The new government of Pakistan in the context of big projects and schemes

17
The new government of Pakistan in the context of big projects and schemes

More than a month ago (February 8), Pakistan held very important general elections for the region, which will largely determine the economic and military-political configuration not only in the system of Pakistan itself, but also in a number of other countries.

For Russia, Pakistan is generally a kind of “big country in the south”, between Afghanistan, China, India and Iran, which has a quarter of a billion poor population and at the same time has a nuclear weapon, and of our own production.



This existing description is, to put it mildly, incomplete, but it is largely determined by the practical absence of this country in our information agenda. This is not very good, since both Pakistan and its region are part of the large (at least officially declared) “Southern Project”.

But it’s not just about projects, because using the example of changes in the Pakistani political system, in fact, you can find a lot of useful data for analyzing the situation in other problem areas. Strange as it may seem, even in terms of the conflict in Ukraine, this is not at all an attempt to stitch together some kind of Frankenstein from an assessment of various regional problem areas.

Schedule


The breakdown of the main political forces and parties of the second echelon showed that compromises for the formation of both regional and federal governments in Pakistan, if possible, would not be possible immediately.

The main opponent of the Punjabi elites and a significant part of the army corps, the Pakistan Movement for Justice (PTI) party of the removed (and arrested) Prime Minister I. Khan, received 93 seats.

The party of his irreconcilable opponents, the Sharif family clan (Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), PML-N), representing the hereditary elites of Punjab, big business and a significant part of the army corps - 75 seats.

The party of the elites of Sindh and parts of Balochistan, a real competitor to the first two and associated with the names of Bhutto and Zardari (Pakistan People's Party, PPP) - 54 seats.

Also at the federal level, the party of Muhajir migrants (“United National Movement” (MQM-P) performed relatively strongly at the federal level, taking 17 seats. The remaining movements performed, plus or minus traditionally, with 2–4 seats each.

It was clear that in this situation, even taking into account the so-called. “women’s quotas” and non-Muslims, it will be possible for the Sharifs to get a majority and form a government (and therefore the vector of development for the coming years) only through agreements. 103 seats is not even close to a majority. Even the unification with Bhutto did not provide guarantees. Therefore, bidding and approvals lasted throughout the rest of February and the beginning of March, ending with the taking of the oath of office by the cabinet only on March 11.

When voting for the candidacy of the new prime minister, only 92 votes were cast for the PTI candidate I. Khan (O. Ayub). This was even less than what was initially recruited, taking into account quotas.

As many as 201 votes were cast for the Sharif candidate, Sh. Sharif, i.e., in the end, the Sharifs collected not only common votes with the Bhutto family, plus all their quotas, but also received 28 votes from other political forces. PTI I. Khan was left in splendid isolation.

As administrators and managers here, the Sharif clan can only be applauded. They agreed with everyone, except those with whom it was impossible to do this in principle. The father of the leader of Bhutto's party, Bilawal Bhutto, A. Zardari eventually became the president of Pakistan again. Bilawal himself, who had headed the country's Foreign Ministry several times before, did not join the federal government this time, concentrating on party work, and this was determined by the fact that his political force received benefits in other areas.

For example, the Ministry of Commerce, which was headed by D.K. Khan, comes from the elites of Sindh and Balochistan, close to Bhutto. By the way, according to the criterion of “high birth”, this is perhaps the most interesting character - in general, one can consider the genealogy from the time of Zoroaster. A. Zardari himself is also a Balochistan elite.

By the way, in terms of the long-standing discussion that the presence of aristocratic old elites is a kind of guarantee of success in management. They say that all our troubles are due to the fact that Russia lost these imperial elites in the 20th century and has not yet raised them in the 21st century. Well, in Pakistan, no matter what the surname, with the exception of part of the army elite, it’s impossible to imagine anything older than the elite, but for some reason this did not guarantee the economic and military leadership of the state in the region either in the pre-colonial or post-colonial period. And, in fact, all these ancient clans did not interfere with being a colony for a long time. The hereditary aristocracy gets along quite well with the colonial status of the state. But you can trace how all these names are integrated into Western power chains.

The important Ministry of Internal Affairs also went to the candidate agreed between the military and Bhutto - M. Naqvi, and not to the Sharifs' protege. And this is the fight against drug trafficking. The departments related to privatization and infrastructure also did not come completely under the control of the Sharifs, and there the military caste installed a relatively neutral figure.

