Pakistan’s investment credibility needs more than delegations and promises

Pakistan faces a difficult economic question: Are investment announcements translating into real economic activity?

The answer should not depend on political loyalties. It should depend on measurable results.

Pakistan regularly hosts business delegations, investment meetings and signing ceremonies. Governments and institutions announce major investment plans and memoranda of understanding. These developments can be useful. But an announcement alone does not create a factory, a job or an export.

The country needs to track what happens after the headlines.

How much capital actually enters Pakistan? How many projects begin operations? How many jobs are created? How much do these projects export? And how much tax revenue do they generate?

These are the measures that can show whether investment diplomacy is producing lasting economic value.

Debt adds urgency to the debate

Reported figures published on August 13, 2026, put Pakistan’s total debt and liabilities at about Rs99.587 trillion.

That figure represents a broad measure of debt and liabilities. It should not be described simply as foreign debt. The reported amount includes domestic and external obligations as well as other liabilities.

Even with that distinction, the scale remains significant.

Pakistan reportedly added about Rs5.2 trillion to its debt and liabilities during FY2025-26. The increase over two years was reported at about Rs12.5 trillion.

Pakistan eyes bigger African trade as Malawi offers exporters higher margins

Borrowing is not automatically a sign of economic failure. Countries around the world borrow to finance development.

The important question is what the borrowing produces.

Does it create productive industries? Does it expand exports? Does it generate skilled employment? Does it widen the tax base enough to support future repayments?

Those questions deserve clear answers.

Borrowing and privatisation need greater scrutiny

Pakistan has also pursued privatisation for decades.

According to figures from the Privatisation Commission, 182 transactions generated about Rs651.283 billion in proceeds between 1991 and June 2024.

The transactions covered sectors including banking, telecommunications, energy, cement, chemicals, fertilisers and engineering.

Privatisation can improve efficiency when competition and strong regulation accompany the process. But selling state assets cannot become a permanent substitute for building productive economic capacity.

The same principle applies to borrowing.

A sustainable economy needs investment that creates new value. It needs industries that compete globally and businesses that generate exports, employment and tax revenue.

Investment announcements are not the same as investment

Pakistan also needs a clearer system for measuring foreign investment.

Public attention often focuses on large investment figures announced during visits and business meetings. Memoranda of understanding can create a path for future cooperation. Yet an MOU does not necessarily mean that capital has entered the country.

Investment becomes economically meaningful when funds are transferred, projects are developed and businesses begin producing goods or services.

Official figures provide an important reference point.

According to the investment figures cited in the original analysis, net foreign direct investment stood at about $249.6 million in FY2021-22, $89.3 million in FY2022-23 and $137.3 million in FY2023-24.

Together, those figures amount to about $476.2 million across three fiscal years.

That does not mean investment announcements have no value. Some projects take years to complete. Others may be delayed by financing, regulatory or commercial issues.

The problem arises when proposed investment is presented as if it were already deployed capital.

Pakistan therefore needs a clear distinction between four stages:

Investment announced.

Investment legally committed.

Investment received.

Investment deployed.

Without that distinction, public debate can easily confuse potential investment with actual economic activity.

Pakistan needs an Investment Delivery Register

The government should consider creating a publicly accessible Investment Delivery Register for major foreign investment projects.

The register could provide basic information about each project, including the investor, announced amount and legally committed amount.

It should also show how much money has actually entered Pakistan.

Other useful indicators would include project location, implementation status, jobs created, exports generated and tax contributions.

Such a system would not only improve accountability. It could also benefit genuine investors.

Successful projects would have publicly verifiable records. Investors that deliver could receive recognition based on results rather than promises.

Most importantly, citizens would have a clearer picture of Pakistan’s investment performance.

Promised dollars are not invested dollars.

Foreign delegations also need transparency

The same principle should apply to foreign business delegations.

Pakistan should not label every unsuccessful delegation as fake. International negotiations often fail for normal commercial reasons.

However, public institutions should be able to establish who participated in major investment meetings.

