An exhausted government by Ahmad Rafay Alam
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Urban/urbane
Friday, March 19, 2010
Ahmad Rafay Alam
It’s amazing that Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif had no idea how offensive his remarks at the Jaamia Naeemia in Lahore last week were. Being summoned to meet the Chief of the Army Staff certainly made him look like an errant schoolboy called to the principal’s office.
Normally, I can’t bring myself to comment on what we euphemistically refer to as our “politics” (Latin for poly, meaning many; and ticks, meaning ticks). There are enough experts on the subject to fill a thousand newspapers, but the chief minister’s exhortation to the Taliban to leave Punjab alone – on the specious grounds that both his government and they share a common stance on, of all things, the Kerry-Lugar Bill! – has left one in the uneasy position of having to agree with the reaction to these remarks by Governor Salmaan Taseer. It’s not often that this happens, and so, if the omens portended it, I offer my “expertise.”
The interesting thing about the PML-N is the consistency it has with respect to its connection with the Jaamia Naeemia. This was the seminary at which Nawaz Sharif spoke just days after returning from his exile in Mayfair, SW1, London. This is in contrast to the stance on the other issues the PML-N held then and now. For example, in the 1990s, the PML-N was the party that stormed the Supreme Court and jailed an editor for his comments. Now it is a party for the freedom of the judiciary and the Fourth Estate.
Governor Taseer’s reaction has been very harsh and, which is interesting, very sophisticated. He has pointed out a chain of events that put the PML-N into a rather tight corner. He refers to senior PML-N ministers canvassing for candidates with dubious backgrounds and links to extremist organisations. He refers to recent statistics that reveal that crime in Punjab has skyrocketed in just the past year. These and other references paint a chilling picture of official sympathy for religious extremism. But read in another light, they paint a picture of a government buckling under the pressure of its responsibility and failing to meet the standards it has set for itself.
The statistics on the increase in crime in Punjab are most damning. The first responsibility of the state, as we were told by Mohammad Ali Jinnah in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on 11 August, 1947, is to protect the lives and property of its citizens. A forty-per-cent increase in the incidence of crime in the past two years clearly spells out that this duty is not being done. This is damning news not just for the government of Punjab but all the provincial governments and the federal government as well.
Recently, several incidents have come into public which point to thana culture and a complete breakdown of the criminal justice system. The torture of highway robbers at the hands of the Punjab Police in Chiniot, broadcast all over Pakistan on the electronic media, firstly revealed just how unashamedly common a practice police torture has become – standard operating procedure, in fact – and, secondly, created a wave of sympathy for a bunch of criminals who had been caught red-handed.
Despite the airing, the matter got in the media and, despite the universal criticism of the police brutality, thana culture is so endemic and so entwined with the political establishment that rare was the opinion that offered anything by way of reform. This thana culture is given the air it needs to breathe by politicians who manipulate it for their ends. What we need is not just an end to the thana culture; we need an end to the politicians who approve of police encounters. But you know what they say about the election process: monkey in, monkey out.
Then, there’s the ongoing saga of the DSP of Rang Mahal police station in Lahore. Vicious allegations fly in both directions, but it seems that the crux of the matter is that the DSP refused to release two men arrested on charges of criminal activity. The DSP claims to have fended off unwarranted interference in an investigation by senior police officials. Senior police officials, on the other hand, have alleged the DSP is “insane” and that his scandal-ridden career is a blot on the reputation of the Punjab Police (and that’s quite a tall order).
But what is unarguable is that, on the one hand, if the DSP is correct, unwarranted and mala-fide interference in police investigations by senior police officers is also a common practice and, on the other, if the DSP is wrong, then the Punjab Police has turned a blind eye and let a crazed thug rise through the ranks to a position of seniority.
I, for one, don’t know which is worse. What I do know is that this incident does nothing for the image of the police as an institution meant to protect the lives and property of the citizens of Pakistan. When was the last time someone voluntarily went to the police for help?
The PML-N government in Punjab has been in office for two years, give or take one Governor’s Raj. Other than bully a bureaucracy into a state of exhausted and terrified submission, and the Sasta Ata Scheme, it’s difficult to see what the government has done during its tenure so far. Sure, the city of Lahore has the Shalimar Overpass. Sure, another segment of the city’s infamous Ring Road has been completed. But are these achievements by which a provincial government should be measured?
(Readers are reminded, however, that Lahore still doesn’t have a sewage treatment plant, Lahore’s air is the most polluted in history, and Lahore’s water table is plummeting unsustainably.)
Over and above the parochial nature of the chief minister’s comments, over and above the strange logic they employed, the comments also force an evaluation of the performance of the Shahbaz Sharif government so far.
Just a few months ago, the province nearly touched the State Bank’s limit on overdraft and, if it hadn’t been converted into a loan, Punjab would be bankrupt. Income levels are dropping and poverty levels increasing. Water is running scarce and crop productivity has been said to have been affected. Cities are becoming increasingly choked and polluted, leading to decreases in productivity and increases in health-related issues.
To make matters worse, the spectre of terrorism looms large and, until something is done about law enforcement in this country and the capacity of the police and security agencies, will continue unchecked. Meanwhile, just in Lahore, the GOR-I has been walled up (which has earned it the nickname of “Bureaucratistan”) and the Civil Service Club located inside given several hundred million rupees. One government minister assaulted a female MPA in the Assembly, another PML-N MPA was caught buying jewellery on a credit card she stole, and the last chief secretary was forced to quit when his car ran over a retired military officer. The Lahore Transport Company, the flagship initiative to bring public transport to the city, has, to-date, done nothing of substance.
In the middle of its tenure, the Punjab government must realise that, if nothing else, it is suffering from exhaustion itself. Running an exhausted government does no one any favour. It must understand that it has to change tack and strategy.
For my two bit’s worth, I’ll suggest that (i) not every decision has to be taken at the highest level; and (ii) the government should have a fulltime information minister.
The writer is an advocate of the high court and a member of the adjunct faculty at LUMS. He has an interest in urban planning.
Email: ralam@nexlinx.net.pk
From bust to boom by Abid Hasan
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Abid Hasan
Pakistan is going through one of its worst economic crises. Although the government has been trying to stabilise the economy to avoid a meltdown, the situation on the ground continues to be very fragile and vulnerable. The poor and low income families face intolerable cost of living and high unemployment, while the private sector – Pakistan’s engine of growth— seems to have lost its luster and vibrancy.
The political leaders (and the media) are exhibiting a Nero-like behaviour, bombarding the public with an overdose of ‘constitutional amendments’ and ‘conspiracy politics’ instead of giving greater priority to the real issues. A sound constitution is important, no doubt, however, it will not put food on poor people’s table. A stable political system and drastic improvements in the security situation are the sine qua non for the country to move ahead. The political leadership and the media need to devote more of their energy and attention to accelerate growth necessary to create employment opportunities for the tens of millions of poor and unemployed.
