January 20, 2011

Pakistan : Conflict, Crisis and Compromise

 

Pakistan ’s current crisis is rooted in the conflict over whether the state should continue to be under the over-arching suzerainty of the army or under the direction of a civilian government like in other democracies of the world. Of the 64 years of the state’s existence, 32 were spent under the direct rule of military dictators. The other half was spent under civilian governments with the army waiting in the wings for an opportune time to pounce on power. Such an opportunity often presented itself within two to three years of a civilian rule. No democratic government has ever served its full term.

The current civilian regime led by the People’s Party has, however, managed to remain in power for four long years, despite its palpable failure to tackle effectively the numerous problems agonizing the people at large. The PPP leaders at the helm of affairs are generally perceived as self-seeking and steeped in the pit of corruption.

The President of Pakistan (Asif Ali Zardari) is constitutionally the supreme commander of the armed forces but without any effective control over the army chief and the head of ISI. He lives in the trepidation of being thrown out in a military coup like the civilian governments of the past. So, he and PM Gilani keep initiating measures to bring the armed forces under their effective control - from the transfer of ISI to Interior Ministry to the ‘Memogate’ episode.

It is almost impossible to reverse overnight all the measures taken by military dictators of the past to usurp civilian powers. Pakistan is perhaps the only country whose defense budget, for instance, is not open to civilian scrutiny since it is treated as classified. The President, as the constitutional head of the state, has to give his consent to whatever amount is demanded for Defense. Budgets of all other wings of the government are thoroughly examined by the Ministry of Finance before they are submitted to the Parliament and the President for approval.

The situation clearly calls for the removal of such distortions. But, the Zardari regime has gone about effecting changes in a round about and devious way. The transfer of ISI, the army’s ace spy agency, through a press release was a surreptitious move to bring the agency under civilian control. This was a palpably wrong step. For, the ISI is essentially a military intelligence setup. Its political wing was responsible for all its

questionable projects. Similarly, the modus operandi (Memogate) adopted for communicating a message to the US high command, was clearly sneaky and derogatory for all the officials involved. It was simply naïve to think that the communication would remain confidential. It turned into a scandal known as “Memogate”: The Zardari regime is badly caught in its own trap.

Mr. Zardari’s desires are hardly supported by his actions and achievements. He enjoys the reputation of being a sincere friend but this time he is standing by his friends and allies who have earned notoriety for corruption and violations of the laws. His assertion that his former Minister of Religious Affairs, Hamid Saeed Kazmi, was not involved in the corruption scandal concerning Hajjis offends even the most sympathetic observer of the accused’s case. Zardari has gathered around him tarnished individuals drawing strength from each other’s company.

The country is going through probably the direst period of its history. People have reached a stage where they view the future in utter diffidence and despondence. The economy is in a free fall, with the rate of growth failing to outstrip that of the population. Textile factories are closing for want of power and other inputs. The energy sector is in a complete crisis. There is a noticeable exodus of capital from the country and foreign investment is shier than ever. Public corporations and organizations are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, such as railways, national airline and the steel mills. Unemployment is at its peak.

People want a change, but they do not want a military takeover. The military too would not like to take power; for, the people seem inclined to give even a flawed democracy a chance than welcome military dictatorship. They have had enough of military rule.

The freedom accorded by ex-President Musharraf to the media, particularly the TV channels, has taken firm roots and the media would hardly brook the re-imposition of fetters on its freedom of expression. Army chief Kiyani has categorically assured the people that his setup has no intention of staging a coup.

With the flow of US military aid subjected to severe restrictions, with a basic shift in US policy in favor of aid to civilian institutions rather than to military dictators (the fall of several dictators in the Arab World being a clear indicator), with statements of several Senators, State Department, and other American dignitaries in support of Pakistan’s civilian government, the army finds a coup counter-productive. It will have to accept a substantial cut in defense expenditure to bring it within the financial means of the country.

In this perspective, Premier Gilani strikes one as the Falstaff of the ongoing political drama. Yet, taking into account his status as the chief executive, his loose cannon statements hurt the image and prestige of the nation. On the floor of the parliament, he accused the army of being a state within a state. Later, he tried to wriggle out of the clumsy mistake by claiming that his target was not the army but his own Defense Secretary whom he did sack later on. His denigration of the army while talking to the Chinese media was no less unwanted.

He and his boss, President Zardari, are running a simultaneous battle with the army’s B team, the superior judiciary. Their entry into the seat of power through the back door of NRO, the decision of supreme court invalidating the NRO and ordering the reopening of the corruption cases against all beneficiaries of the Order, place them in an awkward and weak position.

Mr. Zardari excels in working the system. He manifested this during the last general elections and subsequently by recruiting the support of several parties in the formation of federal and provincial governments. With nothing escaping the attention of the media, drawing room deals and under the table give and take, might no longer work. He has to abandon his belligerent attitude towards the army and judiciary.

Indications are that some senior political figures are already serving as mediators to seek a patch-up and compromise between the civilian and military sectors of the society. The earlier the internecine and suicidal warfare ends, the better it would be for the people and the country.

arifsyedhussaini@Gmail.com