The Rs. 28 trillion loot in Swiss Bank's fallacy

If something is too good to be true, it probably isn’t. I am not referring to the fantastical $45 Billion, Abu Dhabi group investment, plus tallest building in the world in Karachi news from a few days ago, will come to that some other time.

Really? Perhaps Google to fact check?

Today, once again, reading through the Political Economy section of the TNS, I came across another sermon on corrupt politicians and ill-gotten wealth, ending predictably with references to Jinnah and Iqbal.

Alauddin Masood couples some facts from some recent reports with the ubiquitous and sensational statement that:

The amount is so huge that it prompted a Swiss banker, recently retired, to say: “Pakistan is a poor country but Pakistanis are not” because they have “28 trillion (28,000,000,000,000) of Pakistan rupees deposited in Swiss Banks.”

http://jang.com.pk/thenews/Feb2013-weekly/nos-17-02-2013/pol1.htm#2

Now this so called “Swiss Banker” has alteast retired now. Over the last couple of years we have been inundated with email forwards, and Facebook shares about this mysterious Swiss Banker and the Rs. 28 trillion figure.

In September 2011, it wasn’t a retired Swiss Banker, but a director Swiss Bank who stated that:

Director Swiss Bank said ‘Pakistanis are poor but Pakistan isn’t a poor country.’ He added that 97 billion dollars of Pakistan is deposited in respective bank and if this money would be utilized for the welfare of Pakistan and its people then Pakistan can make tax less budget for 30 years, can create 60 million jobs, can carpet four lanes road from any village to Islamabad, endless power supply to five hundred social projects, every citizen can get 20000 rupees salary for the next 60 years and there is no need to see IMF and any World Bank for loans.

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2011/09/18/news/national/pakistan-has-97-billion-dollars-in-swiss-banks-director-swiss-bank/

What the?

A few problems are obvious with these assertions.

First, there is no such thing as a “Director Swiss Bank”.

Second, there is no such thing as a Swiss Bank.

Third, why would any Swiss financial official compromise on Switzerland’s reputation for privacy by making such statements?

Fourth, according the Swiss law, financial privacy in Switzerland is akin to attorney client privilege. Why would some Director/Retired Swiss Banker break Swiss laws to make such statements?

Fifth, even if this Swiss Banker is genuine, how would he possibly know the names, source and nationality of all deposit holders in every Swiss Bank?

Sixth, why would he make such normative statement, about whether Pakistan is a poor country or not, and how many years of salary each Pakistani would receive and that to calculated in Rupees?

Alauddin Masood’s article is titled:

If our rulers bring back the money stashed in accounts abroad and invest it in Pakistan, we can have tax free budgets for almost 30 years

What the......

Now many things are wrong with such statements.

First of all repatriating money back into Pakistan doesn’t equate into investment. Second, the assumption that all monies held abroad is ill-gotten, is not necessarily true. Third, what is the relationship between investing the money in Pakistan and thirty years of tax free budgets?

It is one thing to have such commentary shared in social media and online forums, but it’s quite different when it is used as a tool for shaping or justifying economic policy.

But these statements are such an incredible farce that they are also used in India, where articles were published with the title, Indians are poor but not India: Swiss Bank:

"Indians are poor, but India is not a poor country," says one of the Swiss Bank directors. He says that "280 lakh crore (280,00,000,000,0000) of Indian rupees is deposited in Swiss banks which can be used for “taxless” budget for 30 years. It can give 60 crore jobs to Indians. The other uses of the money: From any village to Delhi 4-lane roads. Forever free supply to more than 500 social projects. Every citizen can get monthly 2000 for 60 years. No need of world bank and IMF loan.

http://www.indiatribune.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5058:indians-are-poor-but-not-india-swiss-bank&catid=119:business&Itemid=493

Shocking surprise! Looks like this Swiss Bank director likes to say exactly the same thing to every developing country!

I find such rhetoric frustrating and exhausting.

Economic policy making is difficult enough, but once public opinion is shaped by such rhetoric it is very difficult to design and implement policy with politicians and media personalities harping on with such ludicrous accusations.

Now, you may retort that hold on, while these statements might not be true, the fact remains that politicians are corrupt and they have probably stashed away large sums of money in Switzerland. That is true, and no one is denying that. However, things are bad enough that we don’t and shouldn’t need to rely on made up stuff.

Why do we need to share pictures of atrocities in other countries and pass them off as pictures of victims of terrorism in Pakistan or other Islamic states? Were the victims of atrocities that we are passionate about not photogenic enough?

Are our corruption estimates not sexy enough that we need to come up with Rs. 28 trillion?

So spare the rhetoric and stick to facts. At least one would expect that from writers offering sermons on corruption and budget policy in national publications. 

Updated: Stamp out corruption the Chinese way?

A government official slaps a spa worker with a fat wad of cash and threatens to bury her under a mountain of banknotes, if she does not submit to his sexual advances. This government official, based in Hubei province China was stabbed to death by the women who later became a national hero, seen by many as standing up to a corrupt government official.

A side effect of the Pakistan-China, deeper than the depths of the ocean, higher than the highest mountain friendship, has been the evolution of a romanticised perception of China, of its leaders and its system of governance. Popularly, it’s assumed that corruption is non-existent in China. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Speaking on the occasion of the 90th founding anniversary of the Communist Party of China, President Hu Jintao identified rampant corruption within the Party as a threat to its continued survival. He declared that fighting corruption will be a "protracted, complicated and arduous battle”.

