Latest news with #HussainHaqqani
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
One-third of kids never sees a school, but we have nukes: Ex-Pak envoy's viral clip stirs fresh outrage
'The real threat is from within' — DeltaRR2000 (@DeltaRR2000) Live Events 'We are not going to live as an insecure nation' After Pahalgam: A nation at the brink again Indus treaty suspended, water becomes a weapon 'Why does Pakistan need Lashkar, Jaish, Sipah?' (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel As Pakistan faces a deepening crisis at home, a decade-old warning from former ambassador Hussain Haqqani is hitting harder than ever. A 2013 interview featuring the ex-diplomat has resurfaced online, exposing painful truths about Pakistan's priorities. 'One-third of (Pakistan's) young population… never see the inside of any school — forget about madrasas, religious schools, any school,' Haqqani said. 'Another one-third lives below the poverty line, and yet the country has nuclear weapons.'This statement—now viral—echoes across a nation grappling with economic instability, a broken education system, and worsening India-Pakistan relations. Despite being from 2013, the interview's relevance feels sharply present in critique went deeper than statistics. He questioned the national mindset that glorifies military might at the expense of societal progress. 'The real threat to Pakistan essentially is from a failure to come to terms with its geography, with its history, and with having a direction for it as a nation,' he said during the remarks form a blistering takedown of Pakistan's state doctrine—where weapons take precedence over welfare. 'We are now like the guy who keeps buying guns to try and protect himself and then says, 'Oh gosh, I can't sleep because I'm afraid somebody will steal my guns,'' he observed, describing the country's fixation on defence at the cost of its citizens' sense of also invoked the vision of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. She imagined a future where Pakistan retained its nuclear deterrence but redefined its global role. 'We will keep the nukes, but we will eventually sign up with some kind of international agreement… We are not going to live as an insecure nation,' he said, referencing Bhutto's forward-looking was not a call to disarm but to recalibrate—to pair defence strength with internal development and diplomatic resurfacing of this interview comes on the heels of a major terror attack. On 22 April, a deadly strike in Kashmir's Pahalgam claimed the lives of 26 Indian tourists. The attack, attributed to Pakistan-based terror groups, has plunged the region into crisis. In response, India launched Operation Sindoor, a military campaign targeting nine terror camps across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). These camps were linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and Hizbul followed was a series of retaliatory attempts by Pakistan to strike Indian military bases between 8 and 10 May. India responded by targeting eight Pakistani airbases on 10 May using long-range missiles and India has moved swiftly too. Following the Pahalgam attack, India placed the Indus Waters Treaty under suspension—a significant shift in a treaty that has governed water sharing between the two nations since 1960. With six rivers under its control, India now holds leverage that could strain Pakistan's already fragile agrarian has been outspoken on Pakistan's internal threats long before the recent escalation. In a post on X, he questioned the legitimacy of allowing extremist outfits to flourish while maintaining a formal army. 'A terrorist attack in Pahalgam led India and Pakistan to the brink of total war. To avoid that in future, it is important to shut down Jihadi groups,' he wrote. 'With well-equipped armed forces, why does the country need Lashkar, Sipah, Jaish, and their Difa-e-Watan Council?'These comments were not made in isolation. They coincide with global concerns over Pakistan's nuclear safety. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh recently said Pakistan's nuclear weapons should be brought under international monitoring, specifically the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).Even Haqqani conceded that Pakistan's nuclear programme is technically sound and well-guarded. But the central question remains—what use is strategic deterrence if it coexists with illiteracy, poverty, and social fragmentation?Pakistan's leadership, according to Haqqani, needs to look inward. Until the country resolves its core contradictions—missiles in the skies and millions of children out of school—the promise of security will ring 2013, his message was seen as provocative. In 2025, it feels prophetic.
