Peshawar and tribal areas affected.....jolts in Isloo as well!A 6.2 magnitude earthquake has struck Mansehra, with tremors from the quake being felt all along the western border, DawnNews reported.
..however, people in fear came out of their homes reciting verses from Holy Qura’an, witnesses told reporters.
From the NYT article, the Piskological findings of a study on Jihadi’s conducted by Brig. Mowadat Hussain Rana of the military of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:abhishek_sharma wrote:Frustrated Strivers in Pakistan Turn to Jihad
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/world ... youth.html
Now even by the Jihadi soaked culture of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Brig. Mowadat Hussain Rana is very well placed to comment on JihadA Pakistani military psychiatrist is trying to answer that question. In a study of 24 young men who were involved in terrorist attacks in Pakistan, the psychiatrist, Brig. Mowadat Hussain Rana, has found that they tend to be the younger or middle siblings in families of six or more children. The households are not always poor but are often violent, and the youngsters get lost in the chaos.
“He’s that boy who is not in a rigorous system of rule setting,” Brigadier Rana said in an interview in Rawalpindi. “He becomes someone who drifts, who spends afternoons hitting stray dogs, and no one notices.”
His parents, at their wits’ end, take him to a mullah, hoping to instill discipline, the theory goes. The two develop a close relationship, sometimes even sexual, giving the boy the attention he has long craved. The mullah then introduces him to others, men who make him feel important, as if he is part of something bigger than himself.
Of the 24 militants in the study, about a third attended college, though not all graduated.
. In US, this hoemland security obsession is enriching the pockets of quite a few: manufacturers of gadgets, bogus analysts like Peter Bergen, think tanks, you name it. Billions of tax payer money be poured in. Of course those tea party Nazis raling against "big govt" have nothing to say about this, not the topic of this thread. In India too, perhpahs all these tight security arrangements will create jobs, spur some innovative businesses etc who knowsSSridhar wrote:Hockey World Cup opens with Z+++ securityPakistan's two-decade long terrorism and our dhimmi non-retaliation is costing us, both in terms of such arrangements as above and the overall image. While tight security has become the norm all over the world, India is suffering enormously.Security is so tight that for the expected capacity crowd of 16,000 spectators, nearly half as many of the people outside will be securitymen. There will be 5,000 policemen, 100 commandos and 1,000 paramilitary forces around the stadium.
. I don't know about the hocket tournament, but I'll watch what Kiyani/Hafeez/Pasha trio will be up to during the following 2 events:Shiv, I do recognize merit in what you say regarding security and the conviction that we, Infidels, will not be defeated by the Faithful. I am all for stringent security measures even in peaceful times (and we have not seen peace for a long time) to thwart evil designs which are aplenty in our region. We shall all submit willingly to such measures. For example, I welcomed the turning away of Kirti Chakra IA officer from entering the Cargo complex at IGIA for lack of necessary pass.shiv wrote:Sridhar I see two advantages in this kind of security
"Civilization" means a society that does not need protection of this sort and a lot of civilized societies died because uncivilized societies were ready to take advantage of the "civilization" of teh other society. Leave alone the example of say Somnath or Hampi - I have often written here about my snooty cousins who studied with me and then went to the US, who used to return for holidays in the 1990s and crinkle up a snooty nose at the airline security in India. That contempt lasted until 9-11.
The second advantage is that the "uncivilization" of Pakistan assumed that India could be thrown out of gear by taking advantage of soft targets (after they discovered that hard targets could not be easily defeated in wars.Such security is a clear signal that we will not be defeated no matter what.
There is no dhimmitude here IMO.
Shiv,shiv wrote:Like I stated earlier I have been doing some new reading on the issue of land reforms and other reforms. The reading I did some years ago had credited land reforms in India as the reason for reducing rural poverty. But a lot of material nowadays seems to say that land reforms per se had only a small role in this and that the actual poverty reduction has come by other means. However this seems to be disputed and I'm no economist and my interest is Paquistaan.
I see two things as fallout from this information.
1) If land reforms are good - I do not want that to happen in Pakistan
2) If land reforms are not so good - I don't see them happening but other means may actually be useful to Paquis and I don't want anything good to happen soon.