Economists fear that China is heading for a “hard landing” in 2012. Recent statistics show that electricity production, investment, quarterly growth, retail sales and trade figures have all declined. Given the economic problems of the European Union, uncertainty regarding government spending cuts in the US; it come as no surprise that quarterly GDP growth fell to 8.1%. Now 8.1% growth may sound very good, however it is largely assumed that China needs to grow at at least 8% a year to keep a vast population satisfied and quell any signs of popular dissent.

With corruption having become a national issue and the prospects of a period of declining growth, the last thing the Chinese leadership needed was an internal power struggle. That is exactly what it got!

The purge of the populist Communist Party leader of Chongqing and politburo member Bo Xilai, was also tipped for a senior leadership post later this year, marking the once in a decade change of Chinese leaders. Bo Xilai, a “princeling”, as descendants of senior Communist Party members are known, had been ideologically challenging the current leadership, headed by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao. Xilai’s case has become more complicated as his wife has been arrested as a suspect in the murder of a British businessman, Neil Haywood.

The purge however has not ended with Bo Xilai exit. Others including his three brothers accused of corruption, state officials, and politburo members who actively supported him, such as the former domesticsecurity chief Zhou Yongkang and senior “princeling” generals have also had to leave their posts.

In Pakistan, many believe that the Chinese model should be imported and implemented, ignoring the fact that the very same system has created conditions of stark inequality and rampant corruption. Much like their Pakistani peers, Chinese leaders have been found carrying fake degrees, sanctioned illegal land grabs, involved in siphoning off billions of dollars offshore and perhaps most famously, have managed to sidestep a 2004 ban on newgolf courses, ushering in the construction of 600 of them since the ban came into effect.

Unlike the Chinese leadership that has admitted the shortcomings of its system and is pushing through reforms, we in Pakistan continue to believe in a “Chinese model” which is completely detached from reality. The CPC recognizes the unique challenges it faces given Chinas current international status and her domestic pressures.

So whether its Iran, China or Turkey, longing for importing a system which is perceived to be effective and corruption free but based on a fantasy does no one, especially us any good. 

China isn't corruption free. All those who romanticise an authoritarian regime that will take a hard-line, top down approach to corruption and "stamp" it out and falling prey to cheap rhetoric. It sounds good, it means well, but such talk is cheap and betrays neither an understanding of corruption, nor its incentives and how to mediate them.

It’s high time we in Pakistan did the same and appreciate that the experiences of other countries while informing our policies, are never flexible enough to be implemented wholesale. Especially, when our opinion of a country and her policies are based on a fiction, unrepresentative of reality. 

UPDATE

Talking about good governance, how is this for an attempt at displaying all the good work Chinese officials are upto. A rather poor effort don't you think? Could have got someone better to Photoshop!

Arsalan Bilal on Hunger Strike - UPDATED

Words are mightier than the sword.

Ask the administrators of Bahria University Islamabad who have expelled Arsalan Bilal from the University for threatening staff members by forwarding a poem by Faiz Ahmed Faiz. It appears irrelevant to the administrators that the same email was forwarded to his friends, class fellows, and family members, yet Faiz’s poetry is a reason good enough to warrant expulsion if a teacher is added to the mailing list.

Bahria University has also declared Arsalan Bilal “psychologically unstable”, even though they are no experts in psychiatry. If so, the university appears to have set aside its responsibility towards student welfare and supporting vulnerable members of its community and gone about adding to his mental stress by deciding to expel him.

This should all sound very familiar. In April 2011, Professor Qamar Riaz Mahmitkhel was dismissed from Bahria University for questioning the role of retired military officials and whether creativity could flourish in a military style setup. The question was asked in a packed auditorium and the response of the university’s administrators was for the Director Campus Commodore (retired) Mohammad Ali and security personnel to grab him by the collar and assault him. A 100 or so students subsequently protested against his dismissal at which point Naval Intelligence officials harassed the protestors and the administration threatened them with expulsion.

Mr Bilal who also runs Insight News – Bahria University, a Facebook page dedicated to news related to the institution, had also questioned the role of ex-Naval officials and certain faculty members policies in the university. He has been discouraged in pursuing his undergraduate research in ‘Politicization of religion in Pakistan’ and faced discrimination as he belongs to a minority sect.

As a result, Arsalan Bilal has gone on an indefinite hunger strike before Bahria University Islamabad from the 6^th of April.

When challenged, administrators usually explain their actions by pointing to the greater good. For example, the case of women being raped in International Islamic University Islamabad was hushed up, as the administration wanted to protect the reputation of the institution.

Universities in Pakistan, especially those of the Bahria University variety have reduced higher education to an extension of secondary school. The emphasis is on discipline, uniform, fines for poor attendance etc. What is ignored, is the quality of teaching and the content of the curriculum, emphasising rote learning and propaganda over thoughtful analysis and evaluation. The incident involving a retired Brigadier who assaulted a lecturer in NUML University for “daring” to “say something about the Army” comes to mind.

The fact is that HEC regulations are not enforced and individuals without the prerequisite qualifications are appointed in universities based on their affiliation with either the military or the civilian bureaucracy is not only HEC’s failure to enforce the law, our collective silence fails those students who study in these institutions.

The fact is that despite HEC’s efforts, the quality of Higher Education in Pakistan remains dismal. We are not producing mature, analytical and creative individuals ready to take on the world. Some universities are nothing more than over glorified finishing schools where 20 year olds are treated like children. The same administrators may send their own children to foreign universities where they are no uniforms, no attendance and the environment lacking any “discipline” of the variety they enforce on others.

Public universities cannot and must not be used as the post retirement, cushy appointment for retired bureaucrats, whether military or civil. I am sure there are many ex-military officials who can make excellent contributions to learning in education, however, the variety that expels students for raising questions and assaults teaching stuff have little to offer apart from their massive egos.

