, the record of both the countries is less than stellar. Higher fiscal deficits averaging 7-8 percent of GDP have persisted for fairly long periods of time and crowded out private capital formation through large domestic borrowing. Defense expenditures and internal debt servicing continue to pre-empt large proportion of tax revenues with adverse consequences for maintenance and expansion of physical infrastructure, basic social services and other essential services that only the government can provide. The congested urban services such as water, electricity, transport in both countries are a potential source of social upheaval.
The state of financial sector in both countries is plagued with serious ills. The nationalization of commercial banking services, the neglect of credit quality in allocation decisions, lack of competition and inadequate prudential regulations and supervision have put the system under severe pressure and increased the share of non-performing assets in the banks’ portfolio. The financial intermediation role in mobilizing and efficiently allocating domestic savings has been seriously compromised and the banking system is fragile. Both countries are now taking steps to liberalize the financial sector and open it up to competition from foreign banks as well as private banks.
Here is the update on the areas of common failures of India and Pakistan:
Though the level of globalization of the two nations remains well below China's, both India and Pakistan have made significant strides in this direction. In Pakistan, exports account for less than 15% of gross domestic product, compared with about 25% in India and 40% in China, according former Musharraf economic adviser Salman Shah. The policy changes in both nations have also opened up greater FDI inflows, though Pakistan's FDI has declined in the last two years due to security perceptions, after several years of strong FDI inflows, particularly in banking, telecommunications, real estate and oil and gas sectors.
Both countries continue to run large budget deficits. India's fiscal deficit for 2008-2009 stood at 6.5 percent of gdp and it is rising, according to Bloomberg. Pakistan has said its fiscal deficit will widen to as much as 4.9% of gross domestic product in 2009-2010, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The banking sectors in both nations have seen major improvements in delivery of new services. India and Pakistan have ranked 31 and 34 respectively, out of 52 countries in the World Economic Forum's first Financial Development Report. Both nations are ranked ahead of the Russian Federation (35), Indonesia (38), Turkey (39), Poland (41), Brazil (40), Philippines (48) and Kazakhstan (45).
Consumer and commercial credit availability and retail services have improved in the last ten years. Microfinance sectors are now well established in South Asia, helping fight poverty, and empowering women economically.
Both nations are suffering from poor governance resulting in lack of responsiveness to the basic needs of the vast majority of their people. In fact, the latest Human Development Report for 2009 shows that both major South Asian nations have slipped further down relative to other regions of the world. Pakistan's HDI ranking dropped 3 places from 138 last year to 141 this year, and India slipped six places from 128 in 2008 to 134 this year.
The level of urbanization in Pakistan is now the highest in South Asia, and its urban population is likely to equal its rural population by 2030, according to a report titled ‘Life in the City: Pakistan in Focus’, released by the United Nations Population Fund. Pakistan ranks 163 and India at 174 on a list of over 200 countries compiled by Nationmaster. The urban population now contributes about three quarters of Pakistan's gross domestic product and almost all of the government revenue. The industrial sector contributes over 27% of the GDP, higher than the 19% contributed by agriculture, with services accounting for the rest of the GDP.
The increasing urbanization has had the effect of defusing the "population bomb" in Pakistan. With increasing urbanization, Pakistan's population growth rate has declined from 2.17% in 2000 to 1.9% in 2008. Based on PAI Research Commentary by Karen Hardee and Elizabeth Leahy, the total fertility rate (TFR) in Pakistan is still the highest in South Asia at 4.1 children per woman. Women in urban areas have an average of 3.3 children compared to their rural counterparts, who have an average of 4.5 children. The overall fertility rate has been cut in half from about 8 children per woman in 1960s to about 4 this decade, according to a study published in 2009.
Third, Dr. Husain turned his attention to the areas where India surpassed Pakistan:
There is little doubt that the scientific and technological manpower and research and development institutions in India are far superior and can match those of the western institutions. The real breakthrough in the Indian export of software after the opening up of the economy in 1991 attests to the validity of the proposition that human capital formation accompanied by market-friendly economic policies can lift the developing countries out of low-level equilibrium trap.