Economic Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Economic Times
One-third of kids never see the inside of school, but we have nukes: Ex-Pak envoy's viral clip stirs fresh outrage
Synopsis A 2013 interview with former Pakistani ambassador Hussain Haqqani is making waves again in 2025, as Pakistan reels from economic collapse, education gaps, and renewed conflict with India. In the clip, Haqqani challenges Pakistan's obsession with nuclear might while millions of children remain unschooled and citizens live in poverty. His critique has resurfaced following a deadly terrorist attack in Kashmir and India's response through Operation Sindoor. The interview underscores enduring questions about Pakistan's direction, security priorities, and human development. As Pakistan faces a deepening crisis at home, a decade-old warning from former ambassador Hussain Haqqani is hitting harder than ever. A 2013 interview featuring the ex-diplomat has resurfaced online, exposing painful truths about Pakistan's priorities. 'One-third of (Pakistan's) young population… never see the inside of any school — forget about madrasas, religious schools, any school,' Haqqani said. 'Another one-third lives below the poverty line, and yet the country has nuclear weapons.' ADVERTISEMENT This statement—now viral—echoes across a nation grappling with economic instability, a broken education system, and worsening India-Pakistan relations. Despite being from 2013, the interview's relevance feels sharply present in critique went deeper than statistics. He questioned the national mindset that glorifies military might at the expense of societal progress. 'The real threat to Pakistan essentially is from a failure to come to terms with its geography, with its history, and with having a direction for it as a nation,' he said during the panel. His remarks form a blistering takedown of Pakistan's state doctrine—where weapons take precedence over welfare. 'We are now like the guy who keeps buying guns to try and protect himself and then says, 'Oh gosh, I can't sleep because I'm afraid somebody will steal my guns,'' he observed, describing the country's fixation on defence at the cost of its citizens' sense of security. Haqqani also invoked the vision of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. She imagined a future where Pakistan retained its nuclear deterrence but redefined its global role. 'We will keep the nukes, but we will eventually sign up with some kind of international agreement… We are not going to live as an insecure nation,' he said, referencing Bhutto's forward-looking ideals. ADVERTISEMENT It was not a call to disarm but to recalibrate—to pair defence strength with internal development and diplomatic resurfacing of this interview comes on the heels of a major terror attack. On 22 April, a deadly strike in Kashmir's Pahalgam claimed the lives of 26 Indian tourists. The attack, attributed to Pakistan-based terror groups, has plunged the region into crisis. In response, India launched Operation Sindoor, a military campaign targeting nine terror camps across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). These camps were linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and Hizbul Mujahideen. ADVERTISEMENT What followed was a series of retaliatory attempts by Pakistan to strike Indian military bases between 8 and 10 May. India responded by targeting eight Pakistani airbases on 10 May using long-range missiles and India has moved swiftly too. Following the Pahalgam attack, India placed the Indus Waters Treaty under suspension—a significant shift in a treaty that has governed water sharing between the two nations since 1960. With six rivers under its control, India now holds leverage that could strain Pakistan's already fragile agrarian economy. ADVERTISEMENT Haqqani has been outspoken on Pakistan's internal threats long before the recent escalation. In a post on X, he questioned the legitimacy of allowing extremist outfits to flourish while maintaining a formal army. 'A terrorist attack in Pahalgam led India and Pakistan to the brink of total war. To avoid that in future, it is important to shut down Jihadi groups,' he wrote. 'With well-equipped armed forces, why does the country need Lashkar, Sipah, Jaish, and their Difa-e-Watan Council?'These comments were not made in isolation. They coincide with global concerns over Pakistan's nuclear safety. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh recently said Pakistan's nuclear weapons should be brought under international monitoring, specifically the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).Even Haqqani conceded that Pakistan's nuclear programme is technically sound and well-guarded. But the central question remains—what use is strategic deterrence if it coexists with illiteracy, poverty, and social fragmentation? ADVERTISEMENT Pakistan's leadership, according to Haqqani, needs to look inward. Until the country resolves its core contradictions—missiles in the skies and millions of children out of school—the promise of security will ring hollow. In 2013, his message was seen as provocative. In 2025, it feels prophetic. (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) Disclaimer Statement: This content is authored by a 3rd party. The views expressed here are that of the respective authors/ entities and do not represent the views of Economic Times (ET). ET does not guarantee, vouch for or endorse any of its contents nor is responsible for them in any manner whatsoever. Please take all steps necessary to ascertain that any information and content provided is correct, updated, and verified. ET hereby disclaims any and all warranties, express or implied, relating to the report and any content therein. NEXT STORY
News18
3 days ago
- Politics
- News18
Ex-Envoy Gives Reality Check On Pakistan's Nuclear Power: ‘Forget Madrasas, 1 In 3 Kids There...'
