Misplaced priorities in Higher Education

Another day, and it seems history repeats itself.

When we are not discussing some vague educational policy buzzword, namely "uniform education", newspaper articles announce the appointment of new Vice Chancellors or Rectors to various universities across the country.

Apparently, in Pakistan there is a mass shortage of people to run universities. And if your university happens to be affiliated with the military, then most probably, your institution is probably more obsessed with "discipline", dress code and how the sexes can interact with each other.

Today I came across the following post on Insight News - Bahria University

NEWS: Vice Admiral (r) Shahid Iqbal takes charge as new Rector of Bahria University. Sources have informed Insight News that he has already indicated that the rigid rules implemented in the university shall be relaxed for students' convenience, however, the dress code will be imposed strictly by the authorities. "He is a humble and lenient person, " sources said. Iqbal's term will expire in February 2014. [HQ BUREAU]

Now I am sure, the retired Vice Admiral must be a jolly fellow who has served his country admirably over the course of his career, but what exactly is his qualification to run a university and preside over its policy and management? Is his rank in his former profession the only thing that qualifies for his post retirement cushy job?

This whole notion of "rigid rules" for legal adults is preposterous. Learning at university is less and less about what you do in class, and more about your wider experiences, independence, confidence building, building communication skills etc. 

As I commented previously, an 18 year old in Pakistan can join the military, where he or she may be required to kill someone, he or she can drive a car, a motorcycle, marry, hold an arms licence and what not. But god forbid that a 20 year old cloths are "inappropriate" or he/she is sitting too close to a member from the opposite sex. Not too mention that the students are paying consumers.

We see this everywhere from one degree to the other, NUML has had its fair share of controversies where retired Army officers have gone around throwing their weight, beating up lecturers and quite conveniently awarding their own relatives and colleagues degrees and scholarships. NUST is the same, but I believe that they have now relaxed their dress code. In Bahria University last year we had the case of a teacher who dared to question the qualifications of the ex-Naval administrators. Under whose authority, naval intelligence, and serving naval personnel were used to monitor the teachers and students protests is no big secret. The fact that the administrators got away with all this, and the concerned teacher was eventually fired, says alot about what their priorities are.

What I never understand is that, administrators with some affiliation with the military are all focused on rigidity, discipline and conduct when they run schools, colleges or universities, however, they have no qualms about sending their own sons and daughters to private schools and then foreign universities, where there is no "discipline", attendance or dress code. Hypocrisy? 

Perhaps, they have nothing else to offer apart from passing edicts about how students should behave?  

Private universities, who are sometime criticised for being "too modern" or liberal are playing catchup, telling Master level students what to wear and where to sit, while conveniently ignoring the academic product that they are offering. 

Perhaps if the International Islamic University Islamabad was spending less time enforcing gender segregation as their central duty, and placed some trust in their students, they wouldn't have sat idly by, whilst members of their staff sexually harass employees and students. 

For all there wise cracks on how higher education needs to be "disciplined", regimenting university life, in the same fashion as a primary school isn't going to add value to education. We need to really think about the direction in which higher education is moving.

Moralising over the behaviour of students as the primary concern is a pathetic cop out for educational institutions, who then overlook the academic quality they are offering, by selling themselves as disciplined institutions. 

P.S. The following link leads to the Board of Governors of Bahria University - Apparently most of the naval high command moonlights in the university as a second job. http://www.bahria.edu.pk/newSite/home.php?catId=622

The tutoring academy: A quick buck or a necessity?

Malik Hassan Ahmed, posted an interesting question to me on Twitter,

I never went to an academy, my parents never did, do we really need them? Where were they 15-20 years ago? Commercial purposes only?

So I thought that it would probably be best to bring this discussion to the blog so that we can add more detail to it, which is not possible in 140 characters.

My initial response to the question "Commercial purposes only" is to hesitate from drawing a blunt, sharp conclusion.

