Much has been written about corruption and how there seems to be no way out of the morass we find ourselves in. The recent survey of Transparency International and other such tools indicate that most citizens are dissatisfied with the way the state works. Small wonder, that we have insurgencies and a growing gap between the public and the state machinery. It is also a cynical reality truism that change cannot come from within the system but sometimes there are exceptions. Paradoxically, a district management officer took the lead two years ago and set a model of tracking and addressing corruption. Zubair Bhatti, the district coordination officer (DCO) was posted in Jhang where he started a small initiative in the district.

Given its simple nature and adequate media coverage, very soon the 'model' became a guiding principle for the Punjab Government. It definitely goes to the credit of the Chief Minister that he noted such a development and paid attention to it. This is why Shahbaz Sharif has gained a favourable reputation over the years. I know many analysts have issues with the Shahbaz Sharif administration but the truth remains: this is a government whose leadership is responsive to citizens' concerns.

What is Jhang model and why is it important? As is widely known, petty corruption occurs because of lack of political will, and where even that is present, and because of lack of effective information and outreach. Information and feedback have helped develop effective modes of governance across the world. For instance in Bangalore, India the citizen report cards were introduced by a civic group and now their use is widespread. These scorecards highlight the specific issues with services and enable the government to make changes. Focusing on the citizen means that all change and reform must be guided by information given by the citizens.

In Jhang, Bhatti, a pro-active DCO had directed all clerks in the district, who handled land transfers, to submit a daily list of transactions, giving the amount paid and the cell phone numbers of the buyer and the seller. Thereafter, the DCO called the buyers and sellers to undertake spot checks to find out whether they had been asked to pay bribes or commissions. In the process, some of the lower officials were taken to task and this spread the right kind of message among the land registration staff: a powerful citizen voice was around. Similarly, this model was then applied to state service providers such as vets who are used to taking bribes from farmers.

The spread of cell phones in every corner of the country -- 20 percent of the poorest 20 percent of Punjab households have cell phones, according to a recent survey -- provides a huge opportunity to tap citizen feedback and ensure that his or her voice is being heard. State can potentially reach the citizens and check if he or she underwent extortion or received a low quality service. Information and distance are not a big challenge anymore.

The News reported it and later international publications such as The Economist also covered this development. Such was the impact of a simple tool that the Chief Minister and senior bureaucrats took note of this development and now the Punjab government has decided to scale up this operation. It is definitely a heartening development, especially when one is so used to finding no light at the end of Pakistani tunnels of officialdom.

Technology has also helped facilitate this concept. For instance, mobile phones are now a key instrument to advance and deepen citizen information levels. Cell phones are almost universal. Officials in remote corners of the districts can use this distance to extort money from citizens for ordinary transactions -- a health centre operation, registration of property, domicile issuance, driving license etc -- services that are either free or at nominal official cost or with well defined user charges. The idea of using information and getting feedback removes distances and layers of officials between the supervisor and the citizen to allow the supervisory officers to directly find out if money was extorted or his/her concern was ignored or trampled.

Thus, by a direct connection with the user of a public service, the chain of collusion among petty officials can be undone by regular monitoring from the district or provincial headquarters. The Government of the Punjab has now started to implement this in several districts and divisions, most notably Bahawalpur, with a focus on property registration. The idea that the Chief Minister, a Commissioner or a DCO can check on the delivery of a bribe-free service is quite a novel one. It has started to show some results though there is a long way to go.

It is unfortunate that discourse on corruption in Pakistan is limited to high-level scandals. The everyday corruption that disempowers the citizen is often neglected or made invisible. TV anchors spend hundreds of prime time hours to dig out old and new scandals with a primary focus on the politicos. This has been our national tragedy since the 1950s. After 1947, it was actually issues of evacuee property and complete lack of accountability of the bureaucracy that fostered a culture of embezzlement and malfeasance. But even then the target was the politicians who were disqualified one after the other for their irregularities.

Last month, when I visited Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for a research assignment, I was amazed to find out how the Jhang model had been noted by the key officials in the province. In fact, the Commissioner of Peshawar apparently was calling up the citizens randomly to check if they had paid a bribe. This is how a good idea is spread and institutional culture can evolve incrementally.

But the long-term success of implementing Jhang model anywhere, including the Punjab, requires strong support at least for a period of 5-10 years. Experience from Bangalore suggests that citizen report cards only worked when the state was behind the idea of its implementation and using the citizen feedback to improve the quality, range and reliability of services. In Bangalore, public transport has been made better, petty corruption has been reduced and services like water and garbage collection have shown improvement.

