Waning hope for change

Unprecedented turn-over in the May 2013 elections, emergence of PML (N) as the largest party, Mian Nawaz Sharif’s decisions to respect PTI’s mandate in KPK, nomination of Dr Abdul Malik, a nationalist, as CM Balochistan and smooth formation of the governments at the centre and the provinces were welcomed by the masses in general as a good omen for change.

After less than four weeks of incumbent government, the euphoria has faded and hopes for the envisaged change are waning away. Though at this stage it is too early to comment on government’s performance, one may analyse its actions / decisions from the perspective of the direction in which it is likely to proceed. That be the gauge, things do not auger well as government has already discredited itself because of certain decisions / actions, or lack thereof, and unless correction course is applied, things are likely to get worse, turning into total failure.

To start with, there are big question marks on the conduct of elections, especially in Punjab, and, as such, legitimacy of the incumbent government. Despite assurances that government would look into the charges of massive rigging, no follow-up action has been taken.

In an environment where other provinces have certain reservations about Punjab, one fails to comprehend the logic behind taking more than 80% cabinet ministers from this province, especially when most of the key appointments including PM, NA speaker, COAS and CJ (though he holds Balochistan domicile) are also from Punjab.   

Though the government had short time and little fiscal space, yet it could have done better while preparing the budget. Instead of milking the wealthy and providing relief to the poor, government chose to rely on indirect taxation, directly affecting all and sundry, irrespective of their income. The budget is rightly being termed as ‘anti-poor, anti-people’.

Contrary to expectations, there has been upsurge in terrorist related activities with the government demonstrating total lack of will and ability to deal with the situation. The Interior Minister, as if still in opposition, seems to be more interested in undermining the agencies, rather than taking responsibility and condemning those who own the terrorist acts.

Controversial appointments; (1) Appointment of Dr Musadik Malik as  Special Assistant to PM on power and energy (as per information available on internet, he is basically a pharmacist specializing in treatment of erectile dysfunction) (2) Appointment of Najam Sethi as acting chairman of PCB, prompting people to wonder whether his appointment is a reward for the role he played, or failed to play, in the outcome of elections in Punjab, fraught with rigging charges at massive scale (3) Appointment of Captain (Retired) Shujaat Azeem as Advisor to PM on Aviation Affairs, a clear cut case of conflict of interest as he is also CEO of Royal Airport Service, which provides ground handling facility to airlines (unless resigned recently).

Relief in load shedding still remains an illusion.

Circular debt; Logically, the government should have first enquired into charges of bloated operational expenses, over invoicing and kickbacks, scrutinized contracts, carried out audit and then settled the circular debt, especially payment to the IPPs, after necessary bargaining. Instead, it has decided to clear Rs 326 billion of circular debt by 30 June 2013, a decision which is raising many doubts, especially when Mian Mansha, PM’s close friend and owner of a number of IPPs, is one of the members of task force which has recommended this course. Isn’t it a case of conflict of interest? Similarly, the lawyer who has been representing IPPs in their case vs the government has been appointed Attorney General of Pakistan. Seems the government, as well as the opposition, very conveniently, chose to pay no heed to the news item published in THE NEWS dated 14^th June 2013 under heading ‘Auditor General finds Rs 290 billion scam of oil companies’.

Motor vehicles amnesty scheme; Notwithstanding contradictory verdicts by IHC and LHC on legality of this scheme, as per FBR statement 50,901 non-duty paid vehicles have been legalized, generating record revenue of Rs15.837 billion (THE NEWS dated 20^th June 2013). Taking this figure as correct, the average collection per vehicle comes to slightly over Rs 300000/-. With the number of luxury cars that we see on roads after the introduction of this scheme, the figure seems peanuts and needs enquiring into. The government, however, is mum over the issue.

Criminal silence of opposition on dubious payment of circular debt and failure of the government to enquire into details of the motor vehicle amnesty scheme, indicates some sort of understanding between the government and opposition, Charter of Democracy turning into Charter of Mutual Corruption with Impunity.

In this backdrop, Musharraf’s trial has suddenly taken a centre stage, leaving people guessing about the timings, motive and the reason as to why he being tried for 3 November 2007 act but not for toppling Mian Nawaz Sharif’s previous government on 12 October 1999.

While commencement of Musharraf’s trial proceedings has surely caused public’s distraction from certain major issues, the PM is adamant that initiation of proceedings to try Musharraf is in compliance with the SC’s decision, which is factually incorrect. Firstly, invoking Article 6 of the constitution is government’s prerogative and the SC cannot direct the government in this regard and, secondly, if the PM is so concerned about implementing SC verdicts, he should first take action on SC’s decision on Asghar Khan Case, which is binding on him. Similarly, SC is also showing partiality by asking the government to intimate its intent to try Musharraf as per Article 6, where it has no jurisdiction, while ignoring the Asghar Khan Case in which action on its decision is pending.

As such, neither the PM nor Judiciary should be selective in dispensation of justice. If Musharraf is to be tried under Article 6, the PM cannot just order his trial for act committed on 3 November 2007. It is also incumbent upon him to initiate proceedings against Musharraf under Article 6 for his act of 12 October 1999 and ensure that all those who abetted his action are brought to justice, in line with the 18^th Amendment.

No matter what the outcome of Musharraf’s ongoing trials, the facts are; (1) He committed unconstitutional acts on 12 October 1999 and 3 November 2007, in which he was abetted by many (2) Baitullah Mehsud group was responsible for BB’s murder (3) Nawab Akbar Bugti committed suicide by blowing the cave he was in, taking down some Army officers with him (4) It is also a fact that Musharraf is not being tried under Article 6 for toppling Mian Nawaz Sharif’s previous government on 12 October 1999 because the incumbent CJ was part of the bench which indemnified Musharraf’s act, took oath on PCO, was ultimately benefitted by doing so by his elevation to CJ’s appointment and, thus, is an abetter.

I may also clarify that contrary to general perception that Musharraf served US interests and that the latter is trying to save him, the fact is that the top US leaders are covertly, and the mid-tier leadership / think tank are overtly, blaming Musharraf / Pakistan Army / ISI for their failure in Afghanistan. As such, in their perspective, Musharraf must be punished and Pakistan Army / ISI must be undermined, a manifestation of which we are seeing these days, some of us behaving more loyal than the king in this regard. 

In nut shell, justice must be seen as done in Musharraf’s cases, as failing to do so would have grave ramifications. Moreover, using Musharraf’s cases for causing distraction from other issues or settling scores or undermining Army as an institution would be a folly on the part of the government, as the stakes are too high.

People have great expectations from Mian Nawaz Sharif. Accordingly, he must set his priorities right and concentrate on alleviating the misgivings of the masses, rather than losing direction by succumbing to the hawks in his cabinet, parties with vested interests and Judiciary. 

After elections 2013, time to move on (My article published in THE NEWS dated 17 May 2013)

 

ISLAMABAD: Notwithstanding rigging charges and sit-ins here and there, Elections 2013 are over and the Pakistani nation has all the reasons to rejoice on two counts; firstly, the people defied threats by terrorists and came out in large numbers to vote and, secondly, the results indicate establishment of a stable government in the centre, defying most of the analysts who were of the opinion that there would be a split mandate, hung parliament and weak government, vulnerable to intrigues by different stake-holders.