Perhaps Hassan can detail below what types of tutoring agencies/academies is he talking about? Are they those Rs. 200-500 a month, rote learning, Metric/FSc centres where students face the wall and memorize page after page? Does he refer to the various tutorial agencies which borrow their names from different Greek alphabets? Or is his reference to one on one home tutoring?

As far as the question: "do we really need them"? Individual students learn differently, and a classroom in itself is a very bad place for learning as teachers have to teach to the lowest common denominator, ignoring those that need to be challenged, and the very worst, that need help and support. Tutoring can aid learning due to its focus, and in most cases in an environment where students are more comfortable in.

In Pakistan, however, tutoring academies also perform a social function, where peer pressure comes into play. It becomes an after school hangout, where people meet up due to a lack of alternative activities available.

The relationship between students and teachers is more relaxed in an academy setting which also aids learning, and there is also a lot of evidence to suggest that, especially for teens, the 8 am to 3 pm, school day/timetable is extremely inefficient. In some schools in America and Scandinavia, many of them open up at 10, 10:30 because they believe that a later start is more beneficial. After all the school timetable, is not set to benefit students, it has been created to benefit working parents who can drop of their kids before work. A rigid, structured, period based timetable with classes divided into 45-50 minutes slots is for the benefit of administrators who need to slot teachers around, not students.

After school tutoring functions best when it breaks this rigidity in the system, and is held at a time when learning is more conducive.

Now the flip side to all of this is based on some valid observations.

a) Teachers dumb down lessons in class and want students to attend their academy later:  This is ethically suspect and morally wrong. This questions the professionalism of the teacher involved, and can be argued is bad practise and teaching. However, this is hardly surprising given the pressures and expectations, especially in private  schools, where teacher reputation sucks students in and teachers can face massive class sizes where learning is unpractical. However, to demand students pay to attend lessons after school is inexcusable. 

b) Heaving subject loads: Back around 2003-2004, atleast in Rawalpindi and Islamabad the craze of sitting 12-14 subjects in O levels 8 or 10 A levels began slowly. Now I believe this practise has proliferated. A levels is meant to be focused study of four subjects. That’s how the curriculum is developed and time allocated. Students who have pushed themselves to take extra subjects do themselves no favours and land up in tutoring agencies. Now, you may say that, 'well the student is showing initiative and doing hard work', but there is also a risk that universities will look at a wide range of subjects as a sign of lack of focus. The ability to sit exams and get good marks or grades, does not automatically translate into the ability to excel as academically or later, professionally. These practices have created a large market for tutoring agencies. 

c) Tutoring students you teach: There is also alot of criticism of teachers who tutor their own students and consider such practise bad. But then, if the student is comfortable with that teacher is it then wrong to deny them that option?

Below, I hope to hear from Hassan and then continue in the comments with this discussion. 

Full disclosure: I have been a tutor in Pakistan, both one-on-one and in an academy setting.  

The Islamic university where girls were raped

Today a news article in Dawn revealed the shocking case of female students and staff members forced to offer sexual favours in return for grades and demands of their immediate superiors.

I do not believe that this news is “shocking” because such cases are a rarity. In fact I believe that such cases probably proliferate throughout educational institutions, or indeed in any institution where men are in a position to extract sexual favours. This case is shocking because of the International Islamic University Islamabad’s indifference to these cases and its efforts to cover it up. Further, they have tried to justify their actions by claiming that they hushed up these allegations to protect the parents of female students and the reputation of the institution.

So what exactly has happened?

The report claims that a Professor of Economics traded grades for sexual favours, and threatened female students with failing grades if they did not consent to his demands. Such behaviour is coercive, and as some people on Facebook and Twitter are arguing not consensual sex, instead this is rape by any standard or definition. For a teacher, in his position to exploit his ability to pass or fail students to gain favours is morally and ethically corrupt.

The report further claims that a librarian was forced to resign for allegedly harassing his assistant. The offending Economics professor left IIUI and is now employed at the National Agriculture Research Centre.