Indian scientists working in India excel in the areas of defense technology, space research, electronics and avionics, genetics, telecommunications, etc. The number of Ph.Ds produced by India in science and engineering every year -- about 5,000 -- is higher than the entire stock of Ph.Ds in Pakistan. The premier research institutions in Pakistan started about the same time as India have become hotbed of internal bickerings and rivalries rather than generator of ideas, processes and products.
Related to this superior performance in the field of scientific research and technological development is the better record of investment in education by India. The adult literacy rate, female literacy rate, gross enrollment ratios at all levels, and education index of India have moved way ahead of Pakistan. Rapid decline in total fertility rates in India has reduced population growth rate to 1.8 percent compared to 3.0 percent for Pakistan.
Health access to the population and infant mortality rates are also better in India and thus the overall picture of social indicators, although not very impressive by international standards, emerges more favorable. The two most important determinants of Pakistan’s dismal performance in social development are its inability to control population growth and the lack of willingness to educate girls in the rural areas.
Here's the update on areas where India was ahead of Pakistan ten years ago:
In response to the growing concerns about the nation lagging in higher education achievement, Pakistan launched Higher Education Reform led by Dr. Ata ur Rahman, adviser to President Musharraf in 2002. This reform resulted in over fivefold increase in public funding for universities, with a special emphasis on science, technology and engineering. The reform supported initiatives such as a free national digital library and high-speed Internet access for universities as well as new scholarships enabling more than 2,000 students to study abroad for PhDs — with incentives to return to Pakistan afterward. The years of reform have coincided with increases in the number of Pakistani authors publishing in research journals, especially in mathematics and engineering, as well as boosting the impact of their research outside Pakistan.
Although India has about 270 million illiterate adults, India's overall literacy rate is better than Pakistan's. Pakistan's population of illiterate adults is estimated at 47 million, fourth largest after India's 270 million, China's 71 million, Bangladesh's 49 million, according to the latest UNESCO Education For All report for 2010.
But India remains significantly ahead of Pakistan in higher education, with six universities, mostly IITs, ranked among the top 400 universities of the world versus only one from Pakistan, National University of Science and Technology(NUST) ranked at 350, up from 375 last year. Replication of NUST campuses, like the IIT campuses in India, can help spawn more highly rated institutions of higher learning near major cities in Pakistan.
Pakistan's information technology industry is quite young. It is in very early stages of development compared to the much older and bigger Indian IT industry, which had a significant headstart of at least a decade over Pakistan. During the lost decade of the 1990s under Bhutto and Sharif governments, Pakistani economy stagnated and its IT industry did not make any headway. However, the industry has grown at 40% CAGR during the 2001-2007, and it is estimated at $2.8 billion as of last year, with about half of it coming from exports. This pales in comparison to over $5 billion revenue a year reported by India's Tata Consulting alone.
India's literacy rate of 61% is well ahead of Pakistan's 50% rate. In higher education, six Indian universities have made the list of the top 400 universities published by Times Higher Education Supplement this year. Only one Pakistani university was considered worthy of such honor.
Pakistan has consistently scored lower on the HDI sub-index on education than its overall HDI index. It is obvious from the UNDP report and other sources that Pakistan's dismal record in enrolling and educating its young people, particularly girls, stands in the way of any significant positive development in the nation. The recent announcement of a new education policy that calls for more than doubling the education spending from about 3% to 7% of GDP is a step in the right direction. However, money alone will not solve the deep-seated problems of poor access to education, rampant corruption and the ghost schools that only exist on paper, that have simply lined the pockets of corrupt politicians and officials. Any additional money allocated must be part of a broader push for transparent and effective delivery of useful education to save the people from the curses of poverty, ignorance and extremism which are seriously hurting the nation.