Education is far too important to be left to individuals. The key and most important stakeholders are and should be the students themselves. The HEC has developed elaborate structures and layers of bureaucracy that serves everyone but the students. Administrators are all powerful whether in the private or the public sector. Teaching staff have little or no job security and are subservient to the whims of administrators, most of whom have no background in education.  

If you believe that education is more than wearing uniforms and wearing your tie correctly then it’s important to support Arsalan Bilal in his protest. If he is silenced then the status quo will remain unchanged and it will silence anyone else who hopes to question the powers that be. Thousands upon thousands of students will receive a poor education, undeserving for an individual in the 21^st century.

A university student is old enough to join the military, marry, drive, carry a weapon, yet university administrators seem hell bent on treating them as children. Things must not continue as they are! 

Update: Arsalan Bilal on Saach TV: http://saach.tv/2012/04/12/strike-for-justice-or-self-promotion/

Follow Arsalan Bilal on Twitter: @arsalanbilal 

This post was originally published in the ET Blogs: http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/11033/bahria-university-arsalan-bilals-hunger-for-justice/

A related post on Bahria University: http://liberalfacist.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/misplaced-priorities-in-higher.html

Sorry to have disappointed you General Kayani

General Kayani is disappointed in us.


He has castigated the media and the nation for its ruthless criticism of the Army and ISI. 


First he started off with a history lesson saying:


“if you want to fight with history in this context, it’s your choice to do so. However, establishing institutions require a lot of hard work and the media should be careful … that their words do not undermine these [institutions].”


Well now, if only some politician had uttered these words someone would have been hauled before the Supreme Court for contempt, but not in this case. I only wish he had continued to explain who had scuttled the "hard work" of building institutions in the past and explained why they are so fragile today? 


On the other hand it was good to note that the COAS appreciated the power of words, for where coups, jumping over walls are not available as an option, words do count.


He is later quoted as saying:


Gen Kayani added that one should be careful that while criticising one must not undermine national institutions or organisations.

I mean, come on now, why would anyone think that organizations financed by the state and tax payers money and debt that will have to be financed by our grandchildren should be above criticism? How silly!

The COAS also said that only 47 people are missing in Balochistan. 

Only 47!

Why didnt someone tell me. Ill immediately retract my liberal fascist-RAW-CIA-Mossad funded blog posts. 

So how many people need to be added to the "missing persons" list before criticism will be acceptable without undermining national institutions?

Perhaps the following is my favourite quip:

“Even now, there are Baloch who have seen a 10 rupee currency note for the first time in their lives".

So is the Army, that is not present in Balochistan as stated earlier, in the business of distributing Rs. 10 notes? And why are there in this position to begin with? I mean, its not as if the region has suffered repeated military operations over the past 6 decades has it? Opps...

But thats not all. General Kayani is a keen follower of the foreign press. I mean he doesn't have anything better to do right?

Using the US as an example, the COAS said that the American army was not criticised by its people as harshly as the Pakistan Army was criticised by Pakistanis. The US media is careful in reporting events of US casualties in Afghanistan, for example. He said that the ruthless criticism of ISI in Pakistan was far higher than any criticism made on RAW, Mosad or the CIA in India, Israel or USA.

Wow! Justifying the ISI's actions by pointing to our supposed enemies equivalent organizations lack of public condemnation is just the way to go. Talk about setting really low standards!

Also in the US the military chiefs appear before congressional committees and have to justify their budgets, priorities and expenses. We dont even bother with the pretence. Three lines in the budget document is more than enough to satisfy the underlings.

What if President Zardari said the same thing: Even US, Israel and India don't criticise their Presidents as much as Pakistanis do.

What if an IG Police said: Even in US, Israel and India the media doesn't criticise their policeman to undermine them.

Would people expect to restrain their criticism?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When people criticise the Pakistan Army or the ISI, they are not critical of policy choices made by generals not individual soldiers. The generals however, hide behind their institutions when defending their positions.

The individual is just a replaceable bureaucrat sitting in a chair for a while. The institution should always be bigger than the person who sits in it. Thats so that the individual can be hold accountable without tarnishing the image of the institution as a whole. In Pakistan however, the opposite is true. The generals equate any criticism of their performance to criticism of the rank and file soldier. If the person before whom the buck stops is not willing to take responsibility then who will? Using the efforts of jawans and junior officers to emotionally blackmail critics to justify their policies is hardly a testament to their leadership.

The good General made no effort to delve into explaining why people are criticising the Army or ISI and what he plans to do about it. Instead he began a compare and contrast exercise with other "agencies" to justify the status quo.

But why all the hallabalo? I mean is our military and ISI so fragile that a few comments by some liberal fascists who dont love Pakistan, will undermine it?   

Well actually they do. In an ongoing case the ISI responded by saying:

Therefore, the allegations leveled against ISI are baseless and aimed to demoralise its officials and defame the organization.

Denying accusations is one thing, but claiming that across the board, each and every person who is critical of the Army and ISI is out to demoralise them is the most overly simplistic propaganda around. The fact that it actually works is even more telling.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another article recently appear in the DAWN titled: Braving "hell" to keep militants at bay. Such articles pop up now and then highlighting the true cost of perpestant violence, beyond the rhetoric. The theme is always very similar. Soldiers asking why the US thinks that Pakistan does not pulls its weight? Why have Pakistani security forces been targeted with lethal efficiency in cross border attacks by ISAF forces and rightly so!

Another common theme that comes up in such pieces, particularly this one and a previous one that was published some time back about injured and maimed soldiers recovering in MH Rawalpindi.

All shared the same sentiment that; 

Some Pakistani politicians may call it “America’s War,” but Tanvir disagreed.