The acting President of the IIUI, Sahabzada Sajidur Rehman is quoted as saying,

“We did not approach the police to investigate the allegations as it would have brought bad name to the university and set parents of the 9,500 girls studying here worrying,”

I believe this is a case of criminal negligence on the part of Mr Rehman and the university administration as student welfare, is the primary responsibility of any educational institution.

This also lends itself to another line of argument. Would parents rather have their children’s educational institution hush up such cases so that they need not worry? Who are the administrators to make such assumptions?

Second, there is something very, very wrong in the administrators world view, if they believe that the institutions image would be tarnished if such cases were brought to the police, as compared to the negative effect on their reputation, if they tried to cover it up!

Both individuals, the professor and the librarian have now moved on from IIUI. The teacher has landed a new job at a research council where he potentially may continue with such behaviour. Is IIUI not responsible for informing the competent authorities about the actions of this individual to protect his current co-workers who he may prey upon? Have the IIUI made any effort to insure that no other individuals amongst the staff or administration are suspected of similar behaviour?

From this case, some narratives that are dominant in our society are clearly illustrated. One, the moralizing. While there is no shortage of blogsand videos doing the rounds of LUMS, IBA, BNU etc, female students in “modern and western clothing”, with commentators judging and questioning whether they are good Muslims or not, it seems quite acceptable that a male figure, trading sex for favours, is not only acceptable, but worthy of protection and a cover up.

Second, pressure isn’t placed on the perpetrator, instead its borne by the victim. The victim is pressurised to change her story. Again, in a society that is inclined to frown upon any male and female interaction, somehow its in the “greater good” if the victim states that her actions were consensual and that she was not harassed. Why is that?

I for one hope that this issue does not fade away. Its now the responsibility of the IIUI to not only report these cases to the authorities, but to also make known the actions of these individuals so that they do not repeat these crimes again.

We are often told that our “youth” are vulnerable and immature, and all night texting plans are destroying their futures. An “elder” is required to monitor them, well into their 20s. However, kudos to the University’s Students Welfare Association, who bore pressure on the administration and did not fall silent.

Hopefully, a successful prosecution of the perpetrators will give courage to others who are suffering a similar fate and remain silent because they believe that society judges the victim more harshly than her harasser.

This blog post was originally submitted and published on Tribune Blogs here. 

All hail the Karachi Stock Exchange

The last few weeks has seen the Karachi Stock Exchange nudge upwards. That has predictably led to cautious excitement. Could it be that we are returning to the glorious days of the Musharaf regime, when Pakistanis proudly pointed to KSE as one of the best performing stock markets in the world? 


Well, our Finance Minister threw a bone at the KSE, and its oligopolistic board members by offering concessions in the Capital Gain Tax, that now it can be paid without any need whatsoever for the tax payer to declare his/her source of income. If that wasn't enough, the Finance Minister also withdrew Withholding Tax on brokers commissions. 


The stock market surged after hearing this news, and supposedly we as a nation should be happy and excited that this incompetent government has succumbed to your demands. I say your demands, as according to one Arif Habib, WHT was a double taxation and it was the public demand to remove it. 

Joy!

I mean who says your government doesn't listen to you?


Over the last 10 days people have gotten excited, equating removing CGT with increasing investment, that would lead to economic growth. Such comments and views, usually receive many likes and recommendations. This false economy (literally), within which Pakistan operates has led to a vicious cycle of unsubstantiated economic theorising that neither serves Pakistan, her economy, or indeed the long term goals of those people, advocating for such exemptions.


Strictly speaking, buying shares in the Karachi Stock Exchange is hardly investment. The type of investment, a country like Pakistan should be interested in is one which leads to the accumulation of fixed capital, machinery and job creation. The more illiquid the better. 


Getting all excited over foreign investors placing a few million dollars in the KSE is hardly an achievement. The money comes, earns some fees for local brokers, later those shares are sold and the money is remitted abroad. For all that effort, nothing is actually "produced" or added value or welfare to wider Pakistani society.