A basic indicator of healthcare is access to physicians. There are 80 doctors per 100,000 population in Pakistan versus 60 in India, according to the World Health Organization. For comparison with the developed world, the US and Europe have over 250 physicians per 100,000 people. UNDP recently reported that life expectancy at birth in Pakistan is 66.2 years versus India's 63.4 years.
Access to healhcare in South Asia, particularly due to the wide gender gap, presents a huge challenge, and it requires greater focus to ensure improvement in human resources. Though the life expectancy has increased to 66.2 years in Pakistan and 63.4 years in India, it is still low relative to the rest of the world. The infant mortality rate remains stubbornly high, particular in Pakistan, though it has come down down from 76 per 1000 live births in 2003 to 65 in 2009. With 320 mothers dying per 100,000 live births in Pakistan and 450 in India, the maternal mortality rate in South Asia is very high, according to UNICEF.
Finally, Dr. Hussain addressed areas where he thought Pakistan was ahead of India fifty years after independence as follows:
The economic growth rate of Pakistan has been consistently higher than India. Starting from almost the same level or slightly lower level in 1947, Pakistan’s per capita income today in US nominal dollar terms is one-third higher (430 versus 320) and in purchasing parity dollar terms is two-third higher (2,310 versus 1,280). The latter suggests that the average Pakistani has enjoyed better living standards and consumption levels in the past but the gap may be narrowing since early 1990s. Had the population growth rate in Pakistan been slower and equaled that of India, this gap would have been much wider and the per capita income in Pakistan today would have been twice as high and the incidence of poverty further down.
Although both India and Pakistan have pursued inward-looking strategies, the anti-export bias in case of Pakistan has been comparably lower and the integration with the world market faster. The trade-GDP ratio in PPP terms is twice that of all South Asian countries. Pakistan’s export growth has been stronger and the composition of exports has shifted from primary to manufactured goods; albeit the dominance of cotton-based products has enhanced its vulnerability.
Domestic investment rates in Pakistan have remained much below those of India over the entire span primarily due to the relatively higher domestic savings rates in the latter. But the efficiency of investment as measured by the aggregate incremental capital-output ratio or total factor productivity has been higher in case of Pakistan and, to some extent, compensated the lower quantity of investment.
Here's the update on the above assessment:
Although Pakistan's economy has more than doubled in the last decade, the nation's economic growth has been slower than India's since the 1990s. Since 2008, Pakistan's economy has, in the words of the Economist, returned to the "bad old days" of the lost decade of 1990s. According to Economic Survey 2008-09, presented by Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin, Pakistan's economy grew by a mere 2.0 percent, barely keeping pace with population growth. The growth fell significantly short of the 4.5 percent target for the year, which was already very modest compared with an average of 7% economic growth witnessed from 2001-2008.
While it lags behind China, India now exports a larger percentage of its GDP than Pakistan. In Pakistan, exports account for less than 15% of gross domestic product, compared with about 25% in India and 40% in China, according former Musharraf economic adviser Salman Shah.
At 30% of GDP, Indians continue to save twice as much as Pakistanis who save about 15%. Indians' private savings provide a much larger pool for domestic investments than the much smaller private savings in Pakistan.
Let me conclude with an excerpt from a British writer William Dalrymple's article, published on 14 August, 2007 in The Guardian:
"On the ground, of course, the reality is different and first-time visitors to Pakistan are almost always surprised by the country's visible prosperity. There is far less poverty on show in Pakistan than in India, fewer beggars, and much less desperation. In many ways the infrastructure of Pakistan is much more advanced: there are better roads and airports, and more reliable electricity. Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.
Moreover, the Pakistani economy is undergoing a construction and consumer boom similar to India's, with growth rates of 7%, and what is currently the fastest-rising stock market in Asia. You can see the effects everywhere: in new shopping centers and restaurant complexes, in the hoardings for the latest laptops and iPods, in the cranes and building sites, in the endless stores selling mobile phones: in 2003 the country had fewer than three million cellphone users; today there are almost 50 million."