I have the following beliefs. Despite our painting the mango Paki Abdul as a violent being I believe that he carries with him many "Indian" characteristics - one of them being docility and servility. Th mango Abdul Paki will serve his master for scraps thrown at him and attribute to fate and Allah's will the fact that he is fcued up. This is the same foot touching mentality that Avram mentioned.
In other words it takes a lot to make the mango Abdul rise up in revolt against his master. I believe the same was true in India and it took a Gandhi to read the piskology of Indians and Brits to make Indians revolt in a way that suited them.
I think there are certain preconditions that need to be created in society before a population of mango Abduls rise up in revolt against their masters who are using them for external campaigns
1) Extreme poverty and deprivation and human suffering
2) the death or killing of icons whom the mango Abduls see as revered.
I believe that although Mango Abdul admires Paqui Army- the death of an individual army officer such as Kiyani would not affect Abdul. I believe there has to be a targeted killing of "good and respectable" people in Pakistan. These include the likes of Edhi, respected lawyers, doctors, teachers, social workers, cricketers and other icons. Anger has to be generated in society that the leadership is unable to care for those whom people admire. An angry deprived society is most likely to rise up in revolt and give the RAPE something to mull about.
Was that a story from the desert where a camel does something to the man in the tent?abhishek_sharma wrote:Probably he was talking about convincing Pakis to reduce terrorism (and not about Kashmir).
Probably the MEA babus didn't brief him properly.kenop wrote:Was that a story from the desert where a camel does something to the man in the tent?abhishek_sharma wrote:Probably he was talking about convincing Pakis to reduce terrorism (and not about Kashmir).
What is this "convincing" crap? In pure English, convince means prove something through evidence, force of argument. On this count, TSP needs no evidence. They are now even openly claiminng that they terrorize India. I guess he mean "persuade" TSP to reduce terror. Now, however humiliating, persuade means beg, bend down on your knees, do whatever to bring the other person to your PoV. India has tried persuading. TSP didn't budge. Gave empty threats about hot pursuit across the LoC. TSP said be my guest, and India's bluff was called. Then India changed tactic. Tried lots of love. This culminated in "both India and TSP are victims of terror". "Terror poses a threat to TSP". "India's & TSP's destinires arfe linked", "morons ki aasha". TSP laughed these off, and said, appreciate your concern for us, lets talk about Kashmirabhishek_sharma wrote:Probably he was talking about convincing Pakis to reduce terrorism (and not about Kashmir).
. So I guess India has now decided to bend down on its knees before the Saudis. I don't beleive TSP would care two hoots. TSP like Saudi money, but in their hearts, they believe they are TFTA while Saudis are Camel Jockeys.More like MMS care two hoots about what the MEA or for that matter the nation thinks.abhishek_sharma wrote:Probably the MEA babus didn't brief him properly.
Pakistan aims to attract foreign investment worth five billion dollars this year, but needs to tackle reform, maximise anaemic growth and stem rampant violence to clinch its ambitious target.
Last fiscal year, Pakistan recorded its worst economic growth in more than a decade, at two per cent, and attracted only 3.7 billion dollars in investment.
ONE would have thought that with all the political turmoil and full-blown Islamist insurgency Pakistan is passing through, our courts and state officials would have more to occupy them than to ban Basant.
But yet again, this centuries-old kite-flying festival has become the focus of controversy. In 2005, the Supreme Court in its wisdom decided to ban the spring celebrations, but until last year, people got around this edict by applying for a brief suspension. This year, the Lahore High Court has joined the act by refusing to permit any temporary relief from the original ban.
The official reason given for this judgment is that kids cut themselves on the sharp, ground-glass-coated string, and some people get killed by falling off roofs. So instead of directing that the city administration regulate the festival to make it safer, the Supreme Court slapped a blanket ban on the event.
However, Sajjad Bhutta has recently come out with a novel reason for the restrictions. According to this senior Lahore district official, Basant was also the occasion for ‘drinking and dance parties’. And since his goons could not break into every home where these activities were going on, a complete ban was essential.
This attitude is in tune with the annual chorus from the mullahs who denounce the festival as having Hindu origins, and thus somehow un-Islamic. Basant is a festival that heralds the coming of spring, a season of rebirth and renewal in all cultures. Different societies celebrate the end of winter in different ways, but they are all joyous occasions, and normally have no religious connotations.
