The writer is a graduate student at
the University of Notre Dame in the United States
There is a myth — a dangerous one — that pervades all of Pakistani society: that somehow there is a single set of solutions to all of the problems that affect the country and if only we were to have the honest, sincere leaders who would implement them, all would be well in the land of the pure. Our middle class, particularly PTI supporters, love the idea that technocrats can solve everything and that it is all those dirty politicians who are the problem. The reality, however, is rarely quite so simple.
The fundamental flaw in the way we view technocrats is that we think of them as substitutes for politicians. We think that being dispassionate and nonpartisan is good, and that having an ideological view, or supporting a specific political party or agenda is bad. Here is why this view is not only wrong, but dangerously arrogant: it assumes that one person or a single group of people have enough wisdom to decide what is best for everybody in the country, a view that is verifiably false.
To support a specific political party is not to condone all of its flaws or corrupt politicians. It is to acknowledge that if government is the vehicle we use to pool together our collective resources to provide essential services to people, politics is the negotiation process by which we decide who gets what. Having a republic means that all of the many groups that constitute our country get a voice in that decision-making process, making the process not only fairer, but also better.
Picking a political party is not to endorse all its politicians as angels, nor even to ignore their failings: it is simply appointing a negotiator on one’s behalf. And for technocrats to work within political parties, does not mean having to give up their intellectual independence. It is to recognise that the power of their ideas would be multiplied manifold if they were trusted by the elected representatives of the people, a trust that can only be earned through loyalty.
People often fault former president Asif Ali Zardari for not standing firmly behind Shaukat Tarin when he was finance minister. Tarin is unquestionably a smart man, and perhaps even the best man for the job, but why should Zardari have allowed Tarin a free rein, knowing full well that Tarin could very well begin supporting his rivals? Zardari’s lack of trust in Tarin was not that Tarin would not make intelligent decisions or provide sound advice; it was that his decisions would not take into consideration the political interests of the PPP.
There is a role for technocrats and consultants to play in our government. But if they expect to be effective in making things happen, they have to stop acting as though they are above the political fray, and they have to stop hoping to persuade politicians to act against their self-interest. That is almost never going to happen. They have to roll up their sleeves, pick a team, earn their trust, and then help them get things done.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 30th, 2015.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (3)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Politicians squander the education budget. They openly admit that they have interfered with the appointment of teachers for political gain. They stuff PIA and all other state corporations with their people to the point that they collapse. That's just 2 examples out of hundreds where technocrats would be better.
What the writer is saying that we just learn to live with it because that is what democracy dictates. At the end he says: "Zardari’s lack of trust in Tarin was not that Tarin would not make intelligent decisions or provide sound advice; it was that his decisions would not take into consideration the political interests of the PPP."
That embodies perfectly what is wrong with the country. Nobody is willing to do an honest days work to earn a halal income apart from those at the bottom of the system who have no choice but to sweat blood and tears.
How can we ever have technocrats who get on with it? The moment they are appointed the opposition, regardless of who is in power, cries foul. They are doomed before they even start work and bound to fail. Its hight time we invested in the civil service and moved it into the 21st century. Rote learning as a means of selection is outdated and discourages applicants. How about raising the age threshold? They are so many skilled people around who are willing to serve in the public sector but cannot get a foot in.