It is a reflection of the power of 21st century Empire that the American presidential election is the biggest news story on the planet. Wherever one lives, images and newspaper headlines chronicling the campaigns of Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin dominate, regardless of whether we want these distant individuals -- and their often mind-numbing rhetoric -- to take over our public sphere.

After eight years of Bushism, one might be forgiven for feeling relief that someone else is going to win on November 8. If at the turn of the century there was already enormous injustice and insecurity in the world, after two terms in power for one of the most rabidly conservative regimes in the history of the United States, things have gotten much, much worse. Iraq, home to one of the oldest known civilisations of the world, has been destroyed, while the region in which we live has been badly brutalised, with the prospects of peace much more remote than in 2001.

More generally, governments around the world have criminalised dissent under the guise of fighting 'terror', economic want and deprivation have increased dramatically, and an unprecedented gap in communication has opened up between western and non-western societies. These are only some of the gifts bequeathed to the world by the 'leadership' of George W Bush and his team of neo-cons. Even if things do not get much better under the new president, surely they cannot get much worse!

Within America, and particularly among youth, much has been made of the 'change' agenda of Barack Obama. If he were to become the president, the long-suffering non-white minorities of the United States would score a highly symbolic victory. Of course, over the next couple of decades, the non-white population will come to rival that of white America, but nonetheless it is the latter that remains economically, politically and culturally dominant, and the election of a non-white president would represent somewhat of a challenge to the white establishment.

However, it is important not to overstate the role that someone like Barack Obama could play within the given structure of power. Even in a presidential system of government, such as America's, the president cannot act with impunity. At the very least, he would be answerable to his party. Those familiar with the two-party system in the US are well aware that Democratic Party is, at best, less reactionary than its Republican counterpart, and represents only a slight leftward shift along the political spectrum, which does not mean 'leftist' by any stretch of the imagination.

Even if one were to leave open the possibility that an Obama-led Democratic Party would improve the situation of working people -- particularly coloured people -- within the US, the fact remains that America's posture as the world bully is not going to change. It is now easy to forget that it was the Bill Clinton administration that started the 'cold war' against Iraq in the form of a deadly embargo. When Clinton's Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was asked about the embargo-induced death of 500,000 Iraqi children, she categorically stated that the administration had no qualms about the human costs of the policy.

The Democratic Party will be less brazen in its dealings with the rest of the world than the neo-con lobby within the Republican Party, it will emphasise 'nation-building' as opposed to rely entirely on 'shock and awe', and it will be less influenced by the demands of the immensely powerful munitions industry. However, it will still be committed to imperial goals. After the erosion of American financial power, these goals will be increasingly expressed in the form of military power.

If John McCain wins the White House, there is little reason to believe that even a small shift will take place in Washington's policies. McCain has tried to distance himself from the Bush administration in the final weeks of his campaign, but this does not mean that there is a significant difference in the politics of either Republican camp. In fact, the chances are that McCain will retain many Bush appointees in some shape or form and reinforce the neo-con thrust.

All told, after eight years of Bush, the teeming billions all over the world are likely to get more of the same. While it is important to recognise the differences that result from a change in government, it is just as important to understand the entrenched structural forces that remain at work regardless of who is in government. Perhaps the best example of how little difference there is between the incumbent regime in Washington and the two individuals who seek to succeed it is the financial meltdown on Wall Street.

For the 10 days or so when Congress was debating the $700 billion bailout package for Wall Street, both Obama and McCain were indistinguishable in terms of their policy direction. Both clearly avoided any 'controversial' statements, which might have alienated them from the political establishment, corporate media or financial oligarchs. They did not question the logic of government spending three-quarters of a trillion dollars to 'instill confidence' into financial institutions that had engaged in reckless debt-creation, let alone ask whether financial capitalism was good for the people of the US or the world.

Therein lies the crux of the matter. Obama and McCain do not represent a departure from the commitment to a capitalist world order in which the US is top dog, moneymaking is God, and people are increasingly viewed as automatons that function as workers who produce goods and services, or mindless consumers that buy them. In this worldview, the natural world is to be manipulated at an even more breathless rate than it has to date, with little or no concern for longer-term impacts that can now be quite accurately predicted. And the predictions are very clearly dire.

The US has been the undisputed ruler of the world since 1990, and some would argue since the end of the First World War. In this period, humanity has seen unprecedented progress but also unprecedented destruction. Objectively speaking, the vast majority of people around the world have been a victim of the destruction, rather than beneficiaries of progress. What bigger indictment could there be of the leader of the 'free world' than this?

Prof Nasir Islam retired recently from the Telfer School of Management at the University of Ottawa, where he held the positions of director, MBA Program, and vice dean, Graduate Programs. An expert on Afghan culture and tribal structures of Kandahar, he spends a few days every couple of months providing cultural awareness training to Canadian military personnel detailed for Afghanistan, a country so unlike their own. He spent his early childhood in Ludhiana, where his ancestors, Yousafzai Pakhtuns of Afghanistan, had settled in the early 19th century.

Nasir Islam was only 10 when Pakistan came into existence. He vividly remembers the traumatic events of his four-month incarceration in a prisoners of war (POW) jail near Delhi, followed by a nightmarish train journey to Pakistan. After matriculating from Pakistan Model High School, Lyallpur (now Faisalabad), he took admission in Government College, Lyallpur, and graduated from there in 1957. He was member of his college debating team and editor of the college magazine, Beacon.

In 1959, Nasir Islam did his MA in Political Science from University of the Punjab. He won the Diwan Bahadur KB Thapar Medal for standing first in the exam. He then joined the teaching profession, but soon got a US State Department scholarship that enabled him to do Master's and later PhD in Public Administration from the University of Southern California.

Nasir Islam worked for some time with the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in Geneva, but then again returned to the teaching profession. He has taught Public Administration at University of the Punjab, and at Laval University and the University of Ottawa in Canada. He also has the rare distinction of serving as chairperson of the Political Science Department at Laval University. He also occasionally provides consultancy services to various Canadian governmental and non-governmental organisations, as well as the Government of Pakistan.

