When it comes to making use of foreign assistance, Pakistan has shot itself in the foot too many times. Calling out the Americans on administrative expenditure is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Arguing with any donor, American or not, about knowing development better than they do, is a case of selling fairytales. Countries that are net donors tend to be ones that have already sorted some of the deeper, more fundamental issues and challenges of statehood. Pakistan is a net recipient, not a net donor. It doesn't know development, and it shows.
Pakistan's development indicators are terrible. The UNDP's Human Development Index-conceived by a patriotic and proud Pakistani called Dr Mahbubul Haq-is the gold standard for countries' development performance. Where does Pakistan rank on the index? It is 139th out of 179 countries. By some miracle of semantics, it qualifies as a Medium Human Development country. This Medium Human Development "jiggernaut" is sandwiched between Mauritania below it and Yemen above.
Pakistan's life expectancy at birth is 64.9, placing it at number 125. Pakistani nationalists might sleep easier tonight knowing that, at that rank, it ranks two positions above India. Jai Ho. Pakistan's adult literacy rate, at 54.2 per cent places it at the 132nd position, occupying the same neighborhood as Liberia, Bhutan, Togo and Bangladesh.
Pakistan's combined, primary, secondary and tertiary gross enrolment ratio is 39.3 per cent, only good enough for 169th position. Out of 179. The only countries worse off than Pakistan on enrollment figures are, in order, Ivory Coast, Guinea-Bissau, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Niger, Angola and Djibouti.
Why dig up quantitative proof of just how bad Pakistan is at this whole development thing? Simple. To reinforce that the Pakistani state, and all Pakistani governments, can't claim any expertise in the area, at all.

