A dangerous conspiracy to make the country a barren land

A fundamental gap has always existed between the Pakistani state and its people regarding development. While successive governments have announced development projects, a significant portion of the public has continued to express scepticism about these initiatives. The question arises: why do the Pakistani people and their rulers persist in blaming each other, and what impact does this have on the country’s progress?

Efforts to reform Pakistan’s agrarian economy have been made across different eras, yet their outcomes remain a topic of debate. From Ayub Khan’s agricultural reforms to Bhutto’s more radical measures and the later introduction of modern farming techniques, the objective has always been to increase agricultural production and reduce poverty. However, the results appear contradictory. On one hand, the Green Revolution boosted agricultural output; on the other, poverty levels did not decline significantly.

It must be acknowledged that the history of agricultural reforms in Pakistan is closely linked to economic growth, poverty alleviation, and the dream of self-sufficiency in food production. However, these efforts have often yielded contentious results. A critical review of past initiatives—Ayub Khan and Bhutto’s agricultural programmes, the impact of the Green Revolution, the environmental risks of corporate farming, and the looming water crisis—reveals that the first major land reforms were introduced by Ayub Khan in 1959 and 1963. These reforms aimed to weaken the feudal system by redistributing 4 million acres of land from large landlords to landless farmers. Additionally, projects like the Mangla Dam (1967) and Tarbela Dam (1976) were launched to enhance water storage and electricity generation. While these measures laid the foundation for increased agricultural production, poverty remained largely unaffected due to inequitable land distribution and bureaucratic inefficiencies.

Subsequently, in 1972 and 1977, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto reduced the maximum landholding limits, criticising Ayub Khan’s programme as inadequate. His reforms aimed to eliminate class disparities in rural areas; however, political opposition and bureaucratic hurdles prevented their full implementation.

The critical question remains: who truly benefited from agricultural development? Some critics argue that the primary beneficiaries were the military, bureaucracy, and business elite. Conversely, the government maintains that agricultural output doubled, but due to a corresponding rise in population, poverty could not be eradicated.

One major issue is the trust deficit between the government and the public. While the government expects public confidence, citizens remain sceptical of state institutions. Voters question how they can trust a government that itself lacks faith in its judiciary and parliament. Development projects often become entangled in suspicion, with the public questioning their transparency. Many argue that the people should be included in the planning process to ensure policies align with their needs.

Rulers claim that the public obstructs development projects, whereas the people contend that these initiatives are planned without their consultation. Bridging this gap requires incorporating public opinion into development policies. Decisions should be made through elected representatives to ensure transparency and trust. Another widespread grievance is that national resources remain concentrated in the hands of a few elite families, leaving ordinary citizens without a stake in national progress. Equitable resource distribution would naturally strengthen Pakistani national identity.

Pakistan is among the ten most water-scarce countries in the world. While the government attempts to construct large dams and irrigation projects, these efforts often spark controversy. For instance, a 7-million-acre agricultural project in Cholistan has ignited debate, with Sindh and other provinces expressing concerns. Key issues include water distribution, climate change, and modern agricultural techniques. Many fear that additional water for such projects will be unavailable, further exacerbating existing shortages.

Corporate farming has gained particular prominence among modern agricultural methods. The government argues that it can enhance productivity, boost exports, and align Pakistan’s agriculture with global standards—potentially transforming the lives of the 70% of Pakistanis dependent on farming. However, corporate farming primarily relies on genetically modified and hybrid seeds for higher yields. While these seeds initially increase productivity, they pose long-term risks to soil fertility. Continuous cultivation over 10 to 20 years can deplete the soil’s organic composition, rendering it barren and raising the spectre of a future food crisis.

We have seen this in the past. From 1967 to 1970, hybrid seeds, chemical fertilizers, and modern irrigation doubled wheat and rice production. However, poverty did not decrease due to lack of access to small farmers, debt burdens, and uneven access to markets. The government argued that rapid population growth (3% per year) offset the effects of development, while critics argued that the benefits were limited to the military, bureaucrats, and political elites.

Now, once again, we are moving rapidly towards corporate farming. A short definition of this system is where large agricultural land is used for commercial production activities, where companies or corporations raise crops or livestock using modern technology, machinery, and management, and all farmers deprived of these resources are at the mercy of these companies.
The Pakistani government says that the steps taken to promote corporate farming in recent years,

especially after 2020 when a program in the name of agricultural reforms has been launched once again, which includes proposals to lease unused government lands and provide tax exemptions on the import of agricultural equipment and modern technology.

Proposals to establish agricultural industrial parks under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) are also being worked on.

A plan to increase production through drones, artificial intelligence and precision farming for corporate farming is also being finalized. Which will increase foreign exchange reserves by increasing agricultural exports (e.g. wheat, rice, cotton).

Of course, while corporate farming will increase the creation of new skilled and unskilled jobs, it will also save water through methods like drip irrigation.

The use of genetically modified and hybrid seeds in corporate farming increases temporary yields, but it destroys the organic fertility of the land. Continuous use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides weakens the soil structure, and the land becomes barren in 10-20 years. For example, a 30% decline in wheat production has been reported in some areas of Punjab, which is attributed to increased soil salinity and depletion of organic matter.