“This is my country. I am a Pakistani. I don’t see that anyone who destroys our schools, our masjids (mosques), kills people, is good for my country,” he said. “… If they were working for a better Pakistan, we wouldn’t be sitting in this post. The people would be supporting them against us.”......

......“They are the enemy. They are not working for Pakistan. They are telling us that we have to do everything their way,” he said.

Now who exactly are these people who share these sentiments and dare disagree with a brave young officer manning a post on the border? 

Why are the political actions and affiliations of individuals with organizations that consort with militants and religious radicals and their wider supporters not considered agents whose aim is to "undermine" national institutions. 

They are not criticised because they fit in with the status quo which doesn't challenge the dominant position of the military and their interests. 

Once in a while (thankfully)I receive messages by individuals who usually prefer to stay "anonymous" who make alot of effort to write really long essays about the sacrifices of the Army and how their privileges is a small token of gratitude that we as a nation can pay, and words such as mine, which will be read by a handful of people, are treasonous. I am sure the people who write these emails feel that they have performed their patriotic duty, and if they feel they have then more power to them.

Now what constitutes patriotism or nationalism changes with the time. But I personally believe that is more patriotic to point out illegal acts, shortcomings in policy and demand individual accountability as patriotic, as this would help save lives and support those on the grounds. it 

Now what constitutes patriotism or nationalism changes with the time. But I personally believe that it is more patriotic to point out illegal acts, shortcomings in policy and demand individual accountability, as this would help save lives and support those on the grounds. 

The generals better get used to criticism, which I appreciate is tough, given decades spent, being told and made to believe that they are better than everyone else and are entitled to their positions of authority and privileges. 

So General Kayani and the senior high command, I believe as professional soldiers, a few words here and there wont bite. And if they start do, then perhaps look around and ask why the "ruthless criticism"is coming up? Even if its only a matter of 47 missing persons.

Honouring the victims of terror...or not!

The production of illegally detained, suspected terrorists in the Supreme Court should have been met with a sense of triumph. Instead, the last month has seen families of missing persons, who have joined the Amna Janjua led missing persons camp as sympathisers with terrorists and militants. Those who have hailed the Supreme Courts actions have been accused of neglecting the memory of the victims of terrorism and their families.

Things have changed quite swiftly over the past few months. Then, everyone seemed content with denying that anyone was actually “missing” or that the military and intelligence agencies had anything to do with their disappearance.

Today, many argue, quite openly that our intelligence agencies only “pick up” the guilty and if they do so, so what? After all its in the national interest!

A letter to the editor in this paper summarised the prevalent sentiment as follows:

And there are instances when those arrested have been found to be involved in attacks on members of the armed forces, military installations and on buildings owned by intelligence agencies. In such instances, cases were filed in the courts but those accused were acquitted.

It appears guilt is determined by the institutional affiliation of the accuser rather than the presumed actions of the accused.

A common criticism is that the courts and judges are incompetent or scared, or worse both. They are unwilling or unable to prosecute cases involving those accused of terrorism and are in majority of cases acquitted. Further, evidence gathered by extra judicial means cannot be submitted in court, further hampering the prosecutions case. 

However, is the solution to limited judicial capacity extra judicial murder and torture? Or is the provision of resources and improvements in the law, to convict criminals properly, a better long term solution?

Another line of criticism against those who have question the policy of enforced disappearances includes the sentiment that:

Instead of trying to understand this issue, our media does the opposite and makes a hue and cry over this, and in the end the terrorists benefit. This also lowers the morale of our armed forces who feel that while they are risking their lives to fight the militants, society in general is placing greater value on the rights of the militants.

I find it quite insulting that people believe that extra judicial actions; which are illegal according to the law of the land, which military personnel have taken an oath to uphold, will somehow improve the morale of the armed forces.

I assume that members of the armed forces are serving to uphold the law of the land, which clearly protects the rights of even the worst amongst us. Those who say that we should recall the sacrifices of our soldiers who are fighting terrorism by looking the other way while illegal disappearances continue do no service to the memory of the brave members of our armed forces.

Perhaps the worst interpretation of the judicial proceedings is the perception of the “rights of terrorists”, as if this is something that the Supreme Court has decided to bestow upon them. They are no rights “for” terrorists, these rights are universal and applicable upon all Pakistani citizens that cannot and should not be selectively applied.

Have we not criticised the United States for its confinement of detainees in Guantanamo bay and their policy of extraordinary rendition for the very same reasons? Do we not highlight the arbitrary confinement of Palestinians by Israel and Indian forces in Kashmir, accusing them of the very same acts that we justify domestically?

No one is campaigning for the guilty to be released unpunished. The constitution which enshrines certain rights to even murderers, rapists and terrorists, also aims to ensure that these very people face the full force of the law. That people arrested are duly processed, with their families made aware of their whereabouts and granted access to legal representation, does not diminish the states ability to hold them to account.

We as a nation should consider whether the memories of those who are victims of terrorism is honoured by brutal, illegal violence. Or do we as a nation rise above the actions of cowards and apply the law in word and spirit?

Unfortunately, we appear seduced by the appeal of raw and bloody justice, delivered swiftly, rather than making the effort to implement the hard decisions required to build the capacity of law enforcement and the judiciary.  

To franchise or disenfranchise overseas Pakistani's?

Overseas Pakistanis have been coming under some stick recently. The Election Commissions recent decision that dual nationals will not be allowed to contest the upcoming elections has been challenged in the Supreme Court.

The current PPP government first suggested allowing overseas Pakistanis to caste votes a couple of years ago and a consultation process was initiated. Recently, the PTI moved a petition in the Supreme Court, calling on it to allow overseas Pakistanis to vote.