While the SECP has successfully lobbied for tax concessions for itself, it seems that the rest of the country doesnt have such luck. Inflation over the past few years has pulled the salaried class into higher tax bands. Rising prices means that consumers pay ever higher amounts of excise duties and GST on their expenditure. By offering concessions to brokers and investors/speculators on the stock market the government has done little more than shift the incidence or burden of taxation squarely on the less well off.


The rich in Pakistan, like any other country in the world, perform very well as tax evaders and avoiders. They control the resources that allows them to influence state policy, transfer their wealth abroad and evade paying taxes within Pakistan. 


However, what is really a kick in the teeth is that they are able to portray concessions to their tax rates, as something in the national interest. Looks like our financial masters have been following the Republican debates quite enthusiastically and have a PA on hand to make notes.


One of the ill effects of the mid 2000s was how people made money out of nothing. People pumped money into NIT, IPO's of state organizations such as PPL and doubled their investment in a matter of weeks. Everyone had a go, queuing up, buying firms, opening brokers outlets. The speculative bubble even sucked in municipal authorities such as the Capital Development Authority who has lost more than half of its investment in various shares on the stock market.


The fact that a tax payer funded organization was able to gamble away public money and no one is held to account is nothing less than criminal negligence. Especially considering the uneven manner in which money has been lavishly spent on some parts of the capital city, while other areas remain in shambles. People have not received compensation for land taken over by the CDA for over 2 decades in some cases, yet the stock market seemed a worthy destination for public resources.


I wonder which brokerage house earned a killing on CDA's share trades?


I for one am not excited by any rise in the KSE, for any stock markets performance is far removed from the real economy. However, over the coming weeks, I am all but certain, that Business Sections in different papers will be full of articles predicting a coming boom or a return to the "good ol days". However, those days were not so good and a boom is followed by a bust. 


However, fear not, no brokerage houses will be harmed.

Energy prices...let them rise

The price of oil has gone up again.


Predictably comments of how this is "democracies revenge" on the hapless people of Pakistan, and how Zardari's corruption means we pay more at the pump.


What is frustrating is the expectation that, "if there is a shortage of gas, alteast it should be cheaper". Every few days, some article or the other comes out where the author writes something along the lines that:


"if it wasnt enough that the people of Pakistan are suffering from electricity and gas shortages, they will be shocked to hear that the prices of the oil and gas are on the rise!"


A good example is the following:


The apathy and indifference of the members of the federal cabinet is evident from the fact that none of them paid any heed to the woes of the people who have been massively burdened with the hike in the prices of petroleum products and the imposition of a 10 percent cess on the compressed natural gas (CNG). Minister of State for Human Resource Development Shaikh Waqas Akram made a point that the increase in POL prices was too much, but no one bothered to discuss or raise the issue and all, including the prime minister, kept mum and the meeting was called off.

For one that is quite judgemental, and the article lacks facts as to what exactly was going on in the meeting. But more to the point, what does "POL prices was too much" mean exactly? What exactly is acceptable increase? And why does everyone believe that its the government responsibility to make prices lower? Who does it benefit? 

Have less therefore cheaper? 


Now it doesn't seem to make any sense to alot of people, but it makes perfect sense to me. If a commodity is increasingly scarce its price will increase. Why does anyone expect it to fall?


The price of oil is determined by international market forces. Not free of course: OPEC tries to influence oil prices by manipulating price. Demand from China is a factor affecting energy prices. And recently, the increasingly aggressive tone between Iran and the US, and the Iranian threat to blockade the Straits of Hormuz, has contributed to rising oil prices. Then there are issues of limited refinery capacity that also contributes to higher prices.


Yes, we can argue that petroleum products are heavily taxed. Should the government lower the tax when oil prices increase to give the masses "relief"?


Spoilt silly


The problem with our consumption behaviour is that oil pricing uptil the end of the Musharaf era spoilt us badly. We became used to cheap petrol and diesel. Both were heavily subsidised.