Nasir Islam's work, focussing on governance, institutional development, intercultural management and eradication of corruption, has been published in major international journals. He has also served as member of the Boards of Trustees of two of Ottawa's prestigious hospitals -- the Civic and the General. In 2003, the International Association of Schools and Institutes of Administration gave him the Pierre de Celles Award for Excellence. He fluently speaks five languages: English, French, Punjabi, Spanish and Urdu. He lives in Ottawa with his wife Jennifer and their two daughters. The News on Sunday interviewed him recently in Ottawa. Excerpts follow:

The News on Sunday: You have remained associated with the teaching profession for a long time. What is wrong with the education system in Pakistan?

Nasir Islam: There is no mystery about it. A society that values soldiers, police officers, customs and income tax officials, and even peons more than teachers cannot have a high quality education system. Pakistan on average has been spending about five to seven percent of its GDP on defence and only one to two percent on education. The result is obvious. On average, 25-30 percent of the budget is spent on armed forces, and a very small fraction of the rest on education and health. Over the course of time, Pakistan has developed a three-tier education system: madrassas for the masses, Urdu-medium public schools for the lower middle classes and English-medium private schools for the rich. Only the latter have adequate financial and human resources, as well as some degree of quality. The curricula in madrassas and Urdu-medium schools do not adequately provide any level of life skills. Social studies, history and Islamic Studies are largely based on a revisionist view of history. The students are not allowed any creativity and are not imparted any analytical skills. The pedagogical methods used in the two former categories do not encourage the students to develop any love for learning.

TNS: Management education is the new fad in Pakistan. Is it moving in the right direction?

NI: A large number of business schools have been opened in Pakistan during the last decade. However, there is still no world-class graduate programme in Business in the country. I have never seen the name of any Pakistani business school in any ranking of the academic institutions. There remains a shortage of well-qualified full-time faculty. The programmes depend on part-time teachers. There is very little attention given to research. The Institute of Business Administration (IBA) and Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS) remain the leading business institutions, but even they do not rank among the world's top universities.

TNS: What are your views on the research facilities available in Pakistan?

NI: In 1993, I prepared a detailed report on Pakistan's research capacity. It was a revelation. At the NWFP Agricultural University in Peshawar, there were 117 PhDs in various scientific disciplines from some of the world's top universities. They were mostly sitting idle, doing nothing. The university could barely pay their salaries. There were no funds for research, no functioning labs and no funds for participation in international conferences. At the IBA, Pakistan's foremost business school in Karachi, only the dean held a PhD degree. There was no research programme. This was my impression 15 years ago. I wonder if the situation is any better now!

TNS: Do the immigrants face serious problems in adapting to the Canadian way of life?

NI: Burning the boats in your native country and coming to live in a foreign environment is a big challenge. I think that employment and language are the two main problems one faces in integrating with the host society. Those who are reasonably fluent in English or French and find work in the area of their expertise usually do well. Canada remains one of the most tolerant societies in the world. Despite 9/11, the Muslims can still lead their lives according to traditional values, provided they do not cause problems for others. The recognition of immigrants' professional qualifications, however, remains a problem, particularly in professions like medicine, nursing, school teaching and engineering.

TNS: Why have we failed to ensure good governance in Pakistan?

NI: There are many reasons. Let me enumerate the ones that I think are more important. The lack of visionary leadership and institutions is the most important cause of poor governance in Pakistan. In the initial phase of a nation's life, the leaders create and shape the institutions of governance; during the later phase, the political institutions promote good leadership. We, in Pakistan, have missed this initial phase and suffered from want of committed leadership. Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan died too early to give attention to institution building. After them, we had a bevy of second-rate leaders, who had neither the vision nor the commitment to build institutions. In fact, megalomaniacs like Ghulam Mohammad and Iskandar Mirza literally destroyed whatever was left of democratic institutions. The emergence of the army as the defender of our physical and ideological frontiers further destroyed the political processes that promote good leadership and any prospects of institutional development. This also made a mockery of rule of law and the process of accountability and transparency in government, which are essential components of good governance.

TNS: Are there any structural impediments militating against good governance in Pakistan?

NI: Some fundamental structural conditions make it difficult to govern Pakistan. Good governance requires rule of law. It presupposes a single system of laws, while Pakistan has at least three parallel systems: secular laws of the state, the Shariah and the customary law. All kinds of groups challenge the state's authority and take the law into their own hands. They legitimise their actions by appealing to the parallel sources of authority, such as religion and tribal customs. One can do 'honour killing' and get away with it in the name of tribal customs. One can send suicide bombers and destroy life in the name of Islam. In such a situation, the state no longer has the monopoly of coercive power and its writ does not prevail. You can hardly have good governance in a failing state.

TNS: Most of our senior bureaucrats are highly educated, even foreign trained. Why have they failed to make even a small dent in the cumbersome, iniquitous and nearly absurd administrative structures and procedures in Pakistan?

NI: The success of bureaucrats depends not only on their qualifications and training, but also on the environment in which they work. It is not surprising often to see the people with same qualifications and training performing quite well in a foreign organisational setting. The environment in Pakistan is not conducive for speaking truth. There is no accountability. There are no laws to protect the whistle-blowers. The system is corrupt and offers many temptations. Autocratic regimes, both military and civil, and a personal system of authority have reduced the bureaucrats to the level of sycophants. Though there are highly qualified people in the bureaucracy, the power still rests with those who are generalists. The distinction between the secretariat and directorates concentrates policymaking in the hands of these generalists. Some of them have never set foot in places where these policies are actually implemented. It creates a vacuum between policy and its implementation. During the last military regime, a large number of military officers were inducted into government at all levels, further undermining the effectiveness of the policy process. Corruption, nepotism and cronyism are part of our culture. They negate the effectiveness of training. When highly trained people from abroad return to such an environment, they tend to follow the prevalent pattern.

TNS: What are your views on rampant corruption in the state machinery of Pakistan?

