FoDP dumps expected billions into WB basket

By Shaheen Sehbai

WASHINGTON: The Friends of Democratic Pakistan, a forum which was created by President Asif Ali Zardari to raise billions of dollars for 'his' Pakistan, on Thursday quietly dumped the issue back into the lap of the World Bank, something which Mr Zardari had specifically warned against when he launched it a year ago.

And in another subtle move the FoDP turned itself into a political debating club for expressing support, minus of course the talk of the billions. Foreign Minister Qureshi had to explain to the media that the FoDP meeting was not about "pledges", although Mr Zardari had nothing else in mind except getting pledges of billions.

This subtle change of its purpose and definition contrastssharply with the original idea of President Zardari who launched it almost exactly one year ago at the same time and place, with the urgent appeal to collect $100 billion dollars as grants, from what he considered to be friends ready to trust him after the tragic death of Benazir Bhutto and his dramatic rise to power.

On Oct 4, 2008, shortly after the FoDP was launched with much fanfare, Mr Zardari had gone on record asking for the $100 billion dollars and warning against involving the World Bank. After interviewing him, the Wall Street Journal reported: "On Mr Zardari's request for $100 billion in grant he has a simple and powerful argument to make that the world cannot allow his government to fail...In asking the international community for infusion of $100 billion into Pakistan's economy, Zardari was keen to insist that it not be described as aid. Aid is proven through the researches of the World Bank . . . (to be) bad for a country. I'm looking for temporary relief for my budgetary support and cash for my treasury which does not need to be spent by me. It is not something I want to spend. But (it) will stop the (outflow) of my capital every time there is a bomb (blast). In this situation, how do I create capital confidence, how do I create businessmen's confidence?"

But when on Thursday in New York, the high profile summit of FODP ended with a political statement of good wishes and "we all love you" but go to the World Bank Trust for money, the only saving grace for the Pakistani managers of the FODP moot was the Senate passage of a modified version of the Kerry Lugar Bill. This was the best news President Obama could give to the FODP leaders although it has to pass through several stages before any dollars reach Pakistan.

Just one day before the FODP meeting Zardari had urged the US to reimburse $1.6 billion dollars and had called for an early realisation of about $6 billion pledged to Pakistan at a Tokyo donors conference early this year.

A top diplomatic source in New York said Pakistan had just received less than 15 per cent of this pledged amount so far and the creation of a Word Bank trust means the whole issue has been thrown into the mill of the financial institutions where Pakistan is already grappling with conditions and repayment schedules. What Mr Zardari wanted was aid or grants not loans. That has not yet come.

Even the prolific support of Richard Holbrooke for Mr Zardari was not enough to get more than statements stuffed with hot air. His own remarks after the FODP meeting reflected this helplessness or inaction. This is what he said: "... we wanted to show clearly that we were - that the United States and Pakistan's other friends are all working together for Pakistan. It's a long way from this meeting to realities on the ground, but this is the first summit meeting of the Friends of Democratic Pakistan, and we're very proud that it was co-hosted by our President on American soil." In essense, a long way to go but we are proud to host it now.

The way the FODP initiative was mixed up and merged with the Kerry Lugar bill was a master stroke of the PPP strategists who wanted to cover up the lack of progress in New York with the work in progress on Capitol Hill.

The British envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan, Sir Cooper, called the adoption of the Kerry-Lugar bill the best "Eid gift" to the people of Pakistan. Where is that gift was left open for the people to look for but he reaffirmed British support for the country.

This support for the "people of Pakistan" was a repeated mantra because the US and other world leaders did not want to fall into the trap of equating the support for Pakistan to support for Mr Zardari. President Obama mentioned this in his opening remarks at the FODP by congratulating President Zardari but reaffirming deep commitment to the people.

Diplomatic insiders in New York say one of the reason behind President Zardari's "absence" from all the speeches of President Obama in New York, three at least, was this hesitation in US circles to express direct and unequivocal personal support for the Pakistani president. It was hilarious to note that Mr Zardari missed Obama's speech because he had to go for a medical check up but his personal physician, who is accompanying the president and should have been with him in the hospital, was left behind to hear Mr Obama's address, one diplomat revealed.

The hoopla about the passage of the Kerry Lugar bill may have partly made up for the lack of substance at the FODP meeting but a close reading of the Kerry Lugar text reveals that the conditions and clauses included have almost made the US the big brother with a big stick watching almost every economic, political, military and social activity in Pakistan. No wonder the US needs a lot of houses and residences in Islamabad.

The list of conditions and monitoring subjects (pl refer to the text of the bill) makes stunning reading but the key para which is likely to create a lot of trouble, although it is desperately needed in Pakistan's context, is about keeping the armed forces under control of the civilians.

This para is about US monitoring and every six months Secretary of State has to give the Congress "an assessment of the extent to which the Government of Pakistan exercises effective civilian control of the military, including a description of the extent to which civilian executive leaders and parliament exercise oversight and approval of military budgets, the chain of command, the process of promotion for senior military leaders, civilian involvement in strategic guidance and planning, and military involvement in civil administration."

The Indian factor has been added in these conditions under the following clause: "It is the sense of Congress that the achievement of United States national security goals to eliminate terrorist threats and close safe havens in Pakistan requires the development of a comprehensive plan that utilizes all elements of national power, including in coordination and cooperation with other concerned governments, and that it is critical to Pakistan's long-term prosperity and security to strengthen regional relationships among India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan."

There are several roadblocks, checkpoints and mechanisms to monitor where the aid given to Pakistan will flow because of the widespread fears of corruption and pilferage of the aid dollars.

Pakistan's foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi addressed that question in a diplomatic way but Richard Holbrooke said it bluntly. In response to a question on possibilities of corruption, the foreign minister assured the journalists that a mechanism has been devised in consultation with the Friends of Pakistan to make the whole process transparent. He said that the donor countries were satisfied with this arrangement.

Answering the same question, Holbrooke said that the US government has assigned Ambassador Robin Raphel, who under the instructions of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, will coordinate with the relevant government ministries as the aid process moves forward. What he meant was that she will be the "monitor in chief" to catch any thief, big or small.

Whether Kerry Lugar washes away the impact of the missing dollars at the FODP meeting, a senior ex-diplomat in New York put the whole circus into a comical perspective. He said: FODP or FODP was a stock character in English literature and especially comic drama, as well as satirical prints. He is a "man of fashion" who overdresses, aspires to wit, and generally puts on airs. FODP was widely used as a derogatory epithet for a broad range of people by the early years of the 18th century; many of these might not have been considered showy lightweights at the time, and it is possible that its meaning had been blunted by this time.