The subsidy on petrol was plainly criminal. It resulted in a massive transfer of wealth from the have nots, to the haves. During 2002-2007, when banks were offering cars on two photocopies of an ID card and a utility bill, it was the urban, salaried class that benefited. The richer you were, the bigger your car, the more extravagant the use. And it was these people who went around filling there tanks with subsidised petrol. Who footed the bill? The taxpayer, and they continue to do so. The debt that was accumulated during this period to keep energy prices at bay in the lead up to the early 2008 elections, still remain.


The burden of that debt and the inflation that increased government borrowing caused hit the poorest hardest. The costs of inflation are dis-proportionetly felt by those on low incomes. While the well off, those people who had taken out consumer goods, including cars on finance and debt, experienced a decline in real terms, as inflations benefits debtors rather than creditors. Further, a salaried individual is more likely to enjoy annual increments in wages, not equal to, but in line with inflationary expectations. The small man is screwed both ways.


Alot of hot air


History will probably judge our move towards CNG as a major disaster. At most it should have been a source of fuel for public transport to cut down its cost. Again, its criminal to see brand new cars converted to CNG. If you can afford to own a Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla, you can afford to pay for petrol. After a decade of cheap CNG, people dont expect its price to rise. Or when it rises they expect the difference between petrol and gas prices to remain the same. However, that is neither sustainable, nor desirable. Households on low income which cant afford UPS's and Generators, should at least be able to cook and heat there homes. Instead, the CNG Pump Owners lobby not only wants the price to fall and taxes removed, but a reduction in gas load shedding as well. Why should those with the least, have to bear the cost for some guy who can afford to buy his/her own car, but prefers to put gas in it?


Subsidies are generally a bad idea. They encourage over production and/or over consumption. It is also very difficult to make sure that those who the subsidy intends to benefit, actually benefit. Worst off, the economics of energy pricing have been co-opted by political rhetoric.


Every energy price increase is met with accusations of corruption and how democracy has brought us the gift of higher petrol/diesel prices.


The other day I read a comment on the Express Tribune which something something along the lines:


"Even when global oil prices were $142 a barrel, petrol in Pakistan was cheaper than it is now"


Well no surprises there, at that time the Musharaf government maintained the subsidy, by stopping oil prices from rising. It didnt help win him the elections, but it did insure that the new government was setup for failure.


Promises, promises, promises


The worst thing now is for opposition parties to promise lower energy prices. Its high time they all stuffed the rhetoric and say whats needed. Energy prices are going to keep on rising. What they should be focusing on, rather than promising to throw untold, 100s of billions of rupees on subsidies,  is on incentivising energy audits, improved insulation and building design, conservation etc. Car producers in Pakistan, who year on year demand tariffs to protect them from foreign competition, need to spurned towards energy efficient engines and design.


Thar coal, more gas in Baluchistan etc etc, are all mirages offered as possible future solutions. They are no closer to reality than they were a few years ago. No one is going to give us free oil, and its economic suicide to expect the state to foot the bill. Its also corrupt on our part to expect subsidies, the burden of which is borne by those who hardly consumer any of it. The poorest and most vulnerable, must and should be protected from inflationary pressure. However, we need to draw a line somewhere. The guy sitting in his brand new Honda Civic, being interviewed on GEO News on how the government should cut petrol prices doesn't deserve a poor states economic protection.


So gear up for higher prices, and continue to blame corruption, Zardari, democracy, PPP for our ills, just do so while economizing energy use in your surroundings.

Disciplined innovators: Will make JF-17s and sell Tablets too!

First off, thanks to @AliZeeshanIjaz for sharing the following picture with me.

Now I am not sure what to make of this. We are all well aware of the Pakistan Armed Forces and its commercial interests. I guess, getting into the business of knock off tablets, netbooks and ebook readers is just part of the evolutionary process.

However, there seems something very wrong with how a prominent state organization, in a period of resource paucity, has decided on its own to run a parallel commercial arm.

For one, Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra, is a state funded organization which on its own accord has now decided to use its resources, in its own words, to “StrengthenNational Economy Through Commercialization”. Really? Since when is a nations economy strengthened through commercialization? Whose coffers will be "strengthened" from this venture? 