Last Updated: In the video, Hussain Haqqani pointed out his country's priorities by highlighting the disconnect between its military ambitions and the needs of its people. An old interview of Pakistan's former ambassador to the US, Hussain Haqqani, has resurfaced online. The clip, from a 2013 discussion, is drawing attention at a time when Pakistan is grappling with economic instability and internal challenges. In the video, Haqqani, a longtime critic of Pakistan's strategic doctrine, pointed out his country's priorities by highlighting the disconnect between its military ambitions and the needs of its people. 'Half the population of Pakistan is below the age of 21. One-third of (Pakistan's) young population… never see the inside of any school — forget about madrasas, religious schools, any school," he said. 'Another one-third lives below the poverty line and another one lives just above it, and yet the country has nuclear weapons," he added. Haqqani's comments come back into focus amid growing tensions between India and Pakistan. A recent terrorist attack in Kashmir's Pahalgam, which claimed the lives of 26 tourists, has strained India-Pakistan relations once again. In response, India has reviewed some of its diplomatic commitments including placing the Indus Waters Treaty under suspension. This move has serious implications as Pakistan depends heavily on the Indus River system for its water needs. With the treaty now on hold, India technically has the power to control the flow of water from six rivers. In the interview, Haqqani didn't deny the efficiency of the country's nuclear programme. But he raised a crucial question — what good is it if citizens remain poor, uneducated and insecure? 'We are now like the guy who keeps buying guns to try and protect himself and then says, 'Oh gosh, I can't sleep because I'm afraid somebody will steal my guns,'" he mentioned. Haqqani further argued that the real threat was not external. 'The real threat to Pakistan essentially is from a failure to come to terms with its geography, with its history, and with having a direction for it as a nation," he added. The former ambassador called for a change in Pakistan's direction similar to what former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto had hoped for. 'We will keep the nukes, but we will eventually sign up with some kind of international agreement… We are not going to live as an insecure nation," he said, quoting Bhutto's vision. Hussain Haqqani, Pakistan former Ambassador to United States, very well answers why Pakistan is such a failed state."One third of Pakistan's children will never go to school. One third of Pakistan lives below the poverty line…."All due to Pak Military. #FailedStatePakistan — Rashtriya Rifles (@DeltaRR2000) May 27, 2025 India not only took strong diplomatic steps after the terrorist attack in Pahalgam but also responded with military action called Operation Sindoor. Last month, the Indian armed forces launched precision strikes last month targeting nine terrorist camps located in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). These strikes were aimed at camps linked to three major terror groups — Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Hizbul Mujahideen. First Published:
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Why India could not stop IMF bailout to Pakistan
Last week the International Monetary Fund (IMF) approved a $1bn (£756m) bailout to Pakistan – a move that drew sharp disapproval from India as military hostilities between the nuclear-armed neighbours flared, before a US-led ceasefire was unexpectedly declared. Despite India's protests, the IMF board approved the second instalment of a $7bn loan, saying Islamabad had demonstrated strong programme implementation leading to a continuing economic recovery in Pakistan. It also said the fund would continue to support Pakistan's efforts in building economic resilience to "climate vulnerabilities and natural disasters", providing further access of around $1.4bn in funding in the future. In a strongly worded statement India raised concerns over the decision, citing two reasons. Delhi questioned the "efficacy" of such bailouts or the lack thereof, given Pakistan's "poor track record" in implementing reform measures. But more importantly it flagged the possibility of these funds being used for "state-sponsored cross-border terrorism" – a charge Islamabad has repeatedly denied - and said the IMF was exposing itself and its donors to "reputational risks" and making a "mockery of global values". The IMF did not respond to the BBC's request for a comment on the Indian stance. Even Pakistani experts argue that there's some merit to Delhi's first argument. Pakistan has been prone to persistently seeking the IMF's help – getting bailed out 24 times since 1958 – without undertaking meaningful reforms to improve public governance. "Going to the IMF is like going to the ICU [intensive care unit]. If a patient goes 24 or 25 times to the ICU then there are structural challenges and concerns that need to be dealt with," Hussain Haqqani, former Pakistani ambassador to the US, told the BBC. But addressing Delhi's other concerns – that the IMF was "rewarding continued sponsorship of cross-border terrorism" thereby sending a "dangerous message to the global community" – is far more complex, and perhaps explains why India wasn't able to exert pressure to stall the bailout. India's decision to try to prevent the next tranche of the bailout to Islamabad was more about optics then, rather than a desire for any