TODAY'S PAPER | APRIL 06, 2020

Why soft power is pivotal

Maleeha Lodhi | April 06, 2020

The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and UN.

WHY write about soft power at a time of the Covid-19 crisis?

Because the global health emergency helps to illustrate its significance and impact. It also
makes sense to evaluate the importance of soft power for Pakistan’s diplomacy in the post-
pandemic world.

If soft power is understood as a country’s attributes or behaviour that appeals to others and
creates positive perceptions, then consider the case of China in the midst of the ongoing
coronavirus crisis. China’s remarkably successful fight to contain the virus and then extend
help to over 80 countries set an example admired the world over, notwithstanding the
stigmatising rhetoric from its detractors.

What does that mean?

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

It means that by its example and subsequent actions for the collective good, China created a
soft power effect. In other words, by earning respect from its conduct, China managed to
elevate its global position. This underlines how soft power can be instrumental in enhancing
a country’s influence and international standing.

Turning now to consideration of the utility of soft power, the evidence is overwhelming.
When soft power is deployed as a pivotal part of a country’s diplomatic strategy it pays rich
dividends, enabling that country to build trust and influence and thus more effectively
promote its foreign policy goals.

Pakistan needs to step up its diplomatic

game and act strategically.

We have long known that perceptions are consequential to a country’s standing in global
affairs. Soft power can be an indispensable, cost-effective tool to shape perceptions that can
encourage cooperation from the international community.

As others have also pointed out, the international standing of a country today depends as
much on perceptions of it and its reputation as its military and economic power. The
growing shift in recent decades from hard power to the importance of soft power means
that being ‘liked’ helps nations to increase their clout in international affairs.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

The term soft power is used rather imprecisely in Pakistan. It is conceived in a limited way
by policymakers and often misinterpreted in popular discourse.

The term and notion are owed of course to the American scholar Joseph Nye, who in a
seminal work in 1990 described soft power as the ability to shape the preferences of others
and secure outcomes through “attraction rather than coercion or payments”. He
counterposed soft power, “the power of persuasion and co-option”, to the “power of
coercion” represented by the hard power of military and economic strength. And he
identified culture, political values and foreign policy as the principal sources of soft power.
Subsequent literature expanded on the concept. A prolific debate ensued on the diverse
sources, dimensions and measures by which to assess soft power. Much of this remained
West-centric, but there were lessons for the ‘rest’ to draw on.

A Soft Power Summit, organised recently by Brand Finance in London, where I was also
invited to speak, attracted participants from 100 countries, reflecting the wide interest the
subject attracts. The keynote from former UN secretary general Ban-Ki Moon set the tone:
“Soft power is an essential ingredient in international diplomacy now more important than
ever.”

Speakers generated a rich debate especially around the Global Soft Power Index 2020 report
launched by Brand Finance. This identifies seven Soft Power Pillars and ranks 60 countries
according to measures that include performance on these pillars, reputation, awareness,
familiarity and overall influence. It is based on responses to these of over 55,000 people
from around 100 countries. The seven pillars are business and trade, governance,
international relations, culture and heritage, media and communication, education and
science, people and values.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

Western countries are among the top five in the ranking index, with Japan and China at four
and five. Pakistan figures among the bottom 10, at 53 out of 60. India at 27 is described as
underperforming. Singapore is the top Southeast Asian nation at 20, drawing soft power
from its perception as a leader in education and science. One can debate the measures used
and question the methodology of such surveys, but there is much to learn from them.

I experienced firsthand the critical role soft power can play in achieving a specific
diplomatic goal when I served as Pakistan’s envoy at the UN in New York. With 193
countries represented at the UN, it is an ideal global platform to execute soft power
strategies. Many countries do that on a sustained basis.

In Pakistan’s case, we had to win election to a key UN body two years ago. Competition was
tough. So was the challenge, as the electorate was the 193-member General Assembly. In
Africa and Latin America, we have few diplomatic missions and little or no representation
in the 38 Small Island Developing States (SIDS). All have a vote and every vote counts.

What did we do in addition to traditional lobbying and making reciprocal arrangements?