Though leaders of the main political parties have accepted the mandate and are all set to form governments in the centre and provinces, yet barring PML(N) most are alleging rigging in elections and making demands which might sabotage the entire electoral process. Imran Khan has already demanded verification of thumb impressions in certain NA seats by Nadra. If carried out, given our political culture, discrepancies would be there and results may lead to a chain reaction, most demanding verification of thumb impressions in their respective constituencies. Such an undertaking would surely undermine the entire electoral process, letting down the masses and diminishing their hope in democracy.

Can we afford time to go through the ordeal and derail the process, especially when regional and international environment favour a stable Pakistan, is a question which our political leadership must ponder, especially when no substantial change in the outcome of elections is anticipated, if we survive the undertaking.

We all know that ISAF / US forces are to complete draw-down of their forces from Afghanistan by end year 2014 and most of their weapons / equipment worth billions of US dollars would have to pass through Pakistan. For its smooth passage, two pre-requisites must be ensured; Firstly, a stable Pakistan and, secondly, governments in the centre and KPK by political parties who could interact with Taliban for causing least interruptions in the move back. As such, for the international community, especially USA, the out-come of elections is a dream come true with NS in the centre and PTI in KPK, both for whom Taliban have soft corner. In this backdrop, we are likely to see substantial international support to keep Pakistan stable, at least till end year 2014, and a patient hearing by USA to demands, such as, not to use drones unilaterally.

Thus, despite the fact that in the last five years the PPP-lead coalition has played havoc with the country and put economy in shambles, NS government is likely to get a head-start due to regional environment and international support, thereof. Though he may have to take certain hard decisions to put economy back on track and, on the political front, deal with Zardari, playing the ‘Sindh Card’ and majority in Senate to retain presidency, yet support of international players would be readily forthcoming.

With the establishment, NS will have to tread a cautious line, absorb what all is happening on Western Front and then take decisions as head of executive and not with a mind-set of an opposition leader. He must bear in mind that Pakistanis have paid a very heavy price in pursuit of a strategy, whereby, the foreign forces are now withdrawing from Afghanistan, with India nowhere to be seen in the end-game. He must also remain cognizant of the fact that 2nd tier US leadership and think tank are openly blaming Pakistan Army / ISI for their defeat in Afghanistan. Such a stance has repercussions for Pakistan, though there is not much they can do at a stage when they require Pakistan Army’s support to ensure smooth draw down of their forces.

As for PPP, they lost miserably not because the Taliban did not let them campaign but because of their poor performance. They failed to deliver and suffered, as simple as that. It’s time for them to carry out appraisal of their performance in last five years, take corrective measures and perform in Sindh. The analogy that ‘elections are won by money and not performance’ has backfired now and will in future. If they must re-enter Pakistan’s political arena, performance would be the key.

Though PTI could have secured a few more seats, in my view, the position it has attained is a blessing in disguise. Firstly, some of Imran Khan’s policies are unrealistic and during campaigning, he had made promises as per public perceptions which he could not possibly fulfil at the central government level e.g withdrawal of forces from FATA and Baluchistan, shooting down of drones, education policy, election of SHO by villagers, etc. He had declared that he would not ally with anybody to form the government but already we see that he is making a coalition government, conceding important ministries, such as education and finance, to JI. So, in fact, IK has been saved from a lot of embarrassment getting fewer seats than his expectations. Now he will get time to mature his policies in KPK and may be next few years he is in a position to form government in the centre.

Thus, Elections 2013 is best news for everybody, barring elements who want to destabilize the country and do not see democracy taking its roots. The regional and international environments also present a unique opportunity to our political leadership to take the country out of the present predicament. It’s time for them to display political maturity and grasp the given opportunities, instead of wasting further time in sit-ins / elections related issues, which must be left for the ECP to deal. It’s time to move on.

Can Pakistan rise to face the politics of terror? (My piece published in THE NEWS dated 4th May 2013)

The nation these days is witnessing worst kind of terrorism in Sindh, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Balochistan, with the former ruling coalition partners comprising PPPP, MQM and ANP facing the brunt. Why this surge in terror related activities and to achieve what objective, is the question agitating everybody’s mind.

Some are of the view that TTP denounces democracy and the spate of terrorist attacks is aimed at derailing the democratic process, some feel that they are only targeting liberal parties to benefit the right and far right parties while there are people who smell a conspiracy to postpone the elections.

To me the bigger question is; Can our political leadership rise above their petty agendas to save Pakistan or are we, as a nation, destined to oblivion?

Before we seek to find an answer to above questions, I may reflect on 2008 elections during which militancy was also used as an instrument to influence the outcome, especially in Punjab. It started with Benazir’s assassination and, thereafter, we witnessed an unprecedented surge in terrorist related activities in Punjab and such environments were created that people yearned for peace.

PML-N sold the theme and, rightly or wrongly, convinced the masses that with change of the government, there would be an end to terrorism. Resultantly, they won the elections in Punjab. Thus, firstly, surge in terrorism before elections is not a new phenomenon and, secondly, this surge has a clear-cut objective.

Notwithstanding the fact that TTP takes responsibility for most of the acts of terrorism, the militants can be divided into two main groups - ideologically motivated, mostly funded by our friends in the Middle East and the other group sponsored by CIA (with RAW as their collaborators).

However, irrespective of their leanings, both these groups are pursuing agendas detrimental to Pakistan’s interests - while the ideologically motivated are trying to enforce their brand of Islam, denounce democratic dispensation and carry a soft corner for the far right, at least for the time being, the CIA-RAW sponsored militants are being used to breed instability in Pakistan in pursuit of differing objectives.

Unfortunately, these days both the groups are active in spreading terrorism for different reasons and hence the surge. I will start with the ideological group.

Historically, Saudi Arabia has been funding religious parties and certain militant organisations to enhance their sphere of influence in Pakistan. These religious parties, however, always disappointed them due to their dismal performance in elections. The Saudis got a major breakthrough when, during exile, the Sharifs stayed as their guests and developed a very intimate understanding. They now consider the Sharif family as ‘friends’ who could serve their interests in Pakistan. Zardari’s overt tilt towards Iran has further strengthened this bondage.

Thus, with perceived victory for Sharifs, the ideological group is unlikely to sabotage the elections, though they may facilitate the outcome by discouraging the liberal parties to campaign.

The other external stakeholder is the USA which is supposed to complete draw-down of forces from Afghanistan by the end 2014. Being a critical period, their preference would be the re-instatement of the PPPP-MQM-ANP coalition (the liberal group) which has served their interests well in the last five years. A technocrats’ government with ingress of their sponsored individuals would also be acceptable but, surely, they would not want a dispensation which creates hurdles in execution of their perceived plans for the region. As such, with PPPP trailing behind, postponement of elections and installation of a technocrats’ government with Zardari continuing as President would be their first preference. Failing which, in a post-election scenario, a weak, but friendly, coalition government would be acceptable. Even if that is also not possible, their effort would be to derail the process of smooth transition of power so that a favourable technocrats’ government could be installed.

