Reviving the spirit of March 23
To fulfill the unrealised dream visualised on March 23, 1940, we have to confront the failures that we face today
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 was heartening to witness the March 23 parade after a lapse of seven years. The parade was highly impressive and a sterling demonstration of the professional competence and combat readiness of our gallant armed forces. The march past, aerobatics, parachute jumps and the display of conventional and strategic hardware inspired national confidence in these trying times. More significantly, it demonstrated the resolve of the armed forces and conveyed a strong message to the terrorists that the armed forces would not be deterred and to the world that the nation is fully prepared to defend its integrity against any external aggression.
While we rightly cheered and clapped at the display of military hardware and pageantry, it is also time for us to critically reflect on what the idea of Pakistan was and where the state and people stand today. After 68 years of the founding of Pakistan as a democratic country, it is still struggling to clearly define its direction, identity and interests. Intellectual deficit, moral bankruptcy an absence of political will have prevented our leaders from taking a clear position on several fundamental issues. Debate as to whether Pakistan should be an Islamic or Muslim state like Indonesia or Turkey occasionally surfaces, but because of the fear of a backlash from the clergy and religious parties, the debate narrows down to challenging the credentials of the proponents of the secular idea. Of course, Mr Jinnah visualised Pakistan as a modern, progressive democratic state that imbibed Islamic values where citizens of different faiths were considered equal. Our experience of over six decades should have also convinced us that despite 97 per cent of the population being Muslim, we face serious sectarian and ethnic factionalism and religious strife. Unscrupulous political leaders and the clergy have used the religious card to divide rather than unite us. The educated elite have remained complacent in providing guidance and direction.
Mr Jinnah was categorical about the nature of the state. He famously once said: “Democracy is in the blood of Musalmans, who look upon complete equality of mankind — and believe in fraternity, equality and liberty.” Then there is his historic speech to the Constituent Assembly in which he stated that “Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of every individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.” There cannot be a more emphatic expression of his desire to see Pakistan as a secular democratic state. This may now be a distant dream but any state, irrespective of its ideological moorings, has the primary responsibility of protecting the life and property of its citizens. The tragic killings of the last few weeks will bear witness to the grim reality that the state failed to meet this basic obligation.
Failure to develop a strong and efficient institutional framework has resulted in Pakistan remaining in a state of perpetual economic uncertainty and slow growth. Successive governments, due to vested interests and lack of political will, have been dodging the critical requirement of undertaking structural reforms in areas of taxation, state enterprises and security organisations.
Nawaz Sharif’s passion for building highways, public transport and undertaking mega projects is fine because these would serve the basic need of millions of people. But there should have been a corresponding emphasis on education, health and human resource development to sustain growth and self-reliance. The World Bank, in its recently released report ‘Pakistan Country Partnership Strategy’ emphasises the need to address the country’s education emergency as a matter of urgency. It recommends “increased school enrollment and adoption of education quality assessment”. One does discern a glimmer of hope from the initiatives and interest shown by the chief ministers of Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa for the betterment of education. Parliament did pass legislation for the attainment of education for all, but this needs to be pursued vigorously, especially in Balochistan, interior Sindh and Fata. Hopefully, the provincial governments, under whose responsibility the education and health sectors now fall, will be more active in addressing this challenge.
When we look at what is happening to national and regional political parties, two trends are clearly apparent. The PPP and the PML-N are being challenged by the younger generation and the parties are resisting change. It is possible that if the PTI plays its cards sensibly, it could be the main beneficiary of this shifting political dynamic. What would be the future of the MQM and the PPP if they continue with over-centralised leaderships? Will the PPP eventually be relegated to rural Sindh? Will Altaf Hussain survive the current avalanche of charges that he and the party face? Will they have the support to retain the old structures?
A key determinant in shaping our country’s future is the trajectory of civil-military relations. During last year, the civilian government yielded considerable space to the military in domestic, foreign and security-related areas. One gets the impression that the civilian leadership is resigned to outsourcing all challenging assignments to the army and is comfortable with this approach. Frequent assertions that the civil and military leaderships are ‘on the same page’ are a classic manifestation of the immaturity of our political leadership. It is only through improvement in governance and strengthening of democratic institutions that the civilian leadership will be able to correct the civil-military imbalance.
