Imran Khan has perhaps scored well in the first innings of the first Test match of politics played at Minar-e-Pakistan last month. And for the urban middle class political pundits who are tired of corruption and bad governance, it was an exhilarating moment. Educated but politically naive youth and many contemporary journalists have pinned their hopes on ‘Imran, the harbinger of change’. Change from what to what? This is the question. Imran Khan’s promises change in the culture of corruption and present policy against the jihadi forces. He has consciously avoided touching the basic issue that ails the Pakistani politics — the control of the military establishment on the country’s foreign and national security policy. Another important issue is how to put the economy back on track. His party officials have some ideas. “Our committee on economy is working on a policy paper and would be presenting it to the people with the party manifesto,” PTI Karachi President Naeem-ul-Haq informed me. He has some ideas that need to be crystallised and approved by his party before sharing them with the public. Before analysing why Imran Khan is vague on these important issues, let’s focus on one of the most talked about issue in urban setting: corruption. Although corruption cannot be condoned in any society, at the same time its rise and fall should not be discussed without social, economic and political perspective. First, let’s briefly define ‘corruption’ as it is perceived today by the economists and political analysts. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Politics, “Corruption obtains when an official transfers a benefit to an individual who may or may not be entitled to the benefit, in exchange for an illegal payment (the bribe). By taking the bribe, the official breaks a legal binding he gave to his ‘principal’.” It further says, “A positive relation appears to exist between the extent of bribery and the ‘level of red tape…” Two social scientists Donatella Della Porta and Yves Meny in their excellent book, Democracy and Corruption in Europe, have said: “Corruption can be initially defined as clandestine exchange between two markets; the political and/or administrative market and the economic and social market.” Corruption perhaps has been the oldest evil that has existed in human society. The issue has come under the spotlight particularly after the end of the Cold War. Before that the capitalist democracies were only critical of corruption in the socialist countries and would cover up their own follies. But once the fear that people might get attracted to an alternate socialist politico-economic system fell with the Berlin war, the western democracies became introspective about the ills within. Corruption in developing and developed countries is not only an exclusive domain of the politicians and the government officials, as it appears from the roaring speeches of Imran Khan and the media in Pakistan. Multi-billion corruption scandals in the west have brought down famous banks and companies and the worst recession. In Pakistan the media industry is also well aware of the corrupt practices of their owners, advertising agencies and even multinational brand managers. The irony is that the same people sermon ad-nauseam about politicians’ and government officials’ corruption — forgetting that only the pious who have not sinned can cast the first stone. As Imran Khan has yet not ruled, his party can claim that it has clean hands. But once the election dynamics will take over him, and many who did not find place in the PML-N and the PPP will jump on his bandwagon, the ‘clean professionals’ and former Jamaat-e-Islami cadre is more likely to be sidelined in the PTI. Public interest about corruption in the developing countries like Pakistan has surged as the democratic institutions started functioning and the economic structure is being deregulated giving more space to the private sector. This transition has led to the collision between the market players and a new social class of politicians, who are seen by the people, acquiring wealth rapidly. The arrogance of this new class of politicians is irritating to the middle class of the country. When the government officials and corrupt politicians react to the voices raised against corruption they miss the point. They fail to recognise that with the democratic evolution ‘new social forces’ have also “risen, which previously lacked social muscle to stand up”. These emerging social forces are led by the middle class journalists and backed by the rejuvenated judiciary. In the late 80s the media and the judiciary of the developed countries like Italy, Spain, the UK and France went through the same throes. And corruption in these societies, the US included, continues even today. We should analyse who are the major actors in this ‘corruption drama’ at the national level and what gives them the chance to gather this rent from society. What is the level of the financial loss to the country because of corruption is difficult to say. The figures floating in the media at present are not backed by any in-depth economic study. I think a bigger loss to the economy is committed by the delayed decisions on important development and commercial issues. Bitter sugar fiasco and reversal of the Pakistan Steel Mills privatisation are good examples. Leaving aside the corruption at the lower level for the time being let’s discuss where each deal runs into million and billions. The major actors in Pakistan are the same culprits who scream from the pulpit that corruption is rampant — politicians, civil and military bureaucracy and the business tycoons. The latter is the biggest beneficiary of this system. As one businessman confessed the other day, after giving me a lecture on rising corruption, that if a business house pays Rs 10 million in bribes, the gain acquired is at least 10 times of this amount. Much of the corruption that irritates the common man is when they have to pay bribe to get the legal work done at the lower level. This, American functionalists say, is for ‘lubricating the machinery that was jammed’ in the developing countries. They also appropriately named it as ‘wheels’ as opposed to ‘bribe’ because the person who lubricates these ‘wheels’ is just getting the file moved cutting the bureaucratic red tape. In Pakistan at present, however, the corruption of the politicians is in focus much more than the lower level corruption which is irritating the common man. A seasoned professional manager had told me once, “When we vote for one candidate who has spent Rs 20 million or more on his election campaign, we also stamp approval that he can recover his investment with interest.” Those of us who have the opportunity as journalists to visit the elected representatives’ homes or offices in the morning have seen a number of people sitting in the waiting room with applications. And almost 80 percent ask for illegal favours. These people do not suffer from middle class morality issues that corruption and nepotism are immoral. The facts that majority of the 37 million votes cast went to these two parties (the PPP and the PML-N) show that voters did not care for all the corruption allegations that were drummed during the nine-year Musharraf rule. The people’s court gave its verdict in the elections. I am not saying that many who are mentioned in the NRO list were innocent; my contention is that the voters did not care. Maybe they choose the lesser devil, the one which is approachable. There is no doubt that corruption is widespread in this country. But most of the people who complain about this in their drawing rooms or on TV have either not paid their taxes honestly or have bribed the people to get extra favours. It is a part of all capitalist economies; the difference is that of degrees. (To be continued) The writer can be reached at ayazbabar@gmail.com