Few countries have shown the kind of resilience and bouncing back that Pakistan has displayed. In its 60 years’ history, Pakistan has had a decent growth rate that could be the envy of most developing countries, despite several catastrophic events — the breaking up of the country, several wars, nationalisation, major shocks to the civil services and higher judiciary every time there was a military takeover or transition to civil rule, to name a few. Clearly, Pakistan’s private sector has shown the ability to overcome adversities.
This article suggests several actions that the government could take to overcome the current economic despair and malaise to put the country on the right track.
Firstly, Pakistan needs a world-class team for managing key economic ministries — finance, planning and commerce. One clear driver of Pakistan’s boom years in the 1960s, 1980s and 2000s, of the ‘shining’ India in the last decade, and of many East-Asian economies, has been the outstanding quality of the economic managers and their team — majority of whom were highly trained economists with international experience. Collectively and individually these economic teams embodied the five Cs — clean, competent, courageous, credible and continuity — which are the necessary traits for all successful, high-performing teams. All the Pakistani economic teams, during the boom years, led by Shoaib (1960s), GIK (1980s) and Shaukat Aziz (2000s), met the five Cs criteria. India has had an economic team comprising Manmohan and his boys — for over a decade.
It is absolutely critical that the economic ministers and their teams have: (i) high integrity standards so that they don’t use economic policy to benefit themselves and can also block policy capture by corrupt vested interests (ii) strong professional competence (iii) domestic and international credibility, and (iv) conviction and the courage to say no to bad ideas. Having an economic team with the credentials of 5Cs in place for a long period has done wonders for many countries, and can certainly do wonders for Pakistan, too.
Secondly, the prime minister must set aside at least half of his time to personally lead reforms in the following areas which are critical to accelerating pro-poor growth — exports, fiscal reforms, water, energy, poverty reduction, and public administration. He should establish, and head separate cabinet committees to oversee formulation and implementation of reforms in each of the above areas. The reforms should be developed after a thorough discussion in national and provincial assemblies (perhaps each issue could be granted a special session). Extensive dissemination of the reforms in the media and the public by the prime minister and his cabinet should be ensured, for public dissemination is the outreach strategy pursued by President Obama while promoting his healthcare reforms. These committees should meet at least once a quarter, and include provincial CMs and officials, since any meaningful reforms can only take place with the full involvement of the provincial governments. The work of these committees and the personal involvement of the prime minister would give a sense of direction and hope to the citizens, private sector and government institutions.
Pakistan urgently needs an out of the box strategy to accelerate the export growth. For a country which is so dependent on imported energy and food, Pakistan will always face foreign exchange crisis — every few years — unless the export-import gap is narrowed. Pakistan’s excessive reliance on foreign loans and donor aid has mostly resulted from the need to finance the high current account deficits. During the last decade, India’s export has almost doubled to 23 per cent of the GDP (2009), while that of Pakistan’s has stagnated at around 14 per cent. Consequently, India has managed to achieve stable exchange-rates and low levels of current account deficits in recent years as compared to Pakistan. As global experience suggests, (i) exports have been a major driver of growth for the majority of high-growth developing countries, and (ii) export-led growth generates far greater levels of employment as compared to an inward looking strategy. The proposed committee would oversee formulation and implementation of the export strategy. Keeping in view the example of Korea in the 1970s and 80s, this committee should meet at least once a month.
Sustaining high-growth will require fiscal reforms to: lower fiscal deficits and public debt, increase government revenues, reduce state owned enterprises’ losses and wasteful expenditures, and increase resources for pro-poor public services and infrastructure. Lower deficits will reduce future public debt, lower interest rates and increase the availability of credit to the private sector. The proposed fiscal reforms committee would oversee these reforms, which should be discussed in the national and provincial assemblies since increasing tax and non-tax revenues and reducing wasteful spending can only take place with the combined efforts of both federal and provincial legislatures and governments. In addition, the prime minister could set the tone at the top by voluntarily paying taxes on his agricultural income. Once leaders pay their share of taxes, the FBR would be on much stronger grounds to go after ordinary citizens and businessmen evading taxes.
Pakistan urgently needs a comprehensive water strategy to feed the burgeoning population and to avoid internal water conflicts. The proposed cabinet committee on water would oversee implementation of the strategy which would need to be debated in the national and provincial assemblies to reach a national consensus on this divisive issue. The lack of concern shown by our leaders on this important issue has resulted in our water reservoirs running dry. Pakistan can no longer afford inaction. Building large multi-purpose dams and aggressive water conservation would be the key elements of the water sector strategy.
An energy committee is proposed to ensure that this area is given the necessary cabinet-level attention, so that Pakistan always has adequate availability of affordable energy needed for growth and poverty reduction.
Given the high levels of poverty and unemployment, it is critical to ensure effective implementation of safety net programmes and those related to meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for health and education. Overseeing these efforts would be the responsibility of the committee on poverty reduction.
No government can govern and improve the welfare of its citizens if public institutions are not functioning effectively. Up until 1960s, Pakistan’s public institutions were a role-model for other developing countries. They are now dysfunctional as a result of several catastrophic shocks they suffered in the 1960s, 1970s and every time there was a transition in government. The proposed cabinet committee on public administration would oversee reforms to re-build public institutions.
Revival of the economy is critical for Pakistan’s future, but there is no magic-pill that can do wonders for it. Moving from bust to boom will require the prime minister to lead from the front foot, personally overseeing implementation of reforms in the key areas, with the support of a sound economic team and cabinet committees.
The writer is a former operations adviser at the World Bank.
Email: fffhasan@gmail.com
The strategic dialogue by Ikram Sehgal
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Ikram Sehgal
In a few days Pakistan and the US will be engaged in a strategic dialogue having far-reaching consequence for the region and its peoples. Pakistan’s battlefield successes in Swat and South Waziristan changed the dynamics of the geopolitical equation from what it was less than a year ago. US vice-president Joseph Biden was the first as a US senator to recognise the rank injustice done to Pakistan over the years and the need to have a more pragmatic even-handed policy. Once President Obama took office and carried out a thorough review, US decision-makers, including Hillary Clinton, Gen James Jones, Admiral Mike Mullen and Gen Petraeus—joined by the battlefield commander in Afghanistan, Gen Stanley McCrystal—are now unanimous in recognising Pakistan’s crucial role as the centre of gravity to resolve the biggest US headache at present, Afghanistan.
George W Bush’s closest advisors, led by Condoleeza Rice, were heavily weighted in favour of India at the expense of Pakistan, and that too without geopolitical logic. Unfortunately, Pakistan’s military dictators have historically sold Pakistan short at the negotiating table to ensure their own survival, despite the fact that they were always in a position to drive a hard bargain. That selfish failure undercut Pakistan’s core national interests.
Gen Patraeus put it best the other day, that there must be recognition that each country has to go with its own national interest, and work towards convergence of interests, and narrowing the gaps. The US has its own core national interests, as has Pakistan. With a timeline limited to only up to another two years, fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan to a standstill and then exiting without leaving the vacuum will take some doing.