A familiar yardstick often used to measure progress of a nation is its energy consumption. Per capita energy consumption in Pakistan is estimated at 14.2 million Btu, which is much higher than Bangladesh's 5 million BTUs per capita but slightly less than India's 15.9 million BTU per capita energy consumption. However, South Asia's per capita energy consumption is only a fraction of other industrializing economies in Asia region such as China (56.2 million BTU), Thailand (58 million BTU) and Malaysia (104 million BTU), according to the US Dept of Energy 2006 report. To put it in perspective, the world average per capita energy use is about 65 million BTUs and the average American consumes 352 million BTUs. With 40% of the Pakistani households that have yet to receive electricity, and only 18% of the households that have access to pipeline gas, the energy sector is expected to play a critical role in economic and social development. With this growth comes higher energy consumption and stronger pressures on the country’s energy resources. At present, natural gas and oil supply the bulk (80 percent) of Pakistan’s energy needs. However, the consumption of those energy sources vastly exceeds the supply. For instance, Pakistan currently produces only 18.3 percent of the oil it consumes, fostering a dependency on imports that places considerable strain on the country’s financial position. On the other hand, hydro and coal are perhaps underutilized today, as Pakistan has ample potential supplies of both.
Pakistan's KSE-100 stock index surged 55% in 2009, a year that also saw the South Asian nation wracked by increased violence and its state institutions described by various media talking heads as being on the verge of collapse. Even more surprising is the whopping 825% increase in KSE-100 from 1999 to 2009, which makes it a significantly better performer than the BRIC nations. BRIC darling China has actually underperformed its peers, rising only 150 percent compared with energy-rich Brazil (520 percent) and Russia (326 percent) or well-regulated India (274 percent), which some investors see as a safer and more diverse bet compared with the Chinese equity market, which is dominated by bank stocks.
Summary:
Goldman Sachs report on "BRIC" and "Next 11" projects that India will be the fourth largest economy in the world by 2025. Goldman also forecasts Pakistan's rank moving up from the 26th largest now to the 18th largest economy in the world by 2025. If the deteriorating security situation and current economic slump in Pakistan are not contained and managed properly, there is a strong chance that Pakistan would be left significantly behind India at the time of the next update of this comparison in 2020. However, Pakistan is just too big to fail. In spite of all of the serious problems it faces today, I remain optimistic that country will not only survive but thrive in the coming decades. With a fairly large educated urban middle class, vibrant media, active civil society, assertive judiciary, many philanthropic organizations, and a spirit of entrepreneurship, the nation has the necessary ingredients to overcome its current difficulties to build a strong economy with a democratic government accountable to its people.
Here are some more recent comparative indicators:
One out of every three illiterate adults in the world is an Indian, according to UNESCO. Pakistan stands fourth in the world in terms of illiterate adult population, after India, China and Bangladesh.
One out of very two hungry persons in the world is an Indian, according to World Food Program. Pakistan fares significantly better than India on the hunger front.
Poverty:
Population living under $1.25 a day - India: 41.6% Pakistan: 22.6% Source: UNDP
The reason for higher levels of poverty in India in spite of its rapid economic growth is the growing rich-poor disparity. Gini index measuring rich-poor gap for India is at 36, higher than Pakistan's 30. Gini index is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 100: A low Gini index indicates more equal income or wealth distribution, while a high Gini index indicates more unequal distribution. Zero corresponds to perfect equality (everyone having exactly the same income) and 100 corresponds to perfect inequality (where one person has all the income, while everyone else has zero income).
Nutrition:
Underweight Children Under Five (in percent) Pakistan 38% India 46% Source: UNICEF
Health:
Life expectancy at birth (years), 2007 India: 63.4 Pakistan: 66.2 Source: HDR2009
Global views of the United States have improved markedly over the last year while views of many countries have become more negative, according to the latest BBC World Service poll across 28 countries. For the first time since the BBC started tracking in 2005, views of the United States’ influence in the world are now more positive than negative on average.
