Pakistan less corrupt, according to global corruption list

Corruption perceptions will be shaped strongly by what people see or hear in the media, as well as by their own experiences

As opposition leaders accuse the Pakistan government of indulging in corruption, Transparency International’s report on global corruption suggests otherwise. Pakistan’s rank on the Index stood at 134, with 42 countries ranking worse. Last year Pakistan had only 34 countries ranking worse on the Corruption Index.

Showing an improvement, Pakistan scored 2.5 in Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) compared to last year’s score of 2.3.
The 0.2 difference signifies progression means Pakistan is improving in the global list of countries that are perceived to be corrupt.

Transparency International’s annual survey, which looked at 183 countries, ranges from zero (perceived to be highly corrupt) to 10 (thought to have little corruption). A country’s rank can however change because new countries enter the index or others drop out.

India’s CPI score went down by 0.2, going to 3.1 from 3.3 in 2010.
Afghanistan showed improvement by 0.1 in its CPI score this year which was 1.5; however it remained in the list of worst scorers, topped by Somalia and followed by Myanmar and North Korea.

China went up by 0.1 with its score of 3.6 this year.
The US was scored 7.1 on the list which was the same as last year, while UK improved by 0.2 with a CPI score of 7.8.

“This year we have seen corruption on protestors’ banners be they rich or poor. Whether in a Europe hit by debt crisis or an Arab world starting a new political era, leaders must heed the demands for better government,” said Huguette Labelle, chair of Transparency International in a statement.

At the other end of the scale, New Zealand took the leading position by a CPI score of 9.5, followed by Denmark and Finland, scoring 9.4 each.

Two thirds of ranked countries in the list scored less than 5, that shows a global inclination towards corruption.“2011 saw the movement for greater transparency take on irresistible momentum, as citizens around the world demand accountability from their governments. High-scoring countries show that over time efforts to improve transparency can, if sustained, be successful and benefit their people,” said Transparency International Managing Director Cobus de Swardt in the press release.

Eight steps down

Pakistan is ranked 34th on the recently released Transparency International global list of countries perceived to be the most corrupt, falling by eight places in one year.

“The score of Pakistan is 2.3 in corruption perceptions index and Pakistan is standing on 34th position in the list of most corrupt countries,” Transparency International Pakistan chairman Adil Gillani said at a press conference in Karachi on Tuesday.

Transparency International’s annual survey, which looks at 178 countries, ranges from zero (perceived to be highly corrupt) to 10 (thought to have little corruption).

In 2009, Pakistan’s corruption perceptions index score was 2.4. The country slipped five places from 47 in 2008 to 42 in 2009.

India worsened by 0.1, going from 3.4 in 2009 to 3.3 in 2010, while Iraq was fourth from the top of the most corrupt ranking country. Myanmar shared second place with Afghanistan and lawless Somalia was considered the world’s most corrupt country, with a score of 1.1.

At the other end of the scale, Denmark, New Zealand and Singapore were seen as the nations which are the least corrupt, scoring 9.3 points. They were followed by Finland, Sweden, Canada and the Netherlands.

The US was 22nd on the list, while Greece and Italy came in at 78th and 67th, respectively. China was level with Greece.

“These results signal that significantly greater efforts must go into strengthening governance across the globe. Good governance is an essential part of the solution to the global policy challenges governments face today,” said Huguette Labelle, chair of Transparency International in a statement.

However, some experts are sceptical of the survey. “Corruption perceptions will be shaped strongly by what people see or hear in the media, as well as by their own experiences,” Karachi-based economist Haris Gazdar, a senior researcher at Collective for Social Science Research told The Express Tribune.

In this year’s survey, Transparency International Pakistan took the opinions of 5,200 people, which is considered an adequate sample size to gauge the views of the 177 million-strong population of the country. However, it is said that the sample data is not representative and there is a “selection bias”. The TIP survey is silent on the sampling issue and only states that it has used “random sampling”.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2010.

Obama not to issue formal apology to Pakistan: NYT

The White House said US President Barack Obama will not issue a formal apology or condolences on the death of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a Nato attack on the Pak-Afghan border, said a report by The New York Times.

However, the State Department officials feel that there is a need for such an apology to mend the straining relationship between the two countries, according to the report.

The report stated that US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter, through a video conference, told White House officials that the anti-American sentiment has reached its peak in Pakistan stressing the need for a formal apology by the US. But the White House argued that condolences offered by senior US officials and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were enough till the US completes its investigations into the matter, the report said.