Thus, the CIA-sponsored terrorists would aim at creating environment whereby, either the elections are postponed or if held, there is no smooth transition of power.

Realising the gravity of the situation, the COAS and the CJ have categorically stated that under no circumstances elections would be postponed. Though PPPP, ANP and MQM leadership still retain the option to sabotage the electoral process by boycotting the elections, it would be a wrong move as not much is lost if they correctly access the future political scenario. This time, ANP is likely to get sympathy vote and with rural Sindh’s vote bank divided, MQM may emerge as a leading party in Sindh. Other than these parties, Tahirul Qadri types may also make attempts to sabotage the elections by staging sit-ins. Such elements must be ruthlessly checked, onus of which lies on the CJ/caretaker government.

Pakistan’s ordeal would not be over even after the elections, as three distinct groups are likely to emerge in the political arena – PML-N and coalition partners, PPPP and coalition partner and PTI. Unfortunately, none of these distinct groups would be in a position to form the government independently. Imran Khan has already announced that he would not join any other party to form the government, leaving the other two groups to join hands, a rare possibility. As such, smooth transition of power may become exceedingly difficult, a situation which can be exploited by parties with vested interests to pursue their agendas.

In the obtaining scenario, unless sense prevails and the political leadership displays the kind of maturity required to take the country out of present quagmire, peace and stability in Pakistan would remain a farfetched dream, the terrorists would keep on flourishing with substantial inflows of money from their foreign sponsors and the establishment would continue to create enough space for itself to call the shots.

Can our political leadership deliver in such testing times, shun their individual agendas and take the country out of brewing turmoil, because if they fail, we as a nation are destined to oblivion.

 

Break up of Punjab is part of a larger agenda (My article published in THE NEWS dated 30 Jan 2013)

The NA is all set to present a bill for formulation of Bahawalpur Southern Punjab Province in its current session, comprising Bahawalpur, Multan, Dera Ghazi Khan Divisions and Bakkar, Mianwali Districts. Though the move is being ascribed as a political ploy of the ruling coalition in view of the forthcoming elections, yet possibility of a sinister design behind the effort cannot be ruled out. It may seem far-fetched to many but a critical analysis of happenings / events in the last five years would reveal that demand for division of Punjab by carving out a new province, especially in its proposed configuration, is part of a larger agenda of some of our top leaders, as well as, outside powers, especially USA-India Nexus which have long term interests in the region.

To elaborate, I may briefly highlight the USA-Indian agenda in the region and its implications for Pakistan. For implementation of their ‘containment of China’ strategy and intent to exploit the mineral/energy resources of Central Asia, certain pre-requisites must be met; (1) USA must gain and maintain foothold in Central Asia. For the purpose, it must have a secure corridor from the Arabian Sea to Central Asia i.e through Pakistan (2) Since, the USA sees India as a strategic partner in their ‘Grand Design’ for the region, it must also be given pre-eminence and provided a secure corridor to Afghanistan and Central Asia (3) By implication, Pakistan must act as a pliant state and not only expected to provide these corridors but also facilitate USA-Indian ingress into Central Asia, as demanded.

In pursuance of this agenda, USA has been able to exercise influence on Pakistan’s policy making by controlling the ruling elite. However, balkanization of Pakistan still remains an option with USA-India Nexus and Punjab, Pakistan’s centre of gravity in its present configuration, with nuclear weapons and strong Army, is considered as an impediment to such designs. As such, from their perspective Punjab’s strength must be diluted as a first step towards Pakistan’s balkanization (God forbid), if the situation so demands.

That be the agenda, one is perturbed to see how in the last few years deliberate attempts have been / are being made by leadership with vested interests to weaken Punjab. Its manufacturing industry has been deliberately denied gas and electricity, which is now at the brink of disaster. The agricultural output is gradually being affected by construction of new hydroelectric power projects, dams and link canals by India, to which the present government is turning a blind eye. After creation of proposed Bahawalpur South Punjab Province, the Indus River will also be delinked from the remaining Punjab, thus ultimately turning it into a wasteland.  

Thus, for those who are contemplating Pakistan’s balkanization, Punjab would not only be cut to size by its division but virtually rendered as an impotent entity without industry, depleted agricultural output and meagre other sources of income. In such a state, it would be totally dependent on others to survive and, as such, by compulsion act as a corridor for Indo-Afghan-Central Asia trade via Wagah to generate income – the foreign agenda will be fulfilled.

The configuration of the proposed Bahawalpur South Punjab Province is yet another indicator that some of those pursuing it are also catering for the scenario emanating from Pakistan’s possible balkanization (God Forbid). It seems that the same has been prepared on the assumption that with no industrial base, very little natural resources and meagre sources of income in the shape of agricultural output, it would be difficult for the proposed Bahawalpur South Punjab Province to survive independently and will have to depend on Sindh for energy and transit facilities. Thus, economic dependence, coupled with already existing cultural / political cohesion would provide strong basis for unification of Sindh and Bahawalpur South Punjab Province as one entity.

Accordingly, the new province has been configured to secure Sindh’s life-line by ensuring coverage of entire Indus River of the present Punjab. Secondly, it is being ensured that the proposed province links Sindh and KP to serve as a corridor from Arabian Sea / India to Afghanistan / Central Asia.

With no prominent Saraiki leader in the limelight, nobody should have a doubt as to who would occupy the driving seat in such a dispensation. Besides, after unification, their numerical differential with the Urdu speaking population of urban Sindh would increase further - Zardari & Co in total control with marginalized MQM.

The above scenario could be a figment of my imagination and many may not even consider it within the realm of possibilities but those who are supporting the idea of a new province in the proposed configuration must analyse the issue from all perspectives. It is not a matter which may be dealt with and supported on basis that ‘it sets a precedent to pursue our cause’, or bargained for ‘what is in it for us’, or adopt wait and see policy contemplating ‘how can we exploit the situation to our advantage’.

In my considered view, Punjab’s integrity must be preserved as Pakistan’s centre of gravity and if at all an odd province is to be carved out for convenience of masses, it must be done deliberately purely on administrative basis. Any precedence of creating provinces on ethnic grounds would set into motion many more such movements detrimental to Pakistan’s integrity.      

Too much excitement, too soon (My article published in THE NEWS on 27 October 2012)

Verdict on Asghar Khan case has stirred storm in a tea cup. Apparently, PPP is sensing a kill, PML (N) is on the defensive and a few anchor-persons known for their anti-establishment stance, for different reasons, are considering it an opportunity to further their agenda. In my reckoning, there is too much excitement, too soon as little is going to come out of the decision which will only be used for gaining political mileage, resulting into greater acrimony among the political parties.

For many, it’s a landmark decision as for the first time in the history of this country, the former chiefs of the Army and ISI have been directly implicated for distributing public money amongst certain politicians. The missing link, however, is why did they do it? Had they some personal agenda or was it an institutional undertaking? If the amount was distributed among the anti-BB politicians, what were the reasons for stopping BB from reaching the corridors of power.

In this regard, Lieutenant General (R) Hamid Gul has often admitted that he was instrumental in making IJI and has been challenging the judiciary to summon him for explaining his reasons for doing so. The bench dealing with the Asghar Khan case did not summon him but in case of trial of the former chiefs of Army and ISI, I am sure Lieutenant General (R) Hamid Gul would be called as the first witness and, going by the confidence he displays, I am sure he would have many revelations to make, which may not only hurt PPP badly but also spoil its relations with the military establishment. So, to me, trial of the generals would do more harm than good for the country.