We deployed soft power resources in two ways. We undertook intense cultural diplomacy by
hosting events that showcased our rich heritage and we projected Pakistan’s international
role as a force for good by our contribution to UN Peacekeeping (critical for Africa). Cultural
diplomacy involved a packed concert in the prestigious General Assembly hall, a Pakistani
‘street food’ event, and a colourful (first-ever) celebration of Eid at the UN. Our
peacekeeping role was showcased in different ways including a photo exhibition at the UN.
All this aimed to appeal to ‘voters’ by projection of the soft power of our culture and our
policies that contribute to global peace and security. Pakistan won the election, polling 151
votes — much more than were needed. Soft power efforts had played a key role in this
outcome.

Looking ahead, Pakistan needs to step up its diplomatic game and act strategically. There
seems to be a reluctance to change how we conduct our diplomacy when a hyperconnected
and multipolar world offers unprecedented opportunities to influence multiple actors
across the globe. Today, ‘nation branding’ is essential. Policymakers should identify and
imaginatively incorporate our soft power resources into our foreign policy, engaging more
vigorously in public diplomacy to shape the narrative abroad. There is no reason why
Pakistan should remain at the bottom of the Global Soft Power League.

The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and UN.

Published in Dawn, April 6th, 2020

 TODAY'S PAPER | APRIL 06, 2020

Digital help
Editorial | April 06, 2020

AS the Covid-19 challenge continues to test the limits of healthcare infrastructure

around the world, tech giants like Google have rolled out new features with the aim of
helping both citizens and governments. Google’s efforts include a crucial SOS Alert
that connects people with the latest news and safety tips from the World Health
Organisation. The tech company is also active in removing misinformation on
platforms like YouTube and Google Search to limit the harm to unsuspecting users on
the lookout for ‘cures’ and ‘remedies’. In these unprecedented circumstances, artificial
intelligence tools developed by some Silicon Valley companies are combing through
coronavirus research databases to uncover new insights into the global pandemic. The
role of technology and these platforms in this exceptional crisis is undeniable. Yet the
companies at the helm of this technology have a huge responsibility towards citizens.

Google’s recent release of location reports for 131 countries, including Pakistan, is helping
health authorities assess if people are abiding by social distancing orders, with the tech
giant saying it has published the reports to avoid confusion about what is being provided to
the authorities. Undoubtedly, these companies are the gatekeepers of data belonging to
millions of citizens across the world — data which is used to generate profit through
targeted advertising. For this reason, they must responsibly fight disinformation and aid
governments and researchers wherever they can to help the world tackle the coronavirus
outbreak. However, they must be cognisant of the fact that sharing any citizen data with
governments means treading a fine legal and ethical line. China, Singapore, South Korea
and other countries have asked residents to use technology to track their compliance with
quarantines, but privacy activists argue such measures can compromise individual liberties.
The anonymised geo-tracking of citizens can go a long way in helping governments enforce
distancing, but it may also be open to misuse. As some experts have noted, technology can
save lives, but if implementation unreasonably threatens privacy, more lives may be at risk.

Published in Dawn, April 6th, 2020

 TODAY'S PAPER | APRIL 06, 2020

Capacity payments
Editorial | April 06, 2020

A MASSIVE wheel was set in motion last week when the Cabinet Committee on Energy
decided to begin the process of renegotiating capacity payments with LNG terminal
operators and the independent power producers. Hundreds of billions of rupees are at
stake in the process and the move is no doubt going to lead to deep concern among the
sponsors of the projects involved. The committee, chaired by Planning Minister Asad
Umar, who has only recently taken charge of this crucial committee, made the decision
in its last meeting on Thursday to begin the process of this renegotiation which can
take up to three months to complete. The reasons given were fairly obvious — to help
decrease the burden of power sector payments on the government, rationalise fuel
costs and better manage the circular debt. In their initial responses to the idea, the
IPPs have said that a contract is a contract, and that they are already so tight regarding
liquidity, due to the repeated government failure to abide by its payment terms, that
any renegotiation will leave them financially destitute and unable to continue
operations.

