As a nation we have failed in our own projection in the world. Some of it has to do with deeds, or lack of them, but most of it is attributable to the inadequacy of the words that the world wants to hear from us
This is the post 9/11 era, not only in America but also across the globe. And what affects the sole superpower has its ripples floating way beyond one’s imagination. We have seen this. This world is a ‘global village’, as opposed to being somebody’s ‘oyster’, as we are beginning to see. It is not even the greatest superpower’s oyster, as we shall shortly and rightly see. It is a complex web of redundant resources and insatiable desires on the one hand, and stark nothingness on the other. Such are the vagaries of nature. It surely does take us all back to the basic necessity of international trade, as propounded by David Ricardo, the 19th century neo-classical economist, in his Theory of Comparative Advantage.
What has really jolted me out of the inertia and stirred me to put pen to paper is a series of readings in newspapers where no bones are made about casting aspersions on some of the more objective writers. Such balanced contributors have the ability to see the forest for the trees and articulate a viewpoint that, to the most part, is free from any undue influence.
Much to our dismay, the criticism of such visionary writers comes from those representing a cross-section of the population that believes their country is infallible. While this sense of patriotism is appreciated, however misplaced it may be, let us not forget to underscore the significance of introspection. It is all very well and convenient to paint with too broad a brush the lack of fair play displayed by the ‘wannabes’ of this increasingly crafty world, just as it affords us a comfort level to condone all of our own actions and polemics. Such a cross-section tends to live in a tunnel, insulated from the geo-politics of today. For them, life is in black-and-white, as opposed to being open to wider interpretations. This leads them to follow a more simplistic model, as opposed to a path of incisive analyses and consequent inferences.
Being in Pakistan at the time of the nuclear detonation in May, 1998, let me, at the risk of sounding unpatriotic and an infidel to the ‘simplistic’ some, assert my disappointment at the decision to actually demonstrate the nuclear ‘capability’. While the possession of nukes involuntarily may serve as a deterrent, it does not necessarily follow that it be flaunted so ceremoniously. A little situational analysis at the time, done with an inclination toward objectivity and dispassionate thinking, should have yielded a different set of recommendations. This, indeed, was an opportunity to win world acclaim, in addition to being able to leverage our balance sheet. Alas, it was an opportunity lost to the perpetuation of what our country has been plagued with over a period of decades: ad hocism and lack of vision.
Religion has wrongly been brought into the affairs of the state. Fundamentalism has crept in and become inextricably interwoven in each and every fabric of our society. The need for public display of religiosity has mushroomed at a galloping pace. The choice of consumption, or otherwise, of the edibles — specifically discernible when one lives abroad — has overtaken the need to restrain the conspicuous gluttony of what blatantly, almost crudely, represents social evil. A cause of this malaise has been what is known in economics as the ‘demonstration effect’, or simply ‘keeping up with the Joneses’. ‘Rituals’ have surpassed ‘spirit’ by far. Paranoia reigns supreme in our psyche when this ‘global village’ calls upon us to integrate with the rest of the world. We choose to isolate, instead, under the garb of maintaining our identity. Little do we realize that the line between integration and retention of one’s identity is quite well demarcated. All it takes is being a little forward-thinking. One’s faith need not be in any sort of jeopardy. Indubitably, a good part of the reason for our current inadequacies stems from this particular tendency.
It is not difficult to see that the retrogessiveness of the above kind is prevalent all over the Muslim community. So what has it resulted in? Well, with Muslims accounting for about 20 per cent of the global population, is it any surprise then that they are instrumental in only about four per cent of international trade? To add insult to injury, of the four per cent, Malaysia’s contribution is about three-fourths. Unfortunately, Pakistan’s effort to figure on the map has been undermined by vested interests of the kind described above. While we are long on being visibly exhibitive of patriotism, with public statements galore, we are painfully short on promoting the spirit of this emotion.
