Abuse and misuse of democracy

Abuse and misuse of democracy
By Andleeb Abbas

Published in DAWN: 25-05-08

SUSPENSE, mystery, thriller; these are some of the adjectives being used to describe the wheelings and dealings of the paired kingpins of Pakistani politics i.e. Messrs Zardari and Sharif. The drama, which has completely engrossed the whole nation and reduced it to a state of ‘to be or not to be’, has reached a somewhat whimpering end.In other words, we have a deadlock which actually means everyone ends up with less than before.The PML-N did not want the PCO judges, the PPP did not want an unrestricted Iftikhar Chaudhry, and the public did not want an adulterated mixture of a pre-/post-PCO judiciary.

However, that is what happens when you are looking to please everybody and appease no one.In this chaotic climate of conspiracy, the two men who matter the most with regard to the positions they occupy, i.e. the president and the prime minister, have apparently mattered the least. The president, visibly weakened, is now hanging on to the last political straw playing his American card to survive, while the prime minister, knowing that his days may be numbered, is unwilling to look beyond 100 days to make any meaningful commitment. Both are busy securing themselves, rather than concentrating on bailing out the country from the terrible crisis it is going through.This unholy alliance — where the philosophy of all-for-each and each-for-all prevails — is a recipe for the convergence of vested interests and manipulations. This surface convergence hides deeply rooted differences of direction and vision which will keep on surfacing as the political heat is turned up from time to time. The postponement of the by-elections with the apparent collusion of Rehman Malik and Musharraf was just the beginning of a provocation which led to unresolvable differences between the two mega stars of this soap opera titled ‘Democracy’.Democracy does allow differences of opinion. As long as there is a common goal and purpose, differences of opinion actually lead to synergistic benefits where each party ends up with more than it could have if it were alone. That is precisely why the PPP and PML-N had done so well in the elections. The common goal was to come into power by winning a majority in the elections.However, the elections were not an end but a beginning — the beginning of seeing differences surface over many issues. The reason for this friction is that the commonality of purpose has disappeared. While the PML-N is hugely anti-Musharraf and pro-Iftikhar Chaudhry, the PPP is averse to the chief justice and ready to compromise with the president to appease certain foreign forces.The beauty of democracy is that it gives an opportunity to the people to vote for a government and thus to have a say in selecting their representatives and influencing all decision-making. This supposedly makes the government representatives accountable and answerable to the people.However, this process requires a mature public which carefully assesses the pros and cons of every decision. Democracy is not a foolproof system and is especially vulnerable when its principles are challenged.Authority belongs to the majority, but where the majority is unsure, divided and desperate, the choices it makes may not be in its own or the nation’s interest. This is what the PPP is hoping to cash in on — thus for it, democracy still means ‘divide and rule’.Mr Zardari and Gen Musharraf do share some common interests. Both the PPP and Musharraf are inclined towards the White House and would like to toe the American line. It is clear that Zardari and Musharraf would not risk having a chief justice like Iftikhar Chaudhry who could challenge any decision they took and would rather have a docile figure bending all laws to accommodate their many illegitimate designs.However, alliances based on protective and insecure grounds normally end up on opposite sides, as neither party has any real intention of creating a genuine winning situation for the other.Thus Zardari and Musharraf, who have a lot of skeletons to hide in their political cupboards, are just performing a rearguard action to ward off the uncomfortable intrusion of the media, judiciary and civil society to cover up a past riddled with moral deviations.The uncommon yet common interest of all three players is the acquisition and retention of power. However, Musharraf will shamelessly claim ‘Pakistan first’, Zardari ‘roti, kapra aur makan first’, and Nawaz Sharif ‘justice first’. They are all now truly on test to prove whether democracy is a game of compromising on principles or one that entails sacrifices.Mr Sharif has taken the lead to prove his point by removing himself from power. Only time will tell whether that is a short-term political impulse or a long-term principled stand. The good thing about Mr Sharif’s move is that the true colours of each party will be on display when the immediate issue of justice reaches its compromised solution. Shallow characters lead to personality cracks which reveal the snarling faces and clenched fists of these very people who have been smiling ear to ear and thumping hand in hand. There is great danger of these grins turning into grimaces and of mudslinging and the blame game resuming.Democracy is not a term for compromising on principles, neither is it a game of getting on with all and sundry. It is not a licence to agree with the disagreeable; it is not about allowances for chronic bureaucracy; it is not a justification for non-performance; it is not an excuse for breaking promises. Democracy does not mean empowering the already powerful. It means empowering the people who have entrusted the leaders with power, and respecting and honouring their aspirations and expectations even if it means sacrificing personal interests and taking on local and foreign power-brokers. It is the misrepresentation of democracy which has given rise to the belief that in this country democracy cannot work — a philosophy which each autocrat loves to promote. The fault does not lie in the democratic approach but in its twisted manipulation and implementation.It is time that the people of this country did not spare the abusers of this approach and ensured that all these fake democracy claimants were exposed, blunted and made politically impotent. This may be difficult and tedious, but it is possible if the voice of the nation shows determination to put an end to this trend.

