Fighting Corruption
The founding of Transparency International (TI) in Berlin in 1993 was one of the most significant private sector initiatives in fighting universal corruption. I had the privilege of meeting Dr Peter Eigen, the first Chairman TI (who remains a good friend) very soon afterwards in 1994 during the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Annual Summit in Davos. A lawyer by training, Dr Eigen managed World Bank programs in Africa and Latin America for 25 years. Disgusted at seeing scarce funds being misappropriated by public officials and politicians in third world countries, aided and abetted by senior executives of multinationals of the first world, he alongwith his colleagues decided to do something tangible about it, thus was born the TI initiative. The Corruption Perception Index (CPI) was first launched in 1995. This survey of many countries by independent institutions was meant not to measure corruption itself, but to quantify what was perceived to be corruption by ascertaining the views of the general public, interested observers and independent institutions.
‘Business’ of the Media
In January 2002, a very famous TV personality interviewed a leading Indian industrialist and myself in New York for one of the world’s better known channels on the subject of India-Pakistan relationship. The trend of the discussion was satisfying for me even though I felt that the Indian business magnate seemed to go off into anti-Pakistan monologues with no relevance to the questions being asked. At the end of the taping for nearly 15 minutes, he made a very pointed remark to the TV compere, “you will take care of it?” The man nodded assent, a bit sheepishly I thought as he glanced at me. Two days later when the recording went on air, I knew why. In the 7-8 minutes that was aired, I got in only one sentence, the rest of the talking was done by my industrialist friend. Stunned by this axe-ing, I did a little research. In the face of the millions in revenues in advertising spent by that industrialist on that channel, there was no way the particular TV channel was about to allow me to air my views. My presence was as an “extra”, meant to show the “evenhandedness” of the channel and the TV personality in having a Pakistani point of view. That particularly TV compere finds it difficult to make eye contact with me whenever we come across each other in international gatherings. His so-called integrity and principles compromised, one should take all his interviews with pinch of salt.
Judicial Self-Accountability
As is the custom of every military regime on coming to power, the Musharraf government initiated accountability across the board. In two respects the Musharraf’s benign “martial law” has remained totally different from those of his predecessors viz (1) martial law was not declared and (2) martial law courts were not used to dole out summary justice. To punish fiscal malfeasance, corruption and nepotism within the ambit of the law, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) was established immediately within days of the failed civilian coup of October 1999. Exercising due legal process under the public perception of draconian military rule, NAB did excellent work under its first Chairman, Lt Gen Muhammad Amjad. Regretfully, Amjad, himself upright and honest, was not averse to cronyism. Some of these cronies, took good advantage of a counterproductive escape hatch in the NAB Ordinance, allowing the accused the facility of “plea bargaining”. That set a precedent for others for condoning white collar crimes like fraud, pilferage, etc, the crooked being released if a “significant” portion of that ill-gotten money was returned. The moral repugnance of a thief being let off the hook by returning a part of the stolen loot notwithstanding, the criminal/s also got to “whiten” their ill-gotten proceeds. This mechanism was used by some of the investigators of NAB to pocket a portion of that stolen loot.
Attila on Leadership Diseases
Dr. Wess Robert’s best-selling book “Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun” in the 1980s was followed in 1993 with “Victory Secrets of Attila the Hun”. As his protagonist Dr. Roberts chose the brutal barbarian who sacked seemingly impregnable Rome, sending the Roman Empire into a tailspin from which it never recovered. Attila, chronicled by Roman scribes, is believed to have said words to the effect, “every leader must choose the best people, train them well, develop them into competent workers, provide them with direction, challenge them with responsibilities, reward their individual and group contributions, treat them humanely and in this way lead his people to victory”. Winning is not only important, in the national context it is everything, there are no prizes for second place. True for all forms of leadership, Attila’s logic is very much applicable 17 centuries later. All our leaders, civil and military both, need to be given a pep talk on “Leadership diseases and remedies thereof”.
The first thing to guard against is “avarice dysorexia”, a perverted appetite for acquiring illegal wealth. The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has dealt with this disease with reasonable success but since accountability has not been applied in a fair and judicious manner to all sections of society (the judiciary and the Armed Forces are exempt) it may lose its credibility. “Physician, heal thyself” must be a prime consideration. One can talk about the obvious in procurement contracts and there is always the institutional corruption in real estate in the military-run Defence Housing entities. The laws of the land must be applicable equally, corruption cannot be condoned because of rank or station in life.
National Security Strategy
Like any organized entity, every nation needs a roadmap that clearly defines what we are, what we want to be and how to get there. Pakistan today is not the land of Islam the Prophet (PBUH) would have wanted, the vision envisaged by the great poet Iqbal and the nation the Father of the country, Quaid-e-Azam created it to be. We have been laid low by the bankruptcy of the policies that we follow, under pressure internationally from disparate forces with vested interest and under attack domestically by the forces of evil, their appetite for loot and plunder not yet satiated after more than half a century. While we are still far from being a failed State, and that mainly due to the intervention of the Armed Forces Oct 12, 1999, a new set of crisis, part diplomatic and part political, has put us into a near critical condition. At time like these one has barely any moment to reflect, and maybe the corrective measures may be a moot point at this time, however, we should take time-out to ponder what exactly went wrong and why it is still going wrong. While the problems are complex and cannot even begin to be addressed in one column or one day, we can take a cursory look at the failure of mechanics of governance.
Amazing as it may seem, there is no institutionalized decision-making process in Pakistan. True, decisions are made but these are not in strategic harmony, even though at the tactical level we may have been holding our own, but in a very slip-shod, fickle and disorganized manner, taking in the inputs of various public institutions but never turning to private think tanks for input on a whole range of issues. We have been at the mercy of the individual whims and caprices that make for arbitrary decision-making. Instead of a comprehensive examination of causes and affects for adequate analysis, comprehension planning and implementation thereof. The Head of State or the Chief Executive of the Government must have a permanent mechanism that can draw upon all Federal and Provincial resources for information gathering, collation of recommendations and preparation of option papers. This is only possible by having a permanent National Security Council (NSC) Secretariat staffed by the finest brainpower that is available in the country.