There also seems to be something very wrong, on how on the one hand our security analysts, op-ed writers and other retired officers bombard us day after day, on how our military is under resourced, and how we, as a grateful nation, should provide what ever budgetary allocations they demand. They further argue how NATO's presence in Afghanistan and India's shopping spree on military hardware is harming Pakistan's ability to keep up, technologically speaking, with other actors in the neighbourhood.

So, in short, we are low on cash, and falling behind technologically! So why exactly are state resources being utilized to develop consumer products?

A press release states:

Chairman PAC Air Marshal Farhat Hussain Khan therefore decided to optimally utilize the facilities and resources of PAC to contribute in strengthening the national economy through commercialization.

So he can decide to use state resources for commercial purposes as he sees fit? 

Do our best minds, employed at PAC Kamra have nothing else to do? Are we flush with surplus resources to dable in side projects? Apparently, the radar system along the Western border isnt working, they can start by fixing that to begin with! 

Granted, these products appear to be a result of a partnership between PAC Kamra and INNAVTEK China. Even so, why are state resources being utilised for such activities? Where will the revenue generated from the sale of these products go? Who financed the start up of this project? Are these products unique and patented, or are they cheap knockoffs of patented hardware which may potentially open up PAC Kamra to claims of copyright infringement? Are serving PAF officers involved in developing these products? 

Further, the use of PAF fighters as a marketing tool cheapens the achievements of the PAF, and personally, I find it exploitative and cynical that those entrusted to defend us, use martial imagery as a marketing tool.   

Now, there is no denying, a long history of military technology and expertise crossing over, and helping develop commercial products. However, given the state of the Pakistani economy, the current threats we face and the scarcity of resources; the fact that the PAF has decided that it has the time, resources and manpower to run a money making side project on the side as well, suggests to me, that the next time the military demands for increased budgetary allocations, we should ask them to flog more tablets and netbooks. 

Endnote: Please consider signing the following petition, against the increased hate filled rhetoric against the Ahmadiyya Community in Rawalpindi: http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-the-ongoing-anti-ahmadi-hate-campaign-in-rawalpindi

The absurdity of the Maya Khan Brigade

This piece is more an effort to lower my blood pressure than anything else. (Apologies for typos)

The Maya Khan brigade appears to have gone on a rampage in, wait for it....a park!

Telling your parents that you are going to the “park” is never going to be the same ever again.

If you still haven’t seen the show then a clip below kind of sums up the gutter television that SAMAA is producing.

Now the last time I checked (and I didnt realise that I needed to check this to begin with), two people, of the opposite sex, sitting in a park, in broad day light, is not illegal.

Some people who support this campaign against “date's” point out that while they“offending” couples may not be meeting illegally, the fact that they are together is definitely immoral and against Islam!

Even assuming that a man and a women sitting together is indeed “immoral”, who is SAMAA TV, Maya Khan and the chattering aunties to go and hound them in a public space?

Going through the horrid clip above, you see two dozen women running through a park, shouting “wo hijab waali”, “dekho uss nai hijab pehna huwa hai”, escorted by men with name tags and uniformed men, obviously employed by one or the other private security company. If you had this great “hoard” of judgement come charging at you, anyone would feel intimidated, harassed and threatened. The last time I checked, and I may be completely ignorant about this, when I go to a public space, that is not what I expect, nor is such behaviour condoned by any legal authority.

What perhaps magnifies the absurdity of the behaviour of the women involved is their comments and reactions. At the end of the clip, all the laughing, high fives and self congratulation is disgusting! It appears as if they are on a human Safari, corralling all those that they can look down upon into the corner and shoving a camera in their face! As if passing judgement is not enough, the women indulge in a race to the bottom as each tries to out do the other, by offering further justification to explain why they are racing through a public space, harassing people!

While the hating aunties share there views on what a mangni constitutes, even offering some legal jargon to make themselves sound learned, and where you should and should not meet your f fiancée, the smugness and self righteousness increases more than proportionately as each minute passes.