Over the years, the government of Pakistan has earned a bad name for itself for its failure to
abide by the terms of long-term contracts entered into with sponsors of multibillion-dollar
projects, but it is not difficult to see that this time it is different. The weeks to come will be
some of the most difficult that the country has ever seen, and the question that every
Pakistani needs to ask is ‘what can I do to help’. This is not the time to say ‘a contract is a
contract’. All the resources of the state are required to shoulder the cost of the struggle
ahead, to pay for massive increases in health investment and run social protection
programmes for the poor and unemployed that could cost hundreds of billions of rupees
every month. Moreover, power consumption has fallen sharply and fuel imports, in price
and quantity, have also nosedived, causing capacity payments to climb since they are often
indexed on off-take. This is nothing rational or moral about making capacity payments at a
time when the state needs its resources for an intense battle against a global pandemic.
Without the people, there is no economy, no power consumer, and no payments’ stream.
The IPPs and LNG terminal sponsors should understand this.

Published in Dawn, April 6th, 2020

 TODAY'S PAPER | APRIL 06, 2020

Ill-conceived policy
Editorial | April 06, 2020

PRIME MINISTER Imran Khan has announced a major list of incentives for the
construction industry aimed at boosting the economy at a time when the adverse
impact of the coronavirus is wreaking havoc across all sectors. The prime minister
vowed to open allied industries to strike a balance between economic activities and
efforts to contain the pandemic. On the face of it, the logic of incentivising the
construction industry is a sound one. It will spur activity across a wide spectrum of
sectors, attract investment, generate jobs and provide economic sustenance to those
who need it most. The prime minister has been speaking of the benefits of a growing
construction industry, and the government’s Naya Pakistan Housing Programme is also
aimed at producing such a beneficial effect for the economy. Yet there is a problem.

The announcement is fraught with risks. At a time when the entire world is prioritising
lockdowns so that people can stay indoors and away from each other in order to suppress
the spread of the coronavirus, the prime minister’s policy will have the opposite effect. By
incentivising the construction industry and encouraging it to start its activity, the
government is getting people out to work. It is not just a question of those who will be
working at construction sites but also all those citizens who work in allied industries who
will now be forced back to work. In essence then, the federal government is diluting the
concept of a lockdown and asking thousands of Pakistanis to run the risk of either getting
infected with the virus or infecting others. This is not just bad policy, it is outright
dangerous.

Similarly, giving tax breaks to investors makes sense in certain circumstances, but here the
government has essentially allowed people to whiten their black money by investing it in
the construction sectors. By all standards this amounts to giving holders of black money an
amnesty scheme without the government gaining anything from penalties. This goes against
everything that Prime Minister Khan has stood for and it negates his principal argument
that the corrupt should not be rewarded for their corruption. The no-questions-asked
decision has to make sense within a larger policy construct whereby there is sound
economic, political and ethical justification for allowing the black deeds of people to be
whitened without any cost at the altar of ill-conceived policies. The prime minister should
be cognisant of the fact that, by going ahead with this policy of reviving the construction
industry on the terms and conditions specified, he runs a real risk of undermining his own
standing as a crusader against corruption. He may want to rethink the move before it starts
to take a toll on his politics and on the health of Pakistanis at large.

Published in Dawn, April 6th, 2020

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

 TODAY'S PAPER | APRIL 06, 2020

A fragile world
Aisha Khan | April 06, 2020

The writer is chief executive of the Civil Society Coalition

for Climate Change.

“THERE are decades when nothing happens and there are weeks where decades
happen.” Vladimir Lenin did not have a health pandemic in mind but his words ring
true as we witness a transformation take place in peacetime on a scale as never seen
before. In just a matter of weeks, the lethal coronavirus has spread all over the world,
halting trade and travel, slowing the global economy, triggering social upheaval and
endangering the lives of millions.

The comparison with the financial crisis of 2008 or the Second World War is not accurate
because one was the result of high-risk financial mortgage securities and the other the
outcome of a war spread over four years involving many countries. This is a single virus
that has paralysed life at a global level within a short period.