NI: If almost everyone is corrupt in a country, then corruption loses it meaning and significance there. After the promulgation of the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), one can hardly talk about corruption in Pakistan. It seems that corruption is no longer an issue in the country and no one cares about it. Over the last decade, Pakistan remains one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Its score on the Corruption Perception Index competes with that of failing or failed states, such as Afghanistan, Haiti, Iraq and Myanmar. According to Broadsheet, a firm of forensic accountants hired by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), about $50 billion of plundered money remains in the offshore accounts of corrupt Pakistani officials and politicians. There is also petty corruption, which is the result of junior officials' needs. The grand corruption occurs when needs are transformed into greed. Discretionary powers, lack of oversight and greed are a lethal combination, because they lead to corruption that borders on pillage.

TNS: Why have we failed to arrest corruption in the state machinery of Pakistan?

NI: Pakistan has had all kinds of legislation and organisations to arrest corruption but they have miserably failed to contain the tide of malpractices. Most of these agencies have themselves become corrupt. We, unfortunately, have a propensity to evade rules. Pakistani governing style is: everything for friends, nothing for enemies, rules for everyone else. It is mind boggling that a society that pretends to be so pious, so religious, and fills the mosques with worshippers is also so overwhelmingly corrupt. The pious people of the land of the pure only follow the ritualistic part of the religion and ignore behavioral or action related injunctions of the religious texts.

TNS: Why have Muslims failed to organise themselves for development and higher living standards?

NI: I think that the decline began when the doors of ijtehad (independent reasoning) were closed, and all reference to reason and science stopped. The Muslim mind was closed and the Muslim dark ages began. Religion was left to the clergy. Emphasis on ritual, rather than action, became the order of the day. Research, pursuit of scientific knowledge and technological development practically came to a standstill. Colonial occupation of Muslim regions exacerbated these developments. However, there are some good examples in the Muslim world too and we should examine them seriously.

TNS: Is democracy repugnant to some of the basic tenets of Islam?

NI: I think that it depends on how one defines the tenets of Islam. If it means the Talibanisation, Wahabi / Salafi perspective, Maulana Sufi Mohammad's version of Islam, then certainly there is no place for democracy. If we bring back ijtehad and ijma (consensus of the Muslim community through representative institutions), then there is no conflict between democracy and Islam. If we leave the interpretation of the Holy Quran and Shariah to the clergy, then every sect and sub-sect has its own viewpoint.

(Email:

zubairmasood@hotmail.com)

This year's Nobel Prize in Economics has gone to Paul Krugman, professor of Economics at the Princeton University and a columnist for The New York Times. The award has been conferred on Krugman for his work relating to the Theory of New Trade, which he developed almost three decades ago. The theory is an attempt to correct certain assumptions of the Theory of Comparative Advantage, which was propounded by 19th century British economist David Ricardo. The theory seeks to explain why countries engage in international trade: a country has a comparative advantage in producing a good if it can produce it at a lower opportunity cost than other countries.

'Comparative advantage' needs to be distinguished from 'absolute advantage', which a country has if it is more efficient in producing a good than its trading partners. Ricardo argued that a country might not have absolute advantage in producing any good, but it would certainly have comparative advantage in producing some goods. A country should specialise in producing and exporting goods in which it has comparative advantage, while importing goods in which it lacks such advantage. Ricardo also argued that trade benefitted all countries irrespective of their size, as well as all people within a country. In other words, he believed that international trade did not have any effect on distribution of income within a country.

However, trade does affect distribution of income and this is for two reasons: One, resources cannot move immediately or cost-effectively from one industry to another. Two, industries have different production-related-demands; some are labour-based, while others are capital-intensive. Similarly, some industries require low-skilled labour, while others require high-skilled labour. In short, increase or decrease in demand for goods supplied by industries also affects the factors of production employed by them.

Distributional effects of international trade aside, what is the basis of comparative advantage? Ricardo argued that countries differed only in terms of labour productivity. In some countries, labour was more productive or efficient in producing food; while in others, labour was more suited to producing manufactured goods. Thus, according to him, difference in labour productivity was the sole reason for international trade. This is, of course, incorrect, because there are other factors of production as well, such as capital and land.

Two Swedish economists, Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin, refined the Ricardian Theory in the 20th century. Called the Heckscher-Ohlin (H-O) Theory, it regards country differences in factor endowments, and the technology with which these are combined, as constituting the basis of international trade. For example, some countries like India and China have abundance of labour, while others like the United States and Japan have abundance of capital. Similarly, some countries like Gulf States are rich in natural resources, while others like Australia are rich in land.

Generally, an industry will export goods that are intensive in the factors in which it is relatively well endowed. For instance, Saudi Arabia and Iran export oil, Pakistan and Thailand export textiles, the US exports commercial aircraft, Japan exports consumer electronics, Switzerland exports precision equipment, Germany exports cars, Australia and Brazil export agricultural products, and India exports precious stones. The reason is that these countries have the natural resources, labour, capital and technology required to produce these goods. On the contrary, one cannot expect Switzerland to export bananas or Pakistan to export commercial aircraft, because they are deficient in the required resources, making it a better option for them to import these products.

Trade also affects distribution of income: owners of a country's abundant factors gain, while those of scarce factors suffer. In brief, the Theory of Comparative Advantage implies that countries trade with each other because they are different; those having more capital than labour tend to export capital-intensive goods and import-labour intensive goods. It is the other way round for countries having more labour than capital.

The Theory of Comparative Advantage explains well trade between countries that are different. It also explains inter-industry trade, such as trading food for manufactures. For example, Pakistan exports rice to Germany and imports textile machinery from it. However, the theory fails to explain why relatively similar countries engage in trade. It does not, for example, explain why Germany and the United Kingdom, both of which have capital-intensive industries, have bilateral trade. In other words, it does not explain trade between the developed countries, which is also referred to as North-North trade and which accounts for the majority of global trade. Nor does the Theory of Comparative Advantage explain intra-industry trade -- trade of goods belonging to the same industry.

