Stagnating Pakistan-Iran Relations

#3
taiko-saheb, Just to set the record straight:

1) In 1967, 90 Canadair F-86 Mk.6 Sabre jets were bought from Germany by Iran and subsequently secretly transferred to Pakistan.
2) Iranian C-130B`s were used to transfer Pakistani troops between West and East. These aircraft were subsequently donated to Pakistan.
3) A squadron of brand new F-5 fighters transferred to Pakistan by Iran in `71 though these arrived to late to take part in hostilities.

Now most of this was probably arranged by the US administration, but there is not doubt that Iran (under the Shah) went out of its way to help Pakistan.

This article may help:
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_326.shtml

Just to complete the post, we know of the following at least:
1) Ammunition was donated by Inonesian and Turkish (PNS Dacca that was blown up outside Karachi harbour was packed with Turkish ammo)
2) 10 F-104 fighters were donated by Jordan.
3) Indonesia donated 20 Mig-19 (similar to Pakistani operated chinese J-6) fighters
4) Saudi Arabia donated $100 million to enable Pakistan to buy its Mirage III fighters (which were horrendously expensive for those days)

Re: # 31

Hey chucklehead, land deeds are the lowest level of asset monetization in the real estate game. You must be a paki instead of a pakistani. Your knowledge deems you as such. The greater negative to your thinking about RE is that Pakistan under those terms is still a feudal society with capital and asset base locked up in real estate. Inflationary increases in property value doesn`t a billionaire make, it is the ability to leverage the development on the land to enhance equity. Sometimes I think there is a genetic issue in paki thinking. It must be due to the forefathers from arabia and their inherent stupidity.

Re: # 29 by arjun2 on December 2, 2006 9:35am PT

---

mmmkay...

so what about the paki version of infosys or the paki billionaire that the great free market system of pakiland has undoubtedly produced...why don`t you name them...

---

See Bindis are stuck in infosys. Why don`t you produce from the Bindis potato land the likes of Mega Agriculturalists like Noons, Tiwanas, Makhdums, Pagaras?

Aaaah. Bihar is just the land of bhook nang. you can`t produce any wealthy Agriculturist.

Valuation at stock market is just one aspect of measuring individual`s wealth. Obviously it is new and fashionable. It doesn`t however take away the real wealth in real-estate and the wealth of Mega-farms.

Your emphasis is at best akin to new money vs. old wealth. Pakistan historically had its wealth in Mega agri farms. No wonder it was called the bread basket of British India, and food supplier for the bhookay nangays BIMARU states.

Banglore, Calcutta, and Bombay on the other hand were the centers of Munshis (office- contractors) since 1650s. In 2000s they are now Mega-Munshis. Instead of having one desk shop of small Munshi, there are 1000`s of Munshis working in these mega-boxes. Still they are the Munshis of the West just like they were in 1650s.

So calm down if Munshis have finally gotten some wealth even if it is paper wealth. You guys will always be jealous of Pakistan`s Mega-farms. You pseudo-free-marketers!

#27 by taikonaut on December 2, 2006 9:16am PT


mmmkay...

so what about the paki version of infosys or the paki billionaire that the great free market system of pakiland has undoubtedly produced...why don`t you name them...

taikonaut:

these i.t. companies are the only worthwhile things macacas have created since bin qasim stepped on sindhi soil. let them celebrate this success in peace. they dont have much else to be thankful about. their qaum has suffered a lot since bin qasim defeated raja dahir 1300 years ago.

Re: # 41

I am sure paki mega firms are a mega success [for some reason, it`s also a mega secret] ... so how much money do you make per year by shipping out your farm products... I am no researcher in high-flying world of paki mega firms - so you tell us... :)

#38 by mohar11 on December 2, 2006 12:11pm PT

---

Dude - go easy on Lalu... He is supposed to be very friendly with you pakis...

---

We enjoy all Bindi Bihari clowns. Lallu is no exception.

---

And good luck with your ``mega farms``... Just curious - how is the export performance of your farming products?...

---

You BIMAROUs won`t know. You don`t grow anything and wait for handouts for even basic food.

Mega-farms feed Pakistanis day in day out. Whatever is left, we ship out. That is mainly Cotton, Rice, and sugar. This would be clear to you f you knew even basic research. Try some day.

Re: # 36

Dude - go easy on Lalu... He is supposed to be very friendly with you pakis... I heard you pakis went ga ga over him last time he was there :)... and he is also some sort of what you call ``agriculturalists``... so you guys may want to be in touch with him... you know, you guys seem to one of a kind...

