Ambassadors galore!
Not a day passes without the vigilant media reporting the debut of yet another ‘ambassador’ in the country
The writer is a former ambassador of Pakistan and ex-assistant secretary general of the OIC
If one were asked to single out one element in which this country stands out, one may not be entirely inaccurate in putting the finger on the number of ‘ambassadors’ this country continues to mint out. Not a day passes without the vigilant media reporting the debut of yet another ‘ambassador’.
In the not-too-distant past, the media sprang a further bevy of ‘ambassadors’ on an unsuspecting public. In a colourful advertisement put out by a public-sector organisation, the public at large was introduced to a number of ‘road safety ambassadors’. What duties these new-found ‘ambassadors’ were expected to perform and what were their responsibilities is anybody’s guess!
Over the years, several comely ladies have been introduced by the media as ‘brand ambassadors’ for promoting certain cosmetic products. A popular newspaper had a ‘youth ambassador’ writing in its pages. In the public sector, a horde of gentlemen are inducted as ‘ambassadors at large’ by every successive government. The function and/or duties of these ‘ambassadors at large’ are never specified and they fade away after every change in government. One has no reason, nor indeed the right to question the ethics of such inductions both in the private and public sectors. What is intriguing, nevertheless, is the fact that the appellation ‘ambassador’ is freely used in each case.
The dictionary defines ‘ambassador’ as “a minister of high rank representing his or her country at a foreign court or government”. Further, if the ambassador in question is designated as a ‘plenipotentiary’, it connotes that he or she is armed with full powers to sign treaties et al on behalf of his government. This definition would make clear that the designation of a certain individual as ‘ambassador’ carries with it a certain connotation that dignifies the person and, at the same time, assigns responsibilities that should under no circumstances be taken lightly.
By the way, not too long ago there was the designation of an ‘ambassador for women’s empowerment’? The mind boggles! What ambassadorship has got to do with ‘women’s empowerment’ defies imagination.
Harking back to the question of the so-called ‘ambassadors at large’, these entities should logically be designated strictly on the basis of immediate need and for a limited time period only. There have been several instances where certain persons were designated as such and proved serious liabilities for the country and even for the government of the time. All these individuals of dubious credentials apparently did was to obtain diplomatic passports of the country and then to (mis)use them for their own selfish ends. But that, as they say, is another story!
The matter of the elusive and ever-expanding horde of ‘ambassadors’ needs to be put under the microscope so that the expertise of such individuals can be harnessed for the good of society and the country. Why give them the appellation of ambassador in the first place? English is a fairly rich language. One has no doubt that another designation can be devised for such worthy members of the elite. If there is sign of reluctance on the part of either, then they and/or their sponsors should be advised to latch on to appellations other than the ones being (mis)used at present.
Pakistan happens to be among the few countries in which a personage in dire need of a high-sounding address can conveniently be officially designated as an ‘ambassador’ of this, that or the other. The least that the competent authority is expected to do is to define and put on record the extent of powers and the competence that are to be expected of the individual in question and for what period of time. That and the qualifications that the personage possesses in order to make him or her competent to do justice to the awe-inspiring designation, if for nothing else at least to satisfy the curiosity of the multitude he or she is privileged to ‘represent’.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 3rd, 2019.
In the not-too-distant past, the media sprang a further bevy of ‘ambassadors’ on an unsuspecting public. In a colourful advertisement put out by a public-sector organisation, the public at large was introduced to a number of ‘road safety ambassadors’. What duties these new-found ‘ambassadors’ were expected to perform and what were their responsibilities is anybody’s guess!
Over the years, several comely ladies have been introduced by the media as ‘brand ambassadors’ for promoting certain cosmetic products. A popular newspaper had a ‘youth ambassador’ writing in its pages. In the public sector, a horde of gentlemen are inducted as ‘ambassadors at large’ by every successive government. The function and/or duties of these ‘ambassadors at large’ are never specified and they fade away after every change in government. One has no reason, nor indeed the right to question the ethics of such inductions both in the private and public sectors. What is intriguing, nevertheless, is the fact that the appellation ‘ambassador’ is freely used in each case.
The dictionary defines ‘ambassador’ as “a minister of high rank representing his or her country at a foreign court or government”. Further, if the ambassador in question is designated as a ‘plenipotentiary’, it connotes that he or she is armed with full powers to sign treaties et al on behalf of his government. This definition would make clear that the designation of a certain individual as ‘ambassador’ carries with it a certain connotation that dignifies the person and, at the same time, assigns responsibilities that should under no circumstances be taken lightly.
By the way, not too long ago there was the designation of an ‘ambassador for women’s empowerment’? The mind boggles! What ambassadorship has got to do with ‘women’s empowerment’ defies imagination.
Harking back to the question of the so-called ‘ambassadors at large’, these entities should logically be designated strictly on the basis of immediate need and for a limited time period only. There have been several instances where certain persons were designated as such and proved serious liabilities for the country and even for the government of the time. All these individuals of dubious credentials apparently did was to obtain diplomatic passports of the country and then to (mis)use them for their own selfish ends. But that, as they say, is another story!
The matter of the elusive and ever-expanding horde of ‘ambassadors’ needs to be put under the microscope so that the expertise of such individuals can be harnessed for the good of society and the country. Why give them the appellation of ambassador in the first place? English is a fairly rich language. One has no doubt that another designation can be devised for such worthy members of the elite. If there is sign of reluctance on the part of either, then they and/or their sponsors should be advised to latch on to appellations other than the ones being (mis)used at present.
Pakistan happens to be among the few countries in which a personage in dire need of a high-sounding address can conveniently be officially designated as an ‘ambassador’ of this, that or the other. The least that the competent authority is expected to do is to define and put on record the extent of powers and the competence that are to be expected of the individual in question and for what period of time. That and the qualifications that the personage possesses in order to make him or her competent to do justice to the awe-inspiring designation, if for nothing else at least to satisfy the curiosity of the multitude he or she is privileged to ‘represent’.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 3rd, 2019.