IMF Loan To Pakistan: Terror Financing Is Absurd And Must Be Stopped: Global Investor Jim Rogers
New Delhi: After the International Monetary Fund (IMF) approved the disbursement of $1 billion to Pakistan—despite India’s stern warning that such funds could be used by the neighbouring country to sponsor terrorism—veteran global investor Jim Rogers on Saturday said that financing terror is “absurd” and must be stopped.
India has strongly opposed providing financial aid to a country that continues to sponsor cross-border terrorism, warning that such support poses reputational risks to global institutions and undermines international norms, according to government sources.
In an interaction with IANS, 82-year-old Rogers said he is firmly against terror financing by global organisations and praised India’s efforts to defend its borders. “I am certainly against terror financing, and I hope the whole world is. Terror financing is absurd; terrorists are absurd,” Rogers emphasised.
Commenting on the ongoing conflict between the two countries, the American investor and financial commentator based in Singapore said, “India is right in defending its borders. Every country is always right in defending its borders.”
“But the question always becomes who is actually defending the borders and who is attacking,” he added, noting that “India is one of the great and exciting countries in the world.” Political leaders and experts have expressed serious concern over the IMF’s financial support to Pakistan, stressing that it would not contribute to de-escalation of hostilities between India and Pakistan.
India has strongly opposed any further financial assistance from the IMF to Pakistan. “Rewarding continued sponsorship of cross-border terrorism sends a dangerous message,” the Finance Ministry said in a statement. “It exposes funding agencies and donors to reputational risks and undermines global values,” the ministry added.
According to government sources, India abstained from the IMF vote on approving the loan to Pakistan—not due to a lack of opposition, but because IMF rules do not allow for a formal “no” vote. By abstaining, India conveyed its strong dissent within the constraints of the IMF’s voting system and formally recorded its objections.
India also questioned the effectiveness of continued IMF assistance, noting that Pakistan has received support in 28 of the past 35 years, including four programmes in just the last five—without any meaningful or lasting reform, according to sources.
