It seems there is little realisation on the part of our political leadership as to how the nature and character of our nation and its development is affected by the indifference and infighting of the major political parties. This takes the focus away from the goal of serving people, advancing their interests and giving high priority to the economy and national security. Certainly, we need a type of governance that is far more people-oriented and not one that is mostly serving the elite. Our political leaders, as is generally the case, seem oblivious to these challenges because they are not drawing power by serving their interests but using them to stay in power. Their public speeches or those in parliament are more personal oriented rather than policy or governance related. Our politics too is warped due to parallel centres of power.
Rarely do we hear of any strategic direction given by the government and there seems no desire to marshal the collective energy of the nation to address national challenges, what to mention of global challenges. Is it not something to reflect how the world’s second largest Muslim country population-wise, which is also nuclear-capable and strategically located, failed to develop a self-sustaining economy in 75 years? These are major failings and our leaders are skirting around but not willing to address them. The political parties cannot continue with mere empty slogans and periodic large gatherings. There has to be delivery, and this can only come about by taking the economy seriously and addressing the political contradictions.
In fact, the political leaders have to undertake major reforms — foremost being to make the political party’s own organisation and structure more democratic. They do have periodic party elections but it is not easy to challenge the dynastic hold which obviously suppresses national talent. If any party member tries to assert himself and is too outspoken, his political future in the party could be adversely affected. This is not to deny the right to heirs of political leaders to lead but it has to be through free and fair elections. After all, in mature democracies most obvious being the US, Europe and India too we witness this phenomenon. But by and large these are merit-based choices and come through the same well-defined process as any other aspirant for the political slot. To expect that this change will come about in Pakistan voluntarily or with the passage of time would be unrealistic. A more robust debate at the national level supported by the media should at least create an awareness and bring pressure for change. Experience reminds us that when the hold of dynasties lasts for long durations there is a general decline in talent creating a leadership deficit in the political party per se.
Pakistan’s democratic history as opposed to other democracies has been very different. There are several reasons to it. The Indian National Congress was active decades before independence, waging movements in India and even supporting anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. Whereas, the Muslim league came into being much later and it was essentially the dogged determination and brilliant leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah that made the British accept the demand for Pakistan. But ever since the demise of the Quaid and Liaqat Ali Khan there has been a serious leadership deficit. This needs no further elaboration as the impact of successive leadership right up to the present is for all to see and experience. Then at the time of the partition the central role that the armed forces had to play in dealing with internal security, rehabilitation of immigrants and deterring Indian aggression gave it great prominence. The first major engagement with India took place as early as 1948. With military’s role so extensive and the political parties relatively weak, democracy has suffered and remains fragile even 75 years after the independence. Unless the establishment gives space and the political leadership starts delivering and gains the confidence of the public, the present state of affairs will continue to the determent of the country. Parallel power centres weaken democracy and downgrade the central role of parliament and of cabinet. Accountability in the real sense is not possible when the political parties and institutions are defining their own parameters of adherence to the Constitution.
More recently, the introduction of the EVMs is a classic example of how it is being introduced. It is perhaps a better alternative to the present system. But the way it is being launched unilaterally would only serve to further polarise politics and could be a harbinger for a turbulent post-election scenario. More important is the long-term effect of whitling down the opposition. Pluralism is based on the very principle of competing centres of power. If half the time of government is spent in crushing the opposition, or to stifle the media, then we are drifting toward a semi-authoritarian system and further weakening our democracy.
If the Pakistani diaspora becomes the critical factor in selection of future governments then it will have consequences for those parties that are not well represented abroad. How would these elections be conducted and what would be their fidelity? And is it feasible to set up a viable infrastructure for conducting elections for the diaspora in this short duration?
Tensions between India and Pakistan remain at a high pitch and prospects of cooling down are remote in the near future. Absence of normalisation has added costs for the economy and requires greater vigilance and diplomatic effort. With the Taliban in power, relations with Afghanistan have considerably improved; but with strict embargoes and the refusal of the US as well as the West to recognise the government having created serious prospects of a human tragedy, the fallout on Pakistan would invariably be there.
The best course to face these internal and external challenges more effectively is by undertaking major economic reforms, taking firm measures against militancy, strengthening democracy and consolidating our strategic relations with China and seeking opportunities for building bridges with the US.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 15th, 2021.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (2)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Beautiful and well commented.
Well done Gen sb . The basic factor is that the political parties are not institutional. The laws on subject have never been applied to make parties institutional and eliminate person centric parties