“The US government has offered its deepest condolences for the loss of life, from the White House and from Secretary Clinton and Secretary Panetta,” said Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council, referring to Defense Secretary Leon E Panetta, “and we are conducting an investigation into the incident. We cannot offer additional comment on the circumstances of the incident until we have the results.”

Pakistan has strongly responded to the attack on the Pakistani checkposts by cutting off Nato supplies to Afghanistan through Pakistan and refusing to attend the Bonn conference in Germany. The Pakistani government has also demanded for the Shamsi airbase– being used for the drone strikes – to be shut down.

The Pakistan Army said that the attack was unprovoked and was a ‘deliberate act of action’, while in a recent statement, top US military officer General Martin Dempsey denied the allegations.

Nato helicopters and fighter jets attacked two military border posts in northwest Pakistan on Saturday in the worst incident of its kind since Islamabad allied itself with Washington in 2001 in the war on militancy.

Who are the Taliban?

The Taliban are active in both Afghanistan and Pakistan

Recent years have seen the re-emergence of the hardline Islamic Taliban movement as a fightingforce in Afghanistan and a major threat to its government.

They are also threatening to destabilise Pakistan, where they control areas in the north-west and are blamed for a wave of suicide bombings and other attacks.

The Taliban emerged in the early 1990s in northern  Pakistan following the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan.

A predominantly Pashtun movement, the Taliban came to prominence in Afghanistan in the autumn of 1994.

It is commonly believed that they first appeared in 
religious seminaries - mostly paid for by money from 
Saudi Arabia - which preached a hard line form of 
Sunni Islam.

The Taliban's promise - in Pashtun areas straddling 
Pakistan and Afghanistan - was to restore peace and 
security and enforce their own austere version of Sharia, 
or Islamic law, once in power.

In both countries they introduced or supported Islamic 

punishments - such as public executions of convicted 

murderers and adulterers and amputations of 

thosefound guilty of theft.

Men were required to grow beards and women had to
 wear the all-covering burka.

The Taliban showed a similar disdain for television, 
music and cinema and disapproved of girls aged 10 
and over from going to school.

Pakistan has repeatedly denied that it is the architect 
of the Taliban enterprise.

But there is little doubt that many Afghans who 
initially joined the movement were educated in 
madrassas (religious schools) in Pakistan.

Pakistan was also one of only three countries, 

along with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab 

Emirates (UAE), which recognised the Taliban 

when they were in power inAfghanistan from the 

mid-1990s until 2001.

It was also the last country to break diplomatic ties 
with the Taliban.

But Pakistan has since adopted a harder line 
against Taliban militants carrying out attacks on its soil.

The attention of the world was drawn to the Taliban in 
Afghanistan following the attacks on the World Trade 
Centre in September 2001.

The Taliban in Afghanistan were accused of providing 
a sanctuary to Osama Bin Laden and the al-Qaeda 
movement who were blamed for the attacks.

Soon after 9/11 the Taliban were driven from power in Afghanistan by a US-led coalition, although their leader Mullah Mohammad Omar was not captured - and neither was Osama Bin Laden.

 The main Pakistani faction is led by Hakimullah Mehsud, whose Tehrik Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is blamed for dozens of suicide bombings and other attacks.In recent years the Taliban have re-remergedin Afghanistan and grown far stronger in Pakistan, where observers say there is looseco-ordination between different Taliban factions and militant groups.

Observers warn against over-stating the existence 
of one unifiedinsurgency against the Pakistani state, however.

 The Taliban in Afghanistan are still believed to be led by 
Mullah Omar, a village clergyman who lost his right eye 
fighting the occupying forces of the Soviet Union in the 
1980s.

 Afghans, weary of the mujahideen's excesses and infighting after the Soviets were driven out, generally welcomed the Taliban when they first appeared on the scene. Their early popularity was largely due to their success in stamping out corruption, curbing lawlessness and making the roads and the areas under their control safe forcommerce to flourish.

 US onslaught

From south-western Afghanistan, the Taliban quickly extended their influence.

They captured the province of Herat, ordering Iran, in September 1995.Exactly one year later, they captured the Afghan capital, Kabul, after overthrowing the regime of President Burhanuddin Rabbani and his defence minister, Ahmed Shah Masood.

They were accused of various human rights and cultural abuses. One notorious example was in 2001, when the Taliban went ahead with the destruction of the famous Bamiyan Buddha statues in central Afghanistan, despite international outrage.