Which companies did the visitors represent?

What businesses do those companies operate?

What investment capacity do they have?

Did the meetings produce enforceable agreements?

And did any capital eventually enter Pakistan?

These questions are about transparency, not political accusation.

If a delegation is presented publicly as representing major investors, the underlying claims should be verifiable.

If evidence later shows that people were knowingly presented as investors despite lacking the claimed corporate position or investment capacity, that matter should face independent scrutiny.

The standard should always be evidence.

Why are some established businesses reducing their presence?

Pakistan should also examine another side of the investment debate.

While policymakers seek new foreign investors, established multinational companies have at different times sold businesses, reduced operations or changed their Pakistan strategies.

Each corporate decision has its own circumstances. It would be wrong to blame every departure on one government or a single policy.

But the broader question remains important.

Why do some companies that already operate in Pakistan reduce their exposure?

The answer could reveal problems that new investment campaigns alone cannot solve.

Investor confidence is not measured only by the number of conferences held. It is also reflected in whether companies are willing to commit capital for the long term.

Stable regulation, predictable taxation, reliable energy, efficient courts and transparent institutions all influence that decision.

Pakistan’s human capital is just as important

Financial capital is not Pakistan’s only concern.

Human capital matters even more.

According to the Bureau of Emigration & Overseas Employment, more than 10 million Pakistanis have registered for overseas employment since the bureau was established in 1971. The bureau also reported that 763,526 Pakistanis went abroad for employment during 2025.

These figures should not automatically be described as brain drain. Overseas employment includes workers with different levels of education and skills. It also brings valuable remittances to Pakistan.

But the continued movement of highly skilled professionals deserves attention.

Doctors, engineers, scientists, IT specialists, academics and entrepreneurs need opportunities to build successful careers at home.

When skilled people believe merit and opportunity are stronger elsewhere, they naturally look abroad.

Pakistan can attract financial capital again.

Replacing lost generations of talent is much harder.

Pakistan needs institutional reform

The country does not simply need another change of political personalities.

It needs stronger institutions.

That includes greater intra-party democracy, transparent political financing and credible elections. It also requires stronger local governments and professional appointments within the civil service.

Judicial independence and enforceable accountability are equally important.

Businesses also need predictable economic rules. Genuine investors need confidence that policies will not change without warning.

Merit should remain a central principle in public institutions and national advancement.

Pakistan could also debate whether additional administratively viable provinces or regional units would improve governance. Any such change must follow constitutional and democratic procedures.

The objective should not be ethnic division.

The objective should be better administration and stronger citizenship.

The question Pakistan cannot avoid

A country carrying debt and liabilities on the scale now being reported cannot measure economic progress through ceremonies alone.

Pakistan needs measurable outcomes.

Show the dollars.

Show the factories.

Show the jobs.

Show the exports.

Show the tax revenues.

If billions are announced, the public should know how much money eventually arrives.

If an investor delegation receives official recognition, the public should be able to see what followed.

If state assets are sold, citizens should know how the proceeds are used.

If the country borrows more money, policymakers should explain what productive capacity that borrowing creates.

This is not an argument against investment diplomacy.

It is an argument for credible investment diplomacy.

Pakistan has major strengths. It has a large population, a young workforce, natural resources, a strategic location, entrepreneurial communities and a global diaspora.

The challenge is turning those advantages into sustained economic growth.

That requires institutions that reward performance and measure results.

Pakistan does not simply need another government.

It needs a system that makes every government govern better.

A national reset should therefore remain constitutional, democratic and peaceful. But it should also be substantive.

Reform democracy. Restore merit. Strengthen institutions. Decentralise power. Protect genuine investors. Investigate credible claims of deliberate misrepresentation. Measure investment announcements against actual capital flows.

And most importantly, give Pakistan’s talented young people strong reasons to build their futures at home.

That is not an argument against Pakistan.

It is an argument for Pakistan’s credibility, prosperity and national renewal.

By Prof. Dr. Gholam Mujtaba, MD, Ed.D.