The dilemma of Pakistan’s geostrategic location

Floods, disease burden and agricultural productivity are directly associated with geography of a country. Recent floods and Pakistan’s subsequent appeal for international aid has indeed magnified geographical woes and economic vulnerabilities of the country. Seeking international aid could be an easier path but it is not sustainable. Fostering economic growth entirely through indigenous means and local efforts, however, could be a challenging task and a long route. In this context, it is not hard to understand that economic development is all about understanding the practical wisdom behind some fundamental principles of the Mother Nature. Nations may not necessarily need highly specialised technocrats, economists and professional experts to kick-start the vistas of growth in a country. It is because the technical knowledge of experts may be confined to their respective areas of specialisation which could inhibit their abilities to appreciate local challenges of a country or a nation. As a result, they could suggest applying prosaic economic principles deduced from a particular country to other countries without understanding the quotidian challenges associated with that country. This may include, but not limited to, geography, investment climate, politics and the people of a country. Pakistan and Bangladesh, for example, were part of the same country till 1971. Why is it that Bangladesh’s economic growth rates are disproportionately higher than Pakistan? Is it because of different geographical locations of the two countries? The answer could be ‘yes’.

Against this backdrop, a 1998 Working Paper by Gallup, Sachs and Mellinger suggests that a tropical location could adversely enervate growth prospects of a country because of greater disease burden, lower agricultural productivity and lesser distance from sea. A simple scatter plot between latitude and income per capita, according to the research, would suggest that incomes increase with distance from equator. Exceptions are, however, always there. It was also noted that the incidence of malaria is more in countries close to sea. In case of Pakistan, diseases like dengue, malaria, diarrhea, scabies and other skin diseases could easily be associated with its geography, floods and proximity with sea which arguably increase economic burden of the country. Almost 25 years down the lane, since Gallup, et al carried out this study, it could be a right approach to critically evaluate the role of geostrategic location of a country like Pakistan in associating its geography with economic growth prospects.

Many political analysts and policymakers proudly argue that Pakistan has got a great geostrategic location not only in the region but in the world. As far as economic geography is concerned, such arguments may be seriously flawed. It is because the term ‘geostrategic location’ does not merely revolve around geography and/or politics; it rather involves a delicate gossamer of economic, social, political, institutional, industrial and environmental factors because growth usually takes place in multi-sectoral settings. In this context, Pakistan’s geographical proximity with oil rich Persian Gulf, and superpowers like China and Russia, has not yielded desired economic benefits so far. It is because the country’s strategic focus has, prima facie, shifted from entrepreneurship to seeking international aid and overly-relying on available natural resources like urban lands. Consequently, the argument of holding geostrategic location has got diluted and lost its economic and strategic significance. It is Pakistan’s geostrategic location that dragged the country into regional conflicts like the Afghanistan War and the US-led War-on-Terror. Consequently, instead of attaining higher growth rates, Pakistan had to pay a heavy economic price in these conflicts. This suggests that the notion of Pakistan’s geostrategic location has so far acted as another type of the ‘paradox of plenty’ and its pernicious implications are nothing less than holding huge natural resources. Few years ago, there was a great hype on social media that Pakistan had discovered one of the world’s largest oil and gas reserves under sea near Karachi. Many analysts were vehemently supporting the idea that these hydrocarbon reserves will help Pakistan develop faster. However, per literature, such natural resource discoveries are usually cobbled with regional and international conflicts which inherently promote deep economic ambivalence. In this context, the concept of geostrategic location could be treated as equivalent to hydrocarbons as both natural resources and locational dynamics could prompt rent-seeking culture, kleptocracy, despotism and political conflict in a country.

As compared to Pakistan, Bangladesh is geographically far away from oil rich Persian Gulf. Its geographic contiguity is with East Asia where it closely watched the economic boom of the region. Although, the country had similar natural disasters as Pakistan, it could avoid active involvement in international conflicts because of its geography. While Pakistan was dragged into the Afghanistan war in 1980s, Bangladesh was witnessing technological developments in erudite business practices in the neighbouring East-Asian countries where containerisation in international trade made the economic boom possible. Bangladesh may have a comparatively less important geostrategic location than Pakistan but the country’s pellucid economic success corroborates the argument how resource scarce countries develop faster than the resource abundant countries. Pakistan may have greater economic expectations from its geostrategic location but it has so far proven to be another type of the paradox of plenty. Furthermore, it had to get involved into natural resource based international violent conflicts and wars detrimental to growth prospects. Bangladesh, on the contrary, could easily avoid them and learnt business lessons from neighboring East-Asian countries.

Geography based comparison of Pakistan and Bangladesh could have few lessons for Pakistan’s economy. Pakistan’s needs to shift its strategic focus away from oil rich nations to technologically advanced countries. That means Pakistan needs to avoid prodigal conflicts in the region and place a greater reliance on business innovations and exports. If corrective measures are not taken now, Pakistan may again be dragged into some other regional violent conflict in future because of its geostrategic location. Aid seeking culture is also associated with Pakistan’s geography and needs to be discouraged. The bottom line, as noted by Sachs, is: “[The countries] blessed by geographic location, with the wind at their backs — the process of escaping from the damage of the past, from weak institutions, from economic atrophy, and from financial bankruptcy remains a heavy burden. They must meet the challenges both of catching up and of successful transformation. Not all manage, and when governments go bankrupt, societies cannot function.”

Published in The Express Tribune, November 8^th, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.