A Technocratic Government's Economic Justification

 Today, I'm sharing the economy article.

Pakistan's political scene has recently been abuzz with talk of a technocratic government. Nothing finds out about technocracy basically being essential for the political circle and being acquainted with the majority. Even though I am a huge proponent of a meritocratic system and believe in its success, I still think it is a healthy discussion to spread the idea that political structures can be more diverse and still be effective.

We can read and hear opposing perspectives on both democratic structures and marital laws in Pakistan's political discourse. A populist strategy was not considered to be victorious in politics until Imran Khan took power. During the presidency of President General Pervaiz Musharraf, the only genuine example of a technocratic structure existed. Despite the fact that many democratic supporters view his regime as a failure, I believe it is a significant victory for the technocrats, particularly in light of the government's ability to maintain an 8.5% GDP for years.

Major advancements in economic governance and structural reforms enabled faster economic growth and greater social prosperity from 2000 to 2008. He was able to increase the "lost decade's" slow growth rates from 2.1% to 7% in his early years. In addition, Pakistan's GDP increased by 8.95 percent annually in 2005, a significant milestone in the country's economic history. In order to cover imports for six months, the amount of foreign exchange reserves was increased. In the past, only three weeks' worth of imports could be covered by the currency reserves. There were only $700 million in foreign reserves when he arrived. $17 billion are now available. Pakistan was a good place for foreign investors to invest during his time in power. The economy was financed with approximately $14 billion in private capital from other nations, and investments increased at a rate of 23% of GDP. In 2000 and 2001, FDI remained very low at $481 million. However, in the eight years that followed, the same head earned a sizable sum of $5152.80 million. This demonstrates that the government of Musharraf made it simple for foreign investors to conduct business. Technocrats' ability to focus on practical, efficient solutions to a variety of monetary, fiscal, economic, and infrastructure issues rather than ideological strategies is their greatest strength. Their approach to societal issues from the perspective of appropriate knowledge and experience by seeking solutions to broadly conceived issues in science and technology is their second superpower.

However, the purpose of this article is to present a compelling economic case for a technocratic system, particularly in light of the severe criticism it receives from senior politicians and political pundits. Ahsan Iqbal, the Minister for Planning and Development and a seasoned politician, recently stated that technocrats should only serve as advisors to the government. I admire his political intelligence and wisdom greatly. Respectfully, though, I disagree with this idea and believe that Pakistan's current economic turmoil strongly supports a technocratic and even better meritocratic system.

Technocrats are adept at bringing about structural changes and implementing reforms that politicians cannot or may not implement because of their cognitive-practical minds. Technocrats are typically viewed as the last hope by business, institutional, and even political leaders who believe that non-politicians are required to bring about the necessary changes to governance immediately and resolve issues that threaten the nation's integrity and sustainability.

Technocrats' ability to focus on practical, efficient solutions to a variety of monetary, fiscal, economic, and infrastructure issues rather than ideological strategies is their greatest strength. Their approach to societal issues from the perspective of appropriate knowledge and experience by seeking solutions to broadly conceived issues in science and technology is their second superpower. Therefore, labeling technocrats as "advisors" is a slap in the face of many technocrats, who I believe are true assets, if they are capable of devising strategies and restructuring for the benefit of a nation. The politicians may be experiencing economic desperation when they made the recent decision to sell two of its LNG plants to Qatar. Now, I want the readers to pause and consider whether it would have been more beneficial for our politicians to hire technocrats to evaluate national assets and develop a plan for privatization and performance improvement. Or is it better to get rid of our national assets? In addition, in the hope of revitalizing the economy, the "white elephants" that continue to be a source of financial leakages could have been included in this endeavor. Our undocumented economy has been putting pressure on the finances for decades, and politicians appear to have ignored it. However, if increasing tax collection necessitates pursuing undocumented individuals and traders, do so methodically and with reasonable taxation. In order to combat food inflation and insecurity, our agriculture sector requires the most recent technology, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and cutting-edge irrigation methods. As a result, politicians need to step aside and let experts drive agricultural growth in the country.

The general disapproval of politicians, who may refuse to allow technocrats to function out of concern that they will lose their hold on the public, is the most significant obstacle to a technocratic arrangement. As a "technocratic" supreme, the judiciary must intervene in this area to establish a more robust, reformed technocratic structure to support Pakistan's nearly bankrupt economy. However, it would be extremely unfortunate if technocracy were seen as a short-term solution to delaying the country's growing demand for elections, given that technocrats have the ability to steer the economy in a number of different sectors other than those I mentioned earlier.