However, it may be worthwhile to delve a bit more deeply into whether Imran would be Pakistan’s first clean leader if his party registers a win in the general elections. In addition, we also need to ponder on the questions of whether a leader’s personal honesty guarantees that he will not harm the country, and whether the most serious problems that Pakistan has faced since 1947 stem from political corruption or not. A quick glance through the annals of Pakistan’s political history reveals that the answer to all these questions is a big no.
Surprising though it may seem in view of popular beliefs to the contrary, for most of its history Pakistan has been ruled by relatively honest leaders who were not associated with major corruption the way leaders of today are. Even more surprising is the fact that most of Pakistan’s biggest problems have occurred under financially untainted leaders, rather than under corrupt ones.
The founding fathers, Ghulam Mohammed, Iskander Mirza, Yahya Khan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Ziaul Haq and Pervez Musharraf, were all leaders largely untainted by accusations of serious corruption. The sum total of their rule accounts for almost 40 out of Pakistan’s 65 years as an independent nation. However, the founding fathers apart, these leaders still managed to inflict major harm upon the country through their misguided social, economic and political policies. The credit for undermining democracy during the 1950s and sowing the seeds of discontent among the Bengalis goes to Ghulam Mohammed and Iskander Mirza. The responsibility for the 1971 tragedy lies largely with Yahya and Bhutto. The blame for deliberately encouraging violent sectarian groups goes to Zia, while the blame for allowing terrorist groups to flourish in the country after 9/11 goes to Musharraf. The blame for stoking unrest in Balochistan lies with both Bhutto and Musharraf.
In contrast, the leaders most often accused of financial improprieties, i.e., Benazir Bhutto/Asif Ali Zardari, Nawaz Sharif, and to a lesser extent Ayub Khan, have merely ruled for a total of 25 years. Even here, the real damage caused by Ayub stemmed not from his financial improprieties but from his elitist and dictatorial economic and political policies, which stoked unrest among the Bengalis and the Baloch and increased economic inequality within the country. Thus, while corruption by politicians has clearly caused untold harm to Pakistan, the impact of the bad policies of the financially untainted leaders has caused as much, and perhaps, even more damage. As such, while personal honesty is a highly desirable quality in a leader, it is clearly not a guarantee that the leader will not harm the country.
This, of course, does not mean that one should automatically reject an emerging honest politician just because of the bad experiences with other financially untainted leaders in the past. However, it does mean that one should look closely at the proposed policies, pronouncements and worldviews of emerging politicians, rather than focusing on their personal integrity alone. It is here that one starts getting concerned with many of Imran’s pronouncements. His failure to condemn the Taliban unequivocally, his shifting positions on the role of religion in politics, his desire to tackle Pakistan’s educational mess with the help of obscurantist maulvis (as narrated by Pervez Hoodbhoy in his article “Education: The PTI’s false promises won’t help” published in The Express Tribune on February 8) and the shallowness of his policy positions makes one wonder, whether despite his honesty, he would be like the others on the long list of financially untainted leaders who still managed to inflict harm on Pakistan.
Nontheless, this does not mean that one should prefer Zardari or Sharif over Imran, for both of them have perception issues and baggage. It just means that like the other two, Imran is another Pakistani politician who fails to measure up to the task at hand.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 4th, 2012.
COMMENTS (25)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Falcon: The writer is a political economist at the University of California, Berkeley. there u go.
Next time, we would hear do we need integrity? What crap!
While talking about corruption, it is important to make a distinction between its various forms and their impact on the country's economy. Not all forms are equally harmful.
If there is a road that needs to be constructed and some people take some kickbacks in the process, then people can live with it up to a point. Businesses too usually take corruption related expenses as part of their operating expenses to some extent. This form of corruption is bad too, but it does not totally choke the economy, provided the bribery rates are not excessively high.
In contrast, there is this other form of corruption where totally ridiculous projects are conceived only to make money. Things like the rental power projects. These were neither going to solve the energy crisis nor made any economic sense. Similarly, overstaffing govt departments or institutions with political cronies and making large scale appointments in total iolation of merit is something that very seriously damages these institutions, rather than merely increasing their operating costs by a few percentage points.
The reason why the corruption of recent political govts is talked about more, especially that of the PPP, is that it is undisputably of the latter kind where it seriously hurts the economy. Zia too rightly gets a lot of flack for the way many generals made fortunes during the Afghan war because the drugs and weapons introduced in the process have had an extremely detrimental impact on our society. In contrast, there was corruption in Ayub Khan's period too, but the economy also made major strides in industrialization, modernization of agriculture as well as infrastructure development.
@Falcon:
dont know about the other two. but pray tell musharraf has been gone for 4 years. where are the massive corruption scandals against him even now? he was so good at hiding it that everyone who is against him still has nothing? the reality is president musharraf was untainted by corruption and is the first leader to declare his assets and remain corruption free.
After Ayub Khan removed Iskander Mirza and sent him into exile, the government published details of Iskandar Mirza's lavish lifestyle and corruption. I don't remember much about it as I was just fourteen at the time. A for ZAB, he himself mentioned that he had a house in England in a speech in 1974. However, ZAB did not declare that property when Zia asked all politicians to file details of their assets.
