Fair and free elections?
The question on every well-meaning Pakistani mind is how can we change from this semi-state of anarchy
The writer is a retired lieutenant general of the Pakistan Army and a former federal secretary. He has also served as chairman of the Pakistan Ordnance Factories Board
During the last few decades the world witnessed several developing countries strengthen themselves and graduate to the 'developed' status. This was achieved by focusing on the economy, introducing major reforms, reducing unnecessary expenditures; prioritising the education and health of their citizens, improving physical infrastructure and undertaking measures to expand industrial growth and agriculture production.
Their leaders realised this was only feasible in a peaceful environment, so they achieved internal peace by pursuing harmonious policies, bridging communities and treating people with respect and honouring their rights. At the external level they sought peace with the neighbours and tried to stay away from superpower rivalry. In case this was not possible they aligned with one superpower or the other with whom they were more ideologically oriented and their national interests converged. And that provided them the security umbrella.
Of course, no country should expect that all these conditions will be met but the closer it is towards meeting these requirements the better it is for its citizens. The most successful example of this approach has been South Korea and Singapore. China’s progress too has been phenomenal and exemplary. Although they adopted many of these policies while adhering strictly to their version of communist ideology that allows economic freedom but politics and governance is largely dictated by ideology.
The question on every well-meaning Pakistani mind is how can and when will we, if ever, change from this semi-state of anarchy, institutional infighting and focus on development, growth, governance and political stability?
For achieving these objectives a qualitative change in approach by our political and institutional leaders would be necessary. Party leadership will have to focus on their programmes and less on personalities. So far politics has been largely personality oriented. Leaders are important but we do not want that entire politics centres round the Bhuttos, Sharifs or Imrans. We would like political parties to compete on the basis of their past performance, future policies and a realistic demonstration of their ability to fulfill those promises.
A repeat in national elections of the type of manipulation we witnessed during the recent Senate elections or during the formation of Balochistan Assembly would be ominous and an ugly precedent. Fortunately, that is not easy to replicate at the national level.
It is difficult to comprehend what the country has achieved or for that matter any institution gained by these recent events. In fact, we have done disservice to ourselves by throwing up contrived leadership incapable of holding the responsibilities to which it has been elected. The irony is that we have talented politicians that are eminently capable of holding these critical appointments. If only we would pursue the normal democratic process by allowing political parties to compete fairly. Manipulation before, during and after elections that has been the hallmark of Pakistan’s politics of the past should come to an end.
Indeed, it was a sad spectacle and a stark reminder that keeps haunting us of institutional meddling when two former generals had to appear in court on allegations of funding the PML as far back in the 1990s.
This brings me to the central question on how to ensure the country does not go through manipulation at any stage, either before, during and after in the coming national and provincial elections. The constitutional and legal obligation that binds state institutions to conduct within its parameters should be enough to restrain them provided we are willing to learn from the past. But to further ensure the fidelity of elections the election commission, media and the civil society should play a more robust role.
In the past voter has not taken manifestos seriously due to the lack of implementation and other factors such as group and tribal affiliations that determine his choice. Despite this trend there will be a significant cross section that would be influenced by past performance of the government and current capabilities of the political party.
In the US political parties and leaders, including Donald Trump, had a 100-day agenda. It is a different matter to what extent it was implemented and how the policies and priorities were revised once the party saw the problems from inside.
The PTI launch of its 100-day reform agenda although ambitious and meant to impress the voter is a good initiative. By focusing seriously on critical issues it should generate a healthy national debate. Even if many of the listed items are not doable in the time frame at least gives an idea to the people to judge the party’s priorities and compare it with others.
Fortunately, the PML-N in Shehbaz Sharif has a leader who is performance oriented and made a significant contribution in uplifting Punjab over the last five years. He can justifiably claim that he can replicate or even better it in the context of Pakistan. We have to wait and see what the PML-N manifesto would be. And whether Nawaz’s defiance of the establishment would work in favour or against the party. The Gallup Poll, however, maintains that the PML-N remains the most popular party and Nawaz still is the most favourite leader. It also cites the example of Z A Bhutto that his anti-establishment strategy was a huge success and a major factor in his winning the elections. How far this proves credible in the present context only election results would indicate.