MQM-P received a federal second-plan portfolio for its vote and position. Small parties have become significantly stronger in regional governments. And even in Khyber they did not prevent the appointment of the odious supporter of Imran Khan, A. Gandapur, as chief minister.

S. Bugti became the chief minister of Balochistan. Quite a tough supporter of the fight against separatism and “Indian influence”, even though the Baloch himself is from the Baloch tribal elite. He collaborated with both the Sharifs and again with the Bhuttos. The traditional connection between Bhutto and the structures of the Aga Khan Foundation in the climate-friendly and extremely important for agriculture region of Azad Kashmir has also been preserved.

Actually, this means that the current cabinet does not plan to aggravate relations on the border with Afghanistan, where radical movements close to a similar wing of the Taliban are strong (this is a change from previous years), but to clear the approaches from China to sea communications from radicals and work for the Iranian border in the same direction is just gathering.

It is interesting that in Punjab, the daughter of Nawaz Sharif and the niece of the new prime minister, Maryam Sharif, were promoted to chief minister (though not without problems), which, given the role of this central province, as well as the political history Pakistan, allows us to say that they will further try to carry it higher, similar to the role of Benazir Bhutto in the past.

In general, the system looks quite balanced and coalition-based, regarding the voting results - not in terms of the number of portfolios, but in terms of their quality and regional representation.

But then things get more interesting.

Relevance for Russia


The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan was headed by I. Dar, a financier close to the Sharifs, but he was almost constantly engaged in financial activities. The Ministry of Finance was headed by a very remarkable character, M. Aurangzeb. This is actually a direct corridor to international institutions and the JPMorgan Chase group. I. Dar was supposed to take his place, but in the end he went to manage the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

It is clear that the new cabinet will have to deal with the political basis of the “Movement for Justice” of I. Khan, and this is mainly a relatively young generation, in a rather substantive manner. It is growing and, naturally, major reforms have been announced.

But everyone always announces reforms, constantly after elections they plan to build something, lay pipes, reduce tariffs, develop education and jobs, etc. The question is: how relevant is all this from Russia’s point of view? The fact is that although everyone is planning reforms, the first place is still given to the development model of a particular country and its vector, taking into account the objective processes taking place in the world.

The objective process today is the cost crisis, which leads to the fragmentation of the world economy into large cost clusters. Subjective processes - the interaction of transnational and national elite groups, who works with whom and how, helps or opposes. This forms the model.

Let's take our neighbor - Turkey. And they have problems with inflation, and no matter how you listen in the media about the Turkish economy, everything is bad for Ankara, and, they say, R. Erdogan invited purely representatives of “global financiers” to the financial bloc.

But let's take a closer look.

Last summer, Turkey signed a number of agreements with the European Union, then deepened them at the level of regulations. Let us note how many political obligations Ankara has fulfilled.

In the fall, despite all the problems, representatives of not only traditional partners, such as Qatar, which always helps its ally financially, came to Turkey, but also representatives of Arabian countries, which is interesting and typical - the UAE. And a landing party from the largest investment funds from the top 30 landed, and all this was supervised by the appointees of not just abstract globalists, but specifically the Goldman Sachs group.

It would seem that in Pakistan there is an appointee from JPMorgan Chase, and here it is Goldman Sachs, both those globalists and those are all tarred with the same world. No, not alone.

Goldman work when and where and when the time comes to integrate part of the national business into those very top 30 investment monsters. These are not necessarily large national companies, it just means that Turkey is considered as part of the overall investment model, where funds will be launched into innovative industries - microelectronics, information technology, etc.

The European Union is being cut off in these positions, pushing China away from the traditional bonuses of working with Europe, but Turkey, on the contrary, is being strengthened. This looks strange against the backdrop of Turkey’s “catastrophic problems” that we are constantly told about, but it is strange only outside the framework of the grand scheme. They say one thing, but the reality is different.

Who came to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Finance of Pakistan?

The JP Morgan Chase group, associated not with innovative investing, but with country lending - the IMF and the World Bank. And instead of a trusted financier, the Sharifs put a banker on finance - the former CEO of the Morgan group (JP Morgan Global Corporate Bank - Singapore), and I. Dara put on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who will still deal with finance, only international ones. But not through a pool of investment funds, but through the World Bank and the IMF.