US abandonment of the region in the 90s resulted in the rise of the Taliban, and subsequently Al-Qaeda. Someone has to full the vacuum, maybe not as a US proxy, as is the common perception, but to ensure common national interests.
Afghanistan is a predator society and it will take decades of peace to change the existing mindset. For centuries Afghans have used their geographical crossroads location to live off the traders who passed through their territory. Necessarily Afghanistan is dependant on Pakistan for nearly everything, whether it comes from or through Pakistan. While everyone and his uncle blames Pakistan for “hosting” Taliban sanctuaries within its borders, they well know Pakistan has done all within its resources to curb this access but are mostly unable to stop two-way traffic across the Durand Line. We have suffered grievously for it, and continue to do so in more ways than one. At a recent security conference in Brussels there was stony silence when the rather unpalatable subject of the three-million-plus Afghan refugees in Pakistan today for decades was raised, as well as the astonishing fact that not one Afghan government official of note had ever visited them over the years to find out about their fate. (At least 1.6 million of these are in refugee camps, and the rest dispersed in Pakistani cities.) Eloquent about the $1.2 billion Indian aid given over the past decade, the mathematics about $2 per individual per day on food spent on the refugees by Pakistan and that it came to $2 billion per year (or $20 billion on food alone) over the past decade, was lost on the Afghans present (and others).
India’s economic interests in Afghanistan cannot be denied or ignored. Access through the land route through Pakistan must be subject to the Kashmir and water issue being satisfactorily settled. However, Indians cannot rival the interests of Pakistan, which is Afghanistan’s immediate neighbour. While the “strategic depth” theory is nonsense, Afghanistan’s dependence on Pakistan’s economy and agriculture are overwhelming facts of life to consider in the formulation of any policy to bring peace and stability to Afghanistan.
The Pakistani army has destroyed the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Swat and South Waziristan, and now lately their traditional route of infiltration into Pakistan through Bajaur. This has caused the dismantling of their logistics infrastructure and thecapture of many Taliban leaders, as their network has collapsed and sanctuaries exposed to interdiction. Despite his anti-Pakistan tirade, Pakistan has been supportive of Karzai in the Afghan presidential elections. During his recent visit to Pakistan we saw a born-against Karzai—or is he a tremendous actor?
The truth is probably a bit of both. He seemed genuinely interested in a new relationship with Pakistan, but was loath to publicly abandon a long-standing friendship with India. This would be acceptable to Pakistan as long as India does not use Afghanistan as a platform to foment trouble in Balochistan, of which there is no doubt.
One must forgive Fareed Zakaria for his constant tirade against Pakistan, as an Indian Muslim he has to show himself to be more “loyal than the king.” His intellectual dishonesty in turning the once-respected Newsweek into an anti-Pakistan propaganda machine is appalling. If that was not enough, a recent article by Selig Harrison on “Zardari’s courage” was nothing but paid advertisement against the Pakistani army. Shuja Nawaz of the Atlantic Council recently gave testimony before the US Foreign Relations Committee that while Pakistani intelligence agencies may have had links decades ago with organisations like the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) because of Kashmir, to suggest the existence of a continuing connections is baseless—even ludicrous, given the battlefield casualties Pakistan is suffering. Shuja’s elder brother, the late Gen Asif Nawaz Janjua, would have been proud of him.
What a wonderful ambassador for Pakistan in the US this outstanding and credible intellectual would make! In contrast, the present incumbent is not worthy of comment. With such people representing Pakistan in a crucial country like the US, what does Pakistan expect in a strategic dialogue? Kayani should have had the good sense and propriety not to meet with Haqqani recently, Mr Haqqani is now going around claiming he got Shuja Pasha the year’s extension, and has ensured Kayani’s as COAS. Hopefully Kayani won’t take him along into the Pentagon discussions. God knows what else he is likely to claim!
The US is supporting Pakistan generously. Unfortunately it is not enough, neither economically and certainly not in military aid. In key areas of economy, agriculture, power sector, communications and telecommunications, health, etc we require massive injection of funds. Above all, we need to be brought in from the nuclear cold to overcome our dire energy deficiencies. Vital to US success in Afghanistan, Pakistan is getting only a fraction of what it should get, comparatively others get much more for doing much less. The strategic dialogue should be a joint national security strategy session for a comprehensive review of all relevant factors encompassing mutual interests in geo-politics and economics.
The strategic dialogue is crucial for the region’s stability, as well as for peace and prosperity in Pakistan. The armed forces have changed the equation with their magnificent performance on the ground. However, this could not have been possible without the democratic dispensation in Pakistan today, however ugly it is. It is important that the system must stay. The US can stay on top of the game in Afghanistan, and the region, by betting heavily on the proven successful formula, the Pakistan Army and Pakistan.
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: isehgal@pathfinder9.com
Do Lagamain Ya Aik by Haroon Rasheed
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Hope for the country by Roedad Khan
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Monday, March 15, 2010
Roedad Khan
No authoritarian or corrupt ruler can afford an independent judiciary. The two cannot coexist and are bound to collide. Without an independent judiciary, the Republic cannot be made to endure. But when government falls into perfidious hands, it becomes itself the instrument of counter-revolution. No wonder, all those who do not believe in the rule of law and all those who represent the forces of darkness and counter-revolution have joined hands once again to reverse the judicial revolution triggered by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry.
The proposed constitutional mechanism for selection of judges is a thinly disguised attempt to undo the gains of the judicial revolution. Counter-revolution does not give up easily. With the restoration of the deposed judges we thought we had reached the summit and our problems were over. Alas, the ascent of one ridge simply revealed the next daunting challenge. In retrospect, it seems it was naïveté to have imagined that the restoration of judges alone would defeat the corrupt system and criminals and mafiosi who have found in our democracy the perfect Trojan Horse for preserving their power.
In Pakistan, as in all federations, the Supreme Court plays a crucial role. It is the sole and unique tribunal of the nation. The peace, prosperity, and very existence of the federation rest continually in the hands of the Supreme Court judges. Without them, the Constitution would be a dead letter; It is to them that the executive appeals to resist the encroachment of parliament; parliament to defend itself against the assaults of the executive; the federal government to make the provinces obey it; the provinces to rebuff the exaggerated pretensions of the federal government, public interest against private interest, etc. They decide whether you and I shall live or die. An awesome responsibility rests on the shoulders of the Supreme Court. Their power is immense. But they are all-powerful only so long as the people and the government consent to obey the laws.
In every period of political turmoil, men must, therefore, have confidence that the superior judiciary, the guardian of the Constitution, will be fiercely independent and will resist all attempts to subvert the Constitution. It is our misfortune that from the country’s first decade, our judges tried to match their constitutional ideals and legal language to the exigencies of current politics. The superior judiciary has often functioned at the behest of authority and has been used to further the interests of the rulers against the citizens. Their judgments have often supported the government of the day. This was their chosen path through the 1950s and during the martial law period of the 1960s and 1970s. When the history of these benighted times comes to be written, it will be noted that the superior judiciary had failed the country in its hour of greatest need.
