Merit and tolerance – the missing essentials

Feudalism, dictatorships have not allowed culture of dialogue and reason to develop

KARACHI:

What particularly distinguishes the developed world from Pakistan is their social tolerance and capacity to objectively understand a dispute and reach to solutions on the basis of inclusivity.

In our case, tangible evidence exists to indicate a pervading deficiency in the concerned forums and institutions of the state in comprehending a dispute in its various dimensions, meaningfully engaging other stakeholders, generating win-win synergies and implementing them accordingly.

It goes without saying that, amongst other factors, feudalism and extended periods of dictatorships have played a major role in not allowing the culture of dialogue and reason to develop. This article is an attempt at analysing the phenomenon.

Few glaring examples

In view of the above background and the resultant rampant culture of giving primacy to vested interests and cronyism instead of merit and professionalism, we have hardly been able to develop any negotiation skills in the pertaining institutions. The Indus Water Treaty of 1960 can be quoted as an exception.

However, that is primarily because of David Lilienthal, who wrote the famous article “Kashmir: another ‘Korea’ in the making?” 1951, which made the global powers get involved through the World Bank and facilitate the feuding countries in negotiating a sustainable arrangement. The agreement, which our finance minister had otherwise signed on the water dispute earlier in May 1948, was indeed a suicide note for Pakistan’s economy.

Vide the same, Pakistan had accepted India’s undisputed rights over the water flowing from their side to ours, progressive reduction of its flows to Pakistan and it gradually tapping alternative sources, etc.

Another exhibit of the above phenomenon is the fact that the exercise of force by the state is a common recourse in settling disputes. For example, when Kalat declared independence for Balochistan on August 12, 1947, its ruler was compelled to sign the accession papers by deploying military in Balochistan in early 1948.

Unfortunately, over the period, we don’t see much evolution for the better in this approach of the ruling elite.

Thus, Balochistan is still the least developed province among the four with 44% literacy rate, more than 50% of the population living below the poverty line and 64% of the province deprived of electricity cover. No wonder that such acute deprivation encourages disengagement and alienation, sometimes outright hatred towards the rulers, among the masses.

Similarly, though Bengalis were at the forefront in the Pakistan movement, soon after independence our political leadership started emphasising upon Urdu as the only national language, thereby striking a wedge between the two wings.

The treatment meted out to Hussein Shaheed Suharwardy – a Bengali politician who had played a leading role in Pakistan movement is reflective of the intolerance of the said leadership.

His speech of March 6, 1948 in the constituent assembly was an appeal for tolerance and accommodation towards minorities and good neighbourly relations with India. However, twisting his words and deploying highly surreptitious antics, his membership of the assembly was terminated to ostracise him from the mainstream politics.

In both the above cases, we do not find a serious engagement by the rulers on the basis of inclusivity and mutual respect, though none of the concerned leaders had any radical leanings. They could easily have been won over through granting them the place of an equal on the table.

A glaring example is the disregard of the election results of December 1970 by the dominant leadership of the then Western half, which led to the undoing of the country a year later.

Relations with neighbours

It is high time for us to meaningfully engage all the neighbours, especially India. The volume of mutual annual trade between India and China, ie $130 billion, despite their extremely thorny relations, can guide our path for the same.

Also, we should stop trying to solve all the variables in one go with India. We would, rather, need to park a few and negotiate others at a time; while first taking measured steps towards augmenting trade and commerce. Peaceful co-existence with others, objectivity and hard work are the only solutions for a prosperous future.

Commercial contracting

Poorly drafted and negotiated commercial agreements and the general lack of thoroughness and pragmatism among the pertaining teams is a norm in Pakistan. Reko Diq is a textbook example, which, because of the same factors, reportedly, cost the nation $100 million in litigation alone.

Undoubtedly, the original contract in 1993 had some gaps. Still, the Balochistan government had a 25% share in the project, which would have sufficed for any competent team to exercise required leverage over the project and steer it successfully.

However, it appears that even essential coordination and progress monitoring through the formal joint venture forums was not exercised. The issues which later erupted into legal disputes could, otherwise, have been easily resolved at those forums in the conducive environments of board rooms.

It is surprising that even before the submission of the bankable feasibility study for the project in February 2011 for approval, the project was all over the media with accusations of fraud and cheating upon the applicant and declarations of grim chances of award of the mining lease to them. This was despite the fact that as per the agreement of 1993 disputes were to be settled through arbitration in the forums of ICSID (International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes) and ICC (International Chamber of Commerce).

Pakistan was not only a signatory to both but also to a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) with Australia, which mandated arbitration at the above forums for settling such disputes.

Ignoring the same, the Supreme Court in 2013 annulled the agreement of 1993, thereby putting the project back almost at point zero. It was not an unfair expectation that the later declarations of heavy penalties by the said courts and resultant exposure of $10 billion, which loomed over us till the negotiated settlement of March 2022, would compel us to undertake at least a lessons’ learned exercise.

However, all signs are there that we have not learned anything whatsoever from the losses and global embarrassment, which the episode brought for us.

What is to be done

The lethal mix of acute lack of professional capacity in the pertaining institutions and bigotry and associated intolerance of the ruling elite would continue to affect our growth and nation building. Thus, to ensure sustainable progress, this existential issue needs to be addressed on priority.

The writer is a petroleum engineer and an oil and gas management professional

 

Published in The Express Tribune, January 9^th, 2023.

Like Business on Facebook, follow @TribuneBiz on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.