The writer is a consultant and CEO of Franklin Covey.andleeb@franklincoveysouthasia.com

Read more...

The dilemma of leadership

The dilemma of leadershipBy Andleeb Abbas

Published in DAWN: 05-06-08

TOO many ‘leaders’ spoil a country. That is what the new political soap opera serial on the media is displaying. With every episode ending in the suspense question of ‘who will do what to whom’, the show has revealed some interesting aspects of the leadership styles of the major actors in this action-packed drama.
Leadership by desperation: Adopted by Musharraf, this requires one to be shamelessly oblivious of the pressure in the buy-time, buy-people style. Silence can be interpreted more than just consent — a revelation made by the president’s latest political posture of disappearing from the limelight and playing the predictably desperate game of conflict and conspiracy. The philosophy of the president seems to be that if you cannot hoard power yourself, try to dilute the power of your opponents. The best way of doing so is by fragmenting the cohesion of the power brokers.In this case, considering the election results, it had to be the PPP or the PML-N. With a history of conciliation and reconciliation with the PPP, it was but natural to play on common interests and goals and make it look like a win-win for the two of them. In this context, the appointment of Rehman Malik as interior advisor and Salman Taseer as Punjab governor is proof that the PPP will tolerate him as long as it serves their interest.Thus Musharraf’s style of leadership believes in team-breaking rather than team-building.Leadership by default: The PPP philosophy is based on collaboration and cohabitation with all who would go along with ‘their’ agenda. The agenda, of course, is driven by Asif Zardari, PPP leader by default. Zardari, given an almost unimaginable opportunity of ruling the country by the untimely death of his wife, has made the most of it.He has a past riddled with controversy and corruption. Titled as Mr 10 Per Cent earlier on, he has faced several corruption cases. The deal struck between Benazir Bhutto and Musharraf was mainly based on the NRO which has over a period of time cancelled all cases against Zardari.So with Mr Musharraf it is a mutual corruption-condoning agreement which led to using the post-PCO judiciary for the dutiful waiving of all conditions which did not suit Messrs Musharraf and Zardari, whether it was the graduation condition for contesting elections or making the illegal PCO legal for the president.Zardari has a rather loud and obvious leadership posture. His melodramatic reading of Benazir Bhutto’s will was so exaggerated that most people thought it was more fiction than reality.His abrupt chumminess with the MQM was almost too breezy to be taken seriously. His mysterious departure to Dubai and London and holding of long parleys have given a lot of material to the media to keep viewers hanging on.However, all his high-sounding declarations have been found to be short on substance and consistency. These actions show his political immaturity, as he seems to have been trying to play too many cards at the same time; in the end it is his impatience to hog all what is suitable for him which will be his eventual undoing.Leaders who change their statements and stance chameleon style are bound to lose their credibility.Leadership by Emotion: Nawaz Sharif, on the other hand, has been capitalising on anti-president and pro-chief justice public sentiments. The fact that he shares with Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry a common history of taking on Musharraf and then being punished by him for it, is at the moment in his favour. He has sensed that the judges’ restoration issue has given him a kind of popularity that he would not have dreamt of when he came back to the country and any deviation from it will make him fall into the same category as Musharraf and Zardari.This is an ideal opportunity for him to differentiate himself from the lot. His interest in restoring the judges also rests on the hope that in return for this favour he may be able to get Musharraf’s third-time premiership restriction waived.However, a style based on personal vendetta rather than public interest is always vulnerable to reverting to the older pattern of failing to rise above selfish designs when it comes to using the same ground rules for one’s own performance.His real test of leadership will come if he has to take on the PPP as the latter becomes more and more inclined towards the PCO judiciary.At the moment, the protest by his party against the PPP’s politically compromising behaviour is muted.But as the intentions of the PPP become obvious, Mr Sharif will have to prove that his disengagement from the power centre was not just a political ruse to pacify the public, but an actual principled stance designed to prove that he will not compromise on commitments.Effective leaders need to possess the three ‘C’s, i.e. clarity, courage and commitment. Clarity of vision, of purpose, of stance, of actions is what sets the path for others to follow.Unfortunately, the game played by most of our leaders is to create confusion, ambiguity and chaos, where they leave the public guessing about their next move. This gives rise to uncertainty, gossip and speculation, eroding confidence in the future of the country.Another leadership requirement is the courage to uphold all that is true and to have no hesitation in sacrificing personal interests for the public good. Unfortunately, our leaders lack the moral courage to stand foreign and personal pressure and often give in to the temptation of going for a quick fix even if it means sacrificing the national interest.A leader true to his commitments is one who honours expectations and fulfils all claims made to the public. Commitment, as interpreted by our leaders, is temporary statement-mongering, where the memory of our leaders is so short that they are consistently denying, degrading and dismissing anything they had promised during their frenzied political campaigning.Without clarity, courage and commitment we will always have leaders going through the political revolving door, where they enter from one side and exit from the other, only to enter again.Unless the complete exit of all morally handicapped characters is ensured by the public, the drama of finding true leaders will continue to have a tragic ending.