The Theory of New Trade offers an alternative explanation of global trade: countries also trade to realise 'economies of scale' -- the greater the output, the lower the per unit cost -- for which they need to specialise in manufacturing and exporting a narrow range of products. However, it is not necessary that countries trade in products that belong to different industries. Countries may trade products that, though similar, are differentiated. For example, the US and Japan have a two-way trade in cars. Autos manufactured by Toyota (a Japanese firm) and General Motors (an American firm) belong to the same industry, yet they are differentiated. A large number of American consumers prefer Japanese cars, while a good number of Japanese consumers like American cars.

Therefore, the Theory of New Trade offers a plausible explanation of intra-industry trade, which is prevalent among countries at a similar level of development. Gains from trade are substantial when 'economies of scale' are strong and products are highly differentiated. This is applicable more to high-tech manufactured goods than raw materials or traditional sectors, such as textiles and footwear. Hence, intra-industry trade is likely to be greater between the industrialised or developed countries than between agrarian or developing countries. Intra-industry trade also has relatively small income distribution effects. Hence, trade between the developed economies is likely to have smaller distributional effects than trade between developed and developing economies.

Unlike its comparative advantage counterpart, the Theory of New Trade makes a case for government intervention. By a judicious use of subsidisation and high tariffs, governments can help some domestic firms to achieve 'economies of scale'. Such an approach has been labelled as 'strategic trade policy'. It has been argued that the research and development (R&D) of Boeing was largely subsidised by the US government. A similar argument has been made regarding Japan's dominant position in manufacturing laptops.

However, the real issue is choosing the right industry or firm for protectionism. A wrong choice means that public resources or consumer interests will be sacrificed for supporting an industry or firm that has little potential to develop. A case in point is the auto industry of Pakistan, which has not been able to stand on its feet despite a high level of protectionism. The Theory of New Trade is not a refutation of the concept of comparative advantage; rather, it complements the older theory. At the bottom of both the theories lies the notion that countries gain from specialisation in trade.

(Email: hussainhzaidi@gmail.com)

The term 'civil society' has come into vogue recently. Though the rudiments of civil society have been in place since the Enlightenment in Europe, the notion of civil society, as we know it, has gathered its present accoutrement in recent times. More recently in Eastern Europe, the birth of civil society has been inextricably linked with the revival of democracy. Hence, donor's increasing insistence on strengthening civil society as a harbinger of democracy. An open plural society requires an array of civil society organisations to sustain it.

Not surprisingly, an organisation like Open Society Institute has been primarily active in Eastern Europe and extending the notion of civil society-democracy nexus to other parts of the world. Civil society has as many definitions as the organisations constituting it. Norton maintains that democracy is not contested elections and the secret ballot, but civil society where associations, clubs, guilds, syndicates, federations, unions, parties and groups come together to provide a buffer between state and citizens.

In recent years, there has been proliferation of literature on civil society and state. In this regard, Iftikhar Malik's book titled State and Civil Society is worthy of mention. Malik defines civil society as one aiming to strengthen individual and collective rights, and to restrain authoritarianism of both state and civil society, implying decentralisation, democratisation and debureaucratisation. Muhammad Qadeer, a Canadian academic of Pakistani origin, while sailing very close to the political spirit behind the definition, sees civil society as institutions, organisations and practices -- both modern and traditional -- that seek to influence a state's behaviour and provide a base for collective action.

In the Pakistani context, the faint traces of civil society can be discerned in the panchayat system of pre-partition days. With the advent of British colonialism, this system was subsumed by a stronger state. While the British colonial state relegated these structures, colonial system by default gave rise to modern structures of civil society by introducing streamlined system of law and administration. This new system was instrumental in laying the foundation of professional and welfare organisations.

The founding of Mohammeden Educational Society and the Muslim League -- representing the interests of different groups -- solidified the sense of a growing civil society, especially among the Muslim population of the subcontinent. These associations and political groups coalesced into a civil society movement that ultimately led to the creation of Pakistan. The movement for Pakistan had gathered under its umbrella most of traditional and modern associations to provide a wider basis of collective action.

In a country like Pakistan, whose emergence is rooted in a successful civil society movement, there should have been a strong civil society pitted against the state in a collaborative relationship. However, things have happened otherwise. Soon after the partition, the Pakistani state came to exercise a coercive and overbearing influence on civil society. According to Hamza Alavi, a Marxist historian, this overdeveloped state, represented in unrepresentative civilian-military complex, snuffed out democratic stirrings of civil society and rebuffed challenge to its authority.

The nascent civil society, however, continued to flourish despite rigid state control over political behaviour of various societal actors. Muhammad Qadeer has identified three phases in the evolution of Pakistani civil society, as it has come to be known today. In the first phase, which lasted from 1947 to 1968, Pakistan was a civil society of clans, limited to a few politically motivated groups and prominent families. Their larger role was one of opposition to the state, which was overdeveloped, coercive and threw its authoritarian shadow over the civil society as a controlling mechanism.

Despite this, the civil society continued to voice its protest against the unaccountable and overbearing state through public meeting, protests and literary gatherings. A few remarkable individuals also catalysed the civil society into action. Justice Rustom Zaman Kiyani was one such figure. He played a seminal role in raising the flag of protest against the Gen Ayub Khan dictatorship from the platform of lawyers' bar associations (it is surprising that during the ongoing lawyers' movement, Justice Kiyani remained unmentioned, though Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is only following the path set by him).

The high point of this fragmented civil society came when it gelled to mount countrywide demonstrations against Gen Ayub. In this period, the civil society arose in response to growing authoritarian tendency of the state. Again, the charismatic personality of Zulifkar Ali Bhutto was a catalysing factor in coalescing disparate demands of civil society into a coherent anti-authoritarian stance.

