Self-reliance: true meaning and significance
By Aftab Ahmad Khan

The concept of self-reliance has figured prominently in the debate on development. The dependency theory of under-development brought self-reliance into particularly sharp focus. In our case, attempts by international financial institutions and some donor governments to influence us to alter our policies point up the urgent need.

The dependence of our economy on substantial external resource inflows for sustaining a high rate of equity premised growth even after more than five decades of development planning can largely be attributed to the absence of a clear vision of log-term goals in the distant horizon and realistic targets in the immediate future; our inability to mobili e the masses and win their whole-hearted cooperation and participation in accomplishing national development tasks, institutional erosion; apathy towards necessary structural alteration; and preoccupation of governments with fire fighting chores and crisis management which adversely affected their ability to think clearly and coherently about the future.

The basic philosophy underlying the concept of self-reliance is the capability to bear any crisis on the basis of internal strength and resilience; self-reliance, however, is not synonymous with economic autarky, implying a completely closed economic system with no international links. Self-reliance signifies the achievement of a stage of economic development characteri ed by a state of economic equilibrium based on normal commercial transactions rather than on special forms of external support such as concessional bilateral loans and grants. Basically, it implies freedom from dependence on foreign assistance and capacity for autonomous goal setting and decision-making. Consequently, it emphasi es the need to resist and reject all forms of dependency, self-invited or externally imposed, that can be converted into political pressure and weaken our national sovereignty.

Taking this as the basic, in Pakistan context, self-reliance should include the following:

(a) Economic self-reliance

(b) Technological self-reliance

(c) Strategic self-reliance.

(a) Economic self-reliance

It implies that the economy should be able to support an adequate scale of investment from its own production and savings. Normal inflow of external capital may continue but reliance on foreign aid should be progressively eliminated.

(b) Technological self-reliance

It signifies an adequate level of development in regard to science, technology and engineering required for the maintenance and moderni ation of productive processes.

(c) Strategic self-reliance

It implies the capacity to meet the bulk of our defence requirements domestically.

Self-reliance would lose much of its significance if it were associated with a low-level equilibrium trap. What is to be aimed at is a dynamic self-reliance where the rate of economic growth is accelerated while simultaneously developing the capacity to sustain it exclusively from our domestic resources. This means that a self-reliant economy during its process of growth must generate enough savings and exports to maintain the momentum of its development at the socially necessary rate, which in our case should be an annual rate of growth of at least 7 (seven) per cent in domestic output (GDP).

It has to be clearly understood that the journey towards a self reliant economy will be a long and arduous one with difficulties at several points.

The planners will have to devise and implement a coordinated strategy aimed at building up human resources and promoting positive interaction of growth with savings and investments. Special attention will have to be paid to the channelling of higher savings to the most productive investments, an aspect wherein our performance has not been very satisfactory. In the contest of mobili ing resources for the implementation of a strategy aiming at self-reliance, the importance of austerity cannot be over-emphasised.

In the past there has been a lot of noise about avoidance of waste, ostentation and conspicuous consumption but little effective action. The lack of consonance between ideals and existential practice has brought into prominence the growing contrasts between the life styles of the rich and the poor. If this trend is not decisively reversed, it is bound to unleash forces whose power and effects cannot be anticipated and which may retard our progress towards self-reliance aside from generating de-stabilising social tensions.

In conclusion, it may be emphasi ed that self-reliance has to be cultivated both for its intrinsic and instrumental values. Several advantages can accrue from it nationally. It can also make for selective international cooperation on equal terms and breakdown the harsh conditions that usually accompany dependency. Self-reliance will also make possible endogenous growth that is relevant and meaningful in our national context. International cooperation, of course, will remain a fact of life. Where, however, there is a risk of inter-dependence eroding our national sovereignty, it should be avoided even if there are some costs. Other mutually beneficial patterns of inter-dependence should be fostered. Selective participation in the international system is a pre-requisite for the application of a development strategy for strengthening sovereignty and for fostering self-reliance.