In Iran, nouroz, the Persian new year, is marked with joyous celebrations, despite the efforts of the ayatollahs to put a damper on the festivities. Sensibly, the Iranian clergy realised the futility of trying to kill off an ancient tradition deeply rooted in Iranian culture and history.
Our clerics, more influenced by Afghanistan’s Taliban, have been doing their best to prevent people from having fun. Innocent pleasures are denounced from the pulpit, and people are forced into enjoying the simplest forms of pleasures behind closed doors.
Over the years, this ‘Deobandi-Wahabi-Salafi axis’, to borrow Pervez Hoodbhoy’s term, has been pushing us further and further away from normalcy. Intolerance and hypocrisy are now the norm, and extremist thugs have a tight grip on university campuses to make sure nobody has any fun.
Those denouncing Basant as a Hindu festival would be surprised to learn that many of the marriage rituals that have become central to Pakistani weddings have their roots in Hindu society. The singing and dancing that takes place on the occasion of mehndi, for instance, would not be out of place in Delhi and Mumbai. And if one is going to be literal about the scriptures, there is nothing Islamic about the dowry a bride is expected to bring with her.
Our judges, officials and mullahs need to realise that there is more to life than long lists of do’s and don’ts. The Taliban in Afghanistan based their entire rule on what people were and were not allowed to do. When their Pakistani cousins grabbed territory in Swat and elsewhere, the first thing they did was to shut down video shops and slap a ban on music. And of course, education for girls was strictly forbidden.
When we talk of eradicating extremism, we forget that it cannot be done simply by shooting a few terrorists. A change in mindset is needed. When Zia imposed so-called Islamic laws on Pakistan, he set into motion a chain of events that has culminated in the chaos we see around us.
If we are serious about winning our country back from the zealots who have seized control, we need to starve them of oxygen. This takes the form of our school curriculum that teaches intolerance; the large section of our media that stifles rational discussion; and our public discourse that makes a virtue of hypocrisy.
When we ban the shared enjoyment of traditional festivals like Basant, we are only strengthening the extremists who have come to shape our national agenda. Each time they gain one concession, they immediately demand another. We had long ago ceded New Year celebrations to the extremist thugs who went around smashing up hotels and clubs on Dec 31 if there were any signs of festivities. Is Basant going to follow the same path?
I do not always see eye to eye with my old friend, Salman Taseer, the governor of Punjab, but when he declared he would go ahead and celebrate Basant, and forget the consequences, my spirits lifted at his defiance. Almost immediately, Senator Pervez Rashid of the PML-N threatened to have Salman dragged out of the Governor’s House in handcuffs if he defied the ban. This, alas, is the level of persons who fill our assemblies.
For far too long, we have accepted the edicts of our moral police without raising an outcry. One by one, simple pleasures have been legislated away.
Bhutto started the trend by banning certain forms of entertainment in 1977. He admitted his mistake in his last days in a condemned cell when he wrote a moving document called If I Am Assassinated. Zia built on these changes, introducing flogging and public hanging during his murderous rule.
Critics of these injunctions are silenced by branding them as somehow anti-Islam. And yet, there is nothing in religion that bans music. Indeed, dance, music and the visual arts have often flourished in Muslim courts. From Andalusia to Delhi, Muslim rulers encouraged and rewarded artists and performers.
Somehow, our growing army of clerics have convinced themselves that Pakistan is more Islamic than the rest of the Muslim world. As we pride ourselves on our piety, we would do well to heed this voice from an Iranian blogger writing in 2003:
“Twenty-five years of religious rule has had one long-term benefit … for generations to come no Iranian will ever want to mix matters of state with religion…. And if only those ... in our neighbouring countries knew about our failed experiment with an Islamic government they would come to their senses too … It’s a joke they want to do now what we miserably failed at 25 years ago… But it is finished … and when these mullahs are dethroned … it will be like the Berlin Wall coming down… a little patience … our dawn is near.”
Seven years after this was posted on the Internet, Iranians are still struggling for their freedom. But at least they are fighting against the forces of darkness.
That is 3.7 B$ of dubious and fake investment.abhishek_sharma wrote:Pakistan eyes five billion dollars in foreign investmentLast fiscal year, Pakistan recorded its worst economic growth in more than a decade, at two per cent, and attracted only 3.7 billion dollars in investment.