Another aspect of the verdict that may cause uncertainty is that while the confessions of those who distributed money were considered good enough to implicate them, their same testimony is not good enough to implicate those who took the money. If tomorrow it is not proved that the supposed receivers took the money, what would happen to those who admit distributing the money. It is just as if a person confesses to committing a murder but would we declare him a murderer if the victim is still alive.

The third aspect of the verdict relates to the president's political activities. In all likelihood, President Zardari is not going to shun his political activities, will continue to be the de-facto head and lead the party, especially in view of the forthcoming elections. As such, we may be heading for yet another tussle between the President and Judiciary.

Thus, I see fewer chances of any convictions, but greater polarization.

The timing of the announcement of short order is yet another aspect which, I feel, could have been deliberated. We know that these days a consensus was being developed successfully against the militants after the Malala incident and the verdict has totally diverted public attention, indirectly benefiting the militants. Could it have been delayed for a few days for a better cause?

The outcome also raises an important question; is it a pre-cursor to opening other such cases? Pakistan’s history is full of betrayals, treachery and unconstitutional undertakings by the military establishment, Judiciary and the politicians. As a practice, whenever the military took-over power, the Judiciary mostly validated the act and the politicians in the opposition welcomed it. Was not the last military take-over by Musharraf validated by Judiciary, with the present CJ as part of the bench, and BB supported the coup? He was even given unprecedented powers to amend the constitution by the court. Can the country, already in the doldrums, afford to dig all the previous such cases and punish the perpetrators?

Already, NRO case has wasted over four years with no meaningful outcome from public perspective, now we are embroiled in controversy over Asghar Khan case verdict and more cases are in the offing, starting with proceedings on the memo-gate commission.

While the judicial process may take its course, can we afford the polarization unnecessarily generated as an outcome of decisions, especially when already facing existential threat from militancy and extremism – a point for our Judiciary, politicians and anchor-persons to ponder? To put it simply; do we want to live in the past or ready to move on? 

A nation on self destruction mode – to what end (By Tahir Ali)

These days the Muslim Ummah is outraged by the blasphemous movie prepared by an American and are agitating against this gruesome act. Pakistan is no exception. In fact, we as a nation have always topped the list of those who react violently to such provocations and, in the process, attempt to destroy our own country. Is this the right way to demonstrate our love for the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), would the perpetrators of such a heinous act be brought to justice by our violence and what could be the implications of the course we choose to adopt, are the questions we need to ponder. Debate on the subject, both in the press and electronic media, must aim at educating, rather than agitating, the masses.

Let there be no doubt in anybody’s mind that no true Muslim would hesitate to give his life for preserving the sanctity of our Holy Prophet (peace be upon him). We love him more than any of our worldly wants. It is how this love may manifest, needs to be debated. What we are doing these days by coming out on the streets and destroying whatever comes in the way, is the easiest but surely not the right way to demonstrate our love for the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), the best of human beings. To me, though difficult but the most appropriate way would be to emulate his personality, not by rituals but in essence, and follow his teachings to the core. Are we as a nation or as individuals doing that? The answer is in the negative and that is the reason powers that be are paying little heed to the violent demonstrations, construing them as acts committed for venting out of personal frustrations.

Unfortunately, our greatest problem as a nation is our hypocrisy and selective application of religion, as it suits our personal agendas. To quote an example, Allah Almighty says in the Quran, “And make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including sinews of war, to strike terror into the hearts of enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides them whom you know not but Allah does know”. That be the commandment, it must be clear to us that we as a nation won’t be able to assert unless we are strong enough to do so, both as a Pakistani and as part of ‘Islamic Ummah’. Are our day to day undertakings and present behaviour directed at strengthening the country? In this regard, I may also give the example of the Jews who, though a few million, have become so strong that they can enforce on the West whatever they want.  

There are mainly two types of leaders. First category is of those who play on public perception to elevate themselves. They, at best, are mediocre leaders and ultimately are of no consequence. While the other category comprises leaders who come up with their own vision, steer the nation towards the right direction and make a difference in the long run. Unfortunately, we only have leaders of the first category. In the obtaining scenario also, they are exploiting the public sentiment for fulfilment of personal agendas, oblivious of the consequences and implications of such adventurism.

We also need to understand that the religious clergy thrive in the environment of lack of governance, lawlessness, poverty, deprivation, and disillusionment. Handing over the platform to them at this stage for leading the masses, albeit agitated, is a sure recipe for disaster. Since, we refuse to learn any lessons from the past, let me remind the nation and our leaders that ongoing agitation is presenting spectre of the PNA movement in the late seventies, which culminated into takeover by Zia, the consequences of which we are suffering till today. Do we want the history to repeat itself?

Our violent reactions in the past to blasphemous acts perpetrated in the Western countries have hardly stopped them from repeating such acts, but in the process they have found out one of our major vulnerabilities. Now, they can initiate instability in Pakistan at will, whenever they want. We may not rule out the possibility of use of this vulnerability by the USA in future to station a large number of their marines in Islamabad, after the expansion of their embassy into virtually a base, and Karachi where construction of a large consulate building is already in progress.

As the indicators are, our violent agitation and destruction of own infrastructure is unlikely to affect the maker of the blasphemous video, his sponsors or the country where the act has been committed. In fact, as we have turned ourselves into a nation on auto self-destruction mode, the perpetrators have achieved their objective. If nothing else, they have reinforced the perception in the Western world that we are an intolerant and extremist nation.

As such, while we may continue to peacefully demonstrate our outrage, the long term solution lies in gaining strength as a ‘Muslim Ummah’ and adhering to Islamic tenets - the only way to ensure respect for sentiments of the Muslims by others.  

No more Holy Cows (My article published in The NEWS on 14th September 2012)

At last, the Court Martial proceedings in NLC case are about to commence against three retired General officers who have been reinstated for the purpose. Though all agree that the case be brought to its logical conclusion, the development has received mixed response about the adopted course. Some critics continue to cause aspersions on the way the case is being handled, have apprehensions about the outcome and are demanding that the case be investigated by concerned civil agencies. The majority of people, however, have appreciated the step and consider it a good omen for the country’s future. To these people, it’s a new beginning – no more holy cows.

I tend to be with the latter group as the country can no more afford to nurture holy cows, may they be from any premier institution. Same is necessitated because in the last few years, military establishment’s status as a centre of gravity has diluted and the Judiciary, media and the political elite have also emerged as major power centres, are individually vying to take the centre-stage and, as such, any preferential treatment to a single one would up-set the entire equilibrium, disturbing the delicate balance. To elaborate my viewpoint, I have briefly discussed each in the succeeding paragraphs.

