The Pakistani Spectator

It is the norm that a new government in a country changes its lobbying link in Washington, DC as well. Presently, while the late Bhutto’s Pakistan People Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) are busy in keeping their alliance intact on the issue of restoration of sixty judges, they are also discussing the selection of two new lobbying and public relations firms in Washington to represent Pakistan.

Currently Van Scoyoc Associates and Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide do lobbying and public relations for Pakistan. The country’s contacts with these firms will end within next few weeks.

As these two major parties have negotiated the number and distribution of their ministries, reflecting the number of seats they have won in the Pakistani national assembly, they are also discussing with each other as to which two lobbying firms they are both comfortable with in Washington.

In Islamabad, PPP is a bigger partner than PML (N) because it won more seats in the national assembly.

In the selection process of lobbying firms compared to PML-N, PPP has it easier because the late Benizir Bhutto (BB) had hired Marsteller and BKSH & Associates to represent the party’s interests in Washington. The PPP probably would like to pick the same firm, if PML-N agrees.

Compared to the Sharif brothers, late BB’s connections in Washington are deeper and wider.

About a decade ago when I was interning for Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, I observed BB’s meeting with the Representative McKinney on May 27, 1999. The relatively young BB was both charming and convincing.

Unfortunately, she is not in this world, her party still has some good reliable friends in Washington. One of them, very well-connected among the Democratic party, is Mark Siegal. He seems to be willing to help in Washington both, Pakistan and its Islamic identity.

I have observed Siegal, a German-American, giving a good profile to Islam and letting Washingtonian know that we, people of three Abraham faiths, must learn to live together, a position far from some neo-con’s approach of confronting Islam on-head. (Siegal, by the way, once used to lead the Democratic National Committee (DNC).)

Just as PML- N and PPP have some differences in Islamabad, including about the reinstatement of some 60 Justices, they are having the same issue in the selection of lobbyists in Washington.

Since Marsteller and BKSH & Associates lobbied PPP’s position in Washington before the party won election in Pakistan, the firm has felt closer to PPP than to PML-N.

Being in Washington, I am not in a position to watch PML-N internal debate closely on this issue. However, I have learned, with a few e-mails and phone calls, that it’s possible that some leaders of PML-N have taken the position that their party should let PPP pick the BKSH & Associates to represent Pakistan. They have faith in that firm’s professionals to do their best focusing on giving a good profile to Pakistan by ignoring any difference between the two parties in Pakistan.

If a major part of PML-N leadership believes that their party would not be ignored by BKSH & Associates, it will let PPP select the said firm which has already established good professional relationship with late BB’s PPP party.

However, in its internal debate a group of PML-N leaders, who do not have much first hand experience with the U.S. political system, is arguing against BKSH & Associates professionals’ possible tendency of favoring PPP over PML-N in Washington, while the firm gets paid from the Pakistani taxpayers rather than from PPP’s own pocket.

This introverted or perhaps even xenophobic group of PML-N leaders has more than one reason to think suspiciously.

The group understands well that, compared to their party which expressed more faith in Pakistani voters, the late BB believed in taking short cuts to getting the top Pakistani position via Washington.

While former Prime Minister and PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif didn’t visited Washington after President Musharraf made him leave Pakistan, late BB had made many Washington visits in order to use American influence in getting Musharraf to soften his attitude toward her.

In her skills of interacting with the West and Washington the late BB was far ahead on the curve. Since the Sharif brothers knew it was not their forte to deal with Washington successfully, being in opposition, they never tried to compete with BB.

Its known among Pakistani-American community that the PML-N leadership had given up on Washington. Some cool heads in their party thought tacitly that they could coattail BB; in the case she was able to move Washington against Musharraf. Economically speaking, PML leadership might consider it a shroud move on their part because BB was spending a substantial amount of dollars on Washington lobbyists. But PML’s penny-wise strategy turned out to be very costly. It allowed some elements to damage party’s character by presenting it as a kind of conservative Islamic party that believed in confronting Washington.

Former Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif’s ability to establish rapport with former President Bill Clinton, however, reflects PML leadership’s desire to have a good relationship with the States.

The attitude of the two major Pakistani parties reflects that its not just matter of their having different level of skills for dealing with Washington. The PML-N leadership tend to express deeper trust in Pakistani people. A few years back, Shahbaz Sharif, the former and future Chief Minister (CM) of Punjab, the most populated Pakistani province, used to live in New York. Instead of running after Washington’s power brokers, he kept himself closer to the Pakistani-American community.

Several years ago when he was the Chief Minister of Punjab, I had a few interactions with him in the Blair House in Washington, DC, at the Andrew air force base, MD, and in the World bank. Compared to his older brother Nawaz Sharif – a relatively mellow and spiritual man who likes to develop friendly relationships on deeper level with the people around him — I found the younger brother Shahbaz Sharif more specific, focused, to the point, no-nonsense and very business-minded man. Being a man of few words, he prefers not to pay much attention people’s irrelevant stories.