This means that Islamabad will receive additional (really necessary) funds for “macrofinancial stabilization” and to ensure the nominal growth included in the IMF programs of ±2,5–3,0%, but no investment hub, flows from investors from top 30 funds will not be there.

In India it will be, in the UAE and Saudi Arabia it will be, in Turkey it will be, but in Pakistan it will not be. But Pakistan will be able to start importing more technological products, however, it will strengthen its agricultural sector. And these are also opportunities for those who are interested, especially since Islamabad will have certain funds for energy development, but these are opportunities within the framework of a specific model and relationship. China can now begin to calculate how many cars Pakistan will buy from it and whether it is worth installing an additional assembly plant.

On the one hand, somewhere in Pakistan the finances will be handled by a protege of one of the globalist groups, and conclusions can be drawn not only for Pakistan, but also in other areas.

Here we have two practically formed value clusters: Chinese and American-European. And there are four global groups, like in a black square of corners. There seems to be one system, the globalists also seem to be all there, but in relation to the division based on common value in terms of interests, the “angles” can work somewhere together, and somewhere separately, up to the point of conflict.

Pakistan is joining the Chinese cluster and is going to cooperate with structures affiliated with the IMF. If you work with Pakistan on trade and do not interfere with this direction, then there will be no contradictions for Russia.

As an example, if you develop a certain project where pipes with blue fuel will work primarily to create a hypothetical link that will help separate the EU economically from the United States, then Pakistan will face a fight with another global group that aims to establish borders in Ukraine as far as possible (preferably by 1991, taking the assets for yourself).

Like the one whose interests are represented by the (still) rushing E. Macron, borders and assets can be lost, and E. Macron will now have to answer for them in detail after the death of the elder Rothschild.

The benefits here for Islamabad, despite the neutral position of the Sharifs, are not at all obvious, but the problems are quite. Will Pakistan cooperate in such a way as to help Moscow re-make the EU+Russia=total value construct? This is dangerous for Pakistan. And if we formulate it in such a way that the project will strengthen the Chinese cluster as a whole? Yes, this is more interesting and safer for Islamabad, and easier for us if we want it.

The same project, such as the joint supply of Russian-Iranian gas, in the case of one concept can proceed without problems even under sanctions, but in the case of another, it can be delayed for years. In one option, you can get a sales market, in the other, in the best case scenario, political neutrality.

But it would seem that the question was: who took what place from which transnational group after the elections in distant Pakistan.
17 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    17 March 2024 05: 51
    Pakistan has a good lead in the former metropolis - the Prime Minister of Scotland is an ethnic Pakistani, so it would be good to work in this direction so that life does not seem like honey to the Britons. Freedom for an independent Islamic Scotland!
    1. +1
      17 March 2024 05: 58
      For some reason, the ethnic Hindu Sunak does not favor his “small homeland,” and neither does the mayor of London, an ethnic Pakistani. Although no, migration helps wink
  2. +2
    17 March 2024 06: 20
    headed by D.K. Khan, who came from the elites of Sindh and Balochistan, close to Bhutto. By the way, according to the criterion of “high birth”, this is perhaps the most interesting character - in general, one can consider the genealogy from the time of Zoroaster. A. Zardari himself is also a Balochistan elite.

    The list of "democratically elected" leaders of Pakistan clearly shows that
    Democracy - power of the people
    1. +2
      17 March 2024 15: 21
      I was wondering whether they would decide to rejuvenate senior politics by promoting the young Bhutto. After all, they agreed to try for part of the electorate, which itself is rejuvenating. But no, they decided on dad in the end. “I’m still young, White Feather, I haven’t celebrated the sixteenth spring” (c). Well, in general, yes, the power of the people is the power of the best people of the people, nothing less. The best must be born lol
  3. +1
    17 March 2024 09: 05
    The European Union is being cut off in these positions, pushing China away from the traditional bonuses of working with Europe, but Turkey, on the contrary, is being strengthened

    Turkey, apparently, is going to be “embedded” into the Israel-Saudi Arabia-UAE cluster, or... as the main link between the European and Middle Eastern clusters.
    In India it will be, in the UAE and Saudi Arabia it will be, in Turkey it will be, but in Pakistan it will not be.