In Pakistan’s peculiar environment, the military establishment still remains a major entity and people place a lot of hope in this institution. It must continue to perform, deliver and hold ruthless accountability for failings, both professional and moral. Only then its leadership would be able to meet the expectations of the masses and wield influence, directly or indirectly, on those bent upon undermining the country’s institutions. Same is also imperative to counter the ongoing unprecedented propaganda unleashed against the military establishment by parties with vested interests, using a segment of anchor-persons / journalists. In nutshell, military must stand tall on moral and professional grounds. Commencement of Court Martial proceedings in NLC case would surely enhance its image, though a lot would depend on the out-come.

As we flash back the unprecedented movement for restoration of the CJ, speeches of the eminent lawyers, promises and the generated hope, one thought that all our worries would be over with the onset of ‘independent judiciary’. Unfortunately, this was not to be. In spite of the fact that the Judiciary, under the leadership of the incumbent CJ, gave some land-mark decisions, the people continue to suffer due to lack of governance, and justice. As a result, disillusionment is slowly setting in, a manifestation of which can be seen in the recent comments by Asma Jehangir, Kurd, Aitzaz Ahsen, etc, the stalwarts of independent judiciary movement. In my view, greatest damage has been done by the way Arsalan Iftikhar’s case, perceived to be a holy cow, has been handled by the judiciary and, connected with it, unchecked media campaign by PPP jialas. If judiciary is to regain its ascendency, an imperative for the country to survive, justice must be seen as done in Arsalan Iftikhar’s case.

Media, in the last few years, has emerged as a major power centre to reckon with and has many laurels to its credit. However, as compared to the other power centres which are institutionalized, the media remains rudder-less and consequently, a few anchor-persons have become holy cows who feel that they are beyond the institutions, the government and even the state. They have gained mastery over twisting facts in pursuance of self-conceived or externally motivated agendas for certain personal gains. Just to quote a few examples of a self-righteous anchor-person; he urged General Musharraf to take action on Lal Masjid in front of other colleagues and once the operation was undertaken, became its greatest critic. On memo-gate, he openly sided with Haqqani and condemned Mansoor Ijaz, for reasons known to many, but after the findings of the judicial commission, never bothered to admit that he was wrong. He is the main exponent of Army / ISI bashing campaign, commencement of which unfortunately coincided with the US-Pakistan Army stand-off in the aftermath of 2^nd May 2011 and Salala incidents. Any keen observer would note discrepancies in his arguments but he still thrives, has become the holiest of all cows, and untouchable. Probably, President Zardari, the grand master, is the only one who knows the art to tame such anchor-persons. For others who choose to pursue principled journalism, self-accountability, where required, is the best course to adopt. A strict code of conduct would surely be in order to prevent misuse of this powerful instrument.

And finally the political leadership, whose lack of commitment to ‘accountability’ can be gauged from their inability to achieve consensus on the new accountability bill. Resultantly, in spite of vibrant media and pro-active judiciary, corruption in the government machinery is rampant, destroying the national economy like a termite. With investigation agencies under their fold, the top political elite have become holy cows who cannot be touched.

To sum up, things cannot continue the way they are. If this trend is to be reversed, the majority of masses must stop considering corruption as a ‘non-issue’ and holy cows must remain no more in political elite, judiciary, military establishment and the media – all must be treated equally as per law of the land.

The untouchable

Call it a coincidence, but messing with an untouchable in Pakistan has become an omen for governments to fall. Musharraf had to abdicate the presidency for challenging his dubious progression in life from becoming a doctor, induction in the Health Department, re-designation into FIA and elevations, thereof.

The same untouchable now owns a business of Rs 900 million, amassed in less than five years. Recently, he was accused of accepting millions as bribes from a real-estate tycoon, who happens to be close to the government circles - perhaps a wrong move.

As the media started to discuss the allegations, the CJ took suo-moto action by forming a bench of three judges, including him-self. This action was taken on the plea that the accusations on the untouchable were a conspiracy and image of judiciary was at stake, despite the fact that there was no complainant, no defendant, not even FIR. Thanks to legal advice by many, the CJ delinked himself from the case. The remaining bench hurriedly passed on the bucket to the AG and ruled that on the basis of the business tycoon’s written statement in the court “reputation of judiciary stood cleared”, completely ignoring what he had said in the press conference the same day. No sooner the two member bench got rid of the case, the entire episode was again termed as a ‘conspiracy’ against the judiciary, for which someone must pay a heavy price. 

On 19 June 2012, a three bench court disqualified PM Gilani in the contempt case with effect from 26 April 2012, notwithstanding the fact that in the initial judgement on 26 April 2012, the seven member bench had not specifically mentioned about the PM’s disqualification and Speaker’s ruling on the subject, being a constitutional matter, required detailed deliberations. On the other hand, the untouchable’s case is still moving at a snail’s pace by using well known tactics common in our judicial system. The investigations have been taken back from NAB and assigned to a one-man commission – former IG Sohaib Suddle. Why just a one-man’s commission and why Suddle, is anybody’s guess.  

In a country like Pakistan with rampant corruption and diminishing rule of law, judicial activism may be necessary but it must never turn into judicial dictatorship, though a possibility. After all, CJ has a cabinet of SC judges, just like Army Chief’s Corps commanders, has lower judicial hierarchy to support him just as military chain of command, and black coats just as soldiers with only one exception that the latter cannot beat policemen, media persons and judges with impunity. In that sense, CJ in Pakistan is much more powerful than the COAS, and, as such, temptation to be the ‘boss’ and call the shots is natural, at least through indirect control over the executive composed of politicians who falter frequently and remain prone to judicial scrutiny. Such inclinations, however, must be curbed as authority without responsibility is a sure recipe for disaster.  

May be, Gilani’s ouster was justified but can the country sustain frequent sacking of the governments? We as a nation must be clear that interventions by the President or the military establishment (as was the case earlier) or by Judiciary (this time) have never served / would not serve the cause of democracy. The country has suffered a lot due to direct and indirect rule by the military and now that it has decided to stay clear, any attempts by the judiciary to fill the vacuum would be disastrous and may ultimately lead to Pakistan’s Balkanization. 

Judiciary has shown enough muscle but if it still feels that it must immortalize itself, same can be done by earnestly investigating the untouchable’s dubious progression, instead of passing on the bucket, find out details of how he amassed Rs 900 million (or so) worth of business, what do his tax returns show about the source of income, did he receive alleged financial favours from the real-estate tycoon and if found guilty, try him with the speed with which the former PM was disposed off by the three member bench – shortest way for the Judiciary to reach the highest pedestal of moral ascendency. 

An opportunity lost (Has the opportunity to reach the real conspiracy been lost?( My article published in THE NEWS on 17 June 2012)

A week back, the nation was dumbfounded, and shocked, by the revelation of family-gate and related developments. As per the story, Malik Riaz, a real-estate tycoon, facing numerous cases in the courts of law, had spent a considerable amount to entice Arsalan Iftikhar and the latter, somehow, fell into the trap and enjoyed a life-style not commensurate with his position.  While the politicians preferred to shy away, the Media, as usual, came in the forefront to present differing viewpoints on the issue, some terming it as a conspiracy against the Judiciary while the others felt that there was meat in the ‘story’.

The anxiety was turned into hope when CJ, in an unprecedented move, took a suo moto action on what may be ascribed as ‘hearsay’. People thought that not only speedy justice would be provided in whatever transpired between Malik Riaz and Arsalan Iftikhar but also those involved in the conspiracy, if any, would be exposed. As the proceedings progressed, people also hoped that in the process all those who had been financially benefited or bribed by Malik Riaz for gaining certain advantages would also be exposed. Unfortunately, this was not to be.

