Explained: Why the IMF is under fire for $1 billion loan to Pakistan
India abstained from voting at the IMF Executive Board meeting, reflecting its opposition within the limitations of IMF protocol. India Today Business Desk IMF faces criticism for $1 billion loan amid Indo-Pak hostilities
India abstains, warns of IMF funds aiding cross-border terrorism
Critics say IMF emboldening Pakistan's military, not economic reform
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is facing sharp criticism for approving a $1 billion disbursement to Pakistan just days after a deadly terrorist attack in Kashmir's Pahalgam and amid escalating hostilities between India and Pakistan.
The disbursement, approved on Friday under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF), raises total payouts under the programme to $2.1 billion. Additionally, the IMF cleared $1.4 billion under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF), ostensibly aimed at helping Pakistan tackle climate-related vulnerabilities.
But the timing of the announcement has provoked a fierce backlash, not just from Indian officials and strategic experts, but also from voices in the region and beyond who say the move could undermine efforts at de-escalation.
It may be noted that India abstained from voting at the IMF Executive Board meeting, reflecting its opposition within the limitations of IMF protocol. Unlike the United Nations, where countries can cast a 'no' vote, IMF board members can only vote in favour or abstain â€' there is no mechanism for a formal rejection.
By choosing to abstain, India signalled strong dissent and used the opportunity to issue a formal objection. In a statement following the vote, the Finance Ministry said the Fund's processes 'lacked moral safeguards,' warning that fungible inflows from multilateral institutions like the IMF could be diverted to fund military or terrorist activities.
The ministry further stated that these concerns were 'shared by several member countries,' suggesting broader discomfort within the global community. IMF FACES CRITICISM
Indian diplomats and foreign policy voices argue that the loan approval sends the wrong signal at a critical moment. Former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal called the decision 'terrible optics,' adding that the IMF's governance is skewed in favour of Western powers and lacks accountability.
Yashwant Deshmukh, a well-known psephologist, went further, saying the IMF 'has blood on its hands.'
Similarly, Sushant Sareen of the Observer Research Foundation said the fund was 'emboldening' Pakistan's military establishment, rather than curbing its influence or encouraging reform.
India has long argued that IMF support to Pakistan is routinely misused. Over the past 35 years, Pakistan has entered 28 IMF programmes, including four in just the last five years, with little to show by way of structural reform or lasting economic stability.
Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah also questioned the global community's logic, asking how de-escalation can be expected when the IMF is 'essentially reimbursing Pakistan' for attacks on Indian cities.
Meanwhile, Mariam Solaimankhil, a former Afghan MP in exile, accused the IMF of bankrolling 'bloodshed.' 'The IMF didn't bail out an economy. It bankrolled bloodshed,' she wrote on social media. 'How long will the world pay Pakistan to kill?'
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is facing sharp criticism for approving a $1 billion disbursement to Pakistan just days after a deadly terrorist attack in Kashmir's Pahalgam and amid escalating hostilities between India and Pakistan.
The disbursement, approved on Friday under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF), raises total payouts under the programme to $2.1 billion. Additionally, the IMF cleared $1.4 billion under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF), ostensibly aimed at helping Pakistan tackle climate-related vulnerabilities.
But the timing of the announcement has provoked a fierce backlash, not just from Indian officials and strategic experts, but also from voices in the region and beyond who say the move could undermine efforts at de-escalation.
It may be noted that India abstained from voting at the IMF Executive Board meeting, reflecting its opposition within the limitations of IMF protocol. Unlike the United Nations, where countries can cast a 'no' vote, IMF board members can only vote in favour or abstain â€' there is no mechanism for a formal rejection.
By choosing to abstain, India signalled strong dissent and used the opportunity to issue a formal objection. In a statement following the vote, the Finance Ministry said the Fund's processes 'lacked moral safeguards,' warning that fungible inflows from multilateral institutions like the IMF could be diverted to fund military or terrorist activities.
The ministry further stated that these concerns were 'shared by several member countries,' suggesting broader discomfort within the global community. IMF FACES CRITICISM
Indian diplomats and foreign policy voices argue that the loan approval sends the wrong signal at a critical moment. Former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal called the decision 'terrible optics,' adding that the IMF's governance is skewed in favour of Western powers and lacks accountability.
Yashwant Deshmukh, a well-known psephologist, went further, saying the IMF 'has blood on its hands.'
Similarly, Sushant Sareen of the Observer Research Foundation said the fund was 'emboldening' Pakistan's military establishment, rather than curbing its influence or encouraging reform.
India has long argued that IMF support to Pakistan is routinely misused. Over the past 35 years, Pakistan has entered 28 IMF programmes, including four in just the last five years, with little to show by way of structural reform or lasting economic stability.
Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah also questioned the global community's logic, asking how de-escalation can be expected when the IMF is 'essentially reimbursing Pakistan' for attacks on Indian cities.
Meanwhile, Mariam Solaimankhil, a former Afghan MP in exile, accused the IMF of bankrolling 'bloodshed.' 'The IMF didn't bail out an economy. It bankrolled bloodshed,' she wrote on social media. 'How long will the world pay Pakistan to kill?' Join our WhatsApp Channel
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Maggi crisis was one of the greatest challenges of career'
NEW DELHI: The Maggi crisis, which unfolded in June 2015 and led to a nationwide ban of the popular instant noodles, was "one of the greatest challenges" of my career, said Suresh Narayanan , chairman and MD of Nestle India, said in his final letter to shareholders before his retirement on July 31. Narayanan, who took over as the company's CMD in 2015, is recognised for rejuvenating the company's flagship brand Maggi, after the FSSAI (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India) raised concerns about high levels of lead and monosodium glutamate in the product, leading to a temporary ban and significant backlash for the brand. Maggi noodles went from market leadership to near extinction and recovered 60% of its market share within months of its relaunch, he added. In his letter, Narayanan highlighted the decade's achievements, noting that Nestle India's capex increased from 1.8% of sales in 2015 to 10% in 24-25. "This not only demonstrates the focus on Indian consumers, but also our commitment to manufacture in India and 'Make in India' as a theme,'' he said. The company achieved a CAGR of over 10% in revenue and 21% in net profit over 2015-2025. Its revenue in FY24-25 stood at Rs 20,100 crore and net profit at Rs 3,300 crore. "In 2015, many considered us to be solely a Maggi noodles company. Since then we recalibrated and rejuvenated the portfolio launching over 150+ new products that have contributed to 7% of sales,'' Narayanan said. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
Dixon, Florence see silver lining in Trump's tariffs
PARIS: They are a study in contrast: One is an electronics goods maker, the other a footwear manufacturer. One has its base in Chennai, the other up North. But, both are focusing on ramping up at breakneck speed, hoping to cash in on overseas players seeking to tap India, not just for its domestic market but also for exports, especially after Trump's tariffs. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The other similarity is scale. Electronics goods supplier Dixon Technologies, which has been busy with tie-ups to manufacture phones, laptops and consumer durables, is seeing a huge uptick in export orders from the US as countries seek to reduce reliance on China. "Indian market is around $40 billion, the US has imports of around $80 billion. In the next few years, we see a $100 billion export opportunity in the US and EU," said Dixon Technologies chairman Sunil Vachani. If it is smartphones that have seen a massive surge in production, it will be laptops in the next few years as companies look to first meet the domestic demand before venturing into exports, he said. "We missed the opportunity during Trump 1, when Indian companies were not ready. But now we have built scale, we are designing our own products. We have a foot in the door, and we will be like Vietnam in a few years once the component ecosystem is also developed," Vachani added. In Chennai, Florence Shoe Company chairman Aqueel Panaruna, whose family was in the leather footwear business, is manufacturing a million pair of sports shoes for one of the top global brands. His company is also a joint venture partner with Hong Fu, the world's second largest sports shoes maker for the likes of Nike and Adidas, to set up a $300 millon plant that can produce 10 million pairs of shoes. While the new quality control norms on footwear has driven global majors to eye more production in India, the shift began soon after Covid, with who's who of sports shoes, from Nike, Adidas, Puma and New Balance, tying up with local players to meet global and domestic demand. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now For Florence, the challenge in recent years has been the growing dependence on the US, which now accounts for around 80% of its exports, compared to 25% a decade ago. Trump's tariffs have added a 10% additional burden, with shoes now attracting up to 30% customs duty. But Panaruna is not worried. He is in fact banking on the trade deals with the US, UK and EU offering possibilities for more sourcing from India. "If the Hong Fu experience is good, we may see some of the factories shift from Vietnam to India," he said. "With displays and camera modules to be produced in India, value addition in mobiles could rise from 17-18% to around 40% in the next two-three years, nearing China's level of 50-55%," Vachani said.
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
Stress riding pillion on two-wheeler loans, may puncture asset quality: Moody's
Synopsis Moody's Ratings warns of potential asset quality decline in Indian banks' vehicle loan portfolios. The agency cites slowing vehicle sales growth post-pandemic. Two-wheeler loans are particularly vulnerable due to younger, lower-income borrowers. System-wide non-performing loans are expected to remain between 2-3%. Unsecured loan defaults are rising, while housing loans are expected to remain stable.