In the second phase, which covered the eras of Bhutto and Gen Zia-ul-Haq, the civil society was progressively weakened. In Bhutto's time, trade unions and other associations were suppressed. In Zia's time, civil society was fractured along ethnic and denominational lines. The denominational segment of Pakistani civil society sprang into action to agitate against the Bhutto government in 1977. As a reward, this segment was consciously propped up, while the real civil society was purposely suppressed, as part of Gen Zia's 'Islamisation' programme.

Zia's period was also the one that saw a rise in the number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs). More importantly, this led to the erasure of traditional and modern divides in civil society, and enhanced the role of mosques and markets in public discourse disproportionate to their size. The upshot was decreased importance of urban, secular-oriented civil society.

The third phase, which lasted from 1988 to 1997, was characterised by fractured state and the rise of ethnic and denominational civil society, as an extension of the state policies pursued by the Zia regime. This division between secular, liberal civil society and ethnic, denominational civil society resulted in fractured and divisive response to the state's shrinking writ. Gen (r) Pervez Musharraf's easy seizure of power was a resounding statement on the disorganised state of civil society in Pakistan. During his rule, the civil society saw its influence and mobilising power greatly enhanced.

In addition, increased media freedom has enhanced the civil society's power. The sudden bursting upon the political scene of the lawyers' movement represents the high point of the civil society's transformative potential in Pakistan. The victory of Ali Ahmed Kurd in the recent Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) elections is another testament to the enduring relevance of civil society in Pakistan. Just like the civil society of the 1960s, the current civil society has played a major role in forcing Gen (r) Musharraf from power, which is a huge achievement in itself. Despite the state's continuous effort to curb the civil society, it seems to be back on track.

(arif_azad6@hotmail.com)

In his maiden address to the United Nations General Assembly in September, President Asif Ali Zardari broke the good news of the reincarnation of democracy in Pakistan to the world. The core message of his discourse was that democracy is the mainstay of governance in Pakistan; by the single virtue of democracy, most of the country's problems shall be solved in the near future. The reality is otherwise. It is a common perception that despite the tag value assigned to democracy by the government, very little of it is being actually practiced.

At best, democracy is being used as a raison d'etre for ascent to power, since keeping nascent dictators in charge for long is no more fashionable. Different dimensions of democracy, however, remain subdued, without having any bearing on the masses. Several lessons need to be revisited in this regard. It will also be useful to review the feedback from other contexts, in order to arrive at a conclusion.

The most vocal display of democracy is national elections. In the developed world, the interest of the voters is declining, as indicated by several research studies. Since most of the ideological debates seem to have taken a back seat, the focus of election campaigns now revolves around mundane issues like medical benefits, trade tariffs or interest rates. Proclaimed democracies, where the mechanics of conducting elections are relatively transparent, consider decline of interest in elections as a concern.

In sharp contrast, the conduct of elections is perhaps the only visible sign of democracy in countries like Pakistan, where enormous amounts of resources are invested to finance election campaigns. All means and clandestine connections are brought to work to satisfy at least the surface conditions of electoral process. Rigged elections are termed death knell for democracy, as has happened in Kenya and Zimbabwe. Still, there is no guarantee that elections would bring to power a truly representative government. Relatively peaceful elections in Pakistan and Congo did not change the status of governance in these countries. "A democracy is a place where numerous elections are held at a great cost without affecting the main issues and with interchangeable candidates," famous American intellectual Gore Vidal writes.

The basic unit of democracy is a political party. Most of the parties in the West have standard procedures of managing their routine affairs, including membership, fundraising, campaign management, intellectual preparation / research, manifesto articulation, public contact and internal elections. The closely fought competition between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the Democratic Party nomination in the United States presidential elections is a glaring example. On the other hand, the political parties in Pakistan speak a lot about democracy, but practice very little of it. Party funds are secret affairs about which ordinary members have no knowledge; they are involved neither in their generation nor in utilisation.

The political parties in Pakistan are also not open to any public scrutiny. Dynasties and fiefdoms control their internal governance structures. Anyone falling from the eyes of the party head -- even on intellectual dissent -- has no place in the party politics. Some fascist-looking outfits even eliminate dissenters, as alleged by countless critics. Party positions at provincial, divisional and lower levels are mostly filled through nominations. In the majority of cases, the party chief handpicks his favourites for these positions.

The same is true concerning the finalisation of electoral candidates. Only powerful and rich interest groups, that assure lavish contributions to the party's election campaign and guarantee victory, are approached for this purpose. The poor and middle class workers and party supporters do not make it to high places. More often than not, non-elected offices are created to accommodate those who lose elections or are personal favourites of party chiefs. Recent key appointments to leading positions in Pakistan are a case in point.

The practice of democracy shall remain a fallacy without a potent, credible and independent election commission. This vital institution has the most important role of generating the new leadership according to the people's choice. It has done 'wonders' in the past. In 1977, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was left gazing at the unexpected number of seats his party won according to the official notification. It led to a subsequent derailment of democracy and inflicted irreparable damage on the country. Gen (r) Pervez Musharraf got so many votes in the referendum that shocked even some of his ardent supporters.

Election observers from the European Union and United Nations have notified persisting electoral irregularities in many countries, including Pakistan, on different occasions. Various situation analyses have indicated that without strengthening the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), real democracy cannot be achieved. Some of the major steps in this regard may be legal and administrative autonomy, competent staff, and proper resource allocation. The ECP has a continuous workload to deal with, both before and after elections: creation of database, testing of procedures, revision of information, voters' education, monitoring of political parties, checking the financial conduct of elected members, etc.

Zardari will make a place in the annals of history if he takes upon himself to bring the real democracy to this country. There are number of measures that can be the starting point: conducting elections in his own political party, creating a database of party members down to the grassroots level, empowering different tiers of the party to perform assigned jobs, etc. Similarly, the president must also bolster the office of prime minister. That shall send the right message to the masses: the custodians of powers have the moral courage to live up to democratic traditions. True democracy can only be achieved by voluntary delegation of power to the legitimate office, not by converging it beyond the bounds of the Constitution.