The writer is a consultant and CEO of FranklinCovey.

Read more...

Fall of the global empire

Fall of the global empire
By Andleeb Abbas

Published in DAWN: 18-12-08

IS the financial tsunami in America as shocking as it is made out to be, or is it a classic case of a value-correction taking place in a market which had gone overboard with its own addiction to being bigger and more powerful than everybody else?

Whatever the reason, it is a much-needed lesson which all countries and societies across the globe need to learn; firstly to rescue themselves from similar disasters and then to develop their own structures on a sounder basis than inflated materialism to fool clients.The recent economic turmoil has made economists and financial analysts scramble through models and theories in an attempt to find an explanation to what is happening in a world where trillions are just a figment of some crooked banker’s creative imagination. This, of course, raises a lot of questions about which model, which structure and which regulation will stop these waves of doom engulfing the world.Has the capitalist model failed and is there going to be a resurgence of the communist mode keeping in view China’s rise to economic stardom? The world’s best financial brains are still scratching their heads and brainstorming to come up with a plausible explanation. British Thatcherism in the 1970s brought about a whole revolution by championing privatisation and setting the way for most to follow. Now we have Gordon Brown’s version of nationalisation of increasing government stakes in private institutions, setting the way for others to follow.For years deregulation was the development mantra, while all we hear now are shrill cries of panic for more regulation. Financial principles of capitalism, theorising ‘the higher the risk the higher the returns’ has taken the literal course too seriously, leading free market concepts to unholy extremes where $62 trillion worth of credit-default swaps occurred without being traded on exchanges. This is surely not capitalism but swindling which has destroyed the belief in an economic system that had created many opportunities for the less-privileged countries. The system of capitalism is not at fault but its unregulated abuse is. When a system fails, the danger is that opposing systems become an automatic refuge for victims of the failed system.Is communism the answer to this issue? Interestingly the three economies which are comparatively unhurt by this global economic free fall are China, India and Russia, all practising various forms of protectionism, with Russia being the closest to the closed economy model and India the farthest away. Government intervention seems to have become the favourite recipe for economic survival. However, hopefully the infatuation with this model should only be limited and selective.The financial mess definitely needs more government regulation to limit the damage inflicted by the financial gamblers of the world. However if this tendency turns into a full-scale system of government controls it would unnecessarily make countries reticent to opening up markets for trade thus reversing all the good work done to make this world a more equitable place for goods from rich and poor countries to find worth in the most opportune markets of the world.Pakistan’s economic debacle has little to do with the world crisis. In fact its banking system is in much better shape than many others. The crisis that we find ourselves in is a result of years of political and economic deception carried out by successive governments. The complete lack of proactive planning of our basic resources has put us in a state where basic survival is the name of the game. Exports have not performed and imports have ballooned; local industries have been crippled by the lack of basic facilities, and foreign investment by lack of security and opportunity. In fact the world crisis may have given us an outward chance of survival.As world markets crumble, the opportunities to invest elsewhere will become rare; thus capital flight from our country may not find alternative options. Our crisis is still solvable considering that we need only $5bn to bail us out compared to Lehman Brothers which needed $690bn to survive. As predicted, most Friends of Pakistan are fair-weather friends. With Americans taking full advantage of our vulnerability and stampeding over our territory, and China only agreeing to some remote long-term investments, Pakistan had no choice but to go to the lender’s mafiosi, i.e. the International Monetary Fund. In hindsight it may not be the worst choice especially if the IMF manages to force the two biggest resource-guzzlers of our country — the military and government — to cut spending.What has happened in the world is not because of flaws in the capitalistic model but a huge flaw in the humanistic model. All models are subject to use and abuse by the people managing them. Each model is operative only under certain guidelines and principles. It is insatiable greed and corruption which are at the root of the trouble. In fact, western financial extremism has caused terror in the world economy. It is time for the world to spurn this obsession with materialism and balance it with the values of contentment, of integrity, of humility and of humanity. Without these principles, sanity will be at risk.