 On October 7, 2001, a US-led military coalition invaded Afghanistan and by the first week of December the Taliban regime had collapsed.

 Mullah Omar and his comrades have evaded capture despite one of the largest anhunts in the world Mullah Omar and most of the other senior Taliban leaders, along withBin Laden and some of his senior al-Qaeda associates, survived the American onslaught.

Mullah Omar and most of his comrades have evaded capture despite one of the largest manhunts in the world and are believed to be guiding the resurgent Taliban. Since then they have re-grouped in both Pakistan and Afghanistan, but are now under pressure in both countries, from the Pakistani army and Nato respectively.

 Despite ever higher numbers of foreign troops, the Taliban have steadily extended their influence, rendering vast tracts of Afghanistan insecure, and violence in the country has returned to levels not seen since 2001.

Their retreat earlier this decade enabled them to limit their human and material losses and return with a vengeance.

Broadcast of 'anti-Pakistan' foreign news channels to be shut: Cable operators

The All Pakistan Cable Operators Association declared Tuesday that they will shut down all foreign news channels airing “anti-Pakistan” content from tomorrow. 

The decision to shut the channels comes after a media uproar both locally and abroad following a Nato air strike that killed 24 Pakistani troops near the Afghan border. 

During a media conference in Lahore, the operators named BBC News as one of the channels to be closed down, citing their documentary “Secret Pakistan” as one of the reasons for the decision.

The two part documentary series which aired in Pakistan explored accusations by CIA officials and western diplomats that Pakistan was failing to live up to its alliances in the war on terror. “We want to send them a strong message to stop this. If they

don’t stop this, then it is our right to stop them,” Arain said.

The cable operators declared that no foreign anti-Pakistan channel will “ever” be broadcast in the country.

They called on local media to tackle the ongoing negative propaganda by foreign news channels by presenting Pakistan’s viewpoint.

Pakistan refuses to extend 15-day deadline for closing Shamsi base

President Asif Ali Zardari has reportedly turned down a request to extend the 15-day deadline set by the Pakistan government for the US to vacate Shamsi airbase that is believed to be used by CIA-operated drones.

 The request was made on Monday to Zardari by foreign minister Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed al Nahyan of the United Arab Emirates, which has controlled the airbase in Balochistan province since the 1990s, media reports said on Tuesday.

 Sheikh Abdullah arrived in Islamabad on Monday on an unscheduled visit and met Zardari and army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

 His visit comes two days after the Pakistan government asked the US to vacate the airbase following a cross-border air strike by Nato aircraft from Afghanistan that killed two dozen Pakistani soldiers.

 Official statements issued by the presidency and the military about Sheikh Abdullah's meetings made no mention of the issue of Shamsi airbase, which Pakistan leased to the UAE in 1992 for use for members of the emirates' royals flying in for hunting expeditions.

 The UAE reportedly allowed the US to use the base for drone flights after the 9/11 terror attacks.

 Media reports quoted Pakistani sources as saying that Zardari had turned down Sheikh Abdullah's request to review the government’s decision to ask the US to vacate the airbase or to extend the 15-day deadline given to the US.

 During his meetings with Zardari and Kayani, the UAE foreign minister pleaded against pushing too hard for getting the airbase vacated, the Dawn newspaper reported.

 The News quoted its sources as saying that Zardari had told Sheikh Abdullah that the government would follow the decision by the Defence Committee of the Cabinet to get the US to vacate the airbase.

Shamsi airbase, located 300 km from Balochistan capital Quetta, has been used as a launch pad for US drone strikes in Afghanistan and in Pakistan’s tribal belt.

 The Pakistan government had earlier asked the US to leave the airbase in June after the American military raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad on May 2.
................................................
Bonn conference: How significant is Pakistan’s absence?
Pakistan has already agreed to the draft of the Bonn conference, even though it is boycotting the key international gathering to be held in the German city from December 5.

However, Islamabad’s decision to stay away from the conference, which has been a year in the planning, is being seen as a setback to international efforts that seek to stabilise the war-torn country before Western forces pull out from Afghanistan by 2014.

A senior government official, who was supposed to be part of the Pakistani delegation at the conference, said Islamabad’s absence will only have a symbolic value. “We have already agreed to the draft of the Bonn conference,” said the official, who asked to remain anonymous. He maintained that Pakistan initially voiced concerns on certain points of the proposed draft but those reservations had been addressed.