So on the one hand, votes count but standing in the same elections is to be allowed.

A question of patriotism

Living overseas is enough for ones patriotism to be questioned. Having a second nationality doesn’t help ones cause either. Some people say that,

“if you want to join politics, and serve Pakistan then giving up a second passport is a small thing to ask”

Perhaps, but what happens if you stand in elections and don’t win? No one is going to compensate you if one fails. At the same time its also a small thing to ask for voters of a constituency not to vote for such an individual if they consider his or her second nationality unappealing. 

Fast track corruption

The second line of argument goes something like:

“All these dual nationals can pack up and leave whenever they like. They line their pockets and leave”

Does that mean that people who have only Pakistani nationality are less corrupt? Or conversely, does this mean that overseas Pakistanis, because they presumably have the opportunity to dabble in corruption are necessarily corrupt? Essentially, they are being accused of being petty opportunists.

The second argument that they can pack up and leave is the one that I find most frustrating. Yes, I guess, people with second passports can leave when they like. But then again, politicians in Pakistan , given their social and economic status in the country are also quite mobile internationally. To think that the colour of their passport effects their mobility to the same degree as the average Pakistani is a gross exaggeration.

If people are behaving in a corrupt manner, they do so because they are confident that they can get away with it. They weigh the pros and cons and realise that the benefits of behaving in a corrupt manner is greater than the perceived risk or costs. The nationality of the individual is inconsequential to the extent that a foreign passport does not give an individual immunity when prosecuted for a crime. The fact that a Pakistani, overseas Pakistani or dual national knows that he or she can get away with a crime in the first place determines his or her ability to indulge in illegal activity. A second passport may be a convenience, however, its the system that is at fault, not the individual.

Men and women of a lesser God

Now when it comes to overseas Pakistanis, not all overseas Pakistanis are equal.

The vast majority constitute Pakistani labourers, who toil away in the Gulf, North Africa and to a lesser degree in places such as Malaysia. Now these workers, who primarily leave Pakistan in search of work, save a high propensity of their income. In doing so, they remit most of it. Thankfully, due to their efforts over the past few years, Pakistan has managed to contain its Current Account deficit given the massive inflows from such workers.

On the flip side, these overseas Pakistanis are the ones that are conveniently ignored. Before our grand Arab masters, the Pakistani state is unable or unwilling to voice any concern over the treatment that is meted out to them. For example, the seizing of labourers passports in the Gulf is a common practise which breaks the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The city state of Dubai, which effectively went bankrupt a year and a half ago, saw many managers and business owners leave the city in a rush. In doing so, they left without returning passports to labourers or clearing their wages. What did the government of Pakistan offer to such workers? Nothing. The BBC's Panorama looks at migrant workers in the UAE:

I dont even blame the government for such inaction. Dubai and the wider Gulf region has become a playground for the upper-middle and upper economic class of the country. The same people who buy second homes, work in managerial positions and enjoy vacations in these cities have no qualms about enjoying the fruits of the mass, systematic exploitation of their fellow countrymen in a foreign land, while complaining about corruption and injustice in Pakistan itself.

Return to Pakistan, and its these same labourers who are welcomed by rent seeking customs and immigration officials. When these same Pakistanis leave the country, they have to pay of immigration officials due to the “protector law”.

Most people think that all the people working in the Gulf are happy to do so, should consider that a few years ago the UAE government launched a scheme where they offered free tickets to workers who wanted to leave. The number of people who came forward was so large, that they had to eventually stop the entire project due to its cost and the poor press it received. If everything was so hunky dory the government of the UAE wouldn’t have paid the founder of Blackwater to hire and train mercenaries from Columbia, Angola, Namibia and South Africa as a rapid reaction force to put down any labour protests.

No, these overseas Pakistanis, have little hope of support from their host governments or their governments, but nevertheless the Pakistani state is grateful for their remittances. Effectively, the savings of poor labourers overseas, cross subsidises the tax dodging opulence of the Pakistani upper class, for without their remittances, the Pakistani economy would be in a much, much worse state at present.

Giving these Pakistanis the right to vote is little consolation given the injustice and exploitation they face. However, when we talk about overseas Pakistanis, we are not thinking about the poor labourers. Instead, we are looking at those living in the West. For they, supposedly have sold their souls to a foreign master. However, the Pakistani state selling Pakistanis into second class citizenship in the Arab world is well...just brotherly relations. 

The “Western” Pakistanis

No, the problems and the question of loyalty really comes up when we talk about Pakistanis who have dual nationality with Western countries. Pakistani-Brits, Pakistani-Americans etc. Another point that Pakistani commentator like to take up over and over again is to quote the American oath of allegiance. In all its glory:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

People complain that how can someone who has taken this oath be patriotic towards or have Pakistan's best interest at heart? That is utter nonsense. We live in a globalised world where people move not because of changing nationalistic sentiments, but because of economic opportunity or familial pressure. If someone takes this oath that does not make them any more American or any less Pakistani. If you believe that this is infact the case, then you should also believe that when a girl marries a boy and moves to her boys household, her love for her parents and siblings is compromised. You then, should also believe that if a non-Muslim, in school in Pakistan, happens to sit through an Urdu class and comes across a chapter related to Islam and reads through it, he or she will become more Muslim and his or her faith in their religion is also compromised.

Why do British-Pakistanis support Pakistan in a England vs. Pakistan cricket match? I am sure they have sand God Save the Queen at some point in their life or attended a civics class in school?

I am not saying that overseas Pakistanis will always be patriotic towards Pakistan. I am sure they are now third or even fourth generation British or American Pakistanis, who probably have no link with Pakistan at all and no attachment. However, what I do disagree with are the nonsensical arguments that are made to disenfranchise overseas Pakistanis. 