On March 20, 1996, the dark clouds on the judicial horizon lifted and the situation changed dramatically. On that fateful day, the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, delivered the landmark judgment in the Judges’ Case which made the arbitrary appointment of inexperienced, ill-trained, ill-qualified persons of doubtful integrity and party loyalists to the court almost impossible. We all thought this decision was a major divide in the constitutional jurisprudence of Pakistan and in the decisional philosophy of the Supreme Court. It was hoped that it would fundamentally alter the character of the court’s business, the nature of its decisions, and will help restore public confidence in its independence and objectivity.
Our euphoria did not last long. On Nov 28, 1997, the Supreme Court of Pakistan was attacked by thugs organised and led by the government. Gen Jahangir Karamat, the chief of the army staff, to whom an appeal had been made by the chief justice for protection, stood aside and watched the fun. The attack on the Supreme Court was launched in broad daylight. The Honourable Justices had to flee for life. The same day Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah was forced to go on leave and then officially retired on Feb 16, 1998.
In the darkest hour in the history of our country, Fate had found the man who had the character, the will and determination to speak truth to the military dictator. Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry appeared on the scene like a deus ex machina and changed the course of history. He broke with past tradition. The nexus between the Generals and the superior judiciary has snapped. Isn’t it ironical that today the people of Pakistan, especially the poor, the disadvantaged and the voiceless, expect justice not from the parliament, not from the presidency, but from an unelected and unaccountable Supreme Court? This has not made the court very popular with the executive.
It follows that Supreme Court judges must not only be good citizens and men of liberal education, sterling character and unimpeachable integrity; they must also understand the spirit of the age. Their appointment is dealt with by Articles 177 and 193 of the Constitution. Article 177 (1) provides: “The Chief Justice of Pakistan shall be appointed by the President, and each of the other Judges shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice.” The question of consultation has been dealt with extensively in the well-known Al-Jihad Trust Case, wherein the Supreme Court held that “consultation in the scheme as envisaged by the Constitution is supposed to be effective, meaningful, purposive, consensus-oriented, leaving no room for complaint of arbitrariness or unfair play. The opinion of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and Chief Justice of a High Court as to the fitness and suitability of a candidate for Judgeship is entitled to be accepted in the absence of very sound reasons to be recorded in writing by the President/Executive.” This is now the accepted method of selection of Judges. A crude attempt was made to deviate from it but it failed.
Why disturb the status quo? Why circumscribe the discretion of the chief justice? What is wrong with the present method of selection of judges? It has stood the test of time and has the full support of the people. Why involve the law minister, the attorney general and the Bar Council in the selection of judges of the Superior Courts? Why involve parliament and the political parties in the selection of judges? Why politicise the judiciary? Is the proposed method for selection of judges consistent with the principle of separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution? Why not leave the matter to the discretion and good sense of the chief justice, as is the case today? Why reopen the controversy? The reason is not far to seek. Independent judiciary suits nobody in this country. It only suits the people, especially the poor and the exploited. It does not suit the tiny minority which rules this country and is virtually above the law. They want to clip the wings of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and take the country back to the bad old days when the superior judiciary functioned at the behest of authority and was used to further the interest of the rulers against the citizens.
Today there is hope for the country.
“The President may slip, without the state suffering, for his duties are limited,” Tocqueville wrote in 1837. “Congress may slip without the Union perishing, for above the Congress there is the electoral body which can change its spirit by changing its members. But if ever the Supreme Court came to be composed of corrupt or rash persons, the Confederation would be threatened by anarchy or civil war”. This is exactly what would happen in this country if the proposed mechanism for the selection of Judges is adopted.
The judicial revolution triggered by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is irreversible. Let there be no doubt about it. Any attempt to undo it will be resisted. The people have planted an independent judiciary in the path of our turbulent democracy. No longer would the executive be a law unto itself. Today there are many now willing to spill their blood to defend their heart-earned independent judiciary. Try to destroy the independence of judiciary, and the moment is not far off when this beautiful country will be plunged into a civil war.
The writer is a former federal secretary.Email: roedad@comsats.net.pk
How Sonia Gandhi is changing India by Aakar Patel
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Aakar Patel
In her silent way, Sonia Gandhi is changing India. Her position in the government, like President Asif Zardari’s, isn’t one of primary execution. That role belongs to Manmohan Singh in India, as it does in Pakistan to Prime Minister Yousuf Gilani.
Sonia is president of Congress, and also leader of Congress’s parliamentary party. Those are the only roles she has. In the Lok Sabha, India’s equivalent of the National Assembly, the leader is finance minister Pranab Mukherjee. That role should have been Manmohan’s, but he isn’t directly elected, unlike Gilani who represents Multan. Manmohan has been brought into cabinet through the Rajya Sabha, our house of indirectly-elected legislators.
So how is Sonia changing India?
She is doing it through her social legislation. This includes laws against poverty, corruption and now against sexual inequality. The first, the law against poverty, was passed in 2005. It is called the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act. US$10 billion is spent on it every year, and its details are available on the website nrega.nic.in.
The act guarantees 100 days of work to every adult Indian. The work is manual unskilled labour, and the daily wage is Rs60 (Pakistan Rs111). This might not sound like a lot of money, and it isn’t. But for the farming family which faces drought, it brings dinner for a few days.
Economists did not like this act when it was passed. One reason is that India has a corrupt bureaucracy and a lot of the money meant for the poor is taken away by a village or town middleman. Research has shown that often the money also takes weeks to be paid and that it is made difficult for the poor to collect their wages. So the argument was that the benefit might not match the cost.
The other reason for their opposition was that the transaction is not productive in conventional economic ways. The work that the person gets might well be that of digging the village pond or road. The benefit, if any, of this work is likely to show in time and not immediately. However, after five years of it, most people now agree that the scheme works and it is thought to be the reason the Congress was returned to power last year.
The second act of legislation, the one against corruption, is called the Right to Information Act. This law addresses the secrecy that citizens of poor nations are used to in their relations with the state. The officers of government departments — police, municipality, tax — usually behave like masters. The citizen, especially the one who is not rich or influential, looks to them as dispensers of favours rather than of service. They hold enormous arbitrary power because authority isn’t easily challenged in India. The RTI Act, as it is called, forces them to explain under what law they have taken the decision they did. This makes them more likely to do the right thing, or so the act’s legislators believe.
While some things, such as national security, are exempt, most departments that affect citizens are exposed to this law and the citizen, should he be persistent, is likely to get the bureaucracy to move, which is otherwise difficult in this country.
The full impact of this law hasn’t been felt yet, because people are becoming aware of it only gradually. The government advertises both this law and the NREGA heavily, and perhaps in time it will have the effect its authors intended.
The third law was passed by the Rajya Sabha earlier this week. It seeks to reserve a third of all legislature seats in the Lok Sabha and in the assemblies of India’s 28 states for women. Pakistan already has a law, passed under President Musharraf, that sets aside 60 of its 342 seats for women. Musharraf did this by expanding the assembly. India is taking the more difficult route of introducing the reservation without increasing the seats, because it’s more difficult to change the constitution here.