What ever the mode, the only way to break up Bakistan is to start a movement for land to peasants. In fact, it would be great if the Taliban itself starts up this movement. This will immediately endear them to whole of poor & downtrodden and set up Taliban against their own masters. I think India will not do worse if the Taliban takes over Bakistan. For the real backbone of Taliban being the Pak army is already stationed on our borders. Disintegration and take over of portions of Bakistan by Taliban will reduce the international appeal, military aid and future threat of Pakistan (though few terrorist elements might threaten India but they will lack the major safety net provided by Bakistan army) Therefore I think that we should gently mobilize Indian army and force Bakistan army to move back to Indian borders and give Taliban space to grow and give back land to peasants.SSridhar wrote:Shiv, the 'landless revolting against the RAPE' is difficult, if not impossible. One problem, which I consider as major, is that the rural (and even most urban) population in Pakistan believe in some Pir or the other. These Pirs are the most oppressive figures who thoroughly exploit the landless directly and in collusion with the landowners. In most cases, the Pirs are themselves huge landowners. The Pakistanis have unshakeable faith in Pirs. The NWFP was yanked away from the hands of the Congress very quickly by letting loose the Pir of Manki Sharif in 1946. Unless this blind following of the masses with their Pirs is broken, the 'revolt' is impossible. However, all solutions such as encouraging the Taliban or the Hizb-ut-Tahrir or other salafist organizations will have other implications for us. We need to be careful on that.
There were reports of such things during their Buner campaign. A few landlords had reportedly left the area. There is potential only if Taliban get free of control of the PA/ISI (PA top brass would be in some related to the big landlords etc.).Bheem wrote: What ever the mode, the only way to break up Bakistan is to start a movement for land to peasants. In fact, it would be great if the Taliban itself starts up this movement.
Saudi Arabia, with its close ties with Islamabad, could be a "valuable interlocutor" in improving India's ties with Pakistan, minister of state for external affairs Shashi Tharoor said here on Sunday.
"We feel Saudi Arabia has a long and close relationship with Pakistan and that makes Saudi a more valuable interlocutor to us," Tharoor told Indian journalists here.
Tharoor added that Saudi Arabia has its own issues with al-Qaida.
"We expect to have a constructive conversation on the issue. The tentacles of terror have already spread from Afghanistan to Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine, and latest is Yemen," he added.
The approach of the Indian and Pakistani sides presents a study in contrast, although both saw the other as desperately keen for talks to resume. India always held dialogue as a trump card to force Pakistan to respond to its demands to curb the activities of terrorist groups. On its part, Islamabad presumed that India "panicked" at the prospect of regional isolation on its part after placing itself brilliantly to seek leverage with the US from its "strategic assets" - the Taliban - in the endgame in Afghanistan.
Neither assumption is valid. Delhi ought to realize that despite its stubborn refusal to talk, Islamabad parried its demand to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure with links to the Pakistani security establishment that bleeds India. Indeed, indications are that Pakistan envisages the continued use of terrorism as a state policy vis-a-vis India.
Equally, Islamabad is naive to think Delhi will roll over and accept a Taliban regime in Kabul. Indeed, India has several big advantages insofar as its economy is robustly coasting toward a 9% growth rate and it isn't a basket case needing a constant infusion of American aid, apart from enjoying the political stability that comes with civilian supremacy in government.
The Indians used the talks on Thursday to push terrorism to center stage. The Indian brief seems to have been as hard as nails, with Delhi handing over three dossiers listing Pakistan-based terrorists, while its projection in the run-up was as smooth as silk, with Delhi presenting itself as reasonable and open to exchanges on a range of bilateral issues.
The Pakistani side apparently did not expect Delhi to name a senior serving Pakistani military official as a terrorist. Given the political realities in Pakistan with the military calling the shots, Delhi's allegation almost instinctively forced the suave Pakistani Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir, who led the visiting delegation and who is well regarded in Delhi, to launch an uncharacteristic 90-minute televised diatribe against India at a press conference in the Pakistani chancery.
How the Indian allegation regarding the Pakistani military officer pans out remains to be seen since it constitutes a virtual finger-pointing of the army chief in Rawalpindi, General Pervez Kiani, as the mastermind behind terrorism in the sub-continent.