Citizenship for another age

The primary function of oaths and citizenship was to make sure that they were always men that could be called upon to fight a war if need be. Through conscription, individuals could be drafted into military service. However, Pakistan doesn’t draft citizens into the military. And we are not fighting battles for local chieftains (or are we?).

The issue here isn't about the colour of ones passport.

To move beyond questioning ones patriotism, same sensible rules can be established for overseas Pakistanis who may want to participate in elections.

More important than citizenship is residency. For example, the UK along with many EU countries allow non-EU citizens to vote in local or city elections. An overseas Pakistani may be asked to reside in Pakistan for a qualifying period before being allowed to stand for office. He or she should make a declaration of income and assets, and if liable show a history of paying taxes in Pakistan.

The issue here is not about excluding individuals from running from office. The issue here is that constituents are being deprived of choice on the ballot. If the voters of X, Y or Z want to vote for an overseas Pakistani that’s their choice. What however, needs to be discouraged is for potential candidates not declaring dual citizenship, not because there is something wrong in having a second passport, but because that may raise questions on what else he or she is hiding.

In a future post I hope to talk about the economics of overseas Pakistanis and the role immigration plays in supporting our economy. However, in terms of politics, disenfranchising individuals should not be our goal, to serve some warped understanding of patriotism. On the one hand lobbying for overseas Pakistanis to vote, while denying them the right to stand in the same elections is setting dual standards and denies voters a full spectrum of choice.

No civil military balance, without divesting military commercial interests

A poor attempt at a balancing act

Asma Jahangir has spoken on the issue of military-civil imbalance today. Quite rightly, any deference to the words of General Kayani and Pasha that compromises individual rights doesn't say much for either the supremacy of the law, or a “free judiciary”.

Back in May, right after the Abbottabad raid, a lot of people quite excitedly, heralded this as a unfortunate, but at the same time fortunate opportunity to put the military in its place. Get it back into the confines of its constitutional mandate. Then came the in camera briefing in the National Assembly, but after a few weeks it was obvious that the military was running the show.

The PPP government started off by emphasising its determination to guide Pakistan's security and foreign policy. Zardari spoke of a grand free trade area and our then foreign minister SMQ smiled sheepishly with Hillary Clinton as Kayani looked on from the margins. Alot of choreographing, but Zardari's ideas didn't come to much and SMQ is well, batting for the other team now. Even then, few believed that the Army had relinquished influence over foreign and security affairs. Effectively, it could exercise its veto over civilian decisions if and when it wanted.

In the recent past, one has to be quite naive to still believe that its Zardari who shapes Pakistan's foreign policy. Unlike most PTI supporters and reactionary critics, its not as if Zardari allowed drone strikes or handed over Pakistani airbases to US control. Neither was it Zardari who extra-judicially handed over foreign and Pakistani citizens to the US without due process who later ended up in Bagram, Guantanamo etc. And before I forget, the most hated of documents, the infamous NRO was facilitated and negotiated by our very own COAS General Kayani, however, being in khaki he's above criticism or responsibility.

That said, whenever the issue of civil-military relations come up and people talk about balancing it, a lot of emphasis is placed on politicians doing the “right” thing and exercising their mandate and forcing the military to relent before there constitutional superiority. That's why the mere mention of the possibility of the PM sacking Kayani and Pasha unleashed a storm. Mind you that storm was much louder in regards to a possible decision that a sitting PM might which is his prerogative and constitutional, while a coup, orchestrated by the military unleashes jubilation and a fiscal stimulus for mathai shops.

The biggest slice of the cake

I would argue that any balance between the civilian side and the military side of the state can only be achieved if the military economic influence is decreased. The military through its various arms has its fingers in every commercial pie. Resources are skewed favourably in the hands of those in khaki and their institutions; for the industrial, capitalist class knows who to deal with if they want to get things done.

Now the military property empire is a ubiquitous part of Pakistani urban life. The nexus between Bahria Town-HRL-DHA for a few is “national progress” but for those forcibly displaced, the state that misses out on tax revenues, the banks that are forced to offer concessional loans and later write them off, the abrogation of the constitution within these areas; the costs are massive and they keep on piling up. The following DAWN Reporter Episodes paint an ugly picture of the cartel that is now the military-commercial interest which is a law unto itself. (Thanks to @shahidsaaed)

You can tick through a list of industries in Pakistan, and one way or the other, either through outright ownership or in partnership the military is a major stakeholder. Nothing comes of cases of corruptions against generals, so there is no surprise that ex-military types pack commercial organisations. Capitalists vote with their feet, and it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that they vote for the team with the bigger stick.

Incentives in action

Now politicians are a fragmented and competitive group. Sure, they make poor decisions and may be corrupt, however, they act in their self interest, where ever that might take them. Given the might of the military, its monopoly over the use of force, coupled with its huge economic clout, a fragmented group of politicians have no chance to exercise their will over the military. Instead, they are co-opted by the military to do their bidding, and why wouldn't they? 

Now the next obvious question is: Do we want these incompetent civilians dictating policy to the military?

The answer to that is yes. The simple reason is this: Given Zardari's 11% approval rating, the dismal approval rating of the PPP, and overall image of politicians as incompetent, we can be assured that every decision they take is the talk of the evening news cycle. Columns are written, opinions are formed, news is shared and retweeted.

However, decisions taken by the military fall under two categories. Either the military makes a decision, and then civilians are made to face the negative fall out of it. Or the military makes decisions and no one is the wiser. When questioned, you are not offered a policy outline. Instead you get a long emotive speech about sacrifices and bravery which somehow qualifies someone to make decisions on a nations foreign policy or other associated matter that is not even that persons job.

