Saad Masood
Election year is tough – not merely on politicians but especially on the electorate. All political parties showcase their manifestos which include by and large at least one strategy to tackle the rampant corruption in the country. Thus, by proxy, there is a tacit admission that corruption is indeed a big issue for the people of the land. The upcoming elections in Pakistan are no different. All big political parties and personalities state corruption as the root of almost all evils ailing the country. But this would be only treating the symptom and not the underlying problem. Why? After all, ever since the inception of Pakistan, corruption has been referred to as the mother of all scrooges. Then why the age-old wisdom needs to be shifted now? It needs to, and it must! Consider.
The baseline op-eds in this series highlighted that firstly an overarching policy – a galvanising vision – is needed to implement reform. Secondly, different strategies are required to execute that policy. And before all that, the personal doctrine of the person at the helm of affairs must align and push forth the stated policy.
So where does corruption, or eradication thereof, stands in the above stated triad? Considering the manifestos of the three larger political parties – PML (N), PPP and PTI – corruption is the root cause of many issues and thus they believe it is a policy decision to tackle and eliminate corruption. They can’t be more wrong!
Ending, or realistically reducing, corruption is only a strategy. But a strategy must be tailed back to an overarching policy and endeavour to achieve the related policy aim. This is where all political parties have missed the mark and have failed to understand the astute differences between policy and strategy. Thus, the question to ask is, what might that policy objective be which an anti-corruption strategy will achieve? In one word, equality! Creating equality amongst its citizens and within the system itself needs to be the overarching policy for government – present or future. A simple example elaborates this further. Two people go for a job interview and the person well known to the interviewer gets the job even while being less qualified and less competent. Although to the naked eye this might seem like an act of corruption, but the underlying reason is lack of equality. If the two candidates were treated equally then no preferential treatment could be meted and thus justice would be served. Similar extrapolations can be made into other social spheres. However, this notion of using equality as policy option is not new either. History is replete with examples where equality was used as an overarching policy option to achieve successful nation building and pre-longed era of good governance. Consider the following three.
After the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) entered Medina, he successfully created a tolerant and multi-cultural society for all faiths – Muslims, Christians, and Jews. He did so by supporting a policy of equality among the population of the city. The strategy he used the most was to demonstrate his own reputation for piety and fairness. A reputation he had enjoyed his whole life as a result of practicing such a policy. Therefore, having an alignment with his personal doctrine a well. This policy was keenly applicable in his last sermon as well where he said, “All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also, a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action”.
The stated policy of the French republic is Liberté, égalité, fraternité – French for liberty, equality, fraternity. This is the bedrock of the new republic and was selected as the motto of any forthcoming governments after the bottom end of the 18th century. Such has been the power of this policy that no politician or leader dare think to create any strategies in opposition to these policy objectives. This has become part of the fabric of France. So much so that the three colours in the French flag are said to represent the policy of liberty, equality, and fraternity culminating in the recent football world cup victory for one of the most diverse – but equal – group of French players.
The American declaration of independence states “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Notice that even back in 1776 there was a conscientious choice by the founding fathers of America to state equality as their chief policy option which further strategy decisions would achieve. This laid the foundations of the dominant position the United States finds itself in today.
All political leaders worth their salt must recognise the differences between policy and strategy and stop the incessant sloganeering. By all means, an anti-corruption drive is a very necessary strategy for the times, but it must act on the behest of a policy of equality and not independent of it. And to extract true success, all of this must stem from the leaders’ personal doctrine of treating people as equals. But, looking at the present crop of leaders on display, the less said about that, the better!
