Why Pakistan’s Lobbying in Washington Failed?

Khurram Shahzad

Washington has been considered as the capital of the world and America as the neighbor of every country for decades. And perhaps that is why every country wants its active presence in Washington. Pakistan, too thinks it is important to be strategically aligned with Washington and has therefore been engaging advocacy and lobbying firms to protect their interests in DC.

The US-Pakistan relationship has seen many ups and down over the past few decades. Lobbying efforts were yielding results. There was a time when at a Pakistani Caucus’s event, more than 70 congressional leaders were lined up to speak. But, then there were times when Ambassador, Sherry Rehman and Ambassador, Hussain Haqqani were taking the lobbying services of Locke Lord Strategies without much success. On one occasion e.g. Sherry Rehman while working with Mark Seigel of the Locke Lord Strategies arranged for a meeting with the congressional leaders and was expecting nearly 15 congressional leaders but only one showed up.

It is important to mention that between 2008 to 2013, Pakistan was paying $75,000 per month to Locke Lord Strategies, the lobbying arm of the law firm Locke Lord, for its representation in Washington. Locke Lord earned roughly $4.5 million while representing the country, according to Justice Department’s records. Mark Siegel, who served as Pakistan’s Washington lobbyist from 1988-1990 and then again from 1993-1996, led this effort again in 2008, as mentioned in Locke Lord Strategies’ document.

After September 11, 2001, according to Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf, Stephen Payne played a pivotal role in U.S. Pakistan relations, serving on behalf of the Pakistan lobby in the United States through a group called Team Eagle (also known as Team Barakat). A $180,000-a-year contract was signed with the Pakistani government on October 13, 2001, according to a government database maintained under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. According to the contract, the Pakistanis wanted: Meetings with Administration officials and members of Congress and/or staff and sharing with Pakistan the U.S. attitudes and desires regarding the bilateral relationship and assisting in bringing U.S. interests together. The policies in the issue included: (1) Ending U.S. sanctions against Pakistan; and (2) Providing economic assistance in Pakistan’s external debt and related trade issues.

If we dive deep into the pattern of the involvement of Mark Seigel, it is obvious that he was only engaged when the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) was in power. He was a classmate of the late Benazir Bhutto and many claim that he was working for “The Bhutto’s,” not for Pakistan, even though money was going out of Pakistani taxpayers’ pocket. At one point, Ambassador Hussain Haqqani asked Mark Siegel to work on US media as well so that Pakistan’s messages and efforts could be heard. Siegel demanded $40,000 per month more to accommodate this request.

Pakistan had tried many ways to lobby in Washington. Ambassador Hussain Haqqani was allegedly given two million dollars per year, labeled as “secret fund”, for the same reason. An accredited senior journalist Shaheen Sahbai said in a TV appearance that Ambassador Sherry Rehman mentioned to him that when she took charge after Ambassador Haqqani, there was $1.7 million in “that” account. I reached out to Ambassador Hussain Haqqani regarding this “secret fund”, he responded saying, “When I was ambassador, Pakistan had a properly registered lobbyist, Locke Lord Associates, which conducted lobbying operations openly and professionally”. In 2009, Locke Lord took credit for congressional passage of a $7.5 billion U.S. aid package to Pakistan. After taking charge, Ambassador Sherry Rehman started asking tough questions from Mark Seigel on deliverables which eventually resulted in the end of the contract with Locke Lord. I contacted, now senator, Sherry Rehman for comments, but she never responded to my request.

To build a stronger Pakistan-US relations, in July 2019, in the presence of Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Pakistani Ambassador Asad Majeed Khan signed a contract with Holland & Knight. The ex-congressman Tom Reynolds, a senior policy advisor at Holland & Knight will be devising a public policy strategy for Pakistan under a one-year contract worth $1.1M. I contacted the embassy of Pakistan about this contract and got a reply saying, “The Embassy of Pakistan in Washington signed a one-year contract with Holland & Knight, a leading lobbying firm in the United States in July this year. Holland & Knight are working with the Embassy to help advance Pakistan’s bilateral relations with the US in a wide range of areas. Their performance is being reviewed on a regular basis.”

“Why are these conventional lobbying practices not working for Pakistan?” I asked a senior Pakistani diplomat who wanted to stay anonymous. “I think the world has changed now, empowering and engaging the Pakistani American diaspora is the only way forward. When we, the diplomats or our lobbying firm, talk to the congressional leaders and senators, they take us as “paid to talk folks” but when their constituents talk to them, they not only listen but also want to show their action to the request from constituents and that’s the real lobbying,” said the diplomat.

According to OpenSecrets.Org, from 1955 to May 2017, Saudi Arabia paid millions of dollars annually to 1,281 top lobbying organizations, recently including Hogan & Hartson, Podesta Group and Hill & Knowlton. Despite a 75-year economic and military alliance with Saudi Arabia and regular royal visits, 55 percent of Americans have an unfavorable view of the kingdom, according to a Gallup poll in February 2018.

From Pakistan’s perspective, now questions arise whether these investments in lobbying firms have produced any results in Washington? If the targets were set and not achieved, were there any accountability procedures executed?

Recipe of Success in Washington

Right after the nuclear tests in 1998, India hired two lobbying firms in Washington, Verner Liipfert for $50,000 per-month and APCO Associates, for $25,000 per month. In conjunction with the Indian Caucus, which was established in 1993, Indian Americans did all they could to convince the US administration of the rationale behind India’s going nuclear. Similarly, Indian Americans raised funds to lobby for the country during the Kargil conflict.

David Ochs, founder of HaLev which helps to send young people to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s annual conference (AIPAC), openly says, “Congressmen and senators don’t do anything unless you pressure them. They kick the can down the road unless you pressure them, and the only way to do that is with money. For example, when we decided to raise funds for Anthony Brown in Maryland, we asked the Jewish community to go face to face in this small environment; 50, 30, 40 people, and say, ‘This is what’s important to us, we want to make sure that if we give you money, that you’re going to enforce the Iran deal’ and it really worked for us across America.”

In my opinion, in one respect, the senior diplomat is right about empowering the Pakistani American diaspora for greater and effective lobbying in Washington. Pakistani American Diaspora could be used effectively to influence US foreign policy and for that, first things first, they need to frame the issues by setting the debate which will highlight the country’s agenda. In Israel’s case, it is Iran by all means. Secondly, the diaspora always acts as the primary source of information and analysis which provides a great deal of information to members of Congress and serves as a resource for other branches of government and non-governmental organizations as well as for shaping general perspectives. Finally, ethnic group lobbies provide policy oversight. They, the diaspora, examine the policies of the U.S. government, propose policies, write letters, and remain involved in electioneering activities. Pakistan-American Political Action Committee (PAKPAC) is doing a wonderful job to accomplish these things.

But one cannot forget the fact that the efforts based on the ethnic background to mobilize the influence into U.S. foreign policy has quite a limited ability. To produce targeted and concrete results, this effort should be executed in a combination of both, the diaspora and the lobbying firm. As a matter of fact, they are an integral part of each other; in the absence of one, the other cannot produce the required results. Pakistani American doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs, and civic leaders are an effective catalyst to boost Pakistan’s interests in Washington but staying away from controlling tactics and facilitating their autonomy will be the key to success. Moreover, the engagement of one or two personalities across America could be counterproductive. A distributed and interconnected model of Pakistani diaspora can produce sustainable and long-lasting results.