Do as the Chinese do

In China the Divestiture Act of 1998 banned all the commercial activities of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Like their Pakistani counterparts, the PLA had invested itself in banks, hotels, factories, property developments, retailing etc. During the Tienanmen uprising in 1989, China came dangerously close to a military coup. As the vanguard of the revolution the PLA, was a central part of the Communist Party and the Party heavily invested in the PLA. The PLA eventually sided with the pulitburo and the Tienanmen protesters, and protesters across the country were crushed. These events helped accelerate the PLA's independence from CCP control and widen its economic activities. By the mid-1990s as China bombed, so did the PLA's financial interests. In an effort to encourage professionalism in the PLA and in a display of its authority, the CPC promulgated the Divestiture Act of 1998 banning its commercial activities. Without it, the PLA would have gained undue influence, both by wielding weapons and cheque books.... Sound familiar?

Without reducing the military's economic dominance and access to resources the dream of civil authority over the military will not come to pass. This is not a matter of budgetary allocations. Its about a parallel economy that sucks away resources without any accountability. It rewards itself for taking the risks, but given that its “too big to fail”, the costs are passed on to the losers. The military and those associated with it, sail through bureaucratic red tape, judicial and legislative oversight, and political interference.

This is also why, I don’t agree with suggestions that the only way to save the Railways or PIA is to privatise it. Pakistan has toothless regulators that are easily co-opted. Recently, a newspaper report claimed that the National Logistics Cell, which has single handedly destroyed the Railways freight transport market is going to take over parts of the organisation to run as a “private” initiative. Then again, NLC, with its association with the military is above any critique. Until the state has a capacity to regulate privatised industries, there is no point in transferring a public monopoly to a private one. Tax payers keeping a state organisation afloat for better or worse is one thing, however, tax payers of inflationary borrowing doing the same to prop up a privatised industry to line the pockets of shareholders is criminal.

If I may digress for a paragraph, this is also another reason why I dont buy Imran Khan's and PTI's rhetoric on jusitice and ending corruption. How can they talk about justice and reducing corruption when they remain silent on the military and its role in the economy? Why the silence? PTI supporters like to talk about Turkey's example and the Erdogen model of gradual civilian dominance, but Erdogen as an activist and campaigner would not shy away from putting the Turkish military in its place.

Given that the military is the “winning horse” in the race to the bottom, its not surprising that those seeking an economic advantage find one way or another to cling to it. Some argue, that this proves that the military is a disciplined institution and people trust it with its money. However, the flip side is that no competitor is allowed a fair chance to compete with the military's might. And those individuals and organisations who are lucky enough to tag along under the khaki umbrella...well not only are they minting money, but they are also called national heroes. And when there great money making enterprises go belly up, it will be the patriotic duty off every Pakistani to bail them out.

Taxing problems: few winners, many losers

Since the early 1990s, inequality has intensified in Pakistan. The consumer boom under the Musharaf regime, coupled with high inflation since 2007 has widened the gap between the rich and the poor.

While the rhetoric in the media is largely made up about issues of access to resources and state services, the wider implications for ignoring inequality are ignored.

Some quick thoughts on this.

1) Given the minuscule number of tax payers in the country, the idea of having a progressive taxation system that redistributes wealth from the rich to the poor is non-existent. We still live in a system where individuals, even those who can well afford it, expect the state to provide them services for free.

2) The states inability to raise enough taxes forces it to borrow money from the State Bank, commercial bank or foreign sources. In all of these cases the increase in inflation and the burden of repaying the debt is borne primarily by those who the state should be protecting. The "haves" however are net beneficiaries through low or non existent tax obligations.

3) Links between politicians, civil servants, the military, industrialists and feudal networks insures that resources are allocated in a manner that serves their own interests. Laws, systems and methods that would help to reduce inequality either by redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, or by improving the state of the poor are non-existent or co-opted to suit the interests of a small segment of society.

This list could go on for several more points, but I think you get the picture. As we rally against price hikes, increase in the cost of gas, oil and electricity, corruption and mismanagement, we should stop to remember that even in the worst of times, they are winners and losers. The winners continue to win big, while the losers lose more badly. The long term costs of increased inequality are mostly ignored.

The following talk best summarises alot of the points I would agree with.

   
                              

Back to the future: thoughts on Imran Khan, corruption and the Musharaf "boom" years

Fair warning: Long read, potentially rubbish

The following post is based on my observations and interactions with individuals ever since the Musharaf regime ended. They may be some generalizations and perhaps given the narrow sample of people on whose comments a lot of the discussion below is based, the discussion may not neatly fit reality or apply to a majority of people. I am hoping someone would comment on any irregularity or inconsistency with the arguments below for they may have better insight then myself. This is quite a long post, and it may seem abit incomplete at the end, I hope to extend the argument later. 

The rallying cry for Imran Khan is justice. For his supporters and detractors alike, the state of, or the perception of the increase in corruption under the Zardari is ubiquitous.

For a lot of people since 2008, the decline in the national economy is linked with an increase in corruption. But then who is to say corruption did not dominate transactions prior to 2008? Is it that the new, post 9/11 middle class that were able to increase there consumption of consumer goods under the Musharaf regime have suffered the most post 2008?

Easy money

For a lot of people the 2000s saw an increase in wealth and consumption. 2 photocopies of your ID card could get you a car on lease. You could pay Rs. 20,000 to stage a “theft” or “accident” of your car, which on lease was also insured (in the examples I am aware of, peoples cars would mysteriously reappear stripped of anything valuable on Kahuta road in Islamabad/Rawalpindi). Contacts in the bank and/or the insurance company would do their trick. The car would be written off, new car would be presented, everyone’s happy.