An interesting report published this week showed that India’s female MPs were half as likely as the male MPs to have criminal cases against them. This is something that will help supporters of the bill, which now has to pass the Lok Sabha, a more difficult task.
The problem we have in our legislatures is quality. Our assemblies are not famous for the speeches made in them and newspapers have stopped reporting speeches entirely. The way in which the Indian legislator communicates his quality is through anger. He does this either through the walkout or by making a nuisance of himself and preventing the functioning of the assembly. This is in the manner of a child who does not want the others to play.
This sort of behaviour gets neutral coverage in the newspapers. Most Indians do not seem to mind this, and the press shows such politicians as having got their way. The entry of more women might not address this problem of quality, but it will help over years in making us see women differently.
The bill was opposed violently by two small parties, run by Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Yadav, because they want reservation within the reserved seats for women of backward castes and those who are Muslim.
Sonia Gandhi’s response has been that there is nothing to stop these men from giving their tickets to such sections. If the bill goes through the Lok Sabha, and we shall soon know, it will mean that many male legislators will lose their seats and that is one reason for the obstruction.
These laws reveal the scale of Sonia Gandhi’s ambition, and what she thinks her job as Congress president is. They also show she’s not cynical, which is strange because she has lived in an Indian political house since the age of 24. She is convinced that big change can come to India democratically and through parliament.
She has picked that as her cause and these three laws will be her legacy. They set her apart from our other leaders, whose great acts have come not in parliament but on the battlefield, like Advani and his Babri Masjid movement or Vajpayee and his atom bomb.
It appears that the division of power between Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan is that Manmohan has been given charge of policy. This means things like finance, which is his speciality, strategic affairs and foreign policy. Being a finance man, he seeks reconciliation with Pakistan through trade, and Sonia has trusted him to execute a very complex policy on India’s nuclear status with America. Governing India is difficult and can only be done by understanding the complicated structure of the bureaucracy. Manmohan understands it because of his work as finance minister 20 years ago.
What Sonia Gandhi has focussed on is two things: reviving the Congress party and social legislation.
From urban renewal to protecting the jungle land of tribals and from digitising rural records to building village roads, what she’s urging government to take up is quite remarkable. And it is consistent. Her interests lie in social causes, in the classical manner of the Congress.
It is difficult to argue against the fact that she has been very good, both for her party and for this country.
Her husband Rajiv Gandhi led Congress in the Lok Sabha with 404 seats.
He was charismatic, but it’s difficult for us to remember the things Rajiv Gandhi actually achieved. Sonia has half that number in MPs but she is armed with the sort of clarity about her agenda that no leader since Nehru has had.
With limited space to manoeuvre in parliament, she has already delivered laws of the sort of quality and direct effectiveness that no government in India ever has. What she has done might only show in 15 years, when it is clear how successful RTI has been at rolling back corruption or how much poverty has actually been obliterated by the NREGA. But the indication is that her impact will be enormous.
This government has four years to go and it will be revealing to see what else she is able to push through.
In the last few weeks there has been a demand that after his one-day double century, Sachin be given the Bharat Ratna, which is India’s highest award. Sachin says he’s quite open to accepting it, for his skill in hitting around a cricket ball. But the really bold strokes are being played by a 64-year-old widow whose passport now says she is Indian.
The columnist is writing a book on the changing world of servants in India, to be published by Random House. Email: aakar.patel@gmail. com
Towards women’s empowerment by Farahnaz Ispahani
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Farahnaz Ispahani
The touchstone of the morality of a nation or a society is the way it treats its women. Women are a vital segment of any society. Without their unhindered participation in all spheres of national life, no nation can march towards its cherished goals of economic, political and moral progress or aspire to earn a respectable place in the comity of nations. That perhaps is the yardstick by which the difference between the developed and the developing nations is assessed.
Viewed in the backdrop of this, the recent signing of the ‘Protection of Women from Harassment at Workplace Bill 2009′ by President Zardari has taken Pakistan one notch up on the moral plank in addition to all other accompanying benefits. The president speaking on the occasion rightly summed up the vision of the PPP government about the status of women in Pakistan in these words: “We have to create a Pakistan where the coming generations, my daughters, can be proud of the fact that they live as equals. We will make sure that those who wish to harm the ideology of the Quaid-i-Azam, which was for equality for men and women, shall not succeed.”
In a society which still continues to be haunted by the demon of obscurantism, the new legislation marks the beginning of a pragmatic and forward looking approach closer to the emerging social realities. With the growing number of women joining or aspiring to join the workforce in different spheres of national life, the problem of harassment of women in the workplace had also assumed alarming proportions. According to a survey conducted by an NGO, 80 per cent of working women in Pakistan at one time or another have faced this ordeal.
The issue was continuously being highlighted by women rights groups, NGOs working for improving the status of women, women legislators and members of the civil society. The PPP government which has an abiding commitment to the true emancipation of women could not remain oblivious to this snow-balling social phenomenon which infringed upon the dignity, self-respect and self-esteem of women and which also violated their human rights and acted as a deterrent towards their entering the workforce as men’s equals. Coming on the heels of the announcement by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani for the setting up of the office of Ombudsman for Women and an amendment in Section 509 A of the Pakistan Penal Code that defines sexual harassment, the new legislation lays a solid foundation for ensuring a harassment-free working environment for women.
This new legislative measure provides an excellent mechanism to deal with the issue. It puts the onus on the management of the organisations employing women to adopt a code of conduct and also to constitute a three-member inquiry committee, duly notified, to deal with harassment complaints. Their failure to comply with the legislation entails punitive action and financial penalties. The victims of sexual harassment can also seek redress of their complaints from the Ombudsman for Women, if they are not satisfied with the internal proceedings of the concerned organisation.
The legislation is a significant initiative on many counts. Firstly, it will encourage the already working women — who have been enduring the humiliation of sexual harassment in the absence of appropriate legal support — to spurn and resist unwanted approaches by their workmates or bosses and do their jobs with unruffled confidence. Secondly, it will also help mitigate the biggest hurdle in the way of women who were reluctant to join the workforce due to this phenomenon. Thirdly, it will greatly help in changing the mindset of sexual harassers of women. The legislation could act as a catalyst in nudging the process of a social and economic change. Women constitute nearly 51 per cent of our population and their uninhibited participation in economic activities can also give impetus to the efforts to eliminate poverty
The signing of the bill by the president, in the presence of the UN representatives, women rights activists, women parliamentarians, members of the civil society, federal and state ministers and other stakeholders indicates the uniqueness of this piece of legislation and the importance that the PPP government attaches to the issues related to the emancipation of Pakistani women. It also was an appropriate occasion to show to the world how we treat our women. It is encouraging to note that most of the NGOs and human rights organisations whose representatives attended the ceremony did acknowledge the commitment of the government in this regard and hailed the legislation as a historic move by the PPP government in regard to the protection of the rights of women. In fact it would not be an exaggeration to say that in the history of Pakistan, no other piece of legislation has provided protection to the workingwomen from sexual harassment.