    1. Is Pakistan ready for this?
    2. It seems that the main medium-term goal is to decouple Pakistan’s elites from China, but without pitting India against each other. And there, in the long term, when India “overheats” (like China now), investments can be pushed there too.
    China can now begin to calculate how many cars Pakistan will buy from it

    What about China? What if American Generic Electric or German Siemens...
    Pakistan enters the Chinese cluster

    Or maybe someone doesn’t want to let him in there?
    elections in distant Pakistan.

    "The world is so big and so small"...
    1. +1
      17 March 2024 15: 13
      In the Middle East, definitely not, judging by how events have been developing since last summer. They are working on some kind of separate model of integration with the EU. But as a “connecting link”, it’s an interesting idea, you can try to look at it and model it. Yes, the thought is interesting hi
      I don’t yet see any particular desire to oppose China in this area. The United States shows no interest there. Otherwise, they would not have behaved so sluggishly last year and already this year.
      Yes, both big and small, but how many analogies can be found for our Russian system in Pakistan. lol
  4. 0
    17 March 2024 10: 02
    the interest of everyone around, as well as around Iran, and even more interested everyone around the borders and distant geopolitics
  5. -4
    17 March 2024 12: 10
    “...a quarter of a million...” - you don’t need to read further...
    1. 0
      17 March 2024 15: 23
      I won’t change it anymore, because it’s completely obvious what was meant. Of course, I need to read more carefully on my part, I don’t argue. Well, the rest is up to you, of course. If there are no other questions.
  6. 0
    17 March 2024 16: 17
    Michael! I just started reading, but it’s better to correct it right away...
    "...a quarter of a million poor people..."
    They probably just made a mistake.
    1. +1
      17 March 2024 16: 25
      Yes, I already understood hi It’s just that if you replace it, then you will have to remove everything, edit it, and re-expose it. It is clear that two hundred and fifty thousand people cannot live in the country laughing
      I'll leave it in hopes of understanding hi., but I made a notification about the error, maybe they will correct it without re-posting the material.
    2. 0
      18 March 2024 01: 26
      By the way, millions have been corrected wink
  7. 0
    17 March 2024 16: 50
    Thanks for the interesting findings!
    I'll try to ask at a simplified level...
    There are many enterprises in Turkey that produce products for the assembly of generally non-Turkish goods. This did not happen in Pakistan, or the scale is much smaller.
    Now, in anticipation of an influx of money, international, Western, no matter what you call it, China can look at what is happening and consider the possibility of building another plant of its own to produce cars that Pakistanis will buy. Why not build your own plant in Pakistan?
    This is an additional lever for communicating with politicians. The risk of loss is higher, but only on the assumption that domestic policy will change dramatically.
    Correct me please.
    1. +1
      17 March 2024 19: 35
      Yes, good questions, thanks!
      Here's the thing. Pakistan itself has for a long time reserved the space of a textile factory for foreign markets. Fabrics, clothes, shoes, various “accessories”)), etc. He is not the only one there, there is also Bangladesh. Do you remember how at one time Türkiye was such a textile and clothing factory? Turkey took fabrics from Syria, which were traditionally of high quality there, and made various useful things. By the way, during the Syrian campaign, the Turks exported these industries from Syria. This role was later taken over by Pakistan and Bangladesh. Or rather, they were doing this before, but they have intensified significantly. You also need to understand that Pakistan produces a lot of agricultural products. Some of them do not grow and they buy from foreign markets, and some even export. But the sphere is very developed.
      Here is the Jammu-Kashmir\Azad-Kashmir region, why is there such a fight between India and Pakistan? Because there are very good conditions for farming there. So much so that they will fight for him “to the point of melting.”