On my request, a common friend named Shaheen Butt invited me to a Thanksgiving dinner with the CM in New York in November 2006. At the end of the dinner, I reminded him privately for the need to improve his party’s image in Washington. I felt his priority was his party’s workers rather than persuasion of some well-known political operators in Washington.

It’s understood that the PML-N’s lack of interest in Washington negatively affected Washington’s approach toward the party. The policy-makers here developed the feelings of PML’s over sensitivity to the country’s Islamic identity. There are prevalent thoughts that the Pakistan Muslim League-N is prone to play on the anti-American emotions in Pakistan. I disagree with this thinking, though.

BB and her mother Nusrat Bhutto, originally an Iranian lady, are known to have feudal background. Sharifs, on the other hand, belong to an industrialist family. They are one of the most pro-business leaders among developing countries. Having a sizeable business in Saudi Arabia, Sharifs have deeper spiritual connections with that country, but somehow they didn’t use mush Saudi Arabia’s political link to Washington to court it.

In terms of Sharif family’s pro-business propensity, during their rule in Pakistan their party got rid of many useless laws inhibiting the new businesses and resultant economic growth. They tried to boost the economy with multiple advances. Their party lowered the business taxes, relaxed foreign exchange currency rules, and encouraged Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) by letting the foreign corporations form better capital markets for investing in the energy, communication, transportation sectors and in country’s dying infrastructure.

For the first time in Pakistani history, the Sharif brothers built roads on our Washington DC beltway model and link some major industrial city in their country. Furthermore, being good businessmen, the Sharif Brothers tried their best to lure many foreign businesses into their county by allowing them to have more than 50% shares in the businesses, which neighboring India would not do so easily.

Most economists agree that the higher economic growth during Musharraf’s regime was a partial result of the long-term affect of PML-N’s liberalizing economic policies during their rule. Because of Sharif brothers’ radical pro-business approach their party, rather than Bhutto’s PPP, should have been sweetheart of Washington. It did not transpire this way partially because contrary to the late BB’s education in the US, and UK, the Sharif brothers were educated in Pakistan. Unfortunately, they did not have the opportunity, perhaps, to learn enough about the tolerance and highly inclusive nature of American society.

On Washington’s part, because of Sharifs’ more pro-Pakistani people-focused approach, Washington never bothered to appreciate its leaders fully; this in turn deprived American businesses from exploiting many good business opportunities they otherwise could have avail during Sharifs’ regime.

Nadir Chaudhri, a spokesman of former PM Nawaz Sharif and Ahsan Iqbal, the current education minister of Pakistan and a PML-N leader visited Washington in the last week of June and October of last year respectively. I helped to arrange some of their meetings on Capitol Hill and with some of Washington’ experts on South Asia.

In the meetings our most American hosts expressed serious apprehensions about PML-N, fearing that they were a bunch of fundamentalist who would try to implement ‘Sharia’ laws in Pakistan, if and when their party won the election in Pakistan.

Looking into the country’s historical economic policies, compared to PML-N’s very pro-business policies, the late Prime Minister Z.A. Bhutto, BB’s father, had almost destroyed the country’s industrial base by nationalizing almost all major business complexes in Pakistan, unfortunately.

But the late BB was an expert at segmenting her audiences and designing the particular messages accordingly, which prevented the West from learning enough about the corruption and mismanagement baggage her party carried in Pakistan.

Because of BB’s sharpness and her superiority in dealing with Washington has created some insecurity and distrust among a group of PML-N leaders. And this is the very group who is going to oppose the hiring of BKSH & Associates.

This group also believes that BB’s sophisticated deals with Washington never allowed the power brokers to pay proper attention to PML-N, which because of its pro-capitalist and pro-growth economic policy should have been a natural ally of the United States. The group also feels that because of Washington’s ignorance of PML-N, it would be impossible for their party to get equitable profile from the lobbying firm and the personalities like Siegal who have been involved with PPP for several years in Washington.

One of the reasons this group wants to have equal saying as that of PPP in the shopping of lobbying firm for Pakistan because it’s acutely aware of their party’s not-so-good reputation in Washington. However, it’s not in the interest of PPP to put the decision of selecting the lobbying firms on hold for months. As I said at the beginning its easier for PPP to make a quick decision and the party is trying its best to get this job done as soon as possible.

Some South Asian circles feel it’s unlikely for Zardari to have a long political life. Either his son would take over within next couple of years after completing his bachelor degree in England, or the army would push Zardari out of politics sooner rather than later. This might be another factor making part of PML-N leaders complacent and letting PPP do whatever it wants to in the selection of the lobbyist in Washington.

And it’s not going to take us months before we learn with which lobbying firm in Washington the PPP and PML-N end up on consensus basis.

Last 5 posts by kami

• Ahsan Iqbal on Rethinking U.S. Policy - August 5th, 2008
• Who Made Taliban Terrorists? - July 2nd, 2008
• Donde Drug Trade Dollars De Afghanistan? - June 4th, 2008
• Cross Fire - May 30th, 2008
• Good Memories With Some American ‘Right Wing Bigot Christians’ - May 23rd, 2008