Asif Mahmood
No country can move forward without a stable economy. When the economy weakens, national defence, internal stability, and strategic autonomy are inevitably compromised. In Pakistan’s case, this link between economic strength and national security is not theoretical. It is real, visible, and deeply consequential. Yet a strong economy does not emerge in isolation. It rests on one fundamental pillar: transparency. This is precisely where Pakistan has long faced a serious gap, relying more on external assessments than its own credible mechanisms.
Economic strength is not just a development goal for Pakistan. It is a national security requirement. A weak economy limits defence capacity, constrains foreign policy, and erodes state authority. Yet economic stability does not rest only on fiscal numbers or growth targets. It rests on trust. And trust, in modern governance, is built through transparency.
For years, Pakistan has evaluated its governance and economic credibility largely through external lenses. Foreign indices, donor reports, and international rankings have shaped how Pakistan is seen and, at times, how Pakistan sees itself. While such assessments are not inherently flawed, they are not neutral either. They reflect priorities, assumptions, and frameworks that may not fully align with Pakistan’s social, administrative, or institutional realities. When economic data becomes the basis for investment decisions and strategic judgments, the absence of a strong domestic measurement tool becomes a strategic vulnerability.
This is why the launch of the Index of Transparency and Accountability in Pakistan (iTAP) matters. Developed by FPCCI in collaboration with Ipsos, iTAP represents a shift from dependence to ownership. It allows Pakistan to measure institutional performance using its own data, its own context, and its own citizens’ experiences. This is not just a governance reform. It is an assertion of data sovereignty.
One of the most striking contributions of iTAP is that it disrupts the dominant narrative of total institutional decay. While public discourse often assumes corruption to be universal, the data tells a more nuanced story. A significant number of citizens report corruption-free interactions in their routine dealings with public institutions. This does not deny the existence of serious problems. It corrects the assumption that failure is absolute. The distinction matters because reform requires diagnosis, not exaggeration.
From a policy perspective, iTAP introduces discipline into the reform process. Instead of broad accusations and defensive responses, it offers evidence that can guide decision-making. Institutions can be evaluated on performance rather than perception. Weak points can be identified with precision. Progress can be tracked over time. In governance systems, this shift from rhetoric to measurement is often the difference between symbolic reform and real change.
The economic implications are equally significant. Investors do not only respond to incentives. They respond to credibility. A country that measures itself honestly signals seriousness. iTAP tells markets that Pakistan is willing to confront its weaknesses openly and improve them systematically. Transparency reduces uncertainty, and reduced uncertainty lowers investment risk. In this sense, accountability is not an ethical add-on. It is a core economic input.
There is also a domestic trust dimension that cannot be ignored. Persistent negative narratives weaken public confidence and deepen alienation between citizens and the state. When people believe institutions are beyond repair, disengagement becomes rational. By reflecting citizen experience through data, iTAP restores an element of balance. It recognizes institutional performance where it exists and identifies failure where it persists. This balanced recognition is essential for rebuilding trust without denying reality.
The government’s increasing focus on transparency reflects an understanding that prosperity is institutional before it is financial. No economy can grow sustainably if its systems cannot be measured, audited, and improved. Initiatives like iTAP support this direction by providing policymakers with a factual foundation for reform. If this approach is sustained, transparency will stop being a slogan and start functioning as policy infrastructure.
Internationally, iTAP strengthens Pakistan’s position. In a global environment driven by data and benchmarks, Pakistan can now engage from a position of evidence rather than defensiveness. It reduces overreliance on external narratives and allows the country to present its governance story with confidence and credibility.
Ultimately, iTAP is not just about measuring transparency. It is about reclaiming agency. By choosing to measure itself, Pakistan is choosing reform over denial and evidence over assumption. Economic stability, institutional trust, and national security all converge at this point. If Pakistan remains committed to this path, transparency will not merely improve governance. It will strengthen the state itself.