Closely related to this is the uncertainty that arises from the chronically troubled relations with India. In the creation of Pakistan, the assumption was that it would lead to a stable South Asia where India and Pakistan could exist peacefully. That, unfortunately, has not happened and the lingering dispute over Kashmir exacerbates tensions. Currently, a stalemate exists and the doctrine of no war and no peace seems to be operative, where both nuclear-armed countries realise the dangers inherent in war, but are unwilling to move towards peace. For the fulfillment of the unrealised dream as visualised on March 23, 1940, we have to boldly confront the failures that we face today and work relentlessly in finding ways to succeed.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 25th, 2015.
While we rightly cheered and clapped at the display of military hardware and pageantry, it is also time for us to critically reflect on what the idea of Pakistan was and where the state and people stand today. After 68 years of the founding of Pakistan as a democratic country, it is still struggling to clearly define its direction, identity and interests. Intellectual deficit, moral bankruptcy an absence of political will have prevented our leaders from taking a clear position on several fundamental issues. Debate as to whether Pakistan should be an Islamic or Muslim state like Indonesia or Turkey occasionally surfaces, but because of the fear of a backlash from the clergy and religious parties, the debate narrows down to challenging the credentials of the proponents of the secular idea. Of course, Mr Jinnah visualised Pakistan as a modern, progressive democratic state that imbibed Islamic values where citizens of different faiths were considered equal. Our experience of over six decades should have also convinced us that despite 97 per cent of the population being Muslim, we face serious sectarian and ethnic factionalism and religious strife. Unscrupulous political leaders and the clergy have used the religious card to divide rather than unite us. The educated elite have remained complacent in providing guidance and direction.
Mr Jinnah was categorical about the nature of the state. He famously once said: “Democracy is in the blood of Musalmans, who look upon complete equality of mankind — and believe in fraternity, equality and liberty.” Then there is his historic speech to the Constituent Assembly in which he stated that “Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of every individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.” There cannot be a more emphatic expression of his desire to see Pakistan as a secular democratic state. This may now be a distant dream but any state, irrespective of its ideological moorings, has the primary responsibility of protecting the life and property of its citizens. The tragic killings of the last few weeks will bear witness to the grim reality that the state failed to meet this basic obligation.
Failure to develop a strong and efficient institutional framework has resulted in Pakistan remaining in a state of perpetual economic uncertainty and slow growth. Successive governments, due to vested interests and lack of political will, have been dodging the critical requirement of undertaking structural reforms in areas of taxation, state enterprises and security organisations.
Nawaz Sharif’s passion for building highways, public transport and undertaking mega projects is fine because these would serve the basic need of millions of people. But there should have been a corresponding emphasis on education, health and human resource development to sustain growth and self-reliance. The World Bank, in its recently released report ‘Pakistan Country Partnership Strategy’ emphasises the need to address the country’s education emergency as a matter of urgency. It recommends “increased school enrollment and adoption of education quality assessment”. One does discern a glimmer of hope from the initiatives and interest shown by the chief ministers of Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa for the betterment of education. Parliament did pass legislation for the attainment of education for all, but this needs to be pursued vigorously, especially in Balochistan, interior Sindh and Fata. Hopefully, the provincial governments, under whose responsibility the education and health sectors now fall, will be more active in addressing this challenge.
When we look at what is happening to national and regional political parties, two trends are clearly apparent. The PPP and the PML-N are being challenged by the younger generation and the parties are resisting change. It is possible that if the PTI plays its cards sensibly, it could be the main beneficiary of this shifting political dynamic. What would be the future of the MQM and the PPP if they continue with over-centralised leaderships? Will the PPP eventually be relegated to rural Sindh? Will Altaf Hussain survive the current avalanche of charges that he and the party face? Will they have the support to retain the old structures?
A key determinant in shaping our country’s future is the trajectory of civil-military relations. During last year, the civilian government yielded considerable space to the military in domestic, foreign and security-related areas. One gets the impression that the civilian leadership is resigned to outsourcing all challenging assignments to the army and is comfortable with this approach. Frequent assertions that the civil and military leaderships are ‘on the same page’ are a classic manifestation of the immaturity of our political leadership. It is only through improvement in governance and strengthening of democratic institutions that the civilian leadership will be able to correct the civil-military imbalance.