The survey, conducted by GlobeScan/PIPA among more than 29,000 adults, asked respondents to say whether they considered the influence of different countries in the world to be mostly positive or mostly negative. It found that the United States is viewed positively on balance in 20 of 28 countries, with an average of 46 per cent now saying it has a mostly positive influence in the world, while 34 per cent say it has a negative influence.
Compared to a year earlier, negative ratings of the United States have dropped a striking nine points on average across the countries surveyed both years, while positive ratings are up a more modest four points. Ratings of the influence of many other countries, meanwhile, have declined over the past year. On average, positive ratings of the United Kingdom and Japan are down three points, Canada down six points, and the European Union down four points. Ratings of the United Kingdom’s influence in the world declined significantly in 11 countries and rose in only three. (See note at foot of page two for details of how these tracking averages have been calculated)
Germany is the most favourably viewed nation (an average of 59% positive), followed by Japan (53%), the United Kingdom (52%), Canada (51%), and France (49%). The European Union is viewed positively by 53 per cent. In contrast, Iran is the least favourably viewed nation (15%), followed by Pakistan (16%), North Korea (17%), Israel (19%), and Russia (30%).
While it is not among the most favourably viewed nations, the improvement in the ratings of the United States means it has now overtaken China in terms of positive perceptions. Fifteen countries view China favourably on balance, with an average of 41 per cent feeling it has a mostly positive influence in the world and 38 per cent feeling its influence is mostly negative.
Iran attracts mostly negative views in all countries polled except Mexico and Pakistan—on average, 56 per cent rate it negatively. Views of Iran in China and Russia have deteriorated—positive views have dropped 11 points among the Chinese people (30%) while negative views of Iran have jumped up 13 points among Russians (to 45%).
The BBC World Service Poll has been tracking opinions about country influence in the world since 2005. The latest results are based on 29,977 in-home or telephone interviews conducted across a total of 28 countries by the international polling firm GlobeScan, together with the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland. GlobeScan coordinated fieldwork between 30 November 2009 and 16 February 2010.
GlobeScan Chairman Doug Miller comments: “People around the world today view the United States more positively than at any time since the second Iraq war. While still well below that of countries like Germany and the UK, the global standing of the US is clearly on the rise again.”
Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, “While China’s image is stuck in neutral, America has motored past it in the global soft-power competition.
After a year it appears the ‘Obama effect’ is real. Its influence on people’s views worldwide, though, is to soften the negative aspects of the United States’ image, while positive aspects are not yet coming into strong focus.”
Participating Countries
Note: In Azerbaijan, Brazil, Central America (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama), Chile, China, Egypt, Mexico, the Philippines, Thailand, and Turkey urban samples were used.
Note on the calculation of tracking averages
The year-on-year shift in average views of countries cited in paragraph 3 above is based on the views of the 23 countries in which these questions were asked both in 2009 and 2010. (Please see the methodology section for a full list of the countries surveyed in 2010 and 2009.)
All other average figures cited above represent the views across all 2 countries surveyed this year.
Where a country was asked to rate itself, these views have not been included in the average views cited here.
Detailed Findings
While positive views of the United States increased in most countries polled, the most significant increases were in Germany (up from 18% in 2009 to 39% this year), in Russia (up from 7% to 25%), in Portugal (up from 43% to 57%) and in Chile (up from 42% to 55%) with negative perceptions also falling significantly.
The only countries where perceptions of the United States became more negative overall were Turkey (where the proportion with positive perceptions of the United States fell from 21 per cent to 13 per cent and negative perceptions increased from 63 per cent to 70 per cent), and in India (where positive perceptions dipped from 43 per cent to 39 per cent and negative views increased from 20 to 28 per cent).
The only two countries to have majorities with negative views of the United States are Turkey (70%) and Pakistan (52%). Russia is also quite negative (50%).
Last year’s poll found that views of both Russia and China had deteriorated. Looking at the views of the countries polled in both 2009 and 2010, they appear to have stabilized somewhat this year. Views of Russia in particular are more muted, with a decline both in the proportion of those rating it positively (from 31 to 29%) and those rating it negatively (42 to 37%). China’s positive ratings remain at 40 per cent, while its negative ratings have fallen a little to 38 per cent.