The writer is a consultant and CEO of FranklinCovey.

Read more...

Bankruptcy of leadership

Bankruptcy of leadership

By Andleeb Abbas

Published in DAWN: 11-08-08

UNPREPARED and unreceptive minds are more lethal than any economic or political threat. In fact intellectually and morally bankrupt leaders initiate and instigate the downfall of their country.In this era of deficits of all sorts, there is a surplus of minds among our political decision-makers who cannot see the obvious, who cannot focus on the important, and who cannot take the responsibility of finding solutions to the many ills besieging the country.The prime minister’s visit to the US was a typical example of unprepared and purposeless leadership where the only achievement was a further deterioration of the image of our leadership.


Unwittingly made but truly reflecting ignorance was his statement, “The US knows more about Pakistan than I do.”Confusion and chaos are the best ways to describe the state of affairs in the country. With an overdose of statements and announcements coming from every ministry it has become almost impossible for any ordinary person to make sense of all this political noise. Let us take a look at the reasons for this confusion.Who’s the leader of them all? This is the big question mark hanging in the minds of everybody. Who is responsible for providing a direction to this country? Who is finally going to walk the talk?A team full of many captains always ends up with a contest of egos rather than a contest of expertise and achievements. This is precisely how our leadership is projecting itself. From Musharraf to Gilani, from Zardari to the Sharifs, we have a surfeit of proclaimed leaders who issue statements from time to time which are contradictory. From democracy to justice and from the economy to energy, we have seen and heard claims so ludicrous that what is being enacted has become a comedy of errors. Who is loyal to whom is the billion dollar question? Is the president on good terms with the PPP? Is the PPP on good terms with the PML-N? We have vague answers to these questions, but one thing is certain that none of them is loyal to the people of Pakistan. They have taken the public for a ride in the past and been forgiven for it and they are confident that they will get away with their political hypocrisy yet again.Who is responsible for all this? Another burning question. Our political leaders are world champions in the blame game. The president leading the show conveniently blames Shaukat Aziz for the present economic mess, as he earlier did for the judicial crisis. The suicide bombings are a typical example of the irresponsible attitude of the government. The last bombing in Islamabad was a result of the government’s failure to act against the Lal Masjid culprits. Most opposition and religious parties blamed the president, and the president blamed the extremists while the extremists blamed America.The PPP blames the earlier government for the economic mess and the PML-N for impeding economic recovery by exaggerating the importance of the judicial crisis. The PML-N blames the president and the PPP for blocking the restoration of judges. With this irresponsible attitude there is very little hope of any meaningful progress. So much energy and planning goes into berating and bringing down the opposition that little time and effort is left to plan strategic and far-reaching reforms to handle an economy needing critical and fully focused and united attention.Who is saying what? One does not know. Important and strategic decisions have been left to a bunch of incompetent men and women. Whether it is making statements at the highest international level or making sensitive announcements to the public, a careless and irresponsible stance is evident. The prime minister started his US visit by saying that “the next 9/11 may originate from Pakistan” and continued to make strategic blunders throughout his visit which was more of a summer holiday for family and friends rather than serious business.Conclusion: The political and economic turmoil in the country is caused by a leadership paralysis. None of the present leaders have the ability to take control of the situation and lend some method to this economic madness. Weak leadership always settles for compromises where everybody gives in to everything. What we need are leaders who can take responsibility of the situation and instead of placating, pacifying and downplaying their own incapacities, own up to their weaknesses, be honest about what is possible, and take charge instead of having these so-called diplomatic middle-of-the-road policies where eventually they will be run over by their own indecisiveness or by more politically speedy opponents.As James Madison outlined in his Federalist Papers, the two essential attributes for good government are, “First a government must be able to control the governed, and then it must be able to be controlled itself.” This is a critical balance which most governments fail to maintain. Either their desire to control the governed far exceeds their ability to control themselves, as we saw in the last eight years, or their inability to win over the majority to their point of view makes those who are governed directionless, as is being witnessed currently.May be it is time for the public to demand fresh blood in our leadership by looking for people who are bold, honest and driven by a mission to lead their countrymen to a clear destiny of financial, mental and emotional security. To stop this tragic political satire perhaps we need to give an ad: “Wanted: leaders of the rare kind.”