To start with, in this case there was no complainant, no defendant, not even an FIR, yet the CJ took suo moto action. May be, in his perception, the action was justified as judiciary’s image was at stake. The bench has, however, now ruled that “reputation of judiciary stood cleared” just by Malik Riaz’s statement, notwithstanding what Malik Riaz said in the press conference, in an interview on TV and the fact that a number of black coats are out on the streets to show solidarity with the CJ. It seems that the bench has hurriedly drawn this conclusion to pass on the bucket as it did not want to tackle the major issues stemming from this case – allegations on Arsalan, conspiracy to tarnish judiciary’s image and exposure of Malik Riaz’s beneficiaries. 

It is now a matter of record that within a span of few years, Arsalan Iftikhar’s business, whatever it is, has expanded at unprecedented pace. The allegations by Malik Riaz are also substantiated by written documents (though not of entire amount). However, the case has been handed over to the government for further investigations which itself is facing numerous charges and prone to blackmail and compromise. The trust reposed in the government investigation agencies in this case is, to say the least, intriguing.

All indicators are that Malik Riaz could not have done it alone and, complicity of the government, due to numerous reasons, could not be ruled out. Now that the case has been handed over to the AG, part of the government, any possibility of investigation into a conspiracy to tarnish the image of judiciary has been closed. 

Besides, being very close to the ruling elite, a manifestation of which we saw in the protocol given to him, it is unlikely that Malik Riaz would be probed about those obliged by him with bribes and other benefits.

As such, by referring the case to AG, the matter is practically closed or, should we say, hushed up, especially with regard to conspiracy and Malik Riaz’s beneficiaries. Judiciary has lost an opportunity to consolidate their hard-won independence. Probably the price, this time, was too high, higher than those who sacrificed their lives during the struggle for independence of judiciary.  

Bounty on Hafiz Saeed (My article published in THE NEWS on 6th April 2012)

Normally head-money is placed on criminals / terrorists in the hiding. As such, USA has created history and given indications for the things to come, by putting head-money on Hafiz Saeed who is a free Pakistani citizen, is now trying to enter the mainstream politics and when militancy in IHK, of which India has always accused him, has slowed down. It was, thus, natural if the news came as a shocker for the entire Pakistani nation and being construed, by and large, as yet another act of unilateralism by the only super power. Why at a stage when Pak-US relations are under turbulence and the Parliament is discussing contours of future Pak-US relations, would USA take such an action and to serve what purpose, will remain a question under discussion for a few days. To understand, we need to be clear about US objectives for the 21^st century - Pursuance of US interests, interests of the allies and interests of the partners – in the same sequence. The others, in which apparently Pakistan also falls, matter less and expected to facilitate.

The Pakistani leadership assigned with the formulation of foreign policy, especially relations with USA, must understand that the latter has a well defined agenda to pursue in the region, any hindrance in that pursuit would not be tolerated and taken as a hostile act. In this regard, opening of supply routes is critically important and, as such, the announcement to put bounty on Hafiz Saeed at this stage is to give a clear-cut message to the Pakistan Government to comply, as well as, to intimidate the groups threatening its forceful closure, even if the Government permits it.

Secondly, by announcing the decision at India, the Americans have conveyed that, irrespective of the role Pakistan plays for USA, India gets pre-eminence in relations. In fact, the decision was meant to and has pleased India.

Thirdly, Difa-e-Pakistan’s rallies, of which Hafiz Saeed is one of the active members, is emerging as a small but violent force which could threaten USA’s interests in the region. Since, this out-fit is perceived to be supported by the establishment and the organization which Hafiz Saeed heads, is considered by the Americans and Indians as ISI’s proxy, we may not even rule out connivance of Pakistan Government in the decision. In a country where there is trust deficit between the institutions, anything of the sort is possible. Logically also, the kind of close relations our Government thinks it has with the US Administration, the latter should have consulted them before taking decision on Hafiz Saeed. If they have not, as the Government’s stance is, the act gives a clear indication of where the US policy makers place Pakistan in their scheme of things.

Whatever the motivation behind the decision, it is clear that USA is in no mood to play games with Pakistan, means business and would go to any extent to achieve what it wants. The Government, as the indicators are, understands it well and willing to comply, but there are parties who feel that the USA is cornered, desperately needs Pakistan’s assistance for pursuance of her objectives in the region and that we could play around with them for a while to extract maximum in return. Probably, the message is meant for the latter category.

Though, in my view, at this stage the decision is symbolic but we may not rule out the possibility of USA taking this matter to UN to put pressure on Pakistan, in case she is found non-cooperating. While the Government is not likely to give any forceful reaction and may even signal tacit approval, any retaliation by Hafiz Saeed’s followers would surely be against Pakistan’s interest and further tarnish her image. The best course for Hafiz Saeed would be to understand the obtaining international environment, get into the mainstream and take part in country’s political activities, including elections.

The Pakistan Government must understand that the noose is being tightened around Pakistan’s neck and to break loose, it must take decisions, and soon, which enhance its relevance in the international community and not those which push Pakistan further towards isolation. While we must play our cards well, we must also know the limits beyond which our brinkmanship may fail, especially if we try to base it on some negative potential. The need of the hour is to put own house in order so as to face external challenges up-front – the only option left for Pakistan.

PCNS recommendations – time to take bold decisions (My article published in THE NEWS on 4th Apr 2012)

After 9/11, Pakistan rendered unconditional support to the US forces for undertaking operations in Afghanistan. Since then, it’s a common perception that the former President Pervaiz Musharraf buckled down under US pressure and compromised on national security. While the decision would always be termed controversial, there is no doubt that those days USA’s unilateralism was at its peak, there was a strong demand in USA to avenge 9/11, that UN and the entire international community was backing USA and India had already offered all out support to the USA for action against the Taliban.

Now after over 10 years, the Americans in general are sick of war on terror, their economy is sliding down at a fast pace and USA no longer enjoys the kind of moral support to continue operations in Afghanistan or to open up a new front against Pakistan. As such, Pakistani leadership is under least pressure as compared to what Musharraf faced ten years back. However, notwithstanding the leverage the Pakistani leadership now enjoys, it must refrain from rhetoric which some of our politicians are resorting to for self projection. It is time for the political leadership to be the architects of Pakistan’s foreign policy, especially vis-a-vis USA, and they must ensure that the decisions on the PCNS recommendations are taken in the best national interest keeping the bigger picture in mind, giving due cognizance to the internal situation, the regional scenario and the international environment. A few aspects which we normally hesitate to discuss on the media but must be given due consideration while taking decisions on future Pak-US relations, are covered in the succeeding paragraphs.