In a matter of months, it has deprived the global GDP of trillions of dollars. The butterfly
effect of change at one place in a complex dynamic system leading to a large and non-linear
impact with unexpected consequences was never more evident. More than any other single
factor, Covid-19 has made us realise the interconnectedness and fragility of the world we
live in. The rapid spread and scale of the cascading disruptions provide an array of real-time
data, statistical indicators and other types of information for identifying gaps and opening
new windows of opportunity for scaling up urgently needed actions and reforms.

According to the World Bank, over 80 countries have reported changes to social protection
systems and governments are considering direct financial transfers to households and small
businesses.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

The next looming disaster is climate change.

The urgency and swiftness with which countries have taken difficult decisions proves that
governments can make tough choices under emergency situations but do not invest
adequately on prevention and preparedness during peacetime.

The next disaster looming on the horizon is climate change. Covid-19 is only a health
emergency, but it has brought the world to a grinding halt. The climate emergency will be
all-encompassing. The only difference between the two is that one is a clear and present
threat and the other a slow burner. But the impact on the poor, like now, will be
disproportionately high.

Developing countries will face an unprecedented collective threat to human life, with
massive economic losses, outbreaks of epidemics, social disruptions, large-scale migrations
and an unmanageable law-and-order situation. For too long now, response to crises has
been met with inefficient and expensive approaches. It is time for revisiting business-as-
usual scenarios and taking projections of impending disasters seriously for developing real-
time coping strategies.

As the world grapples with economic insecurity and physical safety, it must find ways to
learn lessons from this pandemic and use it as a guide for making future policies that are
more climate-sensitive by taking into account the scale of the crisis that will happen with
the present projection rate of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. The present crisis has
highlighted the vulnerability of the poor in our country. The challenges of poverty,
inequality, hunger, inadequate healthcare and a widening income and wealth gap between
the rich and poor will get amplified by climate change, setting the stage for violent conflict
and a breakdown of law and order.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

Preparedness is as much a social, political and economic issue as it is an issue of human

security and ecological integrity. Investment in carbon-neutral development may slow down
the global economy temporarily but the return on investment and timely transition will
have long-term benefits on the economy, social stability, health and productivity and, most
importantly, sustained inclusive growth.

The environmental benefits that we are witnessing now cannot be seen as a boon as it is
hurting people’s lives. The change must happen as a result of a plan that factors human
well-being and regeneration of nature by design. The theory of chaos is based on the
concept of underlying patterns, interconnectedness, constant feedback loops, repetition,
similarity, fractals and self-organisation within apparent randomness of chaotic systems. It
suggests that chaos leads to order and stabilisation of cyclic decisions, forcing the system to
jump into its own state while trying to influence it from outside.
Governance systems – especially the pros and cons of authoritarian vs democratic in
managing emergencies, the benefits of capitalist and socialist economic models, as well as
concepts of security – will become topics of discussion and debate in the aftermath of this
shared crisis.

Hopefully, the chaos generated by the pandemic will usher in a new global order with a
paradigm shift in how we look at development and security by using new and creative ways
of building a greener, safer and more prosperous future for all.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

The writer is chief executive of the Civil Society Coalition for Climate Change.

aisha@csccc.org.pk

Published in Dawn, April 6th, 2020

 TODAY'S PAPER | APRIL 06, 2020

Bigger questions
Huma Yusuf | April 06, 2020

The writer is a freelance journalist.

THE UK is looking ahead to a bleak Easter. The country’s death toll from the
coronavirus is higher than Italy’s at the same stage of the outbreak, and there is as yet
no sign of the curve flattening, with fatalities roughly doubling every three days. The
next few weeks are a crucial indicator of whether social distancing measures have
worked. Either way, the UK’s experience holds several global lessons for pandemics or
other national crises.