European countries continue to have quite negative views of China, including Italy (72% negative), Germany (71%), France (64%), Spain and Portugal (both 54%) as do South Koreans (61%) and Americans (51%). In Africa, views are quite positive with majorities viewing it positively in Kenya and Nigeria (both 73%) and in Ghana (63%).
Views of the European Union remain mostly positive in almost all countries polled (53% overall). But there is a difference of views toward the European Union among the European nations surveyed, with Germany (76%) and France (74%) the most positive about its influence, Italy (64%) and Spain (62%) a little less favourable and the United Kingdom (54%) much less upbeat about it. Turkey—which is also highly negative about most other countries—also rates the European Union unfavourably (with only 29% positive).
In total 29,977 citizens in 28 countries, were interviewed face-to-face or by telephone between 30 November 2009 and 16 February 2010. Nations were rated by half samples in all countries polled. Polling was conducted for BBC World Service by the international polling firm GlobeScan and its research partners in each country. In ten of the 28 countries, the sample was limited to major urban areas. The margin of error per country ranges from +/-2.1 to 6.9 per cent, 19 times out of 20.
For media interviews with the participating pollsters, please contact:
Steven Kull, Director Program on International Policy Attitudes, Washington +1 202 232 7500 (Mobile: +1 301 254 7500) skull@pipa.org
Oliver Martin, Director, Global Development GlobeScan Incorporated, Toronto +1 416 969 3073 (Mobile: +1 416 721 3544) oliver.martin@globescan.com
Sam Mountford, Research Director GlobeScan Incorporated, London +44 20 7253 1447 (Mobile: +44 7854 132625) sam.mountford@globescan.com
GlobeScan Incorporated is an international opinion research consultancy. We provide global organisations with evidence-based insight to help them set strategy and shape their communications. Companies, multilateral institutions, governments and NGOs trust GlobeScan for our unique expertise across reputation management, sustainability and stakeholder relations. GlobeScan conducts research in over 90 countries, is ISO 9001-2008 certified and a signatory to the UN Global Compact.
Established in 1987, GlobeScan is an independent, management-owned company with offices in Toronto, London, and San Francisco. www.GlobeScan.com.
The Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) of the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland, undertakes research on attitudes in publics around the world on a variety of international issues and manages the international research project WorldPublicOpinion.org.
BBC World Service is an international multimedia broadcaster delivering international, national and regional services in 32 languages. It uses multiple platforms to reach its weekly audience of 188 million globally, including shortwave, AM, FM, digital satellite, and cable channels. It has around 2,000 partner radio stations which take BBC content, and numerous partnerships supplying content to mobile phones and other wireless handheld devices. Its news sites include audio and video content and offer opportunities to join the global debate. For more information, visit bbcworldservice.com. To find out more about the BBC’s English language offerings and subscribe to a free e-newsletter, visit bbcworldservice.com/schedules.
It is not terrorism when US attacks with a drone in Pakistan and kills 700 innocent civilians.
Of the 60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, only 10 were able to hit their actual targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders, besides perishing 687 innocent Pakistani civilians. The success percentage of the US predator strikes thus comes to not more than six per cent.
Figures compiled by the Pakistani authorities show that a total of 701 people, including 14 al-Qaeda leaders, have been killed since January 2006 in 60 American predator attacks targeting the tribal areas of Pakistan. Two strikes carried out in 2006 had killed 98 civilians while three attacks conducted in 2007 had slain 66 Pakistanis, yet none of the wanted al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders could be hit by the Americans right on target.
However, of the 50 drone attacks carried out between January 29, 2008 and April 8, 2009, 10 hit their targets and killed 14 wanted al-Qaeda operatives. Most of these attacks were carried out on the basis of intelligence believed to have been provided by the Pakistani and Afghan tribesmen who had been spying for the US-led allied forces stationed in Afghanistan.