The writer is a consultant and CEO of FranklinCovey Pakistan.\

Read more...

Promising promises but...

Promising promises but...

By Andleeb Abbas

Published in DAWN: 22-04-08

‘DÉJÀ VU’, ‘seen it all’, ‘nothing new’, are the typical comments swirling around in the cynic’s corridors on hearing the prime minister’s ‘100-day plan’.These comments are justified given the historic tradition of every single government making loud claims of not repeating past mistakes, of being different from the previous government, of being transparent, simple and frugal, and yet falling prey to the many, many political, economic and societal forces which somehow always end up in the familiar political refuge of ‘compromise’.

The government must realise that the public is in an unforgiving mood and will not overlook any default on promises made. To create true differentiation from earlier political offerings this government must genuinely put the voters first and fulfill their expectations in every major area of concern.Here are some words of wisdom for our new managers in command with regard to delivering on their promises. The government should actually make a list of commandments for the ministers in charge, which ensures that the mistakes made by the previous government are not repeated:Thou shall do what you say and say what you do: A cut in the budget on the prime minister’s spending is a commendable lead-by-example gesture. However, to make it meaningful, it is important that a complete and detailed explanation of what the expenditures of the ex-prime minister were should be made public. This, in turn, should then be compared with the present cut in expenditures so that the public knows where all this reduction will take place.Similarly, the announcement that vehicles up to 1600cc are allowable for government officials is a bit difficult to implement considering that the most prevalent engine size is either 1300cc or 1800cc. Also, repealing the FCR or abolishing NAB is not possible without the president’s consent. A reality check on what one says is necessary.Thou shall not indulge in nepotism and cronyism: The major qualification of most people appointed to important posts in government has traditionally been their being friends with, or fans of, the men in power. Whether it was the appointment of the prime minister, or the head of the ISI, or the head of the Pakistan Cricket Board, as long as one was a Mush buddy he or she was fit for the job. Beware of this trend. This has been the nemesis of many a leader.Already the hurried appointment of Mr Rehman Malik as prime ministerial adviser on interior affairs, and Mr Hussain Haqqani as adviser has made people wary of more to follow. If the top man sets this example of appointing a couple of his own buddies, each of the 20-odd ministers will follow suit and oblige their cronies.Consequently, you have almost 40 people in major posts but whose qualification and experience have nothing to do with the job required. Thus a fertile ground is created for the incompetent and irrelevant to mess up an economy desperately needing top class expertise to save itself from doom.Thou shall keep public priorities above personal priorities: The first two priorities of the government must be to restore peace and prosperity to the people of this nation. That means devising a proactive strategy to trace the root cause of terrorism, developing strategies to prevent and deal with terrorist acts and ensuring that all agencies involved in investigating and dealing with terrorism are held accountable for their actions.Similarly, the provision of basic amenities to the public has to be pursued with missionary zeal. Provision of water, food and electricity at affordable rates requires creative coordination, unprecedented cooperation at all levels, whereby the best brains representing the differing socio-economic viewpoints of all provinces devise some short-, medium- and