And good luck with your ``mega farms``... Just curious - how is the export performance of your farming products?... I mean - For example, China is known for its manufacturing proucts, hinuds are known for their software services etc. etc.. ... as far as I know, pakiland is NOT exactly known for its farming products... or any other products for that matter... with all the mega agriculturalists and mega farms - you must be taking the world by storm with your farm products - right?...

#34 by mohar11 on December 2, 2006 10:57am PT

---

What`s this about ``Mega Agriculturalists`` and ``Mega-farms`` is he talking about?...

---

Just like Mega-Munshis Premji and Infosys, Pakistan has its own wealthy class that owns Mega-farms. For a Bihari this is a difficult concept. Just ask your Malyalam yum yum buddies and they may be able to help. However Bihari Hindi is too weak to understand these finer concepts.

---

I read somewhere pakiland is in so bad shape that they are importing sugar or even wheat... so what Meg farms?...

---

Welcome to the reality. 10 years of good farming followed by few years of poor yields. This is natural. But how would Bihari know about production, agri-yields, and farming? You spend all your time with Lallu Parsad sucking party or the Rubri mama.

Who is this nut-case taikonut guy?... What`s this about ``Mega Agriculturalists`` and ``Mega-farms`` is he talking about?... I mean - over the years, we have heard all such of delusions from pakis - but never heard of this ``Mega-farms`` claim ?...

I read somewhere pakiland is in so bad shape that they are importing sugar or even wheat... so what Meg farms?...

This dear turkey Taiko’s stubbornness, his turkey-characteristic, in defending the maha-turkey – the country of Pakistan – and its mah-goons in khaki, is highly touching!

Gosh, the generals must be going all mushy – here is a true defender of Pakistan second only to its first defenders in khaki! (Is it spoils sharing time yet?!)

Guys like him are the ones who try to drown out the cries of the Mais by singing ``Dil, Dil, Paaakistaaan....`` hoping that the moans of the victims would get ignored in his din!

Such shameless hypocrites!

The root of problems between Iran and Pakistan is now what it has forever been – that famous Shia-Sunni divide! Now that the Pakistanis (read Sunnis) got the nukes – the Iranians are just as determined to get their hands on nukes as well – and are getting ready to do their own version of “thousand-year grass eating” act!

A “secular” Pakistan is an oxy-moron! But understanding this “fine” point may be asking too much from those who clearly lack the “oxy-“ part of it!

Need proof of moronity – just listen to the idiot talk of Bihar when the discussion is about Iran and the land of the Pure!

#40 by stuka on December 2, 2006 12:29pm PT

---

World Bank study compares Pakistani and Indian Punjabs

---

There are many aspects to this study. Some are valid and others invalid.

Crop yield from W. Punjab midlands exceeds E. Punjab. The figure gets skewed only when you add arid areas of Pothohar and Southern W. Punjab.

If you want real comparison, then add the yeilds of E. Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal together and you will surely see that the figures change.

The idea is simple. Mega farms in W. Punjab can afford material and equipment that small landowners can`t. As the attached study points out, E. Punjabi farmers are much more dependent on taxpayer support and bail out. Again that makes sense. Small farmers can`t compete in free market.

Your quoted report shows higher yield of Cotton in W. Punjab. Again this is indicative of the fact that arid areas are better suited for Cotton.

BTW this report ignores the loss of traditional irrigation rivers thanks to the blockade by Hindia.

Satluj, Ravi, Bias are completely gone. Chenab is available only half the time. So you Hindi Bindis choke us, strangle us, and then laugh at us. And if we get angry you accuse us of terrorism. Wow! Talk about fairness.

No wonder Hindi Bindis are completely lost to the religiosity and ethnic prejudices. What else you could expect from dirt poor Biharis and their decedents.



For those of you who are ready to come out of your prejudiced jaundiced cocoon, here is an interesting and relatively unbiased analysis.


A tale of two Punjabs
Ravian

The two Punjabs adopted the green revolution technology for wheat, rice and cotton crops at around the same time (mid-1960s) and experienced similar phases of its intensification over the next 30 years. The results are fascinating and tell us much about the way different policies affect farmers’ performance

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_31-1-2003_pg3_4


Since the partition of 1947, agriculture in the Indian and Pakistani Punjabs has evolved in different institutional and policy settings. The Indian Punjab has less unequal land distribution, higher education levels and a weaker feudal tradition than the Pakistani Punjab. These factors and the stronger tradition of parliamentary democracy has given the Indian Punjabi farmer greater clout in designing pro-farmer policies compared to his “cousins” across the border.

How have these differences affected agricultural performance in the two Punjabs? The answer, according to serious research*, is not so obvious.

The two Punjabs adopted the green revolution technology for wheat, rice and cotton crops at around the same time (mid-1960s) and experienced similar phases of its intensification over the next 30 years. The results are fascinating and tell us much about the way different policies affect farmers’ performance.

