In their recent op-ed for Business Recorder, Huzaima Bukhari and Dr Ikramul Haq have described Pakistan a 'soft state'. According to them, "Pakistan aptly fits in the concept of a "soft state" - famously articulated by the Nobel laureate, Swedish sociologist Gunnar Myrdal in his 1968 three-volume work, Asian Drama: An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations. It is a broad-based assessment of the degree to which the state, and its machinery, is equipped to deal with its responsibilities of governance. The more soft a state is, the greater the likelihood that there is an unholy nexus between the lawmaker, the law keeper, and the law breaker. Pakistan is a classic case of this unholy nexus where since 1958 numerous tax amnesties failed to achieve the desired results rather encouraged rent-seeking and tax evasion."

I wish to add a key point to the whole argument. Myrdal had compared South Asian countries, particularly India, with European countries. This was, in my view, not a fair comparison; he was in fact comparing oranges and apples. In those days (and even today), levels of socio-economic developments in Europe, particularly in its western part, were vastly different from those in South Asia. Unlike South Asia, Europe had not suffered from colonialism.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2020

Comments

Comments are closed.