In our context, this initiative must not be rooted in a piecemeal manner. It needs to be institutionalised through a regulation that bounds senior officers posted at the district level. If and when the local governments are elected in power, this feature of institutional reform should also become apart of their mandates. This is the only way it could outlast one regime.

However, we cannot be oblivious to the larger issues. Zubair Bhatti, the innovator, left the civil service soon after he had implemented this initiative. The reasons were of course personal. But this exit from the service is not an enigma -- a lot of capable officers have been leaving the service as the human resource policies of the national and the provincial governments does not reward innovation and those who bring change. Status quo is likely to be rewarded almost always. This leaves us with the dilemma of improving the work environment and compensation packages for the public servants. For instance, most of the civil servants (except the judges in the Punjab) earn a wage that cannot even pay for the basic needs of a family. In such an environment, corruption, dejection and frustration brew and this is a matter of urgent attention.

Whilst the Chief Minister Punjab has taken bold decisions such as the increase in judicial salaries and improving the police compensation, he would be well advised to pay more attention to the state of the public service, especially the executive officers who enforce the writ of the state and regulate rights and entitlements. There are issues such as the federal versus provincial service and their respective share of posts. Indeed, the issue of salaries is well-known but nobody wants to do anything about it other than the customary routine increases such as the one this year. Increasing 50 percent salaries when food inflation has been over 30 percent in recent years is hardly a major change. Most importantly, merit and performance need to be made the cornerstones of the civil service management. Favouritism is still the order of the day not just in the Punjab but across the country and some would say across South Asia. This requires a major policy shift and change of strategy by the elected governments.

The survival of Pakistani state, and to a great degree, rests in making the system work and allowing the governance structures to implement policies. At present, we are far away from this goal.

Pakistan's citizens desperately need the attention and protection of the state. Their voice needs to be heard and factored in the accountability process. The civil service structure must deliver and there should be many models such as the Jhang variety. All these innovations must be welcomed as we face the alarming prospect of state failure.

We are told that this is the 'age of terror'. To combat 'terror' it is necessary to enhance the state's coercive capabilities. Accordingly, more money must be spent on acquiring weapons and surveillance technologies and providing our troops with counter-insurgency training. Perhaps, most importantly, the 'nation' must be on board in this epic battle; hence the state's propaganda machineries work harder and faster than ever before to ensure that the security state enjoys the (passive) consent of the mass of people.

All of this is good and well until basic common sense interferes. So, for example, over the last 3 years, those of us living in big cities have found our lives significantly affected by the phenomenon known as the roadblock. Police checkposts are strewn across the metropolitan landscape, and we have accepted that this is all for our own good. But the simple fact is that the average roadblock is nothing more than a complete nuisance for pedestrians, cars, motorcycles and bicycles alike. More often than not, these roadblocks are the cause of prolonged traffic jams, and there seems to be little logic in who the police decide to stop and who they do not (or at the very least their logic leaves a lot to be desired).

Come to think of it, I cannot remember ever discovering that a soon-to-be 'terrorist' has been stopped at a roadblock, or even that any combustible materials have emerged from a vehicle stopped for a search (and we all know that the media would not hesitate even slightly to make this into news). More generally, I do not believe that ordinary citizens are any safer in the 'age of the roadblock' than they were previously. The government and media have gone out of their way to prove that things are much better now than they were a year or so ago, but this is all about perception. Are things better for those who live in the war zones of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and FATA? Do the Ahmadis feel safer in the wake of last month's savage attacks? Can anyone guarantee that an orgy of violence is not around the corner in Karachi?

These obvious indicators to the contrary aside, perhaps we are content to make-believe that things really are better. Maybe the daily roadblock experience is best viewed as some kind of catharsis: we suffer through a few every day and thereby feel like we are contributing to the 'anti-terror' effort (albeit while muttering a few expletives under our breath).

But, surely, common sense should interfere again and pose the question to our conscience: will this 'age of roadblocks' ever end? When will we know that we are safe enough to do away with the checkposts? If the enemy really is, as we are so often reminded, somewhat invisible, and if there is no clear indicator that it is genuinely beaten, then how long will roadblocks continue to be necessary?

About a year ago the Sri Lankan government launched a massive military offensive against the Tamil Tiger rebels in an effort to 'end' the civil war of three decades. Sri Lankans and the rest of the world were told that the initiative was an overwhelming success (so what if the 'anti-terror' brigade committed innumerable crimes against humanity?) and that the 'terrorists' had been struck a decisive blow. A year later, it is worth asking if the Sri Lankan state has relinquished any of its acquired coercive capacity? Has the security state been dismantled? The historic and systematic discrimination against Tamils that fueled the Tiger insurgency is to be forgotten?