The most common way to measure performance is in terms of growth in output per acre. On this measure, the Indian Punjab led Pakistani Punjab in wheat (3.6 per cent annual growth versus 2.2 per cent) and rice (4.1 per cent vs. 0) but was outperformed by the latter in cotton (1.6 per cent vs. the latter’s 3.6 per cent).

As a result of this growth, at the end of the green revolution period (mid-1990s), the Indian Punjabi farmer produced 3643 kg per hectare of wheat which was nearly twice his Pakistani counterpart’s output of 1902 kg per hectare. In rice, the Indian Punjabi farmer’s output of 3426 kg per hectare was nearly three times the Pakistani Punjabi farmer’s output of 1215 kg per hectare. To be fair, Pakistani Punjabi farmer’s poor performance in rice is because he was switching to low yield but high value basmati rice.

It turns out that the difference in growth in the two Punjabs is largely because the Indian farmers use more inputs than their Pakistani counterparts. On average, the Indian Punjabi farmer applied 156 kg of fertilizer per hectare, twice Pakistani Punjabi farmer’s 86 kg’s per hectare. Also, the Indian farmer used more machinery (41 hours per hectare vs. 15). But there was little difference in access to irrigation (91 per cent of total land under irrigation vs. 86 per cent). Indian Punjabi farmers appear to use more tube wells (104 per 1000 hectares vs. 26) but this may be illusory because the Pakistani tube wells are generally larger.

This tale of agricultural productivity differences in the two Punjabs doesn’t end there. All we have learnt so far is that you get more output if you apply more inputs. This, as we have seen earlier (The story of economic growth, Daily Times, November 15, 02), is only a partial story. A far more interesting and meaningful comparison of the two Punjabs is in terms of total factor productivity i.e. how well do the two Punjabi farmers perform controlling input use.

A cricket analogy would help. A batsman may score well compared to another if he uses a better quality bat but that may tell you more about the bat than the batsman. The real test is controlling the performance for the same quality of the bat. This is what total factor productivity does.

Total factor productivity growth on the two Punjab farms is calculated by subtracting input growth from total output growth. In the Indian Punjab, output and input growth in the 30 year green revolution period was five per cent and three per cent respectively giving total factor productivity growth of 1.9 per cent. In the case of Pakistan’s Punjab, with output and input growth rates of 3.2 and 1.9 per cent, respectively, total factor productivity growth was 1.5 per cent. The difference of a mere 0.4 per cent is not much to write home about!

We can get further insight into farm performance by breaking down the 30 year green revolution period into three clearly identified sub-periods i.e. the years of introduction of the new technology (1966-74), the years of input intensification (1975-84) and the years of maturity (1985-1994). Total factor productivity growth in the three sub-periods in the Indian Punjab was 1.3, 1.8 and 1.5 per cent per annum respectively. In the Pakistani Punjab the corresponding growth rates are 0, 1.4 and 2.9 per cent. Thus in the mature stage of the green revolution technology, Pakistani Punjabi farmers were rapidly catching up with their eastern “cousins”.

One explanation for this pattern of total factor productivity growth is that the green revolution technology was knowledge intensive so it was adopted more quickly by the better educated Indian Punjabi farmers that had access to better research and extension services. The Pakistani Punjabis were slow to respond because of poorer education and research and extension services, but when information became available and they learnt to manage the risks associated with technological change, they responded with enthusiasm.

The other explanation is that Indian Punjabi farmers have enjoyed much higher intensity of input use throughout the green revolution period because they are politically better organised and are able to extract large water and fertilizer subsidies from the government. In contrast, the Pakistani Punjabi farmers have had to make do with their own resources and therefore were slower to catch up. But then, unlike their Indian counterparts, they are less of a burden on the government budget.

The third explanation is the outstanding performance of cotton, mung daal and livestock in Pakistan’s Punjab in the final period. Pakistan has been pro-active in promoting long staple cotton for export that has responded well to pesticides while India has focused on low yielding short staple varieties for home consumption.

Surely, there are costs to the environment that need to be taken into account while calculating the benefits of intensive cultivation that uses a lot of water and chemicals in the form of pesticides and fertilizer.

Indeed there are. In Pakistan’s Punjab, for example, half the productivity gain in agriculture associated with the green revolution technology is cancelled out due to the detrimental effects of water pollution. And because Indian Punjabi farmers use water and chemicals more intensively than Pakistani Punjabi farmers, netting out the detrimental effects may well eradicate any remaining differences in the performance of the two Punjabi farmers.

*By Ringku Murgai, Derek Byerlee (both work the World Bank) and Mubarik Ali (at the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center).