Alot of wealth was generated through the development of urban property during the Musharaf era. Advertisements filled newspapers, people lined up outside banks to submit forms, a wink and a nudge and the right “file” could be yours in the morning, and given the rabid speculation by nightfall you could sell of the same “file” for a tidy profit. With some more winks and nudges, people were able to choose ideal plots. The best example I know off are people who bought plots in Bahria Town and DHA Islamabad, who knew people in these organizations or in the primary developer, HRL who knew which plots were allocated on filled in and flattened earth and which plots were on the original surface. Many of the plots in DHA Phase 1, facing the Soan river especially, that were earth filled and flattened out, later sank. Yes, the houses literally sank!

The other example was when CDA launched the sector I-15 plots and apartment ballot and people called friends working in individual banks to get forms submitted and completed on time, while asking them to “go slow” on other peoples applications. Suffice to say, several phone calls were also made to friends fathers who were CDA board members, political figures or high ranking Army officers, surely someone would pay out.

They were people who were importing second hand cars and selling them off. I forget the model of the exact Tayota car which was initially imported with a waived tariff for disabled drivers, which then led to a flood of people getting fake medical reports declaring themselves disabled. They of course then sold off the same car at a premium.

Now the thing is, and I am sure readers of this post from Pakistan would have heard similar stories in one form or the other from the Musharaf years, that all these cases are clearly examples of corruption!

What I find particularly frustrating today is, that the same people who were able to not only enjoy a marked increase in consumption, but also accumulated wealth during this period, are now on the vanguard complaining about corruption under Zardari.

Is it that corruption has increased over the past 45 months as we are made to believe, or is it that the people who enjoyed the benefits of corrupt actions previously no longer can do so or have to pay a higher price to arrive at the same results?

The bubble burst

It doesnt help that the speculative bubble that was the Pakistani property boom, unsurprisingly collapsed. All those multi-billion dollar, in partnership with this and that UAE property developer went down the toilet as the global property boom slumped, and Dubai itself went bankrupt. The highly liquid market of files dried up. Quick money through property and of course the stock market (should have mentioned earlier) came to an end. .

What I suspect is that a lot of people who are unhappy with the current government dont really want justice or an end to corruption. They are looking for a return to the past.

This property boom, egged on in large part by the military run DHA, led to a virtuous cycle, where rising prices fuelled increased development. It was the rule of a military dictator that allowed a lot of the expansion into suburban areas without due and legal process that fuelled this boom. However, people dont view this as corruption, they see this as “nation building”.

The Musharaf era “boom” if you want to call it that, lead to a period of “growth” which appeared highly tangible. People could “see” the progress. They could see the mobile phones in their hands, the many many channels on cable, the TV, Fridge, Refrigerator etc, that had been purchased conveniently in instalments, while a piece of paper declaring future possession of a piece of land, gained in value over weeks and months while sitting ideally. The corruption, the winks and nudges that facilitated this bomb in consumption is viewed as beneficial, thus considered desirable. Even if its genesis is plagued by dubious corrupt actions.

Whether the PPP and Zardari were handed a poor set of cards; highly tangible examples of state failure, electricity, gas, law and order etc, is debatable. People argue that 45 months into government Zardari cant blame Musharaf for today’s problems. Add, the Army, media, judges issues, global economic crisis, rising commodity prices etc to the mix, and even a pretty competent government would have struggled to deal with things.

Corruption of a higher order

So what does this have to do with anti-corruption rhetoric today and Imran Khan? Well for one, I am very sceptical about what exactly we mean by reducing corruption that has plagued us. To me, it appears more an attempt to redistribute the winners and losers. I may be wrong, but for a lot of PTI supporters, the Musharaf regime may be despised for cozying up with America, but the economic “vision” and “progress” of that period is still something that they aspire to.

People are more offended by the corrupt practices of an underpaid, working 12 hours a day young cop who may palm Rs. 1000, but have no qualms picking up the phone to further there cause. This more subtle, sophisticated form of corruption, which is also known as networking or calling in a favour is part and parcel of how the upper middle class functions the world over. These small “benefits” however, translate into long terms financial gains. The few thousands paid to your KESC electrician, policeman or SNGPL gas worker pales in comparisons to the financial gains of those in power.

My contention is that those in power and influence are aspiring for a future that is a rehash of the past. Justice and policies touted to end corruption will not distort their own ability to influence transactions. However, these same policies which hope to end corruption will effect small rent seekers thus reducing the cost of those in power and allow them to get on with their business. Not only do I think that Imran Khan's, PTI's or any political parties rhetoric of ending corruption is a sham, the people who rally for this cause are selective in their application and given that their position in the social hierarchy will remain unchanged. At worst, those below them will be pushed down further and put in their place.

Disappointment

I believe that the political noise which targets corruption is all well and good, and probably in most cases well intentioned. However, the way the PTI especially, has made it what appears a one point, end game of his politics does not address the deep divisions in our society which allow those with greater influence, resources and power to work what ever law, system or circumstance to their benefit. 

To reduce corruption, in word and in spirit, the PTI needs to evolve beyond corruption to actually reduce it. Otherwise, I fear, Imran Khan with all his well intensions is unknowingly doing nothing more than rearranging the winners and losers, to bring back the good times. 

The good times (read: Musharaf rule 2004-2007)? Yes, the time when people (urban, middle class) thought things in Pakistan were on the up, corruption was lower, so that "ideal" state is somehow emulating. After all, if you are aged 20-50, middle class and urban, in the past 30 years, nothing in terms of consumption possibilities beats the Musharaf years. That has captured the imaginations of many as what has been lost since Zardari has come into power.