Lack of protocol lack of respect

In Pakistan Protocol is generally understood as observance of the rules of courtesy in government or State matters. Some think it as stuffiness. Pakistanis are generally likely to consider requirements of protocol as observing formalities. In a broad sense this is not too far the main reason why protocol is observed., but there is another meaning of it showing respect to the host that is his due and in state matters People in Pakistan generally do not fully realize that in state matters it becomes a barometer of a nation’s standing Lack of observance of protocol by foreigners or observance is a barometer of a nation’s standing in international community Lack of protocol by foreigners indicate lack of respect for Pakistan

The most glaring example was when after Japan/s surrender, General McArthur ordered that when the Emperor of Japan, Hirohito, calls on him at his headquarters he would not be recived on his arrival and brought straight to him. When Hirohito arrived in his room, McArthur did not stand up, made him sit down on a chair infront of him and putting his legs on the table put his shoes in the direction of the Emperor.

It may be stated that in the book “ Rusum Dar el Khilafa” by As-Saibi – or Protocols of the Khilafa’ and Kitab et Taj by El Jahiz, on Protocol in Abbaside era written a thousand years ago, lay down in minutest details the procedures for reception, etc, of foreign representatives and dignitaries .in the days of the Ommaiyades and Abbasides , which should disabuse of the notion that there were no formalities od protocol in early Muslim era. In fact lack of protocol, lack of decency and lack of respect. In matters of State its lack is an affront to the state.. While on the subject may I stress that the term VVIP protocol is verry much abused by media in Pakistan. Only the President and Prime Minister are counted as VVIP and by courtesy Chairman Senate and Speaker of National Assembly and nonen else. Media will be well advised not to abuse this term which has universdal acceptance.

The occasion to write this article arose on seeing photos of two visiting American personalities calling on Pakistani leading personalities. These were of the call made by US Under Secretary of Defence for Policy, Michele Flournoy on Pak Chief of General Staffs Committee , General Tariq Majid at the Jont Chiefs of Staffs Headquarter at Rawalpindi and the other of the call of former US Deputy Secretary of State on General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kiyani at the GHQ.

The lady calling on the Chairman JCSC Tariq Majid was in a very informal dress and in disheveled condition, which is in a word improperly dressed and too causal appearance . This is not done at least in the western countries. On making a formal call you are properly dressed and made up properly. Too causal appearance or dress is a sign of disrespect to the foreign VIP on whom one is paying the call. It is supposed to be a very formal matter and there casual dress or casual appearance in not the right thing to do. Lasies are generally were conscious of dress and appearance and to ignore this courtesy one owes to a personality she is visiting is not the thing generally done. It indicates we do not care for you, you are just being given this honour of a visit by me as a gracious act of mine. Of all the people, in the Services proper appearance and dress are things on which great emphasis is placed in all countries. Let me recall some thing like this that occurred somewhere in late 60s. Head of Military Assistance Group called on Major General Sahebzada Yaqub Khan then Chief of General Staff at the GHQ. He came to call on Yaqub Khan in a very causal dress, without tie and coat etc, or proper uniform. Brigadier Iftikhar A Rana was Director of Operations or something working under Gen. Yaqub He was a great friend of mine since the days of our postings in Ankara. He told me that Gen Yaqub tolerated the American caller but as soon as he lefgt Yaqub called Brig Rana and asked him to tell the American General that next time he comes to call on the CGS, the American should be properly dressed.

Formal calls for discussion of official matters are always made on the foreign personalities by their counterparts; and similarly high officisld receive foreign officials of equal rank for talks , or exchange of views, or social purposes of officials of equivalent status. In India one would never find a Dy Secretary of State or a Ministr on the President of India or the Prime Minister of India.. If every oreign official has to discuss official matters with the President and Prime Minister then why have ministers. Dispense them and save money and so many ministries, instead of having dummies called ministers and what not.

It is said of an ex-P M of Pakistan that in Indonesia he asked for a formal call on President of Indonesia. He was refused the privilege on the ground that he had no official status. Was it Shaukat Aziz or some one. He said he had been Prime Minister of Pakistan. He was not allowed the visit on Indonesian Prime Minister. Similar thing happened with me. A high level Minister who was leading Pak Delegation to some UN Committee wanted to call on the Yugoslav Prime Minister. He was not given the interview. When we nsisted I was told that I could call on the Prime Minister and take that Minister with me and could introduce him to the Prime Minister, since Ambassadors have the right to see the President and PM when they so desired.

If Ministers do not deal with their foreign counterparts they lose their standing. They are looked upon as supernumeries. In a personalized “democracy” this practice is quite prevalent. Small details are not insignificant in observing protocol with foreigners. Here are some cases that I know of . I was number two in Pak Embassy in Turkey, Mr Manzoor Qadir came on an official visit and was given audience by Turkish head of state General Gursel. He turned in his chappals and bush shirt to meet General Gursel. Mr S M Hassan was the Ambassador. He had to prevail on Mr Manzoor Qadir to get into a suit and wear shoes. Similarly Mr Ikramullah told us that when with Liaquat Ali Khan as Prime Minister and accompanied with Begum Raana Liaquat Ali Khan Liaquat was to pay a visit on the Shrine in Najaf Begum Liaquat insisted on going her rather western style dress or something. Mr Ikramullah pointed out that he should be covered from head to foot and wear. A chaddar. She would not listen. Then Laquat said “ Begum, Ikramullah is right go and change the dress. ZAB was so particular of correctness in proper dress that he asked explanation of an Ambassador why he received some important person without a tie when he was wearing a suit. I might digress from this subject and take up another matter that bothers any listener of ad nauseum claim of the ruling party of the great sacrifices they have paid to bring democracy and got power through elections.

They depict Pakistan ‘s democracy as their gift , as if whatever happened in the past was of no consequence. As for democracy, they forget that the only country in the world created by votes, referendums and confirmation of the voters’ choice by Provincial Assemblies is none other than Pakistan. Every inch of its territory was laid down by democratic choice.Sacrifices, all so-called sacrifices of the workers of that party pale into insignificance compared to the Indian Muslims for Pakistan- 7 million driven out of their ancestral homes, about 0ne million butchered by communal frenzy, 80,000 women abducted , children snatched from mothers’ laps and torn in two, breasts of women cut by sword, etc. Has any one given this much sacrifices for Pakistan.

I do consider late ZAB’s execution as the greatest injustice , a judicial murder, but that, sad as it was painful as it was, abominable as it was, need not be dragged into this controversy. The greatest sacrifices, the greatest pains suffered by any one for Pakistan were by none other than the “Muhajirs” I was one of them. It was to stop the massacre of Muslims in India, particularly in Delhi, that Gandhiji observed his fast until death, which infuriated the communalists in India so much that they assassinated him. We gave the biggest ever sacrifice for the homeland in the world history to establish a democratic country, but it was inherited by the waderas and now democracy is wadera-cracy masquerading as democracy.

—The writer retired as one of the highest ranking ambassadors of the Foreign Service of Pakistan.