In the wake of President Pervez Musharraf's November 3, 2007 move to scuttle the Constitution and declare emergency in order to hold on to power, the government deployed a team of lobbyists in Capitol Hill to contain the fallout from the president's destabilizing action.
Van Scoyoc Associates was paid $55,000 a month by the Pakistani government – a significant boost from $40,000 the firm earned before July 2007.
Congressional Democrats have been at odds with the White House throughout 2007, but both sides exhibited a willingness to cooperate over foreign aid funding.
As President Pervez Musharraf moved to stifle dissent at home last year, his backers and opponents alike pursued Washington's top lobbying community to ensure that the struggle for power in Islamabad had a Washington front.
The Pakistani embassy hired Cassidy & Associates in October 2007 for a whopping one-year $1.2 million contract to promote Pakistan's status as an “important strategic partner of the US”. The Pakistan account was to be handled by Robin Raphel, a former assistant secretary of state for South Asia (1993 - 1997), who had joined Cassidy as senior vice-president.
But, the lobby firm withdrew from its contract with Islamabad after declaration of emergency in Pakistan on November 3, which indicated Musharraf administration's low stock in the US at that time. In a statement, Cassidy's Director of Corporate Communication Tom Alexander said: “Developments in Pakistan have made it difficult to effectively fulfill our mission on behalf of the Embassy of Pakistan.” These dramatic changes have forced us to withdraw our representation of the embassy, he added.
Cassidy's withdrawal from its contract shows the ethical aspects of lobbying and that it is not a barrier between the truth and the ground situation or hard realities. Furthermore, lobbying is not propaganda to impose a point of view regardless of the truth, ethics and the public good. The prime lobbying function is to be a credible and reliable source of information, and that explains why both politicians and bureaucrats depend heavily on lobbyists for information in the USA.
Furthermore, Cassidy's withdrawal also proves the efficacy of the Chinese proverb, “You cannot carve a rotten wood”. In other words, initially, the product must be good, only then can one polish and promote it. If the product lacks in some basic qualities then PR would not be enough to conceal its inherent drawbacks or defects. Rather, such an activity is unIslamic and also considered unethical by the West, if not outright offensive.
However, considering that Washington's lobbying firms represent some of the most odious regimes across the world, it can't get worse for Musharraf. (Equatorial Guinea happened to be another active foreign government client of Cassidy) While Musharraf was being panned daily in the media, one lawmaker referred to him as a “thug” at a Congressional hearing in early November 2007.
During the year 2007, the Pakistani government felt the need for intensive lobbying, and it took onboard at least, three American firms to improve its image. Harsh criticism from the US congressmen and the presidential candidates, especially after PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto's assassination, was a major factor that prompted Pakistan to engage lobby firms. 
For this purpose, Pakistan hired, in December 2007, an American lobby firm ‘Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide’ for a monthly fee of $45,000. It also renewed its contract with Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. at a fee of $55,000 per month for the same purpose. Earlier, Cassidy had entered a year-long $1.2 million contract with Pakistan's embassy in Washington.
In addition to media training for members of Pakistan embassy, according to the agreement, Ogilvy's work was guidance, reporters' outreach and writing press material. Among other countries, Ogilvy has a large presence in India with offices in Bangalore, Chennai, Hyderabad, Mumbai and New Delhi. Ogilvy has also worked for Homeland Security to “provide real journalists for its biennial mock terrorist exercise” called TOPOFF, since the first exercise in 2000.
The opposition Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) retained public relations giant Burson-Marsteller and its affiliates, lobby firm BKSH & Associates and the polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates at an initial payment of $75,000 to be followed with monthly payments of $28,500. The contract filed with the Justice Department does, however, give some insight into what all money buys.
Among the promised services: surveys of “100 American political, journalistic and business elites in Washington DC and New York”, an “internal brainstorming session” and setting up meetings for Bhutto in Washington “with an eye towards convincing US officials that Prime Minister Bhutto is still relevant to further the democratic process in Pakistan”.
Lobbyists from the Pakistani government, Benazir Bhutto and rival India have all been actively working in the Congress for months. And during the closing months of 2007, they were joined by human rights organisations like the International Crisis Group.
India has long been using the issue of religious extremism in Pakistan to gain leverage on the contentious issue of control on Kashmir, which has been a simmering conflict between India and Pakistan for decades. Among India's lobbying firms is GOP powerhouse Barbour, Griffith and Rogers, which is being paid $58,333 a month, according to its 2005 Justice Department filing.
One of the major objectives of Pakistan's engaging these firms was to prove in the US that February's elections would be free, fair and impartial. Before the general elections, a three-member delegation from Ogilvy visited Pakistan and met with Election Commission Secretary Kunwar Dilshad and discussed matters relating to the conduct of elections.
Mr Dilshad gave a detailed briefing to them about the arrangements to ensure conduct of free, fair and impartial elections. In the light of this briefing, the firm made regular attempts to remove doubts in the minds of Americans about the fairness of Pakistan's elections. But, it could not make any progress.
In fact, all these three firms could not ensure that the US policymakers considered Pakistan a strategic partner. Instead Islamabad's policies as well as ‘stance’ against the international war on terror were sharply criticised. On the other hand, India has been comparatively successful on almost all fronts, including image building, investments, foreign policy through a number of US lobby firms.
In the circumstances, Islamabad should reconsider its approach to engage US leadership as well as renew its efforts at moulding public opinion in that country. One honestly feels that initiation of a regular programme of attaching interns with US legislators and awarding scholarships to about 10 talented students each year for pursuing higher studies in mass communication in that country, and later encouraging them to join the academia and media establishments there would greatly facilitate this task.
Obviously, during internship/studies, these young Pakistanis would foster contacts which would prove more beneficial in the later years, just like Benazir Bhutto's contact with her class fellow and Democratic aide Mark Seigel helped PPP in winning over Democratic Congressmen towards the party's stance.
The most talented among this lot of Pakistanis educated in the US could be engaged for assignments in the press section of Pakistan's embassy in the USA as well as its mission at the UN.