Without going into details, the official pointed out that the government’s main area of concern was that the conference not be used as a forum to point fingers at Pakistan. “We have been assured that no such thing would be part of the final draft,” he said.

Conference not expected to yield major breakthroughs

Pakistan’s decision will also not be a major setback because few tangible results were expected at Bonn, despite the attendance of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other government ministers.

The conference was organised with the expectation that Washington and Kabul would have pinned down by then what their strategic relationship would look like after the departure of foreign combat troops, but talks on this have dragged on inconclusively.

Foreign ministry officials opposed boycott

Sources have said that senior foreign ministry officials were in favour of attending the Bonn conference. The officials were of the view that Pakistan must attend the conference at least at the ambassador-level, sources added.

Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar was to lead the Pakistani delegation at the conference to be attended by 90 countries as well as representatives from the United Nations to finalise a roadmap for post-war Afghanistan. “We should have attended the conference and used it to convey our concerns on the Nato attacks,” said a foreign office official while speaking on condition of anonymity.

It is believed that the security establishment has pushed for the boycott after the inadequate response from the US over the Nato air raid. The decision to boycott the Bonn conference was originally taken in the emergency meeting of the cabinet committee of defence just hours after the Nato attack. However, the announcement was delayed for a couple of days in the hope that Washington might come up with a convincing response to pacify the anger.

Pakistan snubs Afghan conference

Withou­t Pakist­an, peace in Afghan­istan and negoti­ations with the Taliba­n is not possib­le.

NATO attack: Pakistan to boycott Bonn Conference on Afghanistan

Pakistan to Boycott Meeting After NATO Raid

Karzai urges Pakistan to reconsider Bonn boycott

Pakistan will boycott the Bonn Conference, scheduled for December 5 on Afghanistan’s future, to protest the cross-border NATO attack, an official said on Tuesday.

Pakistani officials say the country will boycott an upcoming meeting in Germany on the future of Afghanistan to protest a deadly attack by U.S.-led forces on its troops.

The officials say the decision was taken during a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday in the city of Lahore.

Washington views Islamabad as key to bringing about a reconciliation to end the decade-long Afghan war and allow the United States and its NATO partners to complete a military withdrawal by 2014.

If Pakistan bows out of the peace process, it "would hugely complicate the reconciliation process," said the senior U.S. official.

For Pakistan a break in ties risks an end to billions of dollars in U.S. military and development aid.

But an aid cutoff may affect the military less than Pakistan's civilian government, say senior Pakistani security officials. They say military aid under the Coalition Support Fund has been erratic and that Washington routinely holds up payments.

Kabul says Pakistan ‘important’ to Bonn conference.

Bonn meeting, which will bring together foreign ministers from around 100 countries to discuss commitments to the war-ravaged country after the withdrawal of Nato troops in 2014.

Afghanistan said Tuesday that Pakistan had an “important” role to play at the Bonn conference and expressed hope that Islamabad would reverse their decision to boycott the talks.

“We regard Pakistan as an important country in the region, we hope our Pakistani brothers will be there,” foreign ministry spokesman Janan Mosazai told AFP of the December 5 conference on Afghanistan’s future.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that she was “very sorry” about Pakistan’s announced boycott of the conference next week on the future of Afghanistan and would try to convince it to attend.

Merkel said Germany would still “see what could be done to change” Islamabad’s decision to bow out of the meeting in the western German city, taken in protest at Nato air strikes which killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

“We are both interested in constructive development of Afghanistan,” Merkel told reporters at a joint press conference with visiting King Abdullah II of Jordan.

“Which is why I consider the conference hosted by the (German) foreign minister to be very important. We always said that conflicts can only be resolved in the region and Pakistan is part of this region which is why we are very sorry that this cancellation came today.”

Merkel said that Berlin had not given up on convincing Islamabad to reverse its decision and attend the Bonn meeting, which will bring together foreign ministers from around 100 countries to discuss commitments to the war-ravaged country after the withdrawal of Nato troops in 2014.

“I understand Pakistan’s concern about the loss of human life due to Nato troops but this should not distract from the fact that this Afghanistan conference is a very, very important conference,” she said.

“There was a loya jirga (grand assembly) in Afghanistan and there is now a very, very good chance for a possible political process. On the one hand I can understand (the boycott) but on the other, we will see what still can be done.”

A Pakistani official told AFP that Islamabad would boycott Monday’s conference in Bonn over the deadly Nato air strikes at the weekend.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2100465,00.html#ixzz1f2SelSbU