We may expect storms in the days ahead, and how big the American umbrella is to ferry home the Indians and the Pakistanis in the event of a sudden downpour becomes an element in the Barack Obama administration's checklist, alongside the attendant woes of the war in Afghanistan.
The audacity of Obama's hope is simply stunning - pick up the Pakistani military to be a key ally of both the US and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the fulfillment of strategy on Afghanistan and Central Asia, while stringing Delhi along as a "strategic partner'' in encounters with a rising China and resurgent Russia.
Obama faces an acute dilemma. Time is short and he desperately needs the Pakistani military to bring the Taliban in from the cold to the negotiating table, without which the bleeding of the US's Afghan wound won't stop. The Pakistani military senses Obama's need and it knows it is immensely experienced in serving Washington's interests in the Hindu Kush - but for a price.
The Pakistani wish-list is demanding. The military expects to be built up by Washington to a near parity in conventional strength with its Indian adversary. It also deserves a nuclear deal similar to the one the George W Bush administration granted India. It cannot and will not accept any thinking in Washington that attributes the role of a regional superpower to India; and it expects a US mediatory role to pressure India to settle the Kashmir dispute.
In essence, Pakistan seeks a strategic relationship with the US that duly recognizes its own legitimate claim as a regional power that goes beyond the imperatives of the Afghan war or NATO's enlargement in Central Asia.
Delhi - and indeed other regional powers - will be keenly watching how far Obama bends to accommodate Pakistan. Meanwhile, a series of consultations with other key players with stakes in Obama's regional policies is beginning. Indian Foreign Minister S M Krishna is scheduled to visit Beijing; Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is due to visit Delhi in March; and a round of ministerial consultation with Iran may come up in May.
However, Delhi may see no real need to seek an entente cordiale with third parties in order to catch Obama's eye. India's ties with the US are steadily deepening and unlike in the case with Pakistan, strategic partnership with the US goes down extremely well with the Indian elites and public opinion. It cannot be lost on Washington that India is indeed one of the few "natural allies" left on the planet for the US and unlike the case with Pakistan, Delhi promises a durable relationship of intrinsic worth.
Why should the US, therefore, kill the goose that lays the golden egg? Delhi expects Washington not to tread on India's core interests and concerns and estimates that a relationship of mutual trust and global partnership isn't too much to ask.
While the US has seldom been so influential in the sub-continent, a striking parallel can be drawn with the early 1960s after the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict. Chinese "communist expansionism" was the core US agenda and Washington counted on keeping both India and Pakistan as allies - and perhaps made its most direct intervention to settle the Kashmir dispute so that its geostrategy could work.
However, as Howard Schaffer, an experienced former US ambassador, wrote in a recent book, at a certain point the John F Kennedy administration saw the danger of annoying India by pressuring it on Kashmir lest Delhi drift toward Beijing for a normalization of relations.
But historical analogies apart, the nascent India-Pakistan dialogue process that started in Delhi on Thursday will likely continue. It seems reasonable to estimate that despite hardliners in both countries, Delhi and Islamabad will realize the usefulness of an incremental dialogue process.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is an ardent advocate of a transformation of the adversarial India-Pakistan relationship on lines similar to the historic French-German concord of the 1950s. But there is also some disarray insofar as the Indian security establishment doesn't seem to share his vision and often gives into silly pastimes of laying booby traps along the path of India-Pakistan normalization.
The prime ministers of India and Pakistan are bound to come across one another on April 28-29 at a summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation in the Bhutanese capital of Thimpu.
Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao revealed that Bashir invited her to visit Islamabad for the next round of talks. Will they schedule a session in late March or early April?
I call BS.But there is also some disarray insofar as the Indian security establishment doesn't seem to share his vision and often gives into silly pastimes of laying booby traps along the path of India-Pakistan normalization.
kenop wrote:CNN-IBN is reporting India seeks Saudi mediation in Indo-Pak relations
Tharoor retractsabhishek_sharma wrote:Saudi Arabia can be an interlocutor with Pakistan: Tharoor
I think he is playing with words such as interlocutor and mediator. He denies having used 'mediator' which is true.“No chance of my saying Saudi Arabia should be a mediator... Never said that or anything like it,” Mr. Tharoor said.
