CORPORATE Pakistan consumed by its own set of problems did not expect much from the US elections.They believed that institutions and not parties dictate the policies and election of Barack Obama might not affect the genesis of Pakistan-US economic relations.

Some leaders expressed the fear that a Democrat in the White House might not bode too well for Pakistan because they considered the Democrats to be more demanding. A few others advocated more aggressive economic diplomacy at this point to set the tone of discussion with the new team about to assume office.

President FPCCI Tanvir Ahmed Sheikh, reached over telephone said that the government should be mindful of the timing in economic diplomacy and advocated closer bilateral trade relations with the US.

“Sentiments are positive at the outcome of the election result in the United States. Only time will tell if it would materialise in anything tangible for the benefit of the private sector in Pakistan”, he said.

The company heads of American outfits did not want to come on record with their statement on the victory of the US president-elect.

The relevant officers on the US desk in the ministry of commerce and foreign ministry were traveling and could not be reached. The new Commerce Minister Amin Fahim was too busy to make any comments on the issue.

Zubyr Soomro, a well-known banker who headed forums of overseas businesses at different times, felt that the change in the US might not be of significance in the short-run for Pakistan’s economy. “Our problems are immediate and it will take the new administration in the US at least a few months before it gets time to ponder over economic worries of Pakistan”.

People beyond America might not have a vote but they have a stake in the most powerful leader. The direction of policies in the White House does affect people around the world.

The making of the historic victory of Barack Obama will be analysed from multiple angles by experts in days and years ahead.

Traditionally, the big business in America is perceived to be behind the Republican Party. A US journalist told Dawn analysing the pre-election situation that the Republican Party draws strength from three sources: 1) big oil companies; 2) big corporations; 3) US military industrial complex.

In the election 2008, however, a sizable number of companies in the US supported President elect Barack Obama. Why did they change sides this time if they actually did? A clearer picture will emerge probably when the details of election spending by the two parties - The Democratic Party and the Republican Party - in the elections 2008 become public. For now the consolidated figures or the list of companies or powerful CEOs who endorsed either of the two candidates is not available.

However, the fact that the Democrats ran an organised but also more expensive campaign is not contested by anyone. Visibly, the Republican candidate towards the fag end of the campaign was not able to match the multimillion dollar media campaign run by the Democratic Party.

Most certainly petty individual contribution by supporters would not have financed this campaign. The big money could only have been injected by the big US business.

Robert Frank of the Wall Street Journal wrote, “.a new political divide is emerging among the wealthy. While the Lower Richistanis ($1 million to $10 million in net worth) were voting Republican, most Middle-and Upper Richistanis (those worth $10 million plus and $100 million plus) were voting Democrat.

Lower Richistanis tended to vote almost exclusively based on taxes. But Upper Richistanis placed a higher priority on longer-term societal issues like health care, the environment and education, which are traditional Democrat issues. Some say Upper Richistanis can afford to minimise taxes, since they have plenty of money even after the government takes its share. Others say the ultra-rich have better tax attorneys so they don’t care as much about tax rates”.

In the same article Frank quoted a survey: “According to a new survey by Prince & Associates, voters worth $1 million to $10 million are favouring Sen. John McCain, while voters worth $30 million or more are favouring Sen. Barack Obama. The survey of 493 families showed: More than three quarters of those worth $1 million to $10 million plan to vote for Sen. McCain. Only 15 per cent plan to vote for Sen. Obama (the rest are undecided). Of those worth more than $30 million, two-thirds support Sen. Obama, while one-third support Sen. McCain”.

A dimension that has not been dealt in this analysis is the civil-military divide in business in the US. Logically, the armament businesses that flourished over the last eight years, aught to favour the party and the candidate who do not shy away from hot spots in the world needed to keep the wheels of armament industry moving.