The remaining 50 drone attacks went wrong due to faulty intelligence information, killing hundreds of innocent civilians, including women and children. The number of the Pakistani civilians killed in those 50 attacks stood at 537, in which 385 people lost their lives in 2008 and 152 people were slain in the first 99 days of 2009 (between January 1 and April 8).
Of the 50 drone attacks, targeting the Pakistani tribal areas since January 2008, 36 were carried out in 2008 and 14 were conducted in the first 99 days of 2009. Of the 14 attacks targeting Pakistan in 2009, three were carried out in January, killing 30 people, two in February killing 55 people, five in March killing 36 people and four were conducted in the first nine days of April, killing 31 people.
Of the 14 strikes carried out in the first 99 days of April 2009, only one proved successful, killing two most wanted senior al-Qaeda leaders - Osama al Kini and Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan. Both had lost their lives in a New Year’s Day drone strike carried out in the South Waziristan region on January 1, 2009.
Kini was believed to be the chief operational commander of al-Qaeda in Pakistan and had replaced Abu Faraj Al Libi after his arrest from Bannu in 2004. Both men were behind the 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Dares Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya, which killed 224 civilians and wounded more than 5,000 others.
There were 36 recorded cross-border US predator strikes inside Pakistan during 2008, of which 29 took place after August 31, 2008, killing 385 people. However, only nine of the 36 strikes hit their actual targets, killing 12 wanted al-Qaeda leaders. The first successful predator strike had killed Abu Laith al Libi, a senior military commander of al-Qaeda who was targeted in North Waziristan on January 29, 2008. The second successful attack in Bajaur had killed Abu Sulayman Jazairi, al-Qaeda’s external operations chief, on March 14, 2008. The third attack in South Waziristan on July 28, 2008, had killed Abu Khabab al Masri, al-Qaeda’s weapons of mass destruction chief. The fourth successful attack in South Waziristan on August 13, 2008, had killed al-Qaeda leader Abdur Rehman.
The fifth predator strike carried out in North Waziristan near Miranshah on Sept 8, 2008 had killed three al-Qaeda leaders, Abu Haris, Abu Hamza, and Zain Ul Abu Qasim. The sixth successful predator hit in the South Waziristan region on October 2008 had killed Khalid Habib, a key leader of al-Qaeda’s paramilitary Shadow Army.
The seventh such attack conducted in North Waziristan on October 31, 2008 had killed Abu Jihad al Masri, a top leader of the Egyptian Islamic group. The eighth successful predator strike had killed al-Qaeda leader Abdullah Azzam al Saudi in east of North Waziristan on November 19, 2008.
The ninth and the last successful drone attack of 2008, carried out in the Ali Khel region just outside Miramshah in North Waziristan on November 22, 2008, had killed al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubair al Masri and his Pakistani fugitive accomplice Rashid Rauf.
According to the figures compiled by the Pakistani authorities, a total of 537 people have been killed in 50 incidents of cross-border US predator strikes since January 1, 2008 to April 8, 2009, averaging 34 killings per month and 11 killings per attack. The average per month killings in predator strikes during 12 months of 2008 stood at 32 while the average per attack killings in the 36 drone strikes for the same year stood at 11.
Similarly, 152 people have been killed in 14 incidents of cross-border predator attacks in the tribal areas in the first 99 days of 2009, averaging 38 killings per month and 11 killings per attack.
"if we’ve got actual war intelligence on high-ranking Al Qaeda leaders, or for that matter high-ranking Taliban leaders who are directing actions against US troops –then we will take action,’ Mr Obama told CBS’s Steve Kroft.’"
and Pakistan says: "The senior Pakistani official bridled at the suggestion that Pakistan has been reluctant to target militants in Quetta, saying U.S. assertions about the city’s role as a sanctuary have been exaggerated. “We keep hearing that there is a shadow government in Quetta, but we have never been given actionable intelligence,” the Pakistani official was quoted as saying. Pakistan is prepared to pursue Taliban leaders, including Omar, even when the intelligence is imprecise, the official said. “Even if a compound 1 kilometer by 1 kilometer is identified, we will go find him.” But, he added, “for the past two years we haven’t heard anything more.”
and
"Pakistani officials, according to a report, have warned that the fallout would be severe.
