Pakistan is once again being talked about in strategic circles. After years of being dismissed as unstable and economically adrift, the country is suddenly described as a potential regional security provider. Gulf capitals are paying attention. Washington is recalibrating. Islamabad is being noticed.
This feels familiar. And that should worry us.
Pakistan has been here before. At moments of geopolitical relevance, the country tends to confuse strategic usefulness with economic salvation. That confusion has repeatedly turned opportunity into dependency.
The first old mistake: renting relevance instead of building capacity
For decades, Pakistan leveraged security importance to extract short-term financial relief. Aid flowed. Sanctions were lifted. Credit lines reopened. But the money rarely translated into structural reform.
Each time the crisis eased, difficult economic decisions were postponed. Tax reform stalled. Export competitiveness was ignored. Energy inefficiencies were patched, not fixed. When the geopolitical cycle turned, Pakistan was left exposed again.
Security rent replaced economic reform. That habit has been costly.
The second mistake: letting geopolitics override economics
Another recurring error has been treating the economy as a subordinate file. Strategic decisions were made first. Economic consequences were managed later, often under pressure from lenders like the International Monetary Fund.
No country can sustain geopolitical relevance while living on the edge of default. Strategic credibility collapses when reserves evaporate. Allies notice this faster than domestic audiences do.
The third mistake: blurred civil–military ownership of the economy
Pakistan’s power structure has often allowed ambiguity. Economic policy is announced by civilians, but stability is underwritten by institutions elsewhere. This duality weakens accountability.
Foreign partners prefer clarity. Investors demand predictability. Neither thrives in a system where economic direction shifts with political cycles or institutional moods.
What must change this time
If Pakistan wants this geopolitical opening to translate into economic recovery, the approach must be different.
Military leadership, in particular, faces a defining choice.
First, strategic restraint is as important as strategic capability. Overextension, especially while fighting internal insurgency pressures, will drain resources rather than attract investment.
Second, the military must visibly support economic civilianisation. Not withdrawal, but alignment. Economic policymaking needs continuity, protection from political churn, and space to deliver hard reforms.
Third, Pakistan must stop selling security as a substitute for reform. Regional relevance should be used to secure trade access, energy cooperation, and long-term investment, not temporary balance-of-payments relief.
The real test ahead
Pakistan’s problem has never been a lack of opportunities. It has been the inability to convert moments into systems.
This geopolitical opening will not rescue the economy on its own. But mishandling it will deepen the next crisis.
The choice now is stark: repeat the old playbook, or finally retire it.
History suggests caution. The moment demands discipline.
Comments
Post a Comment