USA HAS ALREADY GIVEN ITS EXIT PLAN FROM AFGHANISTAN AND COMMITTED TO WITHDRAWAL OF ITS FORCES BY 2014. THOUGH DOUBTS DO EXIST ABOUT THEIR SINCERITY, PAKISTAN MUST PROVIDE WHATEVER FACILITIES ARE NEEDED FOR THE PURPOSE AND MUST NEVER GIVE AN EXCUSE TO THE AMERICANS TO PROLONG THEIR STAY IN AFGHANISTAN DUE TO NON-AVAILABILITY OF SUPPLY OR WITHDRAWAL ROUTES. PAKISTAN MAY EVEN SEEK AND WELCOME UN’S ROLE IN THIS REGARD.

Pakistan enjoys immense geo-strategic importance as a gate-way to Central Asia and beyond.  Accordingly, Balochistan, today, has gained a centre stage as a future ‘international strategic corridor’, a development which Pakistan can exploit to her advantage. Pakistan’s unwillingness to oblige may result into foreign sponsored surge in Independent Balochistan movement, having serious ramifications for Pakistan’s integrity.

USA has developed a strategic partnership with India and vying to carve out a role for her in Afghanistan, a major reason of recent animosity between Pakistan and USA. In my view, however, this fear is ill-founded as, I am sure, Indian leadership is not that naive so as to take the risk of directly confronting the Taliban and face the consequences. With India in, if they do, the endgame in Afghanistan would surely be a far-fetched dream. The Americans, as well as the Indians, know it.

THE PARLIAMENTARIANS MUST BE CLEAR ABOUT THE STATUS OF ISAF AND US FORCES OPERATING IN AFGHANISTAN, BECAUSE IN GENERAL PERCEPTION THEY MAY BE CONSIDERED AS OCCUPATION FORCES, WHEREAS, THE HARD REALITY IS THAT THESE FORCES ARE MANDATED BY UN AND FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE LEGITIMATE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT. SECONDLY, EVEN IF THE PAKISTANI MASSES PERCEIVE THE ISAF / US AS OCCUPATION FORCES, DO THE MAJORITY OF AFGHANS ALSO FEEL THE SAME WAY AS WE MUST REMAIN RELEVANT TO THE AFGHAN PEOPLE IN THE ENDGAME? IN ANY CASE, AFGHANISTAN IS NOT A PAKISTANI SATELLITE AND HAS THE RIGHT TO TAKE ITS OWN DECISIONS.

In the third week of November 2011, an Afghan Jirga comprising 2000 representatives agreed on strategic partnership with United States. Unfortunately, the jirga did not demand withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan as a pre-condition and instead demanded that the USA must side with Afghanistan if a third country tried to attack it.  We should have no doubt as to what was meant by the ‘third country’. This is the kind of hostility we have earned in the last ten years because of our role in Afghanistan, a strategy which needs to be reversed. 

The parliamentarians must also take cognizance of the fact that in Pakistan’s chequered history, it’s probably the first time that US Administration is inclined to deal with the political leadership instead of the military establishment. As such, while peoples’ perceptions may influence but should never dictate the decision-making, which must be based on prudence, realism and in the best national interest.     

WHILE FINALIZING THE CONTOURS OF OUR FUTURE RELATIONS WITH THE USA, WE MUST ALSO KEEP IN MIND THE ROLE IT PLAYS IN PAKISTAN’S ECONOMY AND THE INFLUENCE IT HAS ON INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

And finally, since foreign policy flows from internal dynamics, in these defining moments, WE AS A NATION HAVE TO DECIDE ONCE AND FOR ALL WHETHER TO REMAIN RELEVANT TO THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY OR BE ISOLATED, GIVEN USA’S LEVERAGE THE WORLD OVER. For making the right choice, rhetoric apart, we must critically deliberate on the factors that impinge on our sovereignty and have put us in a state we are in. In this regard, the media must play a very positive role to educate and not agitate the masses, without fear of reprisals from the terrorists. In my considered view, we have no choice but to put our own house in order if we are to face the external challenges up front. An internally destabilized, religiously polarized, ethnically divided, economically unviable and foreign aid dependent nation, led by inapt / corrupt leadership, has to relinquish its sovereignty and that is the issue we need to tackle at priority and if we can do that, the others, including USA, would automatically start respecting our sovereignty.       

THUS, BARRING RECOMMENDATIONS ON FOREIGN SPIES AND PROVISION OF BASES WHICH SHOULD NOT EVEN BE CONSIDERED AS OPTIONS, DECISIONS ON THE REMAINING, INCLUDING THE REOPENING OF SUPPLY ROUTES MAY BE TAKEN IN THE LARGER NATIONAL INTEREST, AS PER DICTATES OF THE GROUND REALITIES AND WITHOUT FEAR OF US’S UNILATERALISM OR INTIMIDATION BY THE TERRORISTS. SHYING AWAY FROM TAKING DECISIONS AT THIS CRITICAL STAGE, AS SOME OPPOSITION PARTIES ARE RESORTING TO ON ONE PRETEXT OR ANOTHER, WOULD BE EXTREMELY DETRIMENTAL TO OUR NATIONAL CAUSE.

Pakistan’s Future: There is a way out of present despondency, if ......(My article published in THE NEWS on 19 Mar 2012)

In my article, ‘Pakistan’s future: we must learn to live with Zardari for long’, published in THE NEWS dated 10 March 2012, I had attempted to predict the short-term political landscape of Pakistan, purely based on my assessment of the current situation, standing, as well as, relevance of major stake-holders and our national psyche developed over the centuries. While most of the readers who sent their feedback on given email address found my conclusions a realistic appraisal, few also raised an important question, which I am sure is agitating everybody’s mind today, “Is there hope or a way out?” and asked for solutions to alleviate the prevailing despondency. My simple answer is, “yes, there is hope and there is a way out, however, with many ‘ifs and buts’ and the change has to come from within – change in people and functioning of the system”.

The people; PM Gillani, the other day in a speech glorified his family traditions by saying that for generations they have shown ‘loyalty’ and that he had no intention to change that tradition now. Loyalty to whom – Zardari now, General Zia, when he was in power or if we further go back, I am sure, it would be British and so on. This is our dilemma as a nation, “we take pride in loyalty to those who matter, not loyalty to the motherland”. Thus, we can hope for betterment if, somehow, we can bring about change in our national character, mindset and psyche as enshrined in sura Al Ra’ad verse 11 which reads, “God does not change the condition of any people unless they themselves make the decision to change”. Unfortunately, as of today, we neither have the kind of leadership nor a viable education system to bring about the required change. We, however, now have a vibrant Media, both press and electronic, which has the wherewithal to undertake this gigantic task single-handedly at least in the short term, but does it have the unanimity of approach and motivation to break away from the leanings, especially at individual levels, to earnestly undertake this national task, as change in peoples’ mindset would sound a death-knell for the feudal based political leadership, our ruling elite, and paymasters.

The system; Presently, we have a democratic dispensation which, apparently, has failed to deliver and alleviate the misgivings of the masses. It must, however, be kept in mind that the system has not failed us, we all are collectively responsible for failing the system, which, if I may act as devil’s advocate, is yet to mature owing to intermittent military take-overs. These extra- constitutional dispensations not only curtailed the logical growth of political leadership but also generated a kind of uncertainty, whereby, now the political leaders, especially those in power, remain unsure about their term in office and tend to concentrate on securing their personal future, even through foreign assistance, and in the process neglect the masses. Moreover, the military take-overs may have provided temporary relief but always left behind greater ills for the politicians to tackle. Thus, we can hope for a better future if we can ensure uninterrupted democratic dispensation, no matter how sham, and its consolidation through strengthening of institutions.