Niaz - reason people cry more about corruption is because: 1.It hurts more than other stuff. Financial mismanagement, Balochistan et al is slower burn and impacts fewer lives. Getting a elect connection, telephone, job, dealing with police etc is a daily issue for all, and one encounters corruption at every step 2.The 'fruits' of corruption are evident quickly and to all. The conspicious consumption of the rag to riches corrupt cause a lot of heartburn. Buying capital goods such as houses, cars etc are just not possible without tainted money, and so those following the straight and norrow watch from the sidelines and protest loudly as the nouveau (and corrupt) rich rake it and splurge 3.Balochistan, Financial mismanagement (impact of budget deficit???) etc is too complicated to understand for the common man. The Patwari asking for a bribe is simple
Some of the lamest pieces on the tribune are done to target PTI. Who says honesty is a sufficient condition for a good leader. However it is a necessary condition and the other so called big leaders do not fulfill this NECESSARY condition.
Excellent article Dr. sb. I think this article summarizes the issues we have with our leadership.
A very thought provoking article.
As an Indian I am not qualified to give opinion on my neighboring countries matters/policies with only half baked knowledge of the prevalent circumstances. But must give an Indian example. Two states in North-West India progressed dramatically ( in my opinion ) during rules by Chief Ministers who were accused of corruption. Punjab, during Pratap Singh Kairon - Haryana, during Bansi Lal. They were people who believed in implementation of schemes, come what may.Yes, there were excesses and they ultimately paid for that in Life or elections.
I think sometimes we need DO-ER's and if they are also honest so much the better. It is common in our part of the World to say' Paisey leyta hai pur kaam dheek kar deta hai ' ( takes money but gets the job done jolly good).
There are good policies but very poor implementation. I hope in Pakistan they get both both right next time. My sincere good wishes.
I think a honest person can definately perform better than a theif! No second thought about that!
@kaalchakra: What is the most endearing quality of the Great Quaid? That unlike Congress leaders Gandhi and Nehru, he was an honest man. Even Gandhi and Nehru called him honest. They never said “we are honest.”
You are implying that they (Gandhi and Nehru) are honest merely by using their statements to bolster your own.
Equating honesty with merely accumulation of ill-begotten wealth is incorrect - there has to be a strong self-preservation and selfishness streak in any leader who disrupts the existing political processes, subverts the constitution (if it exists) and assumes an all-powerful position. Every decision subsequently stems from that initial move.
Sitting in California you have the luxury to write philosophical BS, ground reality is we need change and Imran is the only hope
"Iskander Mirza, Yahya Khan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Ziaul Haq and Pervez Musharraf, were all leaders largely untainted by accusations of serious corruption"
In a Pakistan where the press was heavily controlled that's hardly a reliable measure, was it?
Of all the critical pieces about PTI appearing in the media these days, this is the only one that makes a solid and thought provoking point. Policies are indeed as important as financial honesty. ZAB's nationalization of the industry was something that many people genuinely believed was the solution to the unequal distribution of wealth, but it turned out to be a huge disaster.
That said, what this means is that there should be a lively and healthy debate on the policy prescriptions put forward by PTI so that any loopholes can be pointed out and plugged. Instead of the kind of pointless bashing PTI is getting from certain sections of the media, there should be some constructive criticism.
What is the most endearing quality of the Great Quaid? That unlike Congress leaders Gandhi and Nehru, he was an honest man. Even Gandhi and Nehru called him honest. They never said "we are honest."
The same way, the New Leader's honesty is very important to all who are proud of Pakistan.
Here cometh the "main na manoo" PTI nirales and trolls!
@ excellent brother, specially u'r last paragraph
I take it that this author does not use petrol/diesel/cng. Nor is his house targeted by unmanned drones, nor does he live in karachi. Go ahead and vote for your chums Zardari & Nawaz. You might not live to hear the curses of your children, but I will. And then I'll tell them I told you so
Disagree with the depth of your observations. Ayub Khan's corruption, Zia's corruption, and Musharraf's corruption is not well known because of the very strong political clout they enjoyed rather than the reality. Secondly, for militants, tell me what more do you want from PTI...every sectarian violence gets a statement of condemnation from PTI on its website...look at the make-up of top PTI leadership...how many militant apologists you see? Lastly, for position on education, you would be well advised to look at curriculum at Namal University that he himself has founded than some vague discussion in the presence of Hoodboy more than 15 years ago.
Wow, starts from "honest leaders" and ends at PTI's anti-terror policy! Quite a jump you made there sir.
Anyway, coming to the content of your piece, it is a fact that corruption has reached MASSIVE levels in Pakistan so much so that it is threatening to make Pakistan bankrupt. Just for a quick roundup of corruption in Pakistan, you might want to go over the recent report of Transparency International. This corruption has direct effect on people's lives and they pay for this corruption through rising prices of daily items. An HONEST leader (as you call him) has the BEST chances of bringing this corruption under control, because such a person will not have skeletons to protect. Nawaz and Zardari (the corruption dons) are a non-starter by the same rule.
So while you wait for that dream-politician who fits your unspecified standard, please let us the rest of Pakistanis elect someone with some character from our political class and see where it leads to. The world is imperfect and Pakistan cannot afford to wait anymore. Cheers.