“We are not a banana republic,” a senior Pakistani official involved in discussions of security issues with the Obama administration, was quoted as saying. “If the United States follows through, the official said, “this might be the end of the road.” "
Now Imagine, just 14 AQ leaders killed and how much would have joined them after they lost their families?
Photo Gallery: Glimpses into the daily lives of Pakistanis.
A British Tourist’s Pakistan Experience
Driving through the bazaar, I did a double take and looked again. Sure enough, there was this young man who looked like a ‘gora’(expatriate) — you can tell — sitting on a broken down bench in front of a rickety table with a plate of ‘daal’ and ‘naans’ on the side, enjoying the meal, with a curious bunch of people observing him, smiling broadly, looking at his bike parked nearby, trying to talk to him in broken English.
The hotel ‘management’ was keeping the younger boys at bay while catering to the young man’s requests. Curiosity got the better of me so I stopped to enquire and found out that Alex Linghorn is a British national making a stopover in Pakistan on his way home, doing it in as adventurous a way as possible before he settles down, gets married and has a family. Pakistan is the third of ten countries Alex is travelling through during his solo motorcycle trip from Nepal to his home in the UK. He was flushed from the heat, but had a heavy jacket, which he said is a ‘must’ along with gloves, for travelling on a bike as it can save you from injury if you have an accident — such as the one he had in India, getting just a few scrapes when he was knocked down by a truck. In his own words, “From the moment I crossed the Wahga border amidst a fanfare of triumphant parading,” — referring to the flag hoisting and folding ceremony — “I have been continually fascinated by this country. Over the last three weeks I have wandered the narrow streets of Lahore’s old city, captivated by the hundreds of tiny shops crammed with paraphernalia of all kinds sold by honest trades and experienced an exotic and unforgettable Sufi festival.”
On being questioned whether he had any negative experiences, he said he didn’t have any problem, but was struck by one particular overall negative observation (especially in the North, but also in Lahore): women are virtually absent from outdoor daily life. “If you do happen to catch a rare sighting of a woman (and here I exclude the elderly and children) then she is generally ghosting around the periphery in a permanent state of nervous apprehension.”
Adding that he finds it incomprehensible that in a relatively intellectually advanced nation like Pakistan, half the population is denied social freedom that the other half so richly enjoys, he said, “I am sensibly cautious though about broadcasting any such sweeping or incendiary judgments, as three weeks in a country hardly qualifies me. I don’t see it as an Asian issue for women are to be seen everywhere in neighbouring countries, I therefore attribute it to religious tradition.” “My other main observation was how everybody I met, from businessmen in cities to shepherds in remote areas, was completely united in their utter contempt for the Taliban. They just want to get on with their lives and live in peace. They did not see the Taliban as Muslims, but rather as mercenaries.”
Alex was of the view that you can travel around Pakistan on the cheap or in luxury and he did both, the latter with a friend from Britain of Pakistani origin, just for a few days, and the former on his own, with his bike breaking down a number of times and being fixed by friendly mechanics. According to him the latter provided a much richer experience and the opportunity for interactions with ‘real’ people. “The genuine warmth and kindness, I have received from the people of Pakistan has dispelled any lingering myths promulgated by the Western media. This country is a heaven for visitors, offering a cornucopia of treasures; vibrant markets, mouth-watering food, ancient and beautiful buildings, wonderful hospitality, rich cultural diversity” he said, “and of course nature’s gift to Pakistan. No, not the cricket team, the Karakorum! I have stood mesmerised by the spectacular mountain scenery in the Northern Areas. You can be sure I will spread the word to help Pakistan achieve the vibrant tourist economy it so richly deserves.”