To bring the point a little closer home, Pakistanis are inexcusably under-represented in some of the more prominent professions in the US. These professions help define public policy and influence public opinion. We have doctors and engineers in abundance; however, there is a serious dearth of attorneys, journalists, business and media professionals. The result is lack of effective Pakistani lobby in the power corridors of the US Congress. The Israel lobby is by far the strongest in the country. It has not happened per chance, rather by design.
There is hardly any meaningful area in the nomenclature of the US that has no effective representation and contribution of the Jews. The fields of banking and finance, science and technology, medicine, law, media and entertainment are but a few examples. The diversity thus makes for an easier seeping in of the Jewish viewpoint among the masses of the population, and the consequent entrenchment of their value system. It is not difficult to see this viz-a-viz the Palestine-Israel issue at hand. By some reliable information, India is a relatively close second to Israel with respect to her support lobby in the US. Again, nothing happens by accident, specially success, and this is no exception.
To their credit, the Indians have been slowly and surely making their mark in just about every field in the US. Technology is on the forefront. Knowing the growing relevance of this science, they went to work on developing this resource years ago by opening some excellent training centres and producing the human potential that has today become the envy of the entire world. Playing to diversity, they have also ventured out into media, entertainment, education, banking, finance and business. This has helped them sell their beliefs in the congressional sphere, hence their strong lobby.
Let there be no doubt that had our founding father stayed alive a little longer, our country would have had direction. Let it also be reiterated here that the Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah himself believed in secularism. He believed in Pakistan being a modern, liberal state. Mr Jinnah worked diligently to carve out a piece of land for us out of the geography of India. This, by all means, was an achievement of immense proportions, specially since he was instrumental in changing the physical contours of the planet. The rationale was to create a ‘homeland for the minority Muslims’ of the then India, not necessarily an ‘Islamic nation’. A ‘separate country for the Muslims’ and an ‘Islamic nation’ are two distinct and mutually exclusive concepts. Sadly, we are missing the point.
Furthermore, he gave us three principles to build our nation on — unity, faith and discipline. Unfortunately, just like everything else about this great leader, he has been interpreted out of context here as well. When he mentioned faith, he referred to faith in ourselves as a nation and in our destiny, not necessarily faith in a religious sense. Of course, this has been distorted to hide the real meaning. And, just so there is no room for doubt about his preference for the style of government, let me quote him from his speech to the Constituent Assembly members: “You are free; you are free to go to your temples; you are free to go your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed ... that has nothing to do with the business of the State.”
Perception building plays a huge role in contemporary politics, more so because we have the tools to propagate an intended message — the media. Some of the channels in the US have taken this exercise to another level altogether. The SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) of the Foxes (Fox News) of the world are but an almost unsightly example of how sterile minds are rendered even more useless, and how marketing plays into everything these days, not just corporate business. Unfortunately, we, as a nation, have failed miserably in our own projection in the world, thus marketability. Some of it does have to do with deeds, or lack thereof, but most of it is attributed to the inadequacy of words, or the words that the world wants to hear from us — the right rhetoric! After all, marketing is a warfare wherein battles are won with ideas, words and actions.
Ostracism may well be in store for me in light of the views expressed, specially since I live abroad and possibly deemed to have no prerogative over my homeland. However, by way of clarification, I did choose to return to Pakistan after having attended university in the US and served the country for a good 12 years or so, prior to emigrating to America in 1998. Even now, if and when the opportunity presents itself, I do not lag behind in speaking up for my country, be it a casual affair or an arranged talk by a sponsor. That said, I try not being tainted in my views, as all it does is literally kill credibility. The fact that such tone has been clearly effected here should bear testimony to the high level of commitment in this regard.
As a Parthian shaft, let me quote Mr Jinnah again: “The story of Pakistan, its struggle and its achievement, is the very story of great human ideals struggling to survive in the face of odds and difficulties ....”
“Jihad,” do we hear him say? After all, as opposed to kamikaze missions and public execution of hatred (specially among ourselves), isn’t this what the term really stands for? Or ought to?
The author is a banker in the San Francisco Bay Area, USA. In addition, he is an adjunct professor of marketing at his alma mater, Golden Gate University, San Francisco, and serves on its Alumni Board of Directors.
