In the aftermath of World War II, the global political and economic landscape turned on its head. Empires disintegrated, millions of people perished and cities were left annihilated. At the end of it, both, victors and losers, were smarting from the ravages and miseries inflicted by the war. With a demoralised public and a large portion of able-bodied workforce swallowed by war, what they faced was a humongous task of resurrecting and repairing all that was lost in the madness of the moment. In Western Europe, that resolve culminated in the formation of a remarkably successful political and economic union, while in Asia, Japan emerged from the ashes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to lead the way for South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore as one of the most spectacular examples of welfare statehood in recent history. One comes across loads of postwar literature dedicated to the question of why or how some countries managed to grow faster than others. Yet, one defining attribute of the majority of countries that climbed the ladder of development has been a categorical break with their belligerent world outlook. The focus shifted from building armies to an ambitious project of nation-building through trade and artful diplomacy. Strict austerity was institutionalised with saving rates approaching up to 40 percent of GDP. Non-development expenditure, such as defence and public administration, was drastically cut by diverting resources to revenue-generating public enterprises and investment in human capital. Export promotion was subsidised and luxury imports were heavily taxed. On top of it, national anti-corruption campaigns were launched, and cases of misappropriation and tax evasion were severely dealt with. The result of that unflinching focus from warfare to welfare is an enviable success story that decorates the pages of economics textbooks around the world. In stark contrast to European economic consolidation and East Asian ‘Growth Miracle’, the post-colonial development experience of South Asia has failed to inspire any genuine hope of economic turnaround. The region is host to about 50 percent of global poverty with an annual per capita income of only 1,496 dollars. To pinpoint the deplorable state of affairs in Pakistan alone, the last national nutrition survey conducted in 2011 records 58 percent of the population as food-insecure with one of the highest ratios of acute and chronic malnutrition in the world. In a shocking report issued last year by director nutrition in the ministry of national health services, 44 percent of children aged five or less today are born chronically malnourished (stunted) with reduced or dysfunctional cognitive capacity. Mind you, this is happening in a food-surplus country. Not surprisingly, education does not fare any better. As the elite cliques of Lahore and Islamabad gather in their fancy coffee shops to gossip about the recently concluded literature festivals, the literacy rate remains stagnant at 57 percent. To summarise the plight in one figure, Pakistan languishes at 147th position on human development index out of 188 countries vying for a respectable place in the community of nations. Given the pessimism evoked by such statistics of deprivation, Pakistan was not destined to go down this path. At the very outset, following the first scuffle with India in 1948, the needs of society were subordinated to the needs of a soldier. The perceived existential threat from a hostile neighbour hatching conspiracies on the other side of the border consumed the imagination of policy makers in the formative years after the independence. This obsession with security at the expense of everything-else laid the foundation of a security-state whose most prized possession remains its atomic bomb. Setting up the enterprise of Afghan jihad and the ruinous consequences of that fateful era continue to haunt the prospects of long-term stability in the region. To be fair though, India’s recent spat with the US over the sale of a bunch of F-16s to Pakistan, tells something about the hysteria that also rules the other side of the border. Two nuclear-armed neighbours breathing down each other’s neck with no end in sight to a dispute that has become an exorbitant liability for hundreds of millions of people on both sides. It is about time the two countries take a good hard look in the mirror and cobble up a common front to address the abject destitution of their increasingly intolerant masses. The menace of poverty and extremism devours societies from within. It cannot be kept out by piling up stocks of missiles, gunships or F-16s. Only the power of sound reason and the promise of a quality life can neutralise it. The writer is a postgrad student of Economics at University of Bonn, and a monitoring and evaluation specialist in development sector, with progressive experience in project management and emergency response coordination with UN-WFP. He can be reached at asadullahkhan628@gmail.com