(Email:

nomaniconn@hotmail.com)

The condition of municipal and commercial waste management in Pakistan is dismal. According to a recent report prepared by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA), 50 percent of the country's solid waste is dumped in streets and in open drains. The waste is either dumped in transfer-stations along busy roads or transferred to city fringes by open, over-flowing and leaky carts and trolleys. The traditional solution to reduce the ever-increasing volume of waste is to set it on fire. The pollutants released from the burning waste end up in the air, while the toxic ashes get absorbed into soil or are flushed into nearby waterways. The health hazards posed by exposure to these pollutants range from failure of reproductive and immune systems to cancer.

The major components of municipal waste -- such as food, paper, cardboard, plastics, PVC, rubber, leather, expired medicines, yard waste, etc -- are rich in organics, and mostly generate organic fumes, particulate matter and noxious gases when burnt in open. On the other hand, inorganic components -- such as glass, metals, dirt, etc -- generate metallic fumes, vapours and ashes. Most of these fumes are so deadly that they eat up even metallic structures.

Open-air waste burning is prohibited by law in most of the developed countries, because this low temperature, oxygen-starved burning is not only aesthetically unpleasing, but also a source of pollutants that are dangerous for both human health and the environment. These include dioxins and furans, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds; air toxics, including hydrogen chloride, carbon monoxide, and oxides of sulfur and nitrogen; and metals, including antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese, mercury, phosphorous, etc.

Smoke from open-air waste burning is unhealthy, particularly for children, pregnant women, the aged and those already suffering from respiratory problems. While burning sites gut everything from kitchen waste to expired medicines and from rubber to wire insulations, dense smoke from these fires is especially dangerous. The environmental and health hazards of open-air waste burning have been discussed briefly in the following:

Particulate matter: It refers to microscopic particles released by open burning. Particles that are small enough to get into the lungs can cause many health problems. They can aggravate respiratory problems, such as asthma and bronchitis, and they have been associated with heartbeat irregularities and heart attacks. People with heart or lung problems, the aged and children are at highest risk from exposure to these particles. Increased toxic loading on the environment in the form of particulate matter leads to contaminated water / land and affects animal health.

Sulfur oxides: They aggravate heart and lung, as well as acute and chronic respiratory, problems. Even healthy individuals exposed to sulfur oxides experience breathing problems and sore throats. They also cause vegetative damage, corrode surfaces of old buildings and contribute to acid rains.

Carbon monoxide (CO): It reacts chemically with sunlight to create harmful ozone. Burning garbage pile produces more CO than decomposition in a landfill. Even at low levels of exposure to CO, humans may experience a variety of neurological symptoms, including headache, fatigue, dizziness, slowed reflexes, nausea and vomiting. As an important greenhouse gas, CO also contributes to global warming.

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs): They are carbon-based compounds that undergo photochemical reactions when released into the atmosphere. The people who live in immediate vicinity of an open burning dump are especially exposed to high levels of VOCs, most of which are harmful to humans. They also contribute to ground level ozone pollution (smog) that can worsen respiratory, cardiac and other existing health problems. Moreover, inhaling certain VOCs can lead to eye, nose and throat irritation; headache; loss of coordination; nausea; and damage to liver, kidney and central nervous system.

Nitrogen oxides: They are a group of nitrogen compounds that are partially responsible for acid rains; and for contributing to global warming, ozone depletion and formation of smog. In addition to being noxious in odour, nitrogen oxides cause respiratory problems and fluid collection in the lungs.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs): They are a group of chemicals commonly found in particulate matter (or smoke, soot) released from open burning. They are formed because of the incomplete combustion of certain materials. Some PAHs are carcinogenic, or cancer causing. Increased PAH concentration in the environment reduces visibility.

Hexa chloro benzene (HCB): It is a highly persistent environmental toxin that degrades slowly in air and, consequently, undergoes long-range atmospheric transport. HCB bio-accumulates in fish, marine animals, birds, lichens and animals that feed on fish or lichens. Long-term, low-level exposures to HCBs may damage a developing foetus, cause cancer, fatigue and skin irritation, and lead to kidney / liver damage.

Aldehydes: They are used as intermediates for making a large range of compounds, including aldehyde resin paints. Open-air burning of aldehyde containing materials causes eye and respiratory tract irritation, headaches, etc. Aldehyde fumes are animal carcinogen. Their addition to the environment also results in increased toxic loading.

Dioxins and furans: They are a group of 30 highly toxic chlorinated organic chemicals that are produced naturally in small quantities, but are primarily the result of human activity. Today, the largest quantified source of dioxin emissions is the uncontrolled burning of household trash, such as pesticides, herbicides and detergents. Dioxins are classified as persistent, bio-accumulative and toxic pollutants. They may cause cancer and growth defects, and affect immune and reproductive systems.

Heavy metals: They stem from burning of tyres, glazed papers and tin containers. Highly toxic, heavy metals like mercury remain in the human and fish system until a lethal level is reached. They causes respiratory and intestinal problems. Metallic fumes increase toxic loading on the environment, lead to contaminated water / land and affect animal health.

Hydrochloric acid: Chlorinated hydrocarbons generate HCl gas when put in fire, which causes irritation of respiratory tract and dulls the senses. Its discharge increases toxic loading on the environment, and damages vegetation and exposed surfaces.

Hydrogen sulfide: It is toxic in nature and causes respiratory problems and even death if ingested in lethal dose. Healthy people may experience breathing problems, sore throats, irritating eyes, etc, because of exposure to hydrogen sulfide, which also contributes to acid rains, damages vegetation and causes offensive odorous.

Ash: Open-air burning also produces ash residue, which can contain toxic metals, such as mercury, lead, chromium and arsenic. These metals can be toxic when ingested. When a person ingests hazardous amounts of lead, for example, he or she may experience high blood pressure, cardiovascular problems, kidney / brain damage.

(The writer is associate professor at Institute of Environmental Science and Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology, Rawalpindi.)