Q: It takes a lot of courage for a democratic setup like India to try and bring the India-Pakistan talks back on track, especially when you are suffering from the scourge of terrorism. Is the resumption of dialogue at the secretaries’ level a change in the government stand? Your stated position is that while India is ready to keep talking to Pakistan, the stalled peace process can resume only if Islamabad acts against the alleged planners of the 2008 Mumbai attacks.
A: There is no change in our position. We seek a peaceful and normal relationship with Pakistan. We should be good neighbors. In that quest we have consistently sought to engage those in Pakistan who are ready to work with us. There is no alternative to dialogue to resolve the issues that divide us. Today the primary issue is terrorism.
Q: How serious is the Pakistan Taliban threat to India, especially to Jammu & Kashmir which has bubbled up again. How could the Kashmir issue be solved once and for all?
A: As a neighbor, we cannot remain immune to the rise of extremism and terrorism in Pakistan, or on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Extremism and terrorism are major threats not only to India, but also to Pakistan, and all its other neighbors. It is in our collective interest that we resolutely oppose, resist and overcome terrorism and all those who nurture, sustain and give sanctuary to terrorists and extremist elements.
It is a fact that Jammu and Kashmir and its people have suffered repeatedly at the hands of terrorism from across the border. This has militated against the will of the people of the state, who have time and again voted in large numbers in democratic elections to unambiguously reject violence. We have taken several measures for the development of Jammu and Kashmir, and for its people to live in peace and harmony, as in the rest of the country. In so far as our dialogue with Pakistan is concerned, we are ready to discuss all issues with them in an atmosphere free from terrorism.
Saudi Gazette
JuD chief Hafiz Mohd Saeed has said Pakistan will have to "fight a war at all costs" if New Delhi is not prepared to hold talks.
Asked about India's accusations about his involvement in planning and carrying out the Mumbai attacks, Saeed replied: "Let India prove it in any court, I will be ready to accept everything."
To another question on whether people should go to Kashmir for 'jehad' against India, he said there was "no doubt" in his mind that this should be done.
He also said he had no doubt that the Pakistan government is "cowardly."
The JuD chief's face was not shown during the interview and he was filmed over his shoulder from the back. He said he did not wish to be filmed as it was not allowed by 'Shariah' or Islamic law.
The JuD chief's face was not shown during the interview and he was filmed over his shoulder from the back. He said he did not wish to be filmed as it was not allowed by 'Shariah' or Islamic law.
JE Menon wrote:The word "interlocutor" has been used for the US also... there was never anything raised about it. This "issue" is purely a media creation, because there is little else concrete and "newsworthy"... they make an issue of this. It will soon die down and the media will saying the trip was a success despite minor hiccups like the Tharoor "interlocutor" issue - something which only the media made an issue of anyways...
Tharoor meanwhile gets the image of someone who can hardly open his mouth and tweet without being second and third guessed. Let's hope he is at least as clear in his SMSes to NDTV's Nidhi Razdan. Seriously, someone has it in for the guy.
Some one please correct me if I am wrong but when you take inflation and population growth into account 2% growth becomes negative doesn't it?Last fiscal year, Pakistan recorded its worst economic growth in more than a decade, at two per cent, and attracted only 3.7 billion dollars in investment.
Growth rates are typically given in “real” terms ie: after accounting for inflation. I suspect the 2% growth rate reported in the article is in “real” terms and not in “nominal” terms which would include growth caused by inflationary increase.shiv wrote:Some one please correct me if I am wrong but when you take inflation and population growth into account 2% growth becomes negative doesn't it?Last fiscal year, Pakistan recorded its worst economic growth in more than a decade, at two per cent, and attracted only 3.7 billion dollars in investment.
If this is on the basis of the FBI dossier, their goose is getting cooked on low fry....two serving Pakistani Army officers, Major Iqbal and Major Sameer Ali, were actively involved in handling Headley, directed the terror plots, and that Major Iqbal handed him $25,000 before sending him to India.
ThxBut Pakistan's populatin growth rate has been over 2% for a while.arun wrote: Growth rates are typically given in “real” terms ie: after accounting for inflation. I suspect the 2% growth rate reported in the article is in “real” terms and not in “nominal” terms which would include growth caused by inflationary increase.
Regards population growth IIRC it is under 2% in the Islamic Republic.
Bottom line,the Islamic Republic has likely some positive real growth in per capita terms