My above rationale, in no way, should serve as an excuse for those who, these days, are inclined to shut their eyes on Government’s misdeeds, are hesitant to hold them accountable and pursuing their personal agendas under the garb of ‘saving democracy’. They are either unwilling or fail to grasp that ‘accountability is the essence of democracy’. To them, I would only say that democracy is threatened this time not by a military take-over but by the system itself because of the way it is being run and the best way of saving it is to deliver, for which all institutions must play, and be allowed to play, their constitutional role.

Thus, we can hope for a better future if the establishment confines itself to its constitutional role, performs, delivers, ensures prompt accountability for failings and shuns pursuits that lent itself to criticism, genuine or motivated. In my reckoning, the military establishment still is, and must remain, very relevant to the security of our country and the best way to counter those bent upon undermining this great institution is to ‘stand tall on moral grounds’.

We can also hope for a better future if the judiciary starts to assert, without fear or inhibitions, by taking decisions on cases of national importance and ensuring their implementation. In my view, not doing so is harming democracy more as people are losing faith in the system. 

We can find a way out from the present despondency if the media commits itself to pursuit of national interests, rather than agenda based journalism, which some of our anchorpersons are very conspicuously pursuing. I need not emphasise that media is one instrument, which if applied judiciously and earnestly, can single-handedly change the destiny of our people.

And finally, we can hope for a better future if, somehow, at macro level, our political leadership breaks loose from the age-old feudal mindset - subservience of masters and exploitation of the masses - and starts to deliver as per the mandate given to them by the people. At micro level, we would sail through our present difficulties if PPP decides to end its dirty politics based on corruption and Zardari starts to apply his extraordinary mind and ‘capabilities’ for betterment of the masses, if PML (N) leadership can break loose from its psychological fears and starts playing the role of real opposition, if Imran Khan can control his ego, if PML (Q) somehow withers away, if MQM starts to act on what it preaches (it talks of revolution against the feudal class but prefers to sit with them in the Government, without inhibitions), if ANP starts to deliver (though I must admire their courage with which it has faced militancy), if the religious parties can stop pursuing their differing agendas and understand that Pakistan and Islam are synonymous and not two opposing entities, if .........

With so many ‘ifs’, should we lose hope – NEVER, as Pakistan is a country of great potentials.

Pakistan’s future: we must learn to live with Zardari for long (My article published in the NEWS on 10 March 2012)

For predicting the future political landscape of Pakistan, it is imperative that we have a clear understanding of our national psyche developed over centuries and where we stand today with respect to the major players who are likely to shape Pakistan’s political future, at least in the near term.

To understand as to why we are what we are, we need to trace the history of our region which reveals that through centuries, warriors from the North (Afghanistan / Central Asia) invaded the fertile lands of Punjab and further south, ruled the area by brute force and used influential locals (sell offs) for collecting tax on their behalf, in return for some privileges and status. The locals, instead of defending their motherland, always succumbed and a number of young men normally joined the invading forces as low rank soldiers to share the booty. The remaining masses in general learned to live under subjugation, seeking survival by all means, right or wrong. The British adopted the same strategy, ruled for a century by using / controlling through enticements the same two segments of this region – influential who became feudal lords and the uniformed lot. These became distinct ‘elite classes’ for serving the British and for the remaining, subservience became the norm.

After creation of Pakistan nothing changed with the exception that a tussle started for ascendency between the same two ‘elite classes’, i.e predominantly feudal based political leadership and the uniformed establishment, in which, barring few intermittent periods, the latter mostly prevailed due to division amongst political leadership and their failure to deliver whenever in power, successful conversion of Pakistan into a security state by the establishment ensuring their relevance, indifference of the masses and, most importantly, support by the US Administration who felt comfortable to deal with one man at the top. (This has remained USA’s practice, especially in countries where strong anti-US feelings exist, little realizing that such sentiments emanate because of this very approach).

Paradigm shift in the political landscape of Pakistan started to manifest in the last 6-7 years with the reversal of most of the above factors. It started with the US Administration’s decision to invest in the political leadership, albeit a pliant one, rather than Musharraf, who, in their view, had started double-dealing with them. Benazir played a major role in bringing about this change of thought as she, while in exile, was able to convince the US Administration that they were betting on the wrong horse. She was able to successfully convince the Americans that she had the popularity at grass- root level, could mould public opinion in USA’s favour, she was capable of controlling extremism and willing to play USA’s game in the region. Convinced, the US Administration, acceded and Musharraf was accordingly ‘convinced’ for her return to Pakistan. The other fundamental change came from within, whereby, an understanding developed between Benazir and Nawaz Sharif that they would not let themselves to be used by the establishment against each other, rule by consensus amongst themselves and let their children, and their children reap the fruits. Benazir was unfortunately assassinated and succeeded by her spouse, Zardari. With USA’s support waning, Musharraf’s fall was a matter of time, bringing down with him the entire edifice of establishment’s ascendency.

Zardari, being a very shrewd politician and bestowed with many hidden qualities, both positive and negative, successfully formed the PPP led government, he himself became the President and since then has successfully overcome many challenges by adopting a simple strategy; for those who matter, “support me and get whatever you want” and for the Americans, “support me, empower me and get results”.

Today, one can safely assume that Zardari is very close to the US Administration, has out-smarted all politicians, neutralized the establishment, diluted judiciary’s power base and has been able to woo some of those, including media-persons and journalists, who could act as spoilers in his pursuit for maintaining ascendency. He knows how to win-over willing and unwilling partners and has accumulated enough resources to buy loyalties. The only thing lacking is his ability to deliver to the masses and ensure good governance, but then in our beloved country this has never been the criterion. (Those who do not agree may go through the results of recently held by-elections). 

Nawaz Sharif, the 2nd major player in the political arena, simply stating, lacks the abilities and political acumen to counter Zardari who has already taken the former for a ride, not once but many a times. Nawaz Sharif’s anti-establishment phobia and unwillingness to forgive those who sided with Musharraf have been successfully exploited by his main rival. Living with self-conceived euphoria that owing to his so-called principled politics he would clinch the top slot in the next elections, Nawaz Sharif fails to comprehend that, as the indicators are, he is already confined to Punjab.

Thus, with the establishment cornered, judiciary gradually losing relevance because of inability to assert in important cases, media with loop-holes to be exploited, Nawaz Sharif in a state of war with everybody, including his own self, and living in illusions, as well as delusions, ANP as willing and MQM as unwilling partners, PML (Q) in the bag, Imran Khan lacking the understanding of Pakistan’s real politics, un-flinging USA’s support and, above all, subservient or indifferent masses, PPP is likely to head the next coalition government also and we must learn to live with Zardari as our President for a long haul. Of course, under him Pakistan will neither remain a security state nor become a welfare state but will be converted into pliant state, a status we are doomed to be condemned being a bunch of people who stay indifferent during elections, sell cheaply, consider corruption as a non-issue, for whom self-elevation by all means, right or wrong, remains the norm and who willingly allow themselves to be exploited. We deserve Zardari.