If it says it will harden to 58-59, I have to interpret that as meaning as-quenched 58-59, which is abysmal for a decent knife steel. On the other hand, I would say where the steel is made has much less bearing on the quality as the raw materials and the skill of the maker. That being said, the folks in Pakistan and India seem more likely to use scrap steel or all out poor choices due to cost and availability. But then, again, I have seen some very poor choices in steel mixes here in the State by some folks with names in knifemaking.
If a person is really concerned about the quality they should ask the supplier what alloys are used in the construction. If the maker can’t immediately supply this information it should be a huge red flag. Next, see if the maker will give you an idea of percentages of each alloy present, then do the math.
If, for example, it is 60% 1018 and 40% O1 (one time thought to be the ultimate Damascus mix), you have the carbon content of .18 divided by the percentage, or .108, plus the carbon content of O1 (.90%) divided by the percentage or .36% for a total damascus carbon content of .47%, if there was zero decarb in the making, which is not really possible. .47% carbon steel wouldn’t make it into any of my blades, but we all have to choose our own standards.
If you want to take it to the next level you can then compare the alloys for heat treatment compatibility. Let’s just replace the 1018 in the last example with 1095. Now there is more than enough carbon present to make a pretty good blade but one steel needs a medium speed oil, the other darn near needs water to fully harden. This mix will almost necessitate that you choose which of the component’s get a proper heat treat and which one is compromised, and there will be increases in distortion, and other heat treat headaches. Not too much of an issue for the hobbyist who has time to tinker a lot with one blade, but for the guy trying to do business this can be a problem.