The point is simply that this 'age of terror' logic is tenuous at best. It does not take a rocket scientist to recognise that, if things pan out as they have been pitched to us, this war will never end, and the 'age of terror' will go on and on. Most of the present generation has no recollection of the Cold War, and even those who lived through it probably forget, that that war was similarly endless, and that when it eventually did end, many ordinary people found it hard to it reorient themselves and their worldviews. It did not take very long for the 'Evil Empire' to give way to the 'age of terror', and for a new unending war to be concocted. In other words, the indoctrination and manipulation that took place during the Cold War had a long-term effect that extended long beyond the end of the actual confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Today, there is no Soviet Union that can be depicted as public enemy no. 1. To some extent, a reified 'Islam' fulfils the role in the Western metropolis. Whereas the Soviets and their allies were tangible enemies, 'Islam's' vagueness makes it a compelling enemy. In the Muslim world, however, the security state and its propaganda apparatus have to be much more creative. Frankly, the imagination of Muslim ruling classes leaves a lot to be desired, which means that the ordinary populace is far too easily moved by hollow slogans (or alternatively has become terribly cynical). In Pakistan's case, the imperative of security is not new. Sixty three years on, we are still being told to believe that India and Afghanistan are mortal enemies and that there is no question of compromising on the 'greater national interest'.

It is conceivable that the 'age of terror' will eventually peter out, just like the Cold War before it, and that we will then enter a new fear factory constructed by the Empire and its satellites. What will be the state of the world's people and the eco-system that sustains us in this next incarnation of imperialism? It is impossible to say, but surely even those who are seriously deluded about capitalism and its global effects recognise that things are likely to get much worse before getting better. And there is no guarantee that better will even happen. We need much more introspection and critical awareness of what is going on around us, and in particular during those long waits trying to get through those roadblocks that are supposed to make us feel safer.

Sunaina Maira successfully demystifies not only the Western view about Muslims and South Asians but also challenges the long-held belief that the West carries no biases against the Muslims and South Asians. A PhD from Harvard University, Maira teaches at the University of California: Davis. Her teaching and research interests focus on youth, popular culture, transnationalism, South Asian immigrant communities, and the US. Reflecting on her interests, her latest book is titled, Missing; youth, citizenship and Empire after 9/11. Maira has also authored another book, Desis in the House: Indian American Youth Culture in New York City. She was one of the founding organisers of Youth Solidarity Summer -- a programme designed for young activists of South Asian descent, and the South Asian Committee on Human Rights (SACH) that focused on post-9/11 civil and immigrant rights in Boston. A social activist working for rights of immigrants, Maira shares her pointed views with TNS on issues facing the Muslim and South Asian community in the US.

The News on Sunday: For your book Missing, what particular group from the South Asian immigrant community were you focusing on your research?

SM: I was engaging with the Muslim youth from South Asia that had recently migrated to the US. These youngsters were generally from lower-middle class to working class backgrounds and were weak at speaking English. Most of them were students who worked part time in the service industry to keep themselves afloat.

I chose this particular segment of society because I feel it had been largely ignored in the mainstream narrative on the war on terror and its impact on migrant communities. Affluent Muslims in the US had positioned themselves immediately to represent the entire Muslim community in the US and were constantly trying to cement their loyalty to the American state by refusing to criticise US foreign policy, especially towards Muslims. So, I feel that the way the voices of certain segments opposed to the "war on terror" were suppressed in the mainstream raises a lot of questions about citizenship in this global age and also about the extent to which dissent is tolerated in the "free world."

TNS: How did you feel the Muslim immigrant youth from South Asia responded to the 9/11 attacks in America?

SM: There was almost unanimous criticism of the US invasion of Afghanistan amongst this segment of the population. They were always quick to point out the US hypocrisy in supporting religious extremists in Afghanistan during the 1980s and also the US aid provided to dictatorial and corrupt regimes in the Muslim world. Hence, they were not impressed by George Bush's rhetoric of spreading democracy in the Muslim world, nor did they view the US as a liberation force. Owing to the general hysteria in the country against Muslims and for the war, they were unable to articulate their position in public and kept a painful silence over what they perceived was an unjust war. This is an art that the modern state has mastered, that of creating "common sense" through government propaganda with the media's complete backing. This helps in marginalising dissenting views which I feel was the reason many Muslims were not able to openly discuss America's foreign policy goals.

