In defence of Dr Hafeez Shaikh
I know one thing for a fact. Had Dr Shaikh not been there, the situation would have been much grimmer.
The writer hosts a show called “Capital Circuit” for News One and tweets @FarrukhKPitafi
The guessing game is on. Everyone awaits the names of finalists for the position of caretaker prime minister. In an established democracy, these things would hardly assume such importance. But not in Pakistan with its long-chequered history of the electoral process. In the first ever civilian to civilian democratic transition of power of history, everything matters.
Amid the boring long list of candidates, some brilliant names, too, have surfaced.
The first is of Mahmood Khan Achakzai, a towering politician and a conscientious democratic figure. The only thing is that the jobs of caretakers are supposed to be their last before retirement and he has a political party and a political career before him. The fact that his party had boycotted the general elections in 2008 makes it harder for him to stay away from politics for six months. If he can sacrifice this much, he is indeed the best candidate for the job.
The second name that popped up was of Asma Jahangir. At one point, she seemed to be emerging as a consensus candidate. But then three parties, namely the JUI-F, the JI and the PTI expressed their dissatisfaction on her name, followed by a vicious campaign against her. The word has it that her candidature is unacceptable to the country’s powerful security establishment. However, she has told the media that she is not interested in holding the post. Had she made it to the position, she would have ensured that the upcoming elections could not be stolen.
A late entrant into the race is former finance minister Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh. His name surfaced shortly after his resignation from the cabinet. While he is a man of unimpeachable personal integrity, some of his detractors have made some good points. In an environment of paranoia where speculations are always rife about possible if not probable derailment of democracy paving way for a prolonged technocratic set-up, his name has been associated with such rumours for a long time. As if that was not enough, he has served first as finance minister of Sindh and then as a federal minister under General (retd) Pervez Musharraf. If he is chosen for the job, he will have to work hard to convince people that the elections will be held in time.
But some of the criticism is downright unfair. He cannot be called a failed technocrat just because he could not reintroduce the existing General Sales Tax in a VAT mode, nor should the nosedive of rupee be considered his fault. For the former, please recall that Dr Shaikh was not the one who negotiated the last standby arrangement with the IMF. Shaukat Tareen, the man in charge of the negotiations, threw in the towel in frustration ages ago. In a nascent democracy, it is hard to work against cartels and pressure groups. And the then prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, never gave the new finance minister autonomy needed at the time. However, despite everything, I know one thing for a fact. Had Dr Shaikh not been there, the situation would have been much grimmer.
I don’t know whether the IMF will even work with him if he becomes the caretaker prime minister or whether he enjoys enough rapport with influential quarters in Pakistan. I am not even sure if a caretaker should undertake any reform agenda. These lines should not be considered an endorsement of Dr Shaikh in any case, for they are not. Nor is it my place to do something of the sort. However, while objecting to someone’s credentials, we should know what we are objecting to. Many accepted defeat and left where he, at the very least, kept things afloat.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 27th, 2013.
Amid the boring long list of candidates, some brilliant names, too, have surfaced.
The first is of Mahmood Khan Achakzai, a towering politician and a conscientious democratic figure. The only thing is that the jobs of caretakers are supposed to be their last before retirement and he has a political party and a political career before him. The fact that his party had boycotted the general elections in 2008 makes it harder for him to stay away from politics for six months. If he can sacrifice this much, he is indeed the best candidate for the job.
The second name that popped up was of Asma Jahangir. At one point, she seemed to be emerging as a consensus candidate. But then three parties, namely the JUI-F, the JI and the PTI expressed their dissatisfaction on her name, followed by a vicious campaign against her. The word has it that her candidature is unacceptable to the country’s powerful security establishment. However, she has told the media that she is not interested in holding the post. Had she made it to the position, she would have ensured that the upcoming elections could not be stolen.
A late entrant into the race is former finance minister Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh. His name surfaced shortly after his resignation from the cabinet. While he is a man of unimpeachable personal integrity, some of his detractors have made some good points. In an environment of paranoia where speculations are always rife about possible if not probable derailment of democracy paving way for a prolonged technocratic set-up, his name has been associated with such rumours for a long time. As if that was not enough, he has served first as finance minister of Sindh and then as a federal minister under General (retd) Pervez Musharraf. If he is chosen for the job, he will have to work hard to convince people that the elections will be held in time.
But some of the criticism is downright unfair. He cannot be called a failed technocrat just because he could not reintroduce the existing General Sales Tax in a VAT mode, nor should the nosedive of rupee be considered his fault. For the former, please recall that Dr Shaikh was not the one who negotiated the last standby arrangement with the IMF. Shaukat Tareen, the man in charge of the negotiations, threw in the towel in frustration ages ago. In a nascent democracy, it is hard to work against cartels and pressure groups. And the then prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, never gave the new finance minister autonomy needed at the time. However, despite everything, I know one thing for a fact. Had Dr Shaikh not been there, the situation would have been much grimmer.
I don’t know whether the IMF will even work with him if he becomes the caretaker prime minister or whether he enjoys enough rapport with influential quarters in Pakistan. I am not even sure if a caretaker should undertake any reform agenda. These lines should not be considered an endorsement of Dr Shaikh in any case, for they are not. Nor is it my place to do something of the sort. However, while objecting to someone’s credentials, we should know what we are objecting to. Many accepted defeat and left where he, at the very least, kept things afloat.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 27th, 2013.