long-term strategies to deal with the emergency situation confronting the public.Thou shall develop a culture of performance, not personality: Politics brings limelight and position power. To these, egoistic politicians become addicted. Most politicians come in with the intention of making a change and fulfilling the expectation of the public, but find it difficult to wean themselves away from the media and power control which is part and parcel of these high-flying positions.Thus the desire to look good, hear good and assume good overtakes their desire to actually do good and deliver good. The obsessive desire to have their word as the last word makes them resent opposition and rely on people who are never going to show them the wrong side of their actions, thereby blinding them to their own follies.The country is in such dire straits that if the government does not put in place measurable targets of performance for each ministry and does not hold them accountable for it, it is going to end up with an economy in shambles, a media in hot pursuit, and a public in revolt. It is, therefore, mandatory for their survival that they treat the country as a company which is on the verge of bankruptcy, and has been granted a grace period by its stakeholders to become viable again, or else suffer the ignominy of being wiped out.Conclusion: The traditional way of managing this country has been through leadership by excuses. This is a convenient way of not taking responsibility for failure to deliver and laying the blame on tough socio-economic conditions inherited from one’s predecessors. However, as we know, leadership comes into play not when it is smooth-sailing, but when the tide is against one and when storms are derailing any effort to move towards the destination.Instead of harping on what the earlier government did or did not do, the current lot should concentrate on what they can do and prove it. No amount of explanations, justifications and recrimination will pacify a nation sick of being fed on denials and deceit.All these cries of inheriting an economy with huge problems are thus also an opportunity for this rather rare collection of leaders of various parties to show their mettle and character by not compromising on their promises, by not violating principles and by not giving in to the demands of their fair weather friends.The need of the hour is display a leadership based on trust, transparency and a tenacious resolve to make and keep promises, to plan and deliver results, to make choices based on principles and values and to infuse a spirit of motivation and pride in this nation. These are not only moral and intellectual imperatives but absolute survival essentials.

The writer is CEO of Franklin Covey.

Read more...

PERCEPTION AND REALITY

PERCEPTION AND REALITY
By: Andleeb Abbas

Published in DAWN: 09-04-08

Being branded as the most dangerous place in the world is a perception which may be exaggerated and untrue, however, it is a result of a complete lack of image building strategy both at the national and media level. 9/11 has bought more attention to Pakistan than any other country; unfortunately for all the wrong reasons. Internally the people of Pakistan perceive it as a country which has been sold to the Americans for 10 million dollars of military aid, a country struggling for its identity and security; externally it is perceived as a country which is a hotbed of terrorism and turmoil with very little of interest to offer to those looking for attractive areas of investment or enriching cultural exploration. As they say, there is some fire behind the smoke, and, that holds true about Pakistan as well. However to call it the most dangerous place in the world is definitely an exaggeration given force by a completely indifferent and irresponsible attitude of our various ministries and media responsible for presenting a more balanced picture of the country.