One. Lack of leadership is a life and death issue. The confusion around UK’s strategic
approach to tackling coronavirus — an initial plan to achieve ‘herd immunity’ followed by a
policy U-turn and intense social distancing approach to ‘flatten the curve’ — persists in the
country’s approach to testing. Despite WHO’s exhortation to ‘test, test, test’, the leadership
remains ambivalent. The government has gone from capping the number of NHS workers it
would test for the virus to vowing to test 100,000 people per day by the end of the month.
Details on how it will achieve this target are ambiguous. The vacillation will impact the
country’s outcomes in the fight against this pandemic.
Two. There is no place for petty politics in a pandemic (or any global crisis). Prime Minister
Boris Johnson’s government has faced accusations of putting ‘Brexit over breathing’ after
the UK failed to participate in an EU-wide scheme to procure ventilators. The government
claimed to have overlooked a deadline, but media reports indicate the decision was likely
political and face-saving for the pro-Brexit prime minister. This politicking seems criminal
as the NHS falls short of ventilators.

Three. Use data, but always question it. News headlines are crowded with statistics of the
previous day’s death toll, an indicator of the success of the battle against coronavirus and
the state of the curve. But scientists and journalists have emphasised in recent days that
these figures are inaccurate — there is a time delay in reported deaths, and the stats only
cover hospital deaths, not those in the wider community. Pursuing more accurate data has
to be part of the response to this crisis.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

Britain’s leadership remains ambivalent.

Four. Politicians should read the fine print. The Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak has
received global praise for the promise that the state will pay 80 per cent of wages of workers
kept on the payrolls of companies affected by the crisis. He could have stopped there and
enjoyed the plaudits. But he has had to return to the plan several times to expand it to cover
different types of workers. Such iterative policymaking is essential.

Five. A free — and well-regulated — media is a crucial component of (inter)national crisis

management. The British media is keeping the government accountable; newspapers that
have traditionally supported the Conservative party have harshly criticised the
government’s approach, particularly on testing for the virus. At the same time, the media
regulator is ensuring the media plays a productive role in the crisis, recently warning
broadcasters against disseminating conspiracy theories linking the virus to the roll-out of 5G
services.

Six. The public needs something to believe in. People coming out on their balconies to clap
for the NHS. An overwhelming response to a government call for volunteers. A hospital
being constructed in nine days. These small victories keep up public morale, and continue to
motivate adherence to social distancing rules. Such rallying is key in a crisis in which public
behaviour is core to the fight back (perhaps we in Pakistan should lay off the Corona Relief
Tiger Force?).

Seven. It’s not too early to look ahead. Around the world, the focus is on the fatality
numbers, the lack of protective equipment for healthcare workers, the paucity of
ventilators, the race for a vaccine. But at some point the pandemic will subside. And we will
be left with bigger questions. How do we rebuild more resilient societies? How do we
address the inequalities that have been both highlighted and exacerbated by the pandemic?
How do we better prepare for such existential crises? Will coronavirus be the turning point
in our global response to climate change?

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

The real work will start after the immediate crisis passes. But the seeds of the political
polarisation that may emerge are already being planted. Brexiters and remainers, pro- and
anti-immigration, climate advocates and change deniers will recast themselves as the ‘back
to normal’ brigade versus the ‘reimagine and rebuild’ squad. The only way to pre-empt a
divisive, counterproductive debate in the aftermath is to start having open, inclusive
discussions while we’re all unified by the threat of the pandemic. Politicians must start that
debate now, and ensure a high quality dialogue — nothing less than humanity’s future
depends on it.

The writer is a freelance journalist.

Twitter: @humayusuf

Published in Dawn, April 6th, 2020

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

 TODAY'S PAPER | APRIL 06, 2020

Welfare considerations
Umair Javed | April 06, 2020

The writer teaches politics and sociology at Lums.

NEARLY a month into the pandemic, there is little indication that the worst is behind
us. Ominously, a host of projections suggest an exponential rise in cases to continue till
at least the middle of April. We find ourselves in uncertain and unprecedented times,
and all front-line medical professionals, administrators and volunteers deserve our
gratitude for steering us through them.

Times of crisis help highlight the centrality and desirability of efficient public healthcare
and redistributive mechanisms. They also shed light on underlying institutional and
structural factors that shape and condition responses by different states. Barring some
belated decision-making by the federal government, Pakistan’s overall response to date has
generally been efficient and competent. The constant focus on welfare and socioeconomic
concerns from the federal and provincial governments has, in particular, played an
important and applause-worthy role on this front.
At the same time, the nature of the government’s response and who it caters to is revelatory
in its own right. To this end, in my view, the government has drawn on existing resources
quite well for some impacted populations, but requires more creative thinking for others.

