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
It is not unusual for a country that came into existence 71 years ago and until then was a part of undivided colonial India to have weak institutions, a struggling economy and democratic transition. More so, if it experienced at its very birth one of the worst tragedies in the form of massive communal riots and hostility of India, a larger neighbour.
As political parties at that time were in an embryonic state and the economic base was weak, Pakistan chose to be an ally of the United States to resist Soviet expansion. In return, it received financial assistance and strategic support from the superpower that it used to countervail India. This state of affairs was not an unusual phenomenon in the 1960s and 70s for nascent democracies while passing through the initial phase of development. One, however, expected that foreign investment and internal reforms would enable Pakistan to move fast forward towards democratic maturity and fulfillment of its fundamental ideals as visualised by its founding father Jinnah.
Unfortunately, due to leadership failures and institutional disharmony during different regimes, Pakistan’s economy has been mostly struggling and its politics became chaotic. The blame for the current state of affairs has to be shared by the previous governments. Pakistan’s problems are not the making of one government alone. These are results of the cumulative shortcomings of successive governments both civil and military. We also cannot ignore issues of capacity and civic peace that was greatly disturbed due to our involvement in the Afghan jihad and strained relations with India.
Whereas those involved in corruption and malpractices should undergo legal scrutiny and processes, emphasis of the present government should be on governance, reviving the economy, strengthening state institutions and building bridges with neighbours.
Equally important is when PM or cabinet ministers issue statements or address press conferences there has to be credibility and clarity. Lately, on several occasions, the PM and his principal aides have been emphasising that there is great harmony and no divisions among state institutions. Thereby implying that the judiciary, military and the PM are operating in total sync. This seems so, but is the PM in the driving seat in policymaking whether it entails foreign policy, security and defence matters. It is indeed heartening that the two major organs of the state — judiciary and military leadership — are supporting the present government and enjoy each other’s confidence. Let us not overlook that this is an accepted norm and constitutional obligation. Only difference being that we had strayed so far from democratic norms that the affirmation makes national headlines. Hopefully, they would extend similar cooperation when other parties are in power and abide to the letter and spirit of the Constitution. After all democracies that acquired independence the same time as we did like India or later than us South Korea and Malaysia feel far more confident about their democratic evolution. They do not feel the necessity to convince anyone as actions speak louder than pronouncements.
Our future lies in being a mature democracy and a balanced society, and the government should work towards that goal. This will require greater democratisation of political parties, minimising the civil-military divide and civilian government taking full responsibility of foreign, defence and security policies. These measures would prevent foreign powers from taking advantage of the internal contradictions.
Furthermore, one would expect the PM and his cabinet take genuine interest in the affairs of parliament and its committees and evolve and implement policies through it. The other disturbing aspect is the war of words and deep polarisation between the opposition and the ruling party. For Imran Khan to take satisfaction from his cordial relations with state institutions however commendable are no substitute for developing a functional relationship with the opposition. This antagonistic posture towards them is self-defeating as no meaningful legislation could get through. Instead, parliament would remain a battlefield for verbal duels. The more damaging aspect is that it would adversely affect the government’s performance and further strengthen the judiciary and military’s role in governance.
Recent statement of the DG ISPR that the army fully supports democracy was reassuring and indicates that there is a realisation that country’s future lies in strengthening democracy. This reflects a qualitative change from the past and readiness to reform. The suggestion by the DG that the people, politicians and media abstain from criticising for six months was, however, an unusual statement and would be advisable if he clarifies what he has in mind and its context.
The inability to provide essential services to the people has been due to poor tax collection and disturbed security situation. Unless the tax to GDP ratio is increased to about 20%, the dream of transforming the country will be a mirage. This becomes even more critical in the absence of foreign assistance that in the past did help in artificially propping the economy. Political instability was another factor that caused the foreign and domestic investment to shy away and even today these failings cast a shadow on prospective investors. So when the PTI chooses full-blown confrontation with the opposition parties, it should also weigh the consequences on its own performance and its adverse fallout on the people at large. If a society is divided into deeply antagonistic political entities, it leads to chaos and economic activity suffers. Sync between political and economic institutions is the key to progress. One would expect Imran Khan and his party leadership to focus less on demolishing his political opponents by using his good relations with the military and judiciary but genuinely work for the transformation of society, improving the economy and polity.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 12th, 2018.
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