Let us look at the missing links in our image building strategy to make out what has caused this lopsided image:
Unbalanced Media Reporting- Bomb blasts are headline material, so are racial killings and other crimes and scandals. However the way they are handled by our media, or, let us say mishandled by our people incharge of giving official clarifications of what happened, adds fuel to fire instead of playing down the fears of all those involved. The electronic media industry is nascent and has just gone into a period of mushroom growth where every day a new channel is born. This frenzy of media competition has created a war for viewer attention. Most of these channels lack a planned entry where they should occupy a specific niche which gives them a respectable target audience to earn a return over their investment. However due to a lack of specific positioning, it is more of a “me too” strategy. The emphasis is not on creative programming, but “breaking news” or “we are the first there” or “always on the spot” slogans which mean nothing except that any sensational happening, and unfortunately in Pakistan’s case it is suicide bombing, every channel tries to give a more elaborate and more scary picture of the event in an attempt to hold on to the audience attention. In doing so they give plenty of food for the already wary foreign channels to use their clips to give the impression that it’s a place full of landmines blowing off uncomfortably regularly.
This would not be so overwhelming if the media balanced it by showing the positive side of the country by emphasizing the booming business climate experienced by many multinationals. The Cokes and Pepsis have experienced a much more receptive and lucrative market in Pakistan than they have in the much more complicated environment of India and China. Very little of these facts have been highlighted in any media strategy. Similarly the reporting and coverage of criminal incidents happening in other countries like India and US are hardly given the treatment we receive by their media, despite the fact that they do happen much more frequently than portrayed by both our own and foreign media. America has experienced four cases of random shooting in universities since January, which are similar to suicide bombing as the victim has first of all shot randomly in lecture halls and then killed himself. In four months 4 incidences in any other country would severely affect the image of the country, but for US, it is just a matter of news for a day or so and then back to Dow Jones and Britney Spears. India has had human rights atrocities as a matter of routine. Gujrat Muslim cleansing is not a unique incident, however the lack of media exploitation both in Pakistan and overseas, gives the perception of such incidents being just once in a lifetime events. Recently in Orissa in another bizarre Hindu fundamentalism exhibition, on the day of Christmas, 55 Christian churches and 600 houses were torched and burned causing immense damage and scare to the Christian population. Even a single church facing the same problem in Pakistan would have been splashed all across local and foreign media. But, surprisingly, such large scale attempts at Christian cleansing by the fundamentalists in India went almost unnoticed by all media.

Positioning Pakistan Positively-Most of the countries have a specific positioning strategy including those experiencing similar turmoil like SriLanka, Nepal etc. These countries are constantly advertising and developing publicity plans to highlight their positive attractions. They position themselves on their unique features and form slogans which are constantly played with attractive visuals on global channels like BBC and CNN. They also advertise them in print media and foreign magazines of repute like Fortune, Time, Newsweek etc. Malaysia’s “Truly Asia” theme has done wonders to their image despite having political and religious turmoil. India is “Incredible India”, Singapore is “uniquely Singapore”. Even small countries like Maldives and many Indian cities like “Go Goa” have separately marketed themselves on their beaches and have now become huge foreign attractions. Countries like Egypt, Indonesia which have had terrorism originating in them, have done clever advertising to neutralize the damage by showing their tourist attractions. Unfortunately Pakistan has no such strategy. From time to time you did see some feeble attempts by the government to advertise a few Pakistani exportable products, but they were so boring that nobody would like to see or remember them. It is thus imperative that Pakistan’s unique selling points be highlighted by developing a comprehensive media campaign. Pakistan has breathtaking natural beauty in the north and plenty of culture and tradition in all four provinces. However these need to be highlighted, not in the form of a bland long documentary, but a short, spicy, catchy advertisement with a memorable slogan at the end like “Pakistan-Naturally beautiful” with flashes of the most awesome mountain ranges being alluringly portrayed.
Countries, like products, are also like brands- people buy them on the image they represent. Pakistan has been branded as a destination to be avoided both in terms of business, sports or tourism. However history shows that countries like Nepal, Kenya or Bulgaria after almost being written off by many experts have strongly rebranded themselves as places with much to offer.
One of the top priorities of the new economic managers of this country should be develop a professional long term image building strategy to position Pakistan as a country full of natural beauty, exotic culture diversity and lucrative business activity-only by constantly highlighting these images will the country be able to bridge this huge chasm between perception and reality.

Read more...

Principles of leadership

Principles of leadership

By Andleeb Abbas

Published in DAWN: 05-03-08

CONSULTATION, cooperation and compromise are words which are a matter of political fashion these days. Joint conferences, mutual declarations and collaborative statements are overwhelming the media channels. History of distrust of political stances and postures has made us sceptical about this complete change of political heart.

