As the economy struggles to brave hard times, the government is forced to pursue an aggressive economic diplomacy to attract petro-dollars, benefit from the experience and expertise of trading partners, seek market access and demand support in return for its efforts to contain terrorism. The prospects, however, do not seem to be too bright.

The performance of the export sector or the economy at large, however, does not justify the cost incurred on jetting in and out of the country by officials to attend multiple economic forums and meetings.

“We are good in paperwork but pretty short on delivery. What do we intend to achieve as a result of these costly inter-actions?” asked a journalist who accompanied Prime Minister Gilani on his trip to attend D8 meeting in Malaysia. The D8 summit did not raise any hope for multilateral cooperation among the member countries.

A high ranking official estimated the total cost to the public exchequer of a 55-member delegation to D-8 at Rs5 million. Some other members saw it to be much higher as it involved a lot of wasteful expenditure such as hiring of 50 chauffeur-driven big cars for the duration of the delegation’s stay. They put the cost of the trip at Rs100 million. No official word was available on the tour cost.

The delegation included MNAs, MPAs, private sector representatives, journalists, officers of economic and foreign ministries and personal and security staff of the prime minister.

People close to the PM basking on largesse of Malaysian hospitality blamed the remanents of the last set-up for the mismanagement. “Why were there two computers for ten journalists accompanying the PM and 50 cars for 55 people in Kaula Lumpur?”, it was asked. “Give us some time we do not have a magic wand. Let us bring in the new efficient team that wants us to succeed and you will see the difference”, a marketing person turned PPP Jiala told Dawn commenting on the trip management.

“Sixty years into existence and we do not know where we want to take the country. Do we want it to be the manufacturing workshop of the region, a commodity producing country, a financial hub, a transit hub or something else? You put this simple question to a higher-up in the government and he will babble a long response devoid of a clear answer to the question”, said an independent economist.

In the fast track globalised world, the confused, stressed, often sidelined bunch of conservative bureaucrats unaware of currents and counter-currents in international economic diplomacy, neither have the capacity nor the drive to advise the government to make the right moves at the right time. A senior trade expert of the ministry of commerce disagreed with the view.

“It is unfair to blame us for inefficiencies of others. Our hands are tied down we can suggest but we can not decide. It is up to the rulers to decide. The military rulers are single track, too full of themselves to pay heed to suggestions of civilian officers and terribly naïve in fine matters of rule-based technicalities of modern trade to carve out an initiative on their own”, he told Dawn on condition of anonymity.

“The political rulers are either too weak or inexperienced in a country ruled by military for a better part of its history. They are more absorbed in making most of the opportunity in public office to establish themselves financially and cultivate themselves in the right quarters to pay attention to nitty gritty of economic relations and scope of multiple groupings”, he added.

There is no denying the fact that the role of the private sector, described as engine of growth, has not been effective either. The individual businessmen have a long wish list attached to a file of complains with the government. Often they suffer from myopic vision.

What differentiates private sector from others is their preference for a solo flight. In other countries, the private sector has discovered the benefits of joint action to promote common business interests. They pool their resources for marketing research and development to effectively compete internationally. They, therefore, are in a position to give quality input in the making of public policies.

“Elsewhere they do a lot of homework and research to take a more informed position on intricate trade relations and assist their governments in economic diplomacy. Take the case of India. Their private sector platforms such as federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) and Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) can no longer be ignored and often their nominees are part of the official team that hold talks with other countries at the highest level”, a foreign office official told Dawn.

In contrast to that in Pakistan the trade bodies are used as a platform by free riders waiting to go shopping at government expense.