tangible outcome, say experts. As per the country's own observations, the fund had limited ability to do something about the loan, and was "circumscribed by procedural and technical formalities". As one of the 25 members of the IMF board, India's influence at the fund is limited. It represents a four-country group including Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Bhutan. Pakistan is part of the Central Asia group, represented by Iran. Unlike the United Nations' one-country-one-vote system, the voting rights of IMF board members are based on a country's economic size and its contributions – a system which has increasingly faced criticism for favouring richer Western countries over developing economies. For example, the US has the biggest voting share - at 16.49% - while India holds just 2.6%. Besides, IMF rules do not allow for a vote against a proposal - board members can either vote in favour or abstain – and the decisions are made by consensus on the board. "This shows how vested interests of powerful countries can influence decisions," an economist who didn't want to speak on the record told the BBC. Addressing this imbalance was a key proposal in the reforms mooted for the IMF and other multilateral lenders during India's G20 presidency in 2023. In their report, former Indian bureaucrat NK Singh and former US treasury secretary Lawrence Summers recommended breaking the link between IMF voting rights and financial contributions to ensure fairer representation for both the "Global North" and the "Global South". But there has been no progress so far on implementing these recommendations. Furthermore, recent changes in the IMF's own rules about funding countries in conflict add more complexity to the issue. A $15.6bn loan by the fund to Ukraine in 2023 was the first of its kind by the IMF to a country at war. "It bent its own rules to give an enormous lending package to Ukraine - which means it cannot use that excuse to shut down an already-arranged loan to Pakistan," Mihir Sharma of the Observer Research Foundation (ORF) think tank in Delhi told the BBC. If India really wants to address its grievances, the right forum to present them would be the United Nations FATF (Financial Action Task Force), says Mr Haqqani. The FATF looks at issues of combating terror finance and decides whether countries need to be placed on grey or black lists that prevent them from accessing funds from bodies like the IMF or the World Bank. "Grandstanding at the IMF cannot and did not work," said Mr Haqqani. "If a country is on that [FATF] list it will then face challenges in getting a loan from the IMF – as has happened with Pakistan earlier." As things stand though, Pakistan was officially removed from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list in 2022. Separately, experts also caution that India's calls to overhaul the IMF's funding processes and veto powers could be a double-edged sword. Such reforms "would inevitably give Beijing [rather than Delhi] more power", said Mr Sharma. Mr Haqqani agrees. India should be wary of using "bilateral disputes at multilateral fora", he said, adding that India has historically been at the receiving end of being vetoed out by China in such places. He points to instances of Beijing blocking ADB (Asian Development Bank) loans sought by India for the north-eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh, citing border disputes between the two countries in the region. Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook
Express Tribune
28-04-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Washington says in contact with Pakistan and India, calls for restraint
Listen to article The United States said on Monday it was in contact with both Pakistan and India and urged both sides to work towards a 'responsible solution' as tensions escalated following a attack in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). A US State Department spokesperson told Reuters that Washington is 'monitoring developments closely' and has engaged with both governments 'at multiple levels.' The United States reiterated its support for India following the April 22 attack in Pahalgam, where more than two dozen people were killed. Pakistan has denied any involvement and called for a neutral investigation. 'This is an evolving situation,' the State Department spokesperson said, adding Washington 'stands with India and strongly condemns the terrorist attack.' Michael Kugelman, a South Asia analyst based in Washington, said India is now a much closer US partner than Pakistan. He warned that Islamabad may fear limited US restraint if India retaliates militarily. Hussain Haqqani, a former Pakistan ambassador to Washington, noted there appears to be little appetite in the US to mediate tensions this time. 'Both countries work themselves into a frenzy every few years. This time there is no US interest in calming things down,' Haqqani said. On April 23, India unilaterally suspended the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a critical water-sharing agreement brokered by the World Bank that has withstood multiple wars and decades of hostility between the two nations. In response, Pakistan took immediate retaliatory measures. The next day, it threatened to suspend the Simla Agreement and closed its airspace to Indian flights. The National Security Committee (NSC) in Islamabad also issued a strong statement, urging India to halt its blame game and the politicised exploitation of incidents such as the Pahalgam attack to advance its narrow political agenda.