#38 Mohar11

Ama yaar, that is not exactly true. The Pakistanis do have mega farms. Those farms grow vegetables which then get exported all over the world.

And those who like the taste of those types of vegetables - they like it so much that at every munch, they proudly exclaim their pleasure of having it with:

``Jee-I-Had``

Needless to say, those veggies are REALLY green!

And they come wrapped in khaki covers.

Taikonaout

U shld stick to discussing Pakistani politics and not make a fool of yourself by talking about India-Pak economic comparsions.


You said...

``
Your emphasis is at best akin to new money vs. old wealth. Pakistan historically had its wealth in Mega agri farms. No wonder it was called the bread basket of British India, and food supplier for the bhookay nangays BIMARU states.``

Here is an article by a Pakistani...hiw come Indian Agriculturists have higher yields compared to Pakistanis?

http://www.mahapunjab.org/articles/2005/05hassan.html

World Bank study compares Pakistani and Indian Punjabs

Khalid Hassan
Published in: Daily Times
Date: February 12, 2005


WASHINGTON: The Pakistani Punjab comes out looking good in certain areas compared to Indian Punjab, while lagging behind in some others, notably literacy and poverty reduction, according to two new studies made by the World Bank.

A comparison between the two Punjabs was the subject of an informal presentation at the World Bank on Thursday by Ijaz Nabi, sector manager, economic policy, South Asia region. The population of Pakistani Punjab is 80 million, more than half of the country’s, while that of the Indian Punjab is 25.3 million. Their respective GDPs are $32 billion and $14.6 billion, which form 52 percent and 2.5 percent of the national GDP, while in terms of area the Pakistani Punjab is more than four times the size on Indian Punjab, parts of which were made over to Haryana and Himachal. In the former, agriculture represents 27 percent of economic activity, industry 22.5 percent and services 50.5 percent, whereas in the latter, the figures respectively are 39.3 percent, 24.6 percent and 36.2 percent. According to Nabi, in terms of overall poverty, it is 34.1 percent of the population in the Pakistani Punjab compared with only 6 percent in its Indian counterpart. The incidence of poverty is the highest in Pakistan’s southern Punjab (40.4 percent), 31.8 percent on central Punjab and 29.8 percent in the northern part.

The literacy rate in Indian Punjab is 70 percent and only 45 percent in its Pakistani counterpart, while the net primary enrolment is 94 percent and 42 percent respectively. The pattern of disparity is reflected in the three regions of Pakistani Punjab, with the southern part scoring the lowest. Gender comparison also shows Indian Punjab doing far better than Pakistani Punjab. While in Indian Punjab 35 percent of the females are employed, the figure is exactly half that in Pakistani Punjab.

As for agriculture, crop yields in the two Punjabs also vary. In Indian Punjab crop yield is 4.5 tons per hectare, compared with only 2.5 tons in Pakistan. Rice output in Indian Punjab is 5.3 tons per hectare and 3.3 tons in Pakistani Punjab. However, cotton yield in the Pakistani part if 1.8 tons per hectare as against 1.3 tons in India.

Uzbeks likewise. A couple of years ago when in Tashkent, I took a (paid) lift in a car driven by an Uzbek. The driver asked me if I was from Pakistan, on hearing in the negative he really started BC-MCing the Pakistanis saying he just hated them. He had the following to say: once he gave a lift to a Pakistani. As soon as he sat in the car, the Pakistani, as is usually their ilk(trying to gain sympathy I suppose), started lecturing the Uzbek on Islam. The cabbie got so wild, he told the Pakistani, you MF, we are the ones who converted you to Islam and you are trying to teach me what Islam is?

The lack of love for Pakistanis is not restricted to cabbies. A few years ago all Pakistani citizens were driven away from Uzbekistan barring a few that could be counted on the fingertips. This coming from a country which half the Pakistani population claims is the land of their forefathers ( the other half claiming Basra)

By the way, when his diatribe against the Pakistani was over, the driver turned to India and there was nothing but melufluous praise for India and how India for him was a country of his dreams and his accolades to Babur, Raj Kapoor, Indira Gandhi and Shah Rukh Khan.

One wonders what makes Pakistanis so popular? Pakistanis are not liked in the West which is understood but they are also disliked in many Muslim countries.

Seen in this light one supposes that Iran which has a centuries old Islamic civilisation treats Pakistan not as an equal but just as a poor relative who should be kept at a respectable distance.

#35 by bjkumar on December 2, 2006 10:58am PT


This dear turkey Taiko’s stubbornness


Stubbornness in the face of overwhelming odds is commendable...stubborness in believing something contrary to reality is called self-delusion...

so takeout guy sure is stubborn...but so are pakis..they stubbornly chose to live in pakiworld, the make-believe world where paki delusions are facts...