TNS: In a country where there are substantial civil liberties, why did the Muslim youth still feel uncomfortable in putting forward a dissenting point of view?

SM: You see while we feel there are certain universal rights enjoyed by people living in the West, the state is always quick to use coercion to discipline the population by setting certain examples. So, the witch-hunt against progressive elements as part of "McCarthyism" during the 1950s was necessary to keep a check on the growing influence of leftists in the United States. There is a plethora of examples of the 19th and the 20th century where the state bypassed all civil liberties to give a clear message: Dissenting opinion will be tolerated as long as it remains within the contours of liberal democracy. This helped in containing constructing a democratic order that was confined to the "two-party" system and eventually any radical notions were simply pushed to the peripheries.

The same happened after 9/11 when the state acquired draconian powers through laws such as the Patriot Act. More than 5000 Muslims were incarcerated and hundreds of immigrants were deported to their native countries. The environment of fear was further heightened by the state's presence in all spheres of an individual's life through wire tappings by spying agencies. Now of course, this cannot be compared to the measures of fascist regimes but there was a clear message given to immigrants: fall in line or face the consequences.

These policies can be understood using the theoretical framework used by scholars such as Raymond Williams and Edward Said who analyse such "imperial feelings". These consist of a phobia not only towards the "enemy territories", but also creates suspicion amongst immigrant communities who migrate from regions that the US is in conflict with. This places extra pressure on these immigrant communities to continually display their loyalty to the American state, and to apologise for crimes that they had nothing to do with but could be committed by a certain member of their community. Of course, this is not a pressure that white Americans have to face; even certain white Americans are involved in heinous crimes, like initiating unjust wars or bringing the financial system to its knees which is what occurred recently. So, to avoid this trouble, most of the immigrants prefer to concentrate on their work rather than take the risk of confronting the policies of the government.

TNS: Critics would argue that the US at least provides these immigrants the possibilities of upward mobility, something that is denied to them in their home countries. If they have such problems living in the US, why don't they move back to their countries of origin?

SM: You see, the US has always benefited enormously from the contribution of immigrants. So this idea that we should be in awe of Western benevolence for allowing immigrants into their society is absurd since the only reason why countries allow immigrants into their territory is because they need them. Besides, the reason why people gravitate towards developed countries should also be seen in a historical context. Almost the entire third world was colonised by the West which benefited greatly out of the exploitation of its natural and labour resources which resulted in extreme poverty in the colonised world besides other problems. Also, in the global capitalist system, the US and its Western allies have shown little tolerance for any deviance from the norms of global capital and have been regularly involved in sabotaging left-leaning governments, including through military coups, while supporting right-wing dictatorships in their place. Further, there are no restrictions on Western capital that moves into the developing world and almost wipes out the indigenous industries in these countries. So while the US promotes "free trade," it wants to impose more and more restrictions on the free movement of labour.

Hence, considering the heavy involvement of Western countries in the affairs of the Third World, it becomes pretty hypocritical to suggest that immigrants don't have a right to live in the West or that they should always be compliant and follow the line of the state. Not many people want to leave their own lands, but there are certain historical imperatives that compel them to do so and we should be sensitive to them.

TNS: Over the past nine years, have you seen any kind of political activism taking root amongst the Muslim Youth in the US?

SM: Muslim groups are slowly becoming active in the mainstream by forming alliances with progressive groups. Right after 9/11, and after the constant stereotyping of Muslims that followed, many amongst the Muslim youth became defensive and preferred a Muslim identity for themselves over all other identities. However, now there is a realisation within the Muslim community that they cannot remain isolated from the rest of the society and that they must not only initiate a struggle for their rights, but also connect their struggle to other movements that are taking place in the US. So for example, many young Muslims took active part in the anti-war movement at the start of the Iraq war and many were also seen rallying for immigrants' rights. They have also reached out to various organisations that fight for civil liberties and have tried to strengthen that relationship. So I feel this is a positive process that must be further deepened.

TNS: You are critical of the discourse of liberal feminism and feel that it is inadequate in conceptualising women rights in the Third World. Can you explain this position?

SM: There is a constant attempt to view Muslim women through a liberal framework i.e., to constantly portray them as victims without any agency. So issues of marriage, dress code, and "free choice" are often invoked to contrast the relative freedom enjoyed by Western women with those living in the Muslim world. From this analysis, it is then deemed perfectly legit for feminists to support imperial projects in the Muslim world in the name of "women rights." As I stated earlier, such a narrative ignores the many other problems faced by women in the Third World and the Muslim World, some of which are a direct result of the global economic system. So for example, if we agree that a right to a decent wage, education, health and freedom from oppression, colonial rule and poverty are no less important than the freedom to wear the clothing of your choice, then we see the picture is radically altered.

