IMF ‘has six days to save Pakistan’

[Fade]

IMF ‘has six days to save Pakistan’

By Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad and Chris Bryant in Berlin
Published: October 28 2008 11:52 | Last updated: October 28 2008 11:52

The International Monetary Fund has less than a week to prevent a full-blown financial crisis in Pakistan, Germany’s foreign minister warned on Tuesday, as Islamabad said it was nearing agreement with the fund over a bail-out package.

Speaking in the Pakistani capital, Frank-Walter Steinmeier called on the IMF to save the nuclear-armed country from an escalating financial crisis by extending an “appropriate loan”.
Source....
(http://www.ft.com/cms/s/1d44428c-a4e2-11dd-b4f5-000077b07658%2CAuthorised%3Dfalse.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F1d44428c-a4e2-11dd-b4f5-000077b07658.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fworld%2Fasiapacific)

[Laworkerbee]

India would be willing to pay top dollar for Pakistani nukes. Problem solved.

[Clayton Gold]

India would be willing to pay top dollar for Pakistani nukes. Problem solved.

A very simple - but quite effective solution ! p-)

[Stainless Steel Rat]

Is anyone else around here old-geezer-ish enough to wonder if the Thread title meant the "Impossible Mission Force"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission:_Impossible_(1966)

Some have said in the US financial crisis that some businesses (mostly Financial) have grown "To big to fail". With more countries having nuclear weapons, are we at the stage where some Nation-states, no matter how FUBAR they are, are "too dangerous to fail"?

Interesting times.

[Kaplanr]

Alexander Monday as an avatar - I like.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/image.php?u=4023&dateline=1224727904

[BugHunt]

Why is this even in question?

Im sorry but how is letting a nuclear armed nation state slip into anarchy in any1s best interest?

Oh right itll be cheaper in the longrun letting them fail and trying to pick up pieces or invading afterwards right? Or perhaps watching a rogue nuke going off somewhere...

[Laworkerbee]

Im sorry but how is letting a nuclear armed nation state slip into anarchy in any1s best interest?

If you have a better idea, or any idea at all we are all ears my man.

[BugHunt]

If you have a better idea, or any idea at all we are all ears my man.

Give them the clucking bailout?

Sounds like a smart cost effective solution compared to say another freaking badly thoughtout war on the wests part - or compared to cleaning up a city after a nuke goes off.

Dont tell me there aint the money (what $4 billion? A figure i heard) when you look at how much Eygpt and Israel get per year or the burn through rate per week in Iraq (what $2-4 Billion per WEEK).

Its ridiculous there even considering letting that pandoras box open up for what is in effect 1 ivory back scratcher for the US or 1 week of sodding Euro conferences for the EU parliment.

[Laworkerbee]

Sounds like a smart cost effective solution

It is until you realize that we would be blackmailed from there on out to support any failing state that owned nuclear weapons. The United States would face an open ended commitments to supply the Pakistani treasury, in essence we would be held hostage.

Buy, seize, or destroy those weapons, in the end it's the only way.

[3rdMillhouse]

For some unknown crazy reason, the first thing thought when I read IMF was "Impossible Mission Force".

[BugHunt]

It is until you realize that we would be blackmailed from there on out to support any failing state that owned nuclear weapons. The United States would face an open ended commitments to supply the Pakistani treasury, in essence we would be held hostage.

Buy, seize, or destroy those weapons, in the end it's the only way.


Depends on how you look at things tbh.

Do you see "Pakistan" as a homogenous blob, or are there competiting sub sections all vying and able to exert power? Civilian government, military and extremists all fighting for control? And can each of those factions be broken down further (say army hardlinersthat want power/army that want to work with civ gov/army that work with the extremists - extremists who want to negotiate/extremists who just want to kill etc).

So letting Pakistan default has what consequences and weakens whom the most? Probably im guessing the civilian government thats just taken up power....

So if we want the Pakistanis more likely experiment with another dictator or a extremist leader - its probably alright to let them go....


Is this "blackmail" giving aid to another nation? Depends on how you look at things really. Is Israel blackmailing america? Is Eygpt blackmailing america?

Are african or other states "blackmailing" american when they starve and require aid?

Or is it convenient for the US governemnt to work soft power and influence events with what amounts to tiny amounts of its still large financil clot.

$4 bill - compared to say a nuke going off or a $28 bill per month ongoing war habit..?

What makes sense....to me theres only one option. EU should get its finger out as well....

[drunken sailor]

The IMF is going to need collateral. They normally want land but how can they get land from a place like Pakistan. For example the IMF owns the rain forest in Brazil thanks to them defaulting on a loan with the IMF. The IMF cant exactly go into Pakistan and make any money because who ever goes there to take resources would be attacked.

The IMF is bad news for any country. The IMF is the cause of global warming. They have set half of Africa and South America on fire to prep their property. These fires can be seen in Al Gores movie, While he shows them in a sat view of earth he then blames cars for the pollution.:cantbeli:

Pakistan will fail as a country, The question is will they go quietly or not. If Bush keeps sending missiles into Pakistani territory then they may just lash out thinking they have no options.

[BugHunt]

If Bush keeps sending missiles into Pakistani territory then they may just lash out thinking they have no options.


I doubt there any many nations on the planet even one as divided as Pakistan that wont be be largely united and polarised against a outside aggressor bombing......(be those reasons just or not).


How can a country of that size disintergrate "nicely"?


What you tend to get during periods of great instablity and economic hardship are dictators. From our POV he might be nice or nasty.