Domestic despair, foreign pressures

While governance challenges at home are multiplying, pressures from abroad are intensifying. The country appears to be lurching from one crisis to another, but so convinced is the government of conspiracies afoot that it appears afflicted by a death wish, waiting to embrace martyrdom, which has become its most pronounced credo. There is thus little interest in providing governance that the country desperately yearns for, or to revisit the basic tenets of our foreign policy.

With mounting despair writ large on the faces of growing numbers, government institutions are acknowledging that even essential food items are beyond the reach of the poor. On top of this, the security situation continues to deteriorate, with large swathes of the country in the grip of terrorists, driving away potential investors from resource rich areas of Balochistan and Fata. And now, the government has washed its hands off any responsibility for education — a sure recipe for pushing us into deeper ignorance. Not only that, but we will no longer have a national labour, health or environment policy, thanks to the indecent haste with which the Eighteenth Amendment was approved!

As if this was not enough, foreign powers are becoming increasingly frustrated and impatient, some well-motivated, others simply to ratchet up pressure. This past week, both the White House and the US State Department joined hands in the chorus of criticism. In what sounded more an indictment and less an assessment, the White House depicted the government as weak, divided and unable to deal with problems plaguing the country, resulting in ‘political gridlock’ and failure to ‘develop consensus’ on urgently needed reforms. It also warned that the “deterioration of Pakistan’s economy and slow progress on economic reforms pose the greatest threat to Pakistan’s stability”. While acknowledging “some progress against extremist safe havens”, it called for “better balance and integration of various components to reach our objectives”. And in keeping with earlier demands, the report called for more effort to “eliminate sanctuaries for violent extremist networks”, especially as Pakistan has no ‘clear path’ to defeat militants. The next day, the State Department in its report for 2010, charged that the government’s “failure to credibly investigate allegations, impose disciplinary or accountability measures and consistently prosecute those responsible for abuses contributed to a culture of impunity”. It also catalogued issues such as the harassment of journalists, practice of self-censorship and corruption within government departments, in particular the police, child abuse and child labour exploitation.

Not surprisingly, the report was seized upon by US legislators, especially by those who have made their careers bashing up Pakistan. Congressman Gary Ackerman (Republican from New York), a well-known apologist for India, warned that since “Pakistan is about to go broke or collapse”, while India remains “the brightest light in South Asia’s constellation and the strategic centre of gravity for the region”, the US should bestow its favours on the latter. Though there was a half-hearted attempt to defend Pakistan, even Assistant Secretary Robert Blake joined in, emphasising that “the strategic partnership with India will remain among our top foreign policy priorities”.

The Foreign Office spokesperson did what was expected of her, which was to reject the White House assessment of Pakistan’s counter insurgency operations. However, it is not enough to merely reject, but to give our own well-considered assessment, because an objective analysis would reveal that the fault lies primarily at our end. Pakistan-US relations have always been turbulent, but they became even more skewed during the decade-long authoritarian rule, when lacking domestic legitimacy, the rulers sought external approval and approbation. In the process, the country entered into a Faustian bargain from which escape is viewed as too painful, even unachievable. But unless our rulers recognise that there is no such thing as a ‘free lunch’ and arrangements between ‘unequals’ inherently favour the stronger partner, the country will remain a hostage to its own follies and demands of foreign benefactors.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 13^th,  2011.