We would then have to critique not only existing social practices in the Muslim world, but also critique the continuous interference of Western powers in colonising and dispossessing both native men and women from their own lands. For example, it would then not only be critical of the ideology of Hamas towards women, but would be far more critical of Israeli policies that colonise, dispossess, and humiliates women. In the case of Afghanistan, we cannot be critical of the brutal treatment meted out to women by the Taliban without understanding the complex history of Western involvement in the country that continues to plague the region. If a woman in these parts of the world chooses to resist imperialism and colonisation, we should also consider that as part of being the larger struggle for female emancipation.

So I feel radical feminists should not create a dichotomy between the "free Western women' and the "oppressed Muslim women" but instead should realise that the struggle for women rights in the developing world is linked with their struggle against the unjust economic and political order prevalent in the world today.

Two stories made interesting reading. Two goods trains could not leave for India from Sukkur as no locomotive was available to pull them away. The cargo of dry dates that remained stranded in these trains was feared to perish causing damages worth millions of rupees to respective traders. And it was reported in the media that the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has agreed to lend US$500 million for the revival of the Railways. As per the working norms, a sizable portion of this allocation shall be utilised in procuring consultancy services and other technical components.

Several questions arise from this approach. With a possible stagnation of GDP, a whopping foreign loan burden of US$54 billion and a sluggish economy, is it wise to borrow for a moribund infrastructure which needs more than just cash injection? The responses could be entirely obvious. Our fiscal woes need an objective assessment, critical review and bold decisions to take the country out of the economic quagmire that it has plunged for the past two decades.

A cursory review of the budgets presented during the earlier years show that about one fifth of the total outlays are allocated for establishment cost. A detailed study with focused terms of reference will be required to examine the performance benefits, value for spending and other similar parameters. Some factors are apparent. Financial management, especially decisions pertaining to procurements and construction, need to be drastically streamlined. Various public sector institutions have spent millions in construction of buildings that are either entirely unutilised or under utilised due to weak feasibility.

Lines of ghost school structures, abandoned basic health units and similar infrastructure are common observations, especially in remote areas of the country. Similarly, there is a pool of expensive cars brandishing green number plates. One finds mid-career civil servants or ordinary officers using plush luxury jeeps each of which costs not less than five to six million rupees to the exchequer. In contrast, the lower grade government officials have to brave commuting ordeals in rickety transport after coughing out one third of their salaries. It is a well-known fact that acts and deeds subscribed by the higher tiers become trends worth emulating for all and sundry.

Taxation experts and independent observers have been presenting arguments against the spreading web of indirect taxation. It is common sense that indirect taxes adversely affect the already dwindling purchasing power of lower slabs of the society. The conundrums of value-added taxation (VAT) will have intense repercussions on the lower, lower middle, and even middle income groups. As obvious, commodities included in basic kitchen basket will also not be spared from the negative fall outs of this across-the-board taxation.

Given the nature of unregulated supply chains of essential food items, role of middle men and a weak administrative capacity of the government to manage even distribution of food articles, indirect tax shall erode the quality of life of ordinary people.

It is frequently mentioned that the direct tax net for wealthier groups has enormous potential for expansion. It shall not require a foreign consultant to rope in those who get more from this country than their rightful share. Benchmarks can be set by tapping records of all car owners, property owners of 600 square yards, etc.

The FBR should document potential tax payers. Needless to say, acquiring economic balance is impossible without a fair tax system.

Employment offers and schemes of various kinds are hurriedly cobbled together by the regime to extend financial benefits to the deprived. One must appreciate the intentions of the regime which are entirely noble. But in a situation where government is already cash-strapped and struggling to keep afloat, these solutions appear lacking a long-term vision. In times of economic depression, bold actions are needed from the government. One such action is the creation of an enabling environment for investors. Strong commitment and support of the incumbent regime is extremely vital in several investment opportunities of regional significance.

Notable mentions include the Reko Diq Copper and gold enterprise in Balochistan, Thar coal works in Sindh, mineral resources of Swat valley, dairy development projects in wastelands and infrastructural projects to counter electricity shortage. Wealth of knowledge, human resource and initiative already exists. It will be in the larger national interest to focus on accelerated development and promotion of enterprises instead of expensive loans that always failed to rescue the country from fiscal morass.