Politics’ raison d’etre

The default recourse is to suggest that the ‘Establishment’ will need to keep their chestnuts out of the fire for politics to find its purpose. This is too easy a refuge and keeps the political system from honest introspection. If for nothing else but to take this subterfuge away from the perpetually faltering politicians the ‘Establishment’ must keep its chestnuts out.

The last three political (it would be a travesty to call those democratic) dispensations are enough to give us the feel and the substance for what needs correction in our political system but responsibility for each misstep by the political establishment has always been neatly deflected and pinned on others instead. The ‘Establishment’ must not become the vehicle for such proclivity among those who rule over the state and the society. Anyway if there is one lesson that must emerge from the twenty-year long US military presence in Afghanistan and its rather shambolic closure is that militaries are most ill-suited to nation-building and must refrain from such ambition. If Americans can’t do it with all their wherewithal, no one else will too. Period. Best to restrict yourself to what one knows better.

If one views the recent upstaging of Chief Minister Jam Kamal from his position via a revolt within the ranks and then in the Balochistan Assembly through a vote of no confidence, it eminently illustrates what and how may politics redefine itself if it must improve its stock among the people. Jam Kamal may have a lot that did not sit well with his party but it was by now a prevalent precedence of changing guards mid-course in a five-year cycle that turned into a natural urge for many to seek his removal. The general consensus is that he did well and established principles which can only engender clean and smart governance. He curtailed corruption even if he could not stop waste and retained control of the expenditure.

This is big for Balochistan, a province known for letting easy money into personal hands. Let us say that he governed more in the vein of a central authority than one that is shared and hence wasn’t as democratic as he was expected to be — especially with the money which would normally find its way into the hands of Assembly members who were then free to play with it as they liked than expend in public service and needs. Surely he would have done better had he taken his fellow members along in how he intended to control waste and focus resource for public needs only. This little chink became the chasm that his political colleagues used against him. Perhaps he knew them better and saved himself from the hassle of being blackmailed into submission along the conventional and familial recourse of politics. But he was patently failed by his colleagues when he endeavoured to run a model around probity and righteousness.

There is a problem though in the Pakistani model of politics. Regardless of the exactitude exercised by an entity it remains vulnerable to allegations of manipulation of office for personal, tribal or familial benefit. Most politicians are major players in business and industry or agriculture and more often than not their personal wealth sees astronomical increase whenever in power or close to it. The culture of disassociating the office from benefit hasn’t found roots in our polity; neither is there an attached cost to it if it happens. The electorate is either too naive for lack of sufficient literacy, or too conditioned to repeated impunity by the power-wielders, or simply too weak and easily overwhelmed by the power of the brokers to object to perennial tags of corruption attached to politics. Most electorate is still tribal, not much given to discern between major players, and looks to its own petty gains through association. Hence a corrupt political system endures uninhibitedly.

Jam Kamal attempted to correct the ingrained manipulative character of our politics but could not stand the assault by the forces of status quo. Greatly more damaging will be attributions of financial gain related to his person or his family attained during his period of premiership; true to the nature of power, politics and business conflating together to the benefit of the office-holder in our political model — if indeed those emerge. Will it change is what will determine the credibility of our political system. Unless it does it shall never have the moral authority to hold anyone to account — politicians or others. They will only trade allegations and slowly immunise the electorate to its heinous and rapacious impact on their lives as is currently the case when an immense cost of living is already beyond the capacity of the common man either side of the poverty line.

More than the Political Establishment standing up to any attempt at setting a different scale of probity and fighting to keep status quo — a laissez faire political culture — what is of even bigger concern is what the replacement cabal will do in the time available to them in power. Balochistan gets close to 500 billion rupees annually. In the remaining two years or less this money is unlikely to do wonders for the people — the gestation period of projects is such. Hence it shall more likely be free money available to those with control of the treasury. They can buy their way into power in the next elections and make hay while the sun shines on them for the remaining part of this Assembly’s tenure.

That would be crass misappropriation, unchecked pilferage and class opportunism. What level of political credibility can such an approach establish? Politics is not an opportunity for personal enrichment but public service which earns you respect and recognition in return. Till we reach that level of commitment and belief in the purpose of politics we shall not be able to improve at any level of either governance or administration under any dispensation.

One finds the same level of misappropriation of power through the entire political system. Even when at odds with each other they mimic a common trait of careless neglect and misplaced vanity. The entirely unnecessary ruckus on the notification of DG ISI is a case in point. One wonders what this entire recourse served. How was credibility restored to listless politics and an absent governance system? The false flag of ‘process’ — when in reality it remains an informal consultation between the army chief and the prime minister — and introducing unnecessary hurdles to patently in-house military appointments points to personal preferences that feed vanity more than setting an example of civilian superiority.

It is time to separate the ISI totally from the civilian ambit and return it to its primary purpose of an inter-Services military institution. It should not have anything to do with politics or serving their ends except for a formal bona fide input on Intelligence perspectives to assist in the formulation of country’s foreign policy. It is time to separate organisational functions in totality.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 29^th, 2021.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.