Delhi’s Influence Fails to Halt IMF Bailout for Islamabad

Last week, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) approved a $1 billion bailout for Pakistan, a decision that has sparked significant backlash from India amid rising military tensions between the two nuclear-armed nations. Despite India’s objections, the IMF board justified the funding by citing Pakistan’s progress in economic recovery and its commitment to enhancing resilience against climate-related challenges. India expressed concerns about the potential misuse of these funds for terrorism and criticized the IMF for undermining global values.

India’s Concerns Over IMF Bailout

India’s disapproval of the IMF’s decision stems from two primary concerns. Firstly, Indian officials questioned the effectiveness of such bailouts, pointing to Pakistan’s history of failing to implement necessary reforms. They argue that Pakistan has repeatedly sought IMF assistance—24 times since 1958—without making substantial improvements in governance or economic stability. Hussain Haqqani, a former Pakistani ambassador to the US, likened Pakistan’s repeated reliance on the IMF to a patient frequently visiting the intensive care unit, indicating deeper structural issues that need addressing.

Secondly, India raised alarms over the possibility that the funds could be diverted to support cross-border terrorism, a claim that Pakistan has consistently denied. Indian officials warned that the IMF’s actions could expose the organization and its donors to reputational risks, effectively undermining the integrity of global financial institutions. The IMF has not publicly addressed India’s concerns, leaving the situation fraught with tension.

India’s Limited Influence in the IMF

Despite its objections, India’s ability to influence the IMF’s decisions is constrained. As one of the 25 members of the IMF board, India represents a group that includes Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Bhutan, while Pakistan is part of a different group represented by Iran. The voting structure of the IMF is based on economic size and contributions, which means that India holds a relatively small share of 2.6%, compared to the United States’ 16.49%. This system has faced criticism for favoring wealthier nations over developing countries.

Moreover, IMF rules do not allow members to vote against a proposal; they can only vote in favor or abstain. Decisions are typically made by consensus, which complicates India’s efforts to block the bailout. Experts suggest that India’s attempts to exert pressure on the IMF may have been more about optics than achieving a tangible outcome, given the procedural limitations within the organization.

Complexities of Addressing Terrorism Concerns

Addressing India’s concerns about the potential misuse of IMF funds for terrorism is a complex issue. Experts argue that the appropriate platform for India to voice its grievances would be the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which focuses on combating terror financing. The FATF has the authority to place countries on grey or black lists, restricting their access to funds from institutions like the IMF and World Bank. While Pakistan was removed from the FATF grey list in 2022, India’s calls for action at the IMF may not yield the desired results.

The IMF’s recent decisions, including a $15.6 billion loan to Ukraine amidst conflict, further complicate the narrative. Critics argue that the IMF’s willingness to bend its own rules for Ukraine undermines its stance on Pakistan. Mihir Sharma from the Observer Research Foundation noted that this inconsistency raises questions about the IMF’s credibility and its ability to enforce its own guidelines.

Future Implications and Recommendations

If India aims to effectively address its concerns regarding Pakistan’s use of IMF funds, experts suggest that it should focus on the FATF rather than the IMF. Engaging with the FATF could lead to more significant consequences for Pakistan, particularly in terms of its access to international funding. However, there are warnings that calls for reforming the IMF’s funding processes could inadvertently empower China, potentially complicating India’s geopolitical standing.

Historically, India has faced challenges in multilateral forums, often being vetoed by China in various contexts. As India navigates this complex landscape, it must consider the implications of its actions and the potential for unintended consequences in its efforts to influence global financial governance.

Observer Voice is the one stop site for National, International news, Sports, Editor’s Choice, Art/culture contents, Quotes and much more. We also cover historical contents. Historical contents includes World History, Indian History, and what happened today. The website also covers Entertainment across the India and World.

Follow Us on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, & LinkedIn