      Based on what is stated in the material, we can conclude that building a joint production with Pakistan is not the best idea strategically, but using international finance, which will now go to Pakistan as programs, is a sound topic. China, apparently, is simply more on the topic, and what the author analytically digs up and builds, in Beijing they apparently know in practice and have analyzed it before. We just need to look around well and notice the nuances. The Chinese understand that if there is no direct investment in the region, it is safer to finance trade. However, this does not prevent them from building a nuclear power plant and a road to the port of Gwadar, as well as the port itself with its urban infrastructure. But a nuclear power plant is an untouchable cow in politics, and a port is a very “long-term” investment.
  8. 0
    17 March 2024 17: 24
    What do we care about Pakistan? The answer is practically none. A country at approximately the same production level (low additional processing of raw materials or raw materials or food products) as us, buys technological equipment along already trodden paths from China or the Arab states. They take something from the west. They do not trade with us - for reasons including those mentioned above. We are friends with India - and, frankly, given the small and not particularly growing demand for Indian goods in the Russian Federation, there will not be much demand for Pakistani analogues. As for yum, as far as I know, the packs partially overlap with Iran - so, we are already buying Iranian yum and Indian yum - the question is - why do we need Pakistan? And why does Pakistan need us? We don’t know what to do with Indian rupees, but we still have the task of clinging to the Indian market like a crab, and we are also making friends with Iran as a potential and partly actual ally. That is, I mean that no one will infringe on their interests of mutual benefit for the sake of establishing something with the Packs. Now we do not directly border Afghanistan and, generally speaking, our affairs in SA have dropped to a near-minimum level, and for this reason, among other things, I will sum it up and say - at the moment I do not see an economic basis for Pakistan to be ours mutually interesting. We clicked on the moment when it was possible to play both there and in India - the PRC exploited this niche and we are not competitors to it in that direction at the current level of production of goods and services.
    I would also note that judging by the fragmentary information heard in the media, Messrs. Paki was actively cooking (and maybe still cooking) shells for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, working part-time for Western orders. This is a kind of support for improving relations, as, in general, are our military supplies to the Indians.

    IMHO poker is not worth the candle in Pakistan yet. For the situation to change, we need to become stronger industrially and productively - and crawl to the Pakistani market, methodically capturing adjacent and adjacent ones. How far is it still like crawling to Pakistan? am
    1. +3
      17 March 2024 19: 24
      Well, I have some signs of “professional deformation” in terms of finding gaps for mutual trade. But they are not too strong. In every argument from the point of view of “We need Pakistan”, “We don’t need Pakistan”, the starting point is important. Who needs it, what exactly is it for, etc., i.e. what model are we talking about? Well, for example, India = our strategic partner in terms of trade. Does the thesis have a right to exist? Without a doubt. However, all practice shows (and theory here will simply provide additional justifications and explanations) why this undertaking is strategically meaningless. This does not mean that we cannot work within the framework of BRICS, political structures, etc. and so on. But there will be no depth in the economy. But the region as a whole exists and you can get something useful out of it, so how can you build deep relations with Iran if there are no plans for Iraq and Pakistan? This is not very clear to me. The article shows that we can quite easily use the funds that will come to Pakistan from external funds to sell there a lot of different and useful things, building something together is not the best idea, but trading yes.

      About shells for the Ukrainian Armed Forces. There is one caveat, it is that 90% of such messages are authored by an agency like Hindustan, but how much Indians can be trusted in this particular issue is up to everyone to decide for themselves. It's like Bloomberg or Reuters.
      1. 0
        17 March 2024 20: 16
        Thanks for the detailed answer, Mikhail!
        I’m not talking in terms of “needed or not needed,” I just don’t understand how we will increase mutual trade activity. There is no friendship between your states for the sake of friendship, and if we sell weapons, gold, stones and oil to the Indians and they give us tea, rice and incense sticks, then why will Pakistan buy such and such from us for a solid turnover and what will it be for us? Selling is unclear to me. I understand that the chicken is pecking at the grain, but empirically I don’t see any clues, at least for a start. The packs are not under sanctions, unlike Iran (or at least there are much fewer sanctions), this allows them to barter with the whole world, especially the sea. A sea that is close to international trade arteries, and a sea to which we have no direct access. The reasons that limit our growth with India will also be here, but in India we have been hooked since ancient times, when the world was different, so to speak.

        And so yes, I am all for “trading with everyone”, and for the development of industry, etc. But it seems to me that now we are not ready to push that far..
        Iran, in principle, is interesting in itself because it is an antagonist to the West, it has an interest in a number of our technologies, and we have an interest in its industrial products. A kind of symbiotic relationship. And in general, we have a long-standing and good relationship, nask. I know . Well, as far as possible, heh..