In terms of getting it right, the mobilisation of an expanded direct cash transfer scheme
using existing BISP enrolment, National Socioeconomic Register (NSER) and Nadra data has
been the most appropriate response for a large segment of the vulnerable population.
Expanding beyond the original 4.5 million to an additional 4m through NSER by relaxing the
poverty score threshold seems relatively straightforward. The real feat is getting to an
additional 3.5m vulnerable citizens across the country through a combination of SMS-based
self-enrolment, Nadra data and district-based verification.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

Barring some belated decision-making by

the centre, Pakistan’s response has
generally been efficient.

In terms of outreach, according to government data, as of April 3, nearly 12m SMS entries
were deemed eligible for district-based verification, which is an impressively high number.
The next challenge for the government is to expand the scale of assistance being provided
beyond Rs12,000 over the next four months, by urgently redirecting fiscal resources from
other allocations.

If this is carried out successfully, this would be a real feat of drawing on existing other-use
resources (citizenship records, security surveillance data and local administration) for
welfare purposes. Experiences from disasters and crises in other countries show that once
expanded, welfare provisions are relatively hard to roll back. As a positive externality, the
hard work being put in now could form the basis of a more expanded welfare mechanism in
the future.

A similar basket of social protection measures are also being implemented by the provinces
relying on existing welfare instruments like zakat committees, social security offices, and
labour department data. Additional cash transfers seem to be the preferred option, but
Punjab is also considering a large public works-based employment scheme, which would be
able to target a particular strata of daily wage workers and labourers impacted by the
pandemic. It remains to be seen how efficiently these interventions are implemented, and in
conjunction with private charitable efforts, how well they can blunt the adverse impact of
the virus.

If the government scores well on the planning part of its direct cash-based assistance to
vulnerable populations so far, it has more work to do on helping out other adversely
impacted segments of society. Most notably, the lockdown combined with an already slowed-
down economy coming to a screeching halt will pose significant livelihood challenges for
various sectors.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

Based on the material put out so far, it is apparent that the government’s economic stimulus
to date remains skewed towards large enterprises in the formal sector. A host of refinancing
schemes, quicker refunds, interest payment deferments, and tax rebates to particular
sectors are important instruments, but they do not hold as much value to the thousands of
micro, small and medium enterprises, many of whom do not meet documentation
thresholds, and do not exist within the realm of formal banking relations.
Turning attention to the informal sector is important not just because they contribute
extensively to the economy, but because businesses within this segment also absorb large
amounts of urban labour (employing upwards of 60 per cent of the urban workforce). This
means there is both an economic stimulus and a welfare and social protection argument to
be made for their assistance.

Existing data on domestic commerce (wholesale retail trade, transportation, storage), which
is largely informal in nature shows that the biggest costs incurred by these businesses are
utility expenses, land/rental costs, and labour expenses. What can be managed with relative
ease, and what the government has reasonably good data on, is utility bill deferment and
some relief in utility expenses. Regardless of the level of informality, nearly every fixed
brick-and-mortar business (shops, godowns, small manufacturing entities) has a commercial
electricity connection. Past consumption data can be used to categorise businesses by scale,
and targeted relief through deferment or a subsidy, for example, can be provided, especially
for expenses incurred for the time period immediately preceding the crisis.

On the other hand, given the high levels of informality, directly targeting these small
businesses to provide wage-bill support is not as easy an option as it is in other parts of the
world. The government would have to come up with new, possibly microcredit options to
improve cash-flow circumstances if it wants these segments to retain labour at this point in
time.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

Lastly, there is also an urgent need to think about possible rental relief for both vulnerable
commercial and residential tenants. This might be the most difficult one to carry out given
the lack of data on rental agreements and the generally undocumented nature of
commercial and residential rental markets. But we’re currently going through a crisis that
requires creative solutions, and for socioeconomic welfare purposes, now is the time to
think through some of them.

The writer teaches politics and sociology at Lums.

Twitter: @umairjav

Published in Dawn, April 6th, 2020