Poverty alleviation means raising the income of more than one-third of the country's population that lives on less than $1 per day, or just a little more than Rs2,500 per month. This income-based yardstick was fixed by the World Bank a few years ago to measure poverty across the globe, especially in the developing countries and least-developed countries (LDCs). The Government of Pakistan fixed the official poverty line at Rs650 per capita per month in 1998-99, based on the requirement of 2,150 calories per day.

Poverty alleviation, however, also means access to education, health care and clean drinking water, equal opportunities for acquiring jobs and doing business, and combatting HIV/AIDS for vulnerable segments of society. Thus, it remains the major challenge for the government and people of this country. It is sad to note that despite substantial efforts, positive outcomes about poverty alleviation have not been tangible for reasons that have eluded all stakeholders alike.

Poverty is not a recent phenomenon; it has deep roots in history. Moreover, it has socioeconomic and political implications of wide dimensions. Awareness about poverty is a recent development, because of Western economists who asserted that poverty impedes economic progress; hence, it must be eradicated on priority basis. This was universally recognised and the first international initiative in this regard was taken by the United Nations in September 2000. A UN Millennium Summit was organised, which was attended by 149 head of states and governments.

They affirmed their full commitment to according the highest priority to alleviating poverty. Eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were set to meet the basic needs of the poorest people of the world under the single umbrella of poverty alleviation. One of the major objectives of the MDGs is to reduce world poverty by half until 2015. The developed countries are supposed to provide financial assistance, access to market and meaningful debt relief to the developing countries and LDCs to achieve the MDGs.

The latest report by the UN on the subject was skeptical about the achievement of MDGs, because of lax attitude of the governments 'committed' to alleviating poverty and paucity of funds. On the other hand, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, conscious of the high incidence of poverty in Africa, Asia and Latin America, renamed their credit facility from Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) to Poverty Reduction Growth Facility (PRGF).

People have been living with poverty in Pakistan for decades. Some of them accepted it as a fait accompli, while others struggled to shake it off. During the 1960s, the so-called 'decade of development', the income and wealth gap among individuals, different segments of society and the provinces increased to such an extent that it paved way for the acceptance of socialism by the people as an effective means of redistributing national wealth under the slogan of roti, kapra aur makan. Political rhetoric aside, it aimed at bridging income and wealth inequalities, alleviating poverty, and giving voice to the poor of the country in decision-making. Political legacy of the 1970s and poverty have co-existed since then.

During the 1970s and 1980s, poverty declined in Pakistan; it was estimated to be about 18 percent. Besides measures taken by the then governments, economic growth and development in the Middle East, to which our human resource made significant contribution and in turn benefitted financially, played a positive role. The trend was reversed during the 1990s and poverty almost doubled, mainly because of political instability and slowing down of economic growth. According to the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) prepared by the government to avail the IMF's credit facility in 2001, 30.6 percent of the population was poor in 1998-99. It increased to 32.1 percent in 2001-02.

Since 2001, the government has remained committed to reducing the number of poor by half until 2015, as per the MDGs. It adopted a multi-pronged strategy to improve the social sector's performance and job opportunities, provide access to small working capital through micro-financing initiatives, reduce vulnerability to shocks through Khushali Banks established at the grassroots level, and disburse Zakat effectively. The present government is targeting about four million poor households under the Benazir Income Support Programme, which will deliver Rs2,000 per household at the end of alternate months.

Poverty in the country is at variance. It is more conspicuous in rural areas than in urban areas, but some of the slums in big cities like Karachi and Islamabad are affected even more than the rural areas. However, the rural areas of Balochistan, Sindh, the NWFP and Southern Punjab are the worst-hit as concerns the incidence of poverty, which in all probability is higher there than what official figures show.

It could be safely concluded that the government's strategy of alleviating poverty delivered only mixed results, mainly because of two reasons. One, economic growth remained subdued to about 4 percent from 2001 to 2004, and averaged to about seven percent of gross domestic product (GDP) from 2004 to 2007. According to experts, a growth rate of more than eight percent sustained for about a decade or so can really dent poverty, and that too if there is a downward mobilisation of financial resources, as has been the case in China, in Southeast Asian countries, in some of the emerging economies of Latin America, and, to a lesser extent, in India.

Two, annual budgets hardly transferred wealth from the rich to the poor or bridged income inequalities or improved wages through pro-poor fiscal policies. Consequently, the poor segments of society were left in a lurch to wait for the 'trickle down effect' to address their economic woes. However, this hardly ever took place. The government's figure of poverty reduction by about 10 percent during the economic growth bonanza from 2004 to 2007 is at variance with the figures of the World Bank and independent analysts, who estimate that poverty declined by only four percent in the country during this period.

Poverty alleviation could have been addressed more effectively in Pakistan, had it not been for the economic downturn and high rate of inflation, recorded at 24 percent during the first quarter (July 2008 to September 2008) of the ongoing fiscal year. According to IMF estimates, GDP growth in Pakistan could be as low as 3.5 percent during the ongoing fiscal year. Increase in prices of food items, fuels and other commodities has pushed about 100 million people globally below the poverty line in only the last few months, according to IMF estimates.

In Pakistan, the number of people currently below the poverty line for reasons stated above could be substantial. It is difficult to figure out. Prospects to combat poverty are dim and constraints are conspicuous. The number of people committing suicides has increased to worrisome proportion. Social conflicts and family feuds, because of the financial squeeze, have weakened social and moral fabric of the society.

Moreover, the so-called 'war on terror' is taking its toll on poverty alleviation efforts, especially in the NWFP and tribal areas. The government is caught up with the challenges of arresting the downward slide of economy, stabilising macroeconomic indicators, combatting terrorism and ensuring national security. It is hardly left with enough fiscal space and time to vigorously pursue poverty alleviation and meet the MDGs, at least for the time being.

(Email: qazisharif@yahoo.com)

Once again, Pakistan's economy is under a cloud and facing an acute threat of financial default due to meagre foreign exchange reserves. There had been three alternative plans devised to cope with the deteriorating economic situation. Unfortunately, however, due to the lack of progress on the first two options, our economic managers are now knocking at the door of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for balance of payment support under the third plan as a last resort.

