December blues
The writer is a senior political economist
In 1969, ‘Weekly Forum,’ Dhaka, was started by lawyer Kamal Hossain and economist Rehman Sobhan. Reputable Bengali economists, AR Khan and Anisur Rahman, besides political scientists Kabiruddin and Muzzafar were regular contributors. It was closed down in March, 1971. The following piece by this writer was published in it on 31 January, 1970
What is to be done?
The logical conclusion that one could draw from the rich insights into the problem of interwing disparity presented by Professor Anisur Rehman (Vol. I, No.1) and Dr Azizur Rahman Khan (Vol. I, No. 7) is that the country has outgrown the prevalent system of locating policy decisions, economic as well as political. The heroic mass movement of the last winter signalled a no, not only to the political economy of the Ayub years (as maintained by Dr Kabiruddin Ahmad, Vol. I, No. 1), but also — and doubtless more importantly — to the politics of the founder of disparity. An adequate statement of the problem has been furnished and the relevant questions raised (Professor Muzzafar Ahmad Chowdhury, Vol. I, No. 8). The problem that remains now is: What is to be done?
The estimate of the costs of a strong centre by Mr Rehman Sobhan (Vol. 1, No. 1), no matter how infirm, is too big for the country to pay. Even if the impossible somehow happens, i.e. the costs are incurred, the parity miracle, I am afraid, might still elude its prophets. Here is the proposition that explains why: the greatest planologists can’t devise a mode of economic management whereby, say, Muslims of Turkey and West Pakistan, far-flung by geography, culture and language, could enjoy the fruits of economic growth in an equitable manner, while concentrating the decision-making in one region only. A more rational way of looking at things should be to allow each region to achieve whatever growth it can achieve with its own resources and co-operate with the other regions wherever and whenever it promotes regional well-being. The proposition should hold more truly for Pakistan as the two wings are dispersed by a hostile territory and with the additional difference that East and West Pakistan shall be two nations in an economic and not a political sense.
What I am suggesting here is the application of the theory of economic integration with necessary modification in our context. Each wing should have its own plan reflecting regional priorities the requisite legislative powers to sanction financial outlays. The Central Planning Commission should be reorganised, not on the pattern of all powerful European Economic Commission, but as an agency to harmonise and coordinate regional plans on the basis of an agreed pattern of specialisation and to reap economies of scale. National integration as a permissive circumstance of creating economic complementarities is more stably founded. A closer look at the trends of the past two decades reveals a direct relation between economic distance and political distance. The solidarity of a nation depends to a large measure on the economic compatibility of its constituents.
I might be dubbed as a separatist. But I insist that I have only tried dispassionately read the symptoms of separatism, diagnose them and attempt a prescription according to my lights. My assertion is that an economically contented East Pakistan shall contribute more towards the integrity and preservation of the country than otherwise.
And the recipe for this is a recognition of the fact that Pakistan means one nation, but two economies. It is a case of two brothers minding their own business most of the time and each other’s business some of the time.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 16th, 2022.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.