One worrying aspect of Pakistan’s politics has been the shifting loyalties of many of our politicians. This is a reflection of several factors that come into play especially closer to election time. It shows that for these individuals there are no ideological or political principles that govern one’s association with a party. Moreover, it is a sad reflection of the party’s quality of leadership that it has failed to gel its members. Interference by state institutions has played a major role in changing loyalties especially of those who had skeletons in their cupboard. The greatest challenge is to prevent undemocratic manipulations from occurring and have fair and free elections.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 23rd, 2018.
Their leaders realised this was only feasible in a peaceful environment, so they achieved internal peace by pursuing harmonious policies, bridging communities and treating people with respect and honouring their rights. At the external level they sought peace with the neighbours and tried to stay away from superpower rivalry. In case this was not possible they aligned with one superpower or the other with whom they were more ideologically oriented and their national interests converged. And that provided them the security umbrella.
Of course, no country should expect that all these conditions will be met but the closer it is towards meeting these requirements the better it is for its citizens. The most successful example of this approach has been South Korea and Singapore. China’s progress too has been phenomenal and exemplary. Although they adopted many of these policies while adhering strictly to their version of communist ideology that allows economic freedom but politics and governance is largely dictated by ideology.
The question on every well-meaning Pakistani mind is how can and when will we, if ever, change from this semi-state of anarchy, institutional infighting and focus on development, growth, governance and political stability?
For achieving these objectives a qualitative change in approach by our political and institutional leaders would be necessary. Party leadership will have to focus on their programmes and less on personalities. So far politics has been largely personality oriented. Leaders are important but we do not want that entire politics centres round the Bhuttos, Sharifs or Imrans. We would like political parties to compete on the basis of their past performance, future policies and a realistic demonstration of their ability to fulfill those promises.
A repeat in national elections of the type of manipulation we witnessed during the recent Senate elections or during the formation of Balochistan Assembly would be ominous and an ugly precedent. Fortunately, that is not easy to replicate at the national level.
It is difficult to comprehend what the country has achieved or for that matter any institution gained by these recent events. In fact, we have done disservice to ourselves by throwing up contrived leadership incapable of holding the responsibilities to which it has been elected. The irony is that we have talented politicians that are eminently capable of holding these critical appointments. If only we would pursue the normal democratic process by allowing political parties to compete fairly. Manipulation before, during and after elections that has been the hallmark of Pakistan’s politics of the past should come to an end.
Indeed, it was a sad spectacle and a stark reminder that keeps haunting us of institutional meddling when two former generals had to appear in court on allegations of funding the PML as far back in the 1990s.
This brings me to the central question on how to ensure the country does not go through manipulation at any stage, either before, during and after in the coming national and provincial elections. The constitutional and legal obligation that binds state institutions to conduct within its parameters should be enough to restrain them provided we are willing to learn from the past. But to further ensure the fidelity of elections the election commission, media and the civil society should play a more robust role.
In the past voter has not taken manifestos seriously due to the lack of implementation and other factors such as group and tribal affiliations that determine his choice. Despite this trend there will be a significant cross section that would be influenced by past performance of the government and current capabilities of the political party.
In the US political parties and leaders, including Donald Trump, had a 100-day agenda. It is a different matter to what extent it was implemented and how the policies and priorities were revised once the party saw the problems from inside.
The PTI launch of its 100-day reform agenda although ambitious and meant to impress the voter is a good initiative. By focusing seriously on critical issues it should generate a healthy national debate. Even if many of the listed items are not doable in the time frame at least gives an idea to the people to judge the party’s priorities and compare it with others.
Fortunately, the PML-N in Shehbaz Sharif has a leader who is performance oriented and made a significant contribution in uplifting Punjab over the last five years. He can justifiably claim that he can replicate or even better it in the context of Pakistan. We have to wait and see what the PML-N manifesto would be. And whether Nawaz’s defiance of the establishment would work in favour or against the party. The Gallup Poll, however, maintains that the PML-N remains the most popular party and Nawaz still is the most favourite leader. It also cites the example of Z A Bhutto that his anti-establishment strategy was a huge success and a major factor in his winning the elections. How far this proves credible in the present context only election results would indicate.
One worrying aspect of Pakistan’s politics has been the shifting loyalties of many of our politicians. This is a reflection of several factors that come into play especially closer to election time. It shows that for these individuals there are no ideological or political principles that govern one’s association with a party. Moreover, it is a sad reflection of the party’s quality of leadership that it has failed to gel its members. Interference by state institutions has played a major role in changing loyalties especially of those who had skeletons in their cupboard. The greatest challenge is to prevent undemocratic manipulations from occurring and have fair and free elections.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 23rd, 2018.