While there has been a sense of relief at this rhetoric, there is also an apprehension that this happy merger and union of parties may be too good to be true, and the honeymoon might end as the race for parliamentary power begins.However, even if these are exaggerated postures of bonhomie between opponents, it is a healthy change of strategy and can yield many beneficial effects for setting up a new direction in the political history of this country.The leaders of all parties are displaying different leadership styles to leave an impression on the eager and awaiting public of being catalysts of change and saviours of national integrity, sovereignty and unity. Let us look at the leadership styles of each of these leaders and see if their new-found personal vision will be compatible and sustainable in the long run with the public expectations.Asif Ali Zardari: A man we all love to hate, has all of a sudden become the centrifugal force with gravitational attraction for all parties. Once viewed as the equivalent to the male form of Lady Macbeth who caused the downfall of Benazir, he has emerged as a grieving loving widower bent upon realising his departed wife’s vision. He is playing the role of the healer, the saviour, the unifier.His rhetoric is full of love and let bygones be bygones. He is opening his arms for all those who want to be part of a national reconciliation effort.However, in this over accommodating mode that he has gone into therein lies the suspicion of giving way to everybody and everything. His statements of calling the Q League ‘Qatil League’ have already changed into the familiar chant of no problem in collaborating with all and sundry. His stance on restoration of judiciary is evasive and nebulous and his philosophy on working with the president is highly debatable.It is this excessive acceptance of all good and bad which reveals hollowness in character, which, under different stressful circumstances may turn into compromising on promises and principles. Beware Mr Zardari; do not believe all is fair in war and politics.Nawaz Sharif: A man who has had a past record of swinging from a liberal to a conservative, Mr Sharif has been very vehement in his defence of the priorities of restoring the constitution and the deposed judges. However he is known to be more emotional and changeable than composed and resolute. His recent change of stance on participating or boycotting the election is a typical Sharif swing from one loud claim to the other.His party’s performance in the current election has surprised him as well, and made him go into this mould of being a man who is bent upon changing the history of this country, but the question remains that if he does not get the support of PPP on these two positions that he has taken, would he really have the courage to sacrifice positions of power, or would he once again swing his style from a man who will be the rule maker to a man who is a rule taker. While the upper two prospective leaders have been changing their leadership roles and styles, the following two leaders have maintained their styles in differing situations.Chaudhry Shujaat: A man who is more known for providing comic relief than actual political sense, he remains an unruffled character who believes that power comes with manipulation and corruption. He resolutely denies any wrongdoing and refuses to fall prey to the wily questions of the media.It is this stoic and unabashed stance which has led him to represent what is the worst in Pakistani politics, that is, complete disregard of ethics and absolute distaste for the truth. How long his nuisance value can provide political entertainment to the media, is now a question which is increasingly being answered as, not too long.Pervez Musharraf: If ever there has been a disappointment in the political history of Pakistan, it has been Mr Musharraf. He has been his own undoing. His vision of eradicating corruption and instilling law and justice has been rudely and crudely blown to pieces by his own behaviour. He fails to take responsibility and will fail to save himself from the ultimate disgrace due to this failing.He has violated the basic principle of leadership by preaching what he does not practise himself and by doing exactly what he claims he has never done.Take the example of dealing with corruption, cronyism, injustice and spreading democracy. He has gone back on each and every claim he has made. Till today he disclaims responsibility for all the wrongs that beset the nation.The point is, that if from terrorism to inflation, from corruption to nepotism nothing was his responsibility, then he himself is admitting to his ineffectiveness and ineligibility to handle the very issues his job description requires him to deal with. Thus he is making a case of political redundancy for himself.But one must give him credit for being consistent in his style of egocentric leadership where he will only see what he wants to see, and live in a make-believe world where all the surveys, media and public opinion are fictitious and petty conspiracies bound to fade out with time. However time is ruthless and it runs out fast for those who do not change their styles with changing tides.For all those who have gone before, and for all those who are waiting in the wings, a few words of advice. Leadership and sustainable leadership will only survive if it is principle-centred. Go back to the natural laws and you will find that the principle of integrity, equality and equity are the only ways of building up trust, confidence and respect in the eyes, hearts and minds of people.Whenever the deeds of these leaders do not match their rhetoric they will be writing their own political epitaph. The people of Pakistan have given a golden opportunity to these leaders to learn from their mistakes and reform themselves and help this nation become more disciplined, more united and develop more faith in their own power than be dependent on foreign powers — a revival of the principles of discipline, faith and unity based on the vision of our founder leader are the only true paths to peace and prosperity.

Read more...