Under plan A, the Government of Pakistan was aspiring for about $4.5 billion during 2008-09, of which $1.5 billion were to come from the World Bank, $1.6 billion from Asian Development Bank (ADB), $500 million from the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) and $1.5 billion from increase in workers' remittances. The plan B was proposed for immediate financial support from the 'Friends of Pakistan', such as China, Saudi Arabia and the United States. The plan C was stipulated to approach and negotiate with the IMF for an Emergency Financing Mechanism.

With the first two options unavailable for the government, it has been left with only the last option, which is borrowing from the IMF. Of course, close friends of Pakistan intended to bailout the country from this severe balance of payment crisis, but they are busy in keeping their own house in order after the onslaught of global financial crisis. Nevertheless, there are positive indications from these friends, such as supply of oil on deferred payment from Saudi Arabia and Iran, and foreign investment from China.

Though Pakistan has not officially requested for an IMF loan, its officials are busy in negotiations with the Fund's team on terms and conditions of economic stabilisation programme under the Emergency Financing Mechanism. According to media reports, the IMF is ready to lend $5-9 billion to Pakistan to overcome its financial crisis for a period of two years, but on extremely tough economic conditions. There is a great deal of controversy and contradictions surrounding these harsh conditions, which include withdrawal of subsidies, taxing all sector of the economy, reduction in pensionable government jobs by almost half, cutting down developmental as well as current expenditure, and lesser intervention of the central bank in the market.

Borrowing from the IMF has opened a new Pandora box in the country and people from all walks of life are commenting on the issue. Ghulam Nabi, a school teacher, says: "The poor cannot bear the burden of the IMF's conditionalities and there would be an agitation on the streets." Amina Bilal, a housewife, wonders when would we realise our mistakes and stop begging. Nabia Hamid, a university student, says: "We should not opt for the IMF loan, because the economic actors who are the primary cause of the default will benefit at the expense of the poor who would have to pay more taxes." Ejaz Khan, a small shopkeeper, comments: "The parliament should decide whether we should go for the IMF loan."

Whereas economists have a different view on the issue, political economist Dr Basam Aleem says: "Remaining foreign reserves are insufficient to honour financial liabilities and Pakistan needs an immediate heavy dose of foreign exchange to turn away this crisis." GM Butt, a professor of Economics, views that in the ongoing global economic crisis, a country with increasing trade and current account deficit is left with no other option but to resort to IMF loans. Asad Raza, a chartered accountant, says: "Not the IMF loan, but economic management is the main issue in Pakistan. We need economic overhauling; the burden should be shifted to affluent classes."

On the implications of the IMF conditions on the common people, economist Dr Tahir K Haq says: "Pakistanis should get ready to pay more for utilities like electricity, gas and petroleum products, as well as more indirect taxes on food and non food items." Commenting on the failure of IMF programmes in the past, he says: "While imposing conditionalities, IMF officials do not consider the ground realities and significant variables of respective state. They usually follow 'one-size-fit-all' approach, which is why almost all IMF programmes across the world have failed to produce desired results."

Recent history tells us that IMF programmes neither got acceptance nor achieved success in Pakistan. The governments of Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) signed eight agreements with the IMF in the 1990s, but these agreements failed miserably because of the harsh and anti-poor conditionalities. There is a general feeling that any agreement with the IMF would not only compromise the PPP's populist image, but would also further aggravate the sufferings of more than 40 percent poverty-stricken Pakistanis.

It is a fact that the present government has inherited the balance of payment crisis, because the previous regime ignored the need for adjusting subsides on different commodities to absorb the global economic shocks, such as increase in the international oil prices. However, the economic managers of the present government also failed to assess the situation judiciously and delayed any concrete action for too long. Now the only option that has been left for the government is the IMF, because we need foreign reserves within 30 days to avert the looming crisis.

An important question is that what would be the cost if Pakistan failed to fulfil its financial liabilities? An IMF working paper mentions four types of costs that may result in from an international sovereign default: reputational cost, international trade exclusion, costs to the domestic economy through the financial system and political costs to the authorities. According to analysts, any state that fails to accomplish its financial obligations needs approximately a decade to regain its position in the international trade as a trusted member.

Of course, the major concern of our economic managers is how to save Pakistan from the threat of default on its foreign loans, which must be paid by end of this calendar year. Though Pakistan's economy needs $3-4 billion immediately, it requires about $7 billion till the end of this financial year (June 30, 2009) to bridge the financial gap. Though the government is all set to avail the IMF loan facility, yet it should give some breathing space to the common people; there should be some kind of safety net for the population living below the poverty line and more burden on the rich.

Besides the current financial crisis, there is a dire need for a sustainable long-term policy to improve the overall economic situation. The government needs to cut down its unnecessary non-developmental expenditures. There should be public-private-partnership on development projects and people-oriented economic reforms should be initiated to streamline the economy. Not IMF loans, but well thought-out economic reforms can play a decisive role in this regard.

The present government, instead of running economic affairs on an ad hoc basis, should devise a concrete economic reforms strategy and try to gain the trust of the masses. The economic managers should address issues of poor economic planning and coordination along with implementation gaps. Unending economic troubles have exposed the inadequate capacity of various government departments that deal with economic affairs. There is need to build the capacity of officials of these departments. Instead of spending the meagre resources carelessly, the authorities should use them judiciously. Besides this, auditors should have more powers to stop the misuse of resources.

No government likes to borrow from the IMF, because this is the most unpopular decision in a democratic dispensation. However, in extreme conditions, governments have to use the IMF's loan facility for remedial purposes. For example, India and Turkey went to the IMF for financial help in 1991 and 2001, respectively, after facing economic crises. They achieved remarkable success and reformed their respective economies on concrete basis. Though Pakistani economy has the potential to develop, there is a crisis of leadership in the country. In short, we need charismatic leaders to take Pakistan out of the ongoing economic crisis.

(Email:

sibtainrazakhan@yahoo.com)