The PPP government has also been working on another very important and sensitive issue, that of domestic violence. For years the issue of domestic violence has been a source of public concern, but no previous governments dared to touch it. The adoption of The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act 2008 in line with the National Policy of Empowerment of Women is yet another significant achievement of the present PPP government which supports a zero tolerance policy for violence against women. The courage shown by the government in bringing this nagging problem out of the private domain provides irrefutable testimony to an unswerving commitment of the government to deal with issues related to women. It also reinforces its credentials as an emancipator of the women.
Other steps that the PPP government has taken for the empowerment and redemption of equal status for women in society, in line with the vision of Shaheed Muhtarma Benazir Bhutto, include granting of complete administrative and financial autonomy to the National Commission on Status of Women and fixation of a 10 per cent quota for women in government jobs in addition to the initiation of the process to review all the discriminatory laws against women, declaring women as beneficiaries of the Benazir Income Support Scheme as well as of free distribution of state lands to female heads of households in the command areas of the dams to be built in the country.
The PPP endeavours for the emancipation of women in fact represent the continuation of the struggle launched by the stalwarts like Muhtarma Fatima Jinnah and Begum Rana Liaquat Ali Khan with which my late grandmother Begum Qamar Ispahani also had the privilege to be associated. Unfortunately, that process was severely disrupted due to the extremist ideology of Zia that resulted in promulgation of a number of discriminatory laws against women. The world however is witness to the fact that Shaheed Muhtarma Benazir Bhutto stood strong and unbowed and kept the flame of liberal thought alive. By doing so she helped protect Pakistan from the designs of the dictator, which were to change this nation into a theocratic state. Muhtarma’s struggle kept the torch of democracy, enlightenment and human rights aloft against all odds. Through her shahadat (martyrdom) she has imparted eternity to her vision about democracy and human rights in Pakistan. Inspired by Muhtarma’s vision, we continue to struggle for the empowerment of women.
Farahnaz Ispahani is a member of the National Assembly (MNA) and media advisor to the co-chairperson of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP)
The writer is an MNA and member of the PPP media team.
Email: fispahani@gmail. com
Water: a pre-eminent political issue by Ahmad Rafay Alam
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Urban/urbane
Friday, March 12, 2010
Ahmad Rafay Alam
The word “riparian” has been appearing in the media far too frequently for my liking. It’s usually preceded by the adjective “lower” and usually followed by an irrational rant about how the “upper riparian” is taking advantage. This is unsettling because, as one knows, when the word “riparian” becomes part of one’s day-to-day vocabulary, it means water has become a major issue. And it should be. As has been foretold, water is becoming, if not already is, the mother of all political issues.
At Partition, we are told that Pakistan had water resources in the region of 5,000 cubic meters per person. Now, we are told this resource has fallen to close to 1,200 cubic meters per person, a figure the UN warns is close to when a country is said to be “water scarce”. That may sound alarming but, as someone once said, there are lies, damn, lies and then there are statistics
Nevertheless, the fact is that Pakistan’s water resources are fast dwindling. But before someone panics, they need to understand that, more than other things, we are becoming water scarce because of the remarkable job we’ve done at breeding: it’s the increasing population that’s one of the reasons our per capita water resource statistics are falling.
There are other reasons why Pakistan’s water resources are falling. There is, for example, the remarkably outdated and inefficient irrigation system we currently have in operation. Over 90 per cent of Pakistan’s water resources are used in irrigation (with somewhere near 3 to 5 per cent servicing drinking water requirements and the remainders servicing specific industrial purposes), and over 40 per cent of irrigation water is said to be “lost” because of evaporation and theft. Then there’s the world famous Pakistani work ethic: in today’s day and age, farming is a science and economical yields simply can’t be achieved if sowing and harvest dates are left subservient to the whims of lazy farmers (with due apologies to the many hard-working members of the agricultural sector).
Pakistan’s water resources aren’t just threatened by inefficient irrigation and farming techniques. There is also the spectre of climate change. Almost all of Pakistan’s water resources originate from glacial melt off of Himalayan glaciers. Increases in global temperatures resulting from climate change are expected to affect the rate of glacial melt: At first there will be widespread flooding and then, as the glaciers melt away, there will be no water resource. This is expected to happen within the next century.
The 2003 Government of Pakistan Initial Communication on Climate Change indicates that global warming will affect every one of Pakistan’s cash crops. This will affect our agriculture — the current backbone of the national economy — and rural livelihood. As things stand, poverty in Pakistan — and nearly 30 per cent of the population hovers near the poverty line — is a rural phenomenon. The economic effects of a shortage of water will affect rural livelihood and only exacerbate the conditions of poverty that increasing numbers of children will be forced to experience.
Water shortages have affected inter-provincial relations. The waters of the Indus Basin are regulated within Pakistan by the Indus River System Authority (IRSA), which itself was created by the inter-provincial Water Accord of 1991. Sindh regularly accuses Punjab of not providing it with its share of water. Punjab, on the other hand, claims nothing more than its rightful share of water under the Water Accord. With crop productivity affected in both provinces due to water shortages, IRSA hasn’t been much successful in resolving the increasingly antagonistic positions being taken by these opposing provinces. This has the potential to affect inter-provincial harmony and, by extension, the balance of power in government.
If these factors don’t qualify water to be a pre-eminent political issue in this country, then surely the international repercussions of water will.
Just as the lower riparian Sindhi is a vicious critic of the upper riparian Punjabi, the lower riparian Pakistani holds a deep amount of scepticism of his upper riparian Indian. The flow of water in the Indus Basin is regulated by an agreement between the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan: the Indus Basin Treaty, 1960. Under the treaty, the rights over the water of the three Eastern rivers (Sutlej, Bias and Ravi) are given to India and the use of the waters of the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab) is given to Pakistan. Recently, and there has been further proof that water is an pre-eminent political issue of our time–India has been accused of “stealing” Pakistan’s share of water. Even if Pakistan had the latest means to accurately measure the flows of water–and thereby substantiate its claims–this accusation cleverly hides the fact that, on account of climate change, there are circumstances of drought along the Indian side of the western rivers under Pakistan’s control.
Pakistan and India need to sit down to examine the issue of the management of their shared resource of the Indus Basin. Pakistan can only do this if it has a strong opening bargaining position vis-à-vis India, else it stands to lose even the precarious ground it holds under the Indus Water Treaty. This is a point that the proponents of “revisiting” the treaty on the grounds that it does not envision the impact of climate change must keep in mind.