Then comes the flip side of the argument. That a “free media” can do what it wants and any criticism of it is an attempt to curtail its freedom. No...the moment the supposed “free media” uses bystanders to push up their ratings, they are desperately calling for regulation to mediate their output. By infringing on the rights and privacy of others, the media, or any individual for that matter cannot claim freedom of expression as a right, as they trample those of others.

Given that the right to privacy is a basic human right and Pakistan is a signatory to the various conventions, the blatant, recorded illegality of the actions of SAMAA TV is just calling on someone to take action.

But this is perhaps the most frustrating and cynical part of this whole episode. Maya Khan and her crew pick on individuals who they know are vulnerable, who would not want the spotlight or a media trial. Maya Khan and SAMAA have no right to demand nikkahnama's from anyone and no one has to explain their relationship to them.

In writing this post, I am probably participating in the promotion of this video and the “efforts” of Maya Khan and her ragtag bunch. However, if nothing else, this episode is a clear example of how the race for ratings and fame has made our media personalities increasingly desperate.

We can boycott and refuse to partake, but sadly, there remains a large audience of people who will support such programming.

If you are not one of them, then please sign the following petition: http://www.change.org/petitions/to-mr-zafar-siddiqi-ceo-samaa-tv-stop-subah-saverey-maya-kay-sath-vigilantism-like-lal-masjid

Write into SAMAA TV:

http://www.samaa.tv/programdetail.aspx?ID=59

And lodge a complaint with PEMRA

http://www.pemra.gov.pk/feedback/

The most effective way to lobby these channels on their programming, is to write to those companies that advertise and sponsor their shows.

Finally, some argue that what Maya Khan and her brigade were upto was a good thing. They were helping to get rid of immoral activity. If we accept that argument, then we would have to accept the arguments of the Lal Masjid Brigade who would have rounded up all the women running through the park, beat them with sticks and demanded that they confine themselves behind closed doors. I hate to say this, but in this case, perhaps in the greatest interest, that would not be such a bad thing.

Actually, that would be a bad thing. No individuals rights should be curtailed for the greater good. Hear that SAMAA TV and Maya Khan? Or do you prefer playing the bully that everyone hates in the park?

Now just to cool things down and bring a smile at the end of this post, have a look at the original Hating Aunties:

Oh Pakistan's saviours: Manage expectations, before the expectations manage you

Damn!

We were so close!

The coup was just around the corner. The mathai shops had stocked up, this wretched, corrupt government was going to be booted out and Zardari would wipe that cheshire cat smile of his face.

Ex-military, ex-civil service pundits were on the ready.

TV hosts had their hair gelled.

Qadam barhao General Kayani, hum tumharai saath hain status's were being liked and RT'd.

Sadly, it wasnt to be...yet.

Eventually however:

Zardari and the PPP government will be gone.......rejoice!

Its easy to imagine the streets filled with jubilation, as opposition party's and their electoral machines go into overdrive. Eventually, whoever you consider your saviour will come to power (if you are lucky). And all will be well again! ........Not!

This is perhaps the kind of reaction we should look forward to, when overzealous Pakistani news reporters shove microphones into the faces of celebrating voters.

Yep! She thinks that Obama electoral win means that she can start binning her bills! No need to worry about the gas, electricity or mortgage.

Well, we now know how things turned out.

This is the flip side of political campaigns heavy on passion and emotion.

a) Politicians make grand promises and raise expectations

b) Their failure to manage expectations leads to impossible demands and expectations

c) Those demands are not met, in which case, we are back to point (a) for our next saviour to take charge from.

We have evolved into the next stage of political theatre. Leveraged by an easily excitable news media, social networks, the internet etc. So now the promises get even grander, the expectations rise even higher, and yet despite all the tall claims and blunt accusations, we still have no one that offers rational analysis, policy proscriptions or a healthy debate.

Sigh.

Anyone want to take bets on how quickly the post-Zardari regime's ratings fall through the floor?

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.