In Cholistan, land is being given to domestic and foreign companies under corporate farming. Companies from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and China are interested in corporate farming in Pakistan. Companies like Ingro Foods, National Foods are active in the agricultural sector. But the question is, will its benefits reach small farmers? Where will local farmers stand when limited water is allocated for corporate farming? Moreover, has the government told investors that if the required water does not come to the river in any year, their farms will suffer? Without ensuring facilities and market access for small farmers, the project seems unlikely to succeed.

One of the biggest risks of corporate farming is that the seeds used for high yields severely damage the fertility of the land. These seeds include genetically modified and hybrid seeds, which temporarily increase yields but deprive the land of organic fertility within 10 to 20 years. As a result, the land becomes barren and later becomes unfit for any kind of cultivation.

The negative effects of this type of corporate farming have been seen in African countries, especially Ethiopia, Sudan and other regions, where international companies buy large amounts of agricultural land and grow export crops, but later that land becomes completely barren. After that, that land is no longer fit for any agriculture, which results in serious damage to local farmers and the national economy. It is feared that the same strategy is being adopted in Pakistan to make agricultural land useless on a long-term basis and push the country towards a food crisis.

According to the rulers, the people are an obstacle to development projects, while the people say that development projects are prepared without their advice. This gap can be reduced by including the opinion of the people in development policies. Development decisions should be made through public representatives to ensure transparency and trust.

Pakistan is among the 10 countries in the world facing severe water shortages and severe droughts. Due to climate change, Himalayan glaciers are melting rapidly, which may temporarily increase the flow of rivers, but by 2050, river water reserves may decrease by 30-40%. We know from environmental experts that our glaciers are melting so fast that the difference between a river and a desert will disappear in the next half century.

According to experts, the Indus River Delta is shrinking at a rate of 3.5 meters per year due to rising sea levels. According to environmental experts, our glaciers are melting rapidly, due to which rivers may cease to exist in the next half century and vast areas may turn into deserts. According to IRSA data, due to climate change, Punjab is getting 14 percent less water than required and Sindh is getting 20 percent less water. Water scarcity in low-lying areas of Sindh has pushed saltwater inland, reducing cultivable land. Due to this scarcity, the Indus Delta is continuously being engulfed by the sea, affecting thousands of acres of fertile land. Moreover, our ecosystem is facing severe changes like floods and droughts, but timely measures cannot be taken due to the absence of an early warning system.

Climate change has made rainfall patterns unpredictable. The 2022 floods affected 33% of the
country’s area, while droughts destroyed crops in southern Punjab and Sindh during 2018-2023. Government agencies are unable to accurately predict floods and droughts, making it difficult for farmers to plan.

Those who earn millions of rupees from the national treasury complain that the Indus Delta is being swallowed by the sea due to the continuous shortage of downstream water, but none of them says which year the flood will come and which year there will be so little rain that the beauty of the faces of the fertile lands of the homeland will be lost. On the other hand, our eternal enemy India, which despite taking three eastern rivers in 1960, continues to insist that reconsidering the Indus Water Treaty is the need of the hour.

According to IRSA data, due to climate change, Punjab is getting 14 percent less water than required and Sindh is getting 20 percent less water. Due to this shortage, the Indus Delta is constantly being engulfed by the sea, affecting thousands of acres of fertile land. Moreover, our ecosystem is facing severe changes like floods and droughts, but due to the absence of an early warning system, timely measures cannot be taken.

In this context, when this news is published with the picture of our army chief and Punjab Chief Minister that the federation and Punjab have started a plan to turn 7 million acres of Cholistan into gardens and springs, we have started a new unrest in the lower provinces with our own hands, while the Constitutional Council of Common Interests has not met for 11 months, where the water disputes of the provinces are still pending. Power is such a bad greed that President Asif Zardari himself is with the Green Pakistan Project, but his party has been continuously expressing reservations about this project inside and outside the parliament.

The makers of Green Pakistan say that the irrigation of Cholistan will not be done by reducing the fixed water quota of any province, but the additional water for this will either be obtained from the monsoon flood of the Sutlej River given to India or Punjab will sacrifice water from its quota. For all these important issues, it is necessary that we directly involve the public in the distribution of national resources instead of distributing them only to specific segments.

Public forums and stakeholders should be consulted before making development plans.
Meetings of the Council of Common Interests should be convened continuously for the fair distribution of water so that all provinces are provided with equal opportunities.
Measures should be taken to provide incentives to small farmers, modern agricultural training, low-cost loans, and easy access to markets for farmers.

Details of external loan agreements should be made public to ensure transparency.
Modern methods should be adopted to reduce the risks of glacier melting and water shortages.
To restore trust between the government and the public, the public should be included in decision-making and development plans should be discussed openly to increase trust.

It should be remembered that research shows that major decisions alone are not enough for the success of development plans, but it is also necessary to ensure transparency, consultation, and fair distribution of resources during their implementation. When the people are made partners in development, only then will they consider themselves a real part of this country.

But on the other hand, the government’s actions have not paid any attention to the economic weakness of small farmers and the central impact of the land. No proposal has been made to prevent land degradation due to excessive use of chemical fertilizers and water. How will the conflicts related to land ownership rights and the rights of local populations be dealt with? The threat of climate change (such as floods, droughts) is looming in Pakistan, and no concrete proposals have been prepared to address it.