Water also has security repercussions. It is my understanding (and I stand to be corrected here) that one of the reasons the Pakistan Army maintains the troop levels it does on the eastern border (when the fighting is so obviously along the western border) is because water is considered a security issue. If India gains control of the western rivers of the Indus Basin, it will have the advantage to literally shut off Pakistan’s water resources. In addition, since the canal irrigation system also provides security against a ground attack, Pakistan’s ability to charge these canals will determine some of its defence capabilities. Unlike other political issues in Pakistan, water is not just one- or two-dimensional. Water is multi-dimensional. No other political issue affects the Pakistani economy and society, creates internal migration, is directly linked to climate change, places stress on inter-provincial relations, has security repercussions and involves negotiations with India all at the same time.
At the moment, the types of voices that are filling the debate are unsettling. Over and above the clichéd upper and lower riparian antagonism, the debate is often fuelled by anti-Indian sentiment. One senior journalist has gone as far as offering himself as a human bomb against Indian dams. For once, I wish he would carry out his threat to prove to others who share his worldview: This is not how things are resolved.
In water, the mother of all political issues, Pakistani politics faces a great challenge. For better or worse, the full attention of the Pakistani people is soon going to focus on water-related issues. This is the time for forward and out-of-the box thinking on never-before- encountered problems. Solutions to water-related issues are hot topics globally and all eyes are fixed on how a democratic Pakistan is dealing with the issues water is throwing at it. We must not let the debate and our actions on water be hijacked by unproductive jingoism. In today’s world, Pakistan must constructively deal with its problems. If this can be done, water can be an issue on which Pakistan can be an example to the world.
The writer is an advocate of the high court and a member of the adjunct faculty at LUMS. He has an interest in urban planning.
Email: ralam@nexlinx.net.pk
New solutions for Afghanistan? by Zeenia Satti
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Zeenia Satti
The Pentagon’s seemingly wise new solutions for Afghanistan are divorced from reality and likely to suffer the fate of Obama’s pre-election slogan of change. It is being said about Marjah that “we cannot win this war, but we can help the Afghans win it.” The question is: which Afghans and what kind of help? The footage of troops interacting with the locals showed a mere five to six dust-covered old men carrying blankets given by US Marines. The town-hall-style meeting with Afghan civilians showed forty to fifty elderly Afghans whose spokesmen sang praise of corruption-free Taliban rule. In a blockaded combat zone, there were no mobile camps run by the Marines for wounded civilians or captured Taliban. With three Marines to every Afghan soldier, only 2 per cent of army and police recruits from the south, and Dari as the language of training, the political conciliation of Marjah is ill-conceived. At the national level, the Karzai government is born of massive electoral rigging and violates the core principle of democracy: respect for individual vote. It carries no legitimacy whatsoever with the Afghans, though he is acceptable as the “lesser evil” to America and India.
There is thus a tension between the local control of democracy and the American control of democracy in Afghanistan. This tension is hardwired into America’s Afghan venture. Any government in a box that the US generals are ready to roll out after “clearing” an area will be a government that is not born of legitimate political practices–i.e., is not a democratic government. Going by the Afghan tradition of dealing with illegitimate governments, there is every reason to expect the Taliban will return once the Nato troops move out of Marjah and other areas of operation throughout the country.
The ideal solution would be for the US troops to leave Afghanistan, followed by fresh and fair elections under UN auspices. With foreign troops gone, combat fatigue will make the Afghans turn to nation-building. Just a fraction of US war capital could help a truly elected government build schools, hospitals and infrastructure with the same sincerity which galvanises the amazing Afghan resistance. There has been no Stinger missile display in Afghan resistance that would point to foreign hand equipping it. That is why the American media has started talking about the Afghan resistance with respect. The media’s focus on Afghans’ commitment to their independence has now replaced the focus on latter’s stupid involvement with Osama bin Laden ten years ago.
The departure of US troops can only be facilitated through a dialogue. Unfortunately, the Afghan resistance lacks a sophisticated leadership capable of handling the complexities of dealing with the US to Afghanistan’s benefit. Already, a very auspicious moment has been missed. The first six months of Barack Obama’s ascent to office, followed by Washington’s acknowledgment that 70 percent of Afghan Taliban were not US enemies, was a propitious time for the Afghan resistance to start negotiating, with the caveat of resuming combat in case of unacceptable terms. This would have strengthened Obama’s position vis-à-vis the Pentagon-CIA-Corporate nexus, raising his domestic stock, versus the neocons who got America stuck in a quagmire in Afghanistan, with no exit strategy. The nexus has now prevailed over Obama’s promise of change.
Afghanistan stands a historic opportunity to prosper due to being a potential hub of energy supply from Central Asia to Pakistani, Indian and Euro-American markets. The emergent and advanced economies have an ever escalating demand for the ever diminishing fossil fuels. Central Asia is rich in its deposits but is landlocked, except through transit via Russia, China, Iran, or Afghanistan-Pakistan. Given regional and international political realities, Indian and Euro-US markets are vying for the Afghan-Pakistan route.
In the offing is lucrative pipeline links to Afghanistan’s immediate neighbours to the west, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan (through which all of the rest of Central Asian energy supply can flow through Afghanistan) and in the east to Pakistan and through it to India.
If the US had not invaded Afghanistan and thereby destabilised the whole region, Afghanistan stood an unprecedented chance of economic cooperation and integrated infrastructure development, leading to prosperity for all its inhabitants. India and Pakistan would have had incentive to resolve their outstanding issues through dialogue. Afghanistan would have integrated into regional and world markets, which in time would bring progress functionally related to such integration. Pakistan could have risen as the new regional hegemon, offering military protection through defence pacts to Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan and dealing with India on equal terms.
The fallout of American intervention weakened Pakistan and turned India into a bully. The religious radicalisation of the region now augurs ill for India’s long-term security. Afghanistan, instead of enjoying cultural exchanges and integrated infrastructure development with Central and South Asia, is engulfed in war, terrorism and misery. The American economy crashed, which made its military ventures far more destructive to its population’s welfare then ever before. No good has come of the neocons’ venture into Afghanistan.
If such a situation is not reversed through a meaningful dialogue in Afghanistan, the logical progression of events points to local genocide. Washington has decided to sustain its otherwise unsustainable suburban lifestyle through military means, deployed for securing competition-free access to fossil fuels. By the time the US has taken its Afghan surge to a logical conclusion, the Pakhtuns will most likely be wiped off the region, and what is left of them will be a diaspora of biblical tragic proportions. Their women could be faced with starvation or prostitution (as did Iraqi women), their children sold into slavery. The US will try to change the ratio of ethnic composition of Afghanistan to produce a state with a majority Uzbek, Turkmen, Tajik and Hazara mix, which can be integrated into Central Asian region in a politico- economic framework. One of the most heroic people on earth, and one of the most honorable cultures in human history are faced with extinction at the hands of Western forces in Afghanistan because the former lack wise leadership and the latter thinks it can kill without accountability. The precise number of dead in the region has never been released by the Pentagon.
This is all the more tragic because for once in history, the Afghans stand a chance at rapid economic development. They can enjoy border-free trade with Central Asia in the northwest to Pakistan in the east. Afghanistan can establish a free trade zone at the very centre of its land, between Mazar-e-Sharif in the north to Qal’eh Now in the south, and between Kabul and Kandahar in the east. The Afghan free trade-zone could be the hub of international economic activity on the one hand and a source of national integration on the other. It could provide the Afghans livelihood and service the emerging Asian economies with their largest pool of the world’s rapidly enriching population. Every major energy corporation in the world is waiting to put up shop in the region once peace is established. The Pakhtun habit of hard work could make them the most coveted local work force for corporate ventures. Jobs with lucrative salaries to tremendous business opportunities could make the Pakhtuns of the area thrive instead of dying in dust for the honour of their land and the love of their religion.
The US is not telling that it wants control of an energy corridor through Afghanistan. It is presenting. instead, fake goals such as dismantling of Al Qaeda, because it has pitched its oil seeking wars of aggression as “defensive.” If Washington spoke the truth, instead of being funny and offering money to the fighters to capitulate, maybe the Afghan resistance would acquiesce to an arrangement of mutual benefit.
If violence continues, genocide is the only logical conclusion of Obama’s Afghan surge. If resistance starts to prevail, B52s will roll in. Any other goal setting by Pentagon is a delusional venture into imaginary successes denied by reality.
The tragedy can be averted but for lack of local leadership.
The writer is a Washington-based consultant on geopolitics.
Email: zeenia.satti@yahoo.com
The ides of March again by Ikram Sehgal
Print This Post
| Email This Post
|
Share on Facebook
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Ikram Sehgal
Democracy of sorts came back into being in Pakistan on Feb 18, 2008. The 1973 Constitution, hamstrung by its principal author himself within hours of its enactment, had been systematically disfigured over 25 years of manipulation by those who excel at circumventing the laws of the land and adapting it for that of the jungle. Conspiracy theories abound about the 17th Amendment’s promised repeal (the March 23 date pledged by the prime minister has now been moved to the end of the month).
Will the proposed amendments suit the ground realities in this country? History has shown that there is good reason for Pakistanis to hold their breath in and around the Ides of March, or shortly thereafter. This season seems to be no different!
Feb 18, 2008, was also a good day for the armed forces of Pakistan. Within 90 days of taking over as chief of the army staff, Kayani took the army (and the intelligence services thereof) away from the electoral process, thus ensuring a fairly free and transparent elections. The army spent 2008 reorganising and training for counter-insurgency, sometimes on-the-job, but, above all, instilling and inculcating the motivation to take on militants running riot in vast areas along our north-western borders. When in May 2009 the “clear and present danger” threatened by Sufi Mohammad provided the “casus belli,” the army was ready for action. Swat became a defining moment, South Waziristan followed within months.
During a recent trip abroad there were moments one came close to tears listening to praise (at times given grudgingly) for the Pakistani army’s magnificent performance in battle, for someone used to constant disparagement of the uniform, this turnaround in perception was overwhelming. That the success was possible because of the shedding of precious blood by our officers and jawans was not lost on the intelligentsia, in contrast, a motivated Western media has been niggardly in recognising this. Alarmed detractors, both inside and outside the country, initiated an obnoxious campaign to tar and feather the army’s success. A Newsweek cover story blatantly touted the Indian canard of an ISI-supported Lashkar-e-Taiba “looking west.”
Three years ago Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry stood his ground in the face of a uniformed “show of force.” Hopefully, the affect of the superior judiciary coming into its own will permeate downwards to the lower courts, with greater pressure than the present trickledown effect. The justice the common man requires is the purview of lower courts, which are presently wallowing in corruption. Similar to the cleansing of the superior courts, action must be taken to get rid of corrupt and/or ill-motivated judicial officers down the line. The chief justice and his fellow justices in the Supreme Court and the provincial High Courts should bone up on Clausewitz’s first “Principle of War,” the “selection and maintenance of Aim.”
What the Supreme Court faced down in February was only one of many “dirty tricks,” of which there will be plenty in future. What are the Honourable Justices doing about those who function as upholders of the rule of law? What has been exposed recently on TV was abhorrent. When criminals function in the name of justice, justice becomes a crime.
The 1973 Constitution is weighted heavily in favour of the prime minister’s authority. There must also be sufficient balance between the president and the prime minister. Mian Nawaz Sharif’s many accomplishments, such as the nuclear explosion, energising Pakistan’s economy and making it business-friendly, came to naught when he tried to take on the armed forces and the judiciary.
If the president’s special powers are clipped under the 17th Amendment, will things change? Separation of the powers defined in the 1973 Constitution notwithstanding, the personality of the individual and the perception of his authority also matter. Technically, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee is the superior officer. However, who carries greater clout, he or the chief of the army staff?
Gilani must be commended for not allowing things to get out of hand on one issue after another with the opposition, the superior judiciary and the army. He often plays the good cop to Zardari’s bad cop, and both manage the charade well. In matters of critical importance the man from Multan has virtually no say. If one day he should discover his self-respect and self-esteem, politically he is non-consequential, too weak to attempt even a “Leghari.” Loss of 17th Amendment powers notwithstanding, Asif Ali Zardari can consign Gilani to the political dustbin whenever he wants. If his own party revolts against him, could Gilani depend on the opposition to stand by him in a vote of confidence? So why should Zardari care about his powers being taken away by the 18th Amendment?
Zardari’s dominating input as president will continue to remain. Take the example of Nasim Beg, a superb technocrat who would make an excellent finance minister. Unfortunately, he carries the Zardari tag. Can Gilani even dream of appointing his own man instead of Beg in this critical slot? Indeed, can he take a stand or critical issues and tackle some influential advisors? Undercutting the reputation of the government, these dubious characters only pay lip-service to the prime minister’s authority because they well know Asif Ali Zardari will never play second fiddle to Yusuf Raza Gilani.
The real (indeed, only) reason for the present apprehension about the 17th Amendment is about the selection of the next COAS. Because of the special circumstances prevailing and the success achieved by the army under his watch, Kayani commands tremendous respect, both within the armed forces and with the US and Coalition partners, and we cannot afford to lose this potential. Moreover, he has still some miles to go to rid the army of all the undeserving individuals who were promoted by Musharraf, as well as correcting other anomalies that have been tarnishing the army’s image.
However, giving Kayani an extension will upset the schedule of career planning carefully crafted to ensure a smooth and equitable process. The many extensions Musharraf gave to himself destroyed this system. While an extension must remain a possibility in the present situation, Kayani could be elevated to chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, with priority being given to his choice as successor as COAS. A father figure is needed not only as a calming influence but to maintain the continuity of military non-intervention. Let’s face it: democracy is being sustained despite provocations today because of Kayani’s single-minded commitment to the process. Remember Murphy’s Law, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
Hopefully this month of March will be unlike others, and we will have a smooth transition from what presently is a presidential system in all but name to, theoretically at least, parliamentary democracy. The ultimate question is, does this parliamentary system, where legislators do everything under the sun but legislate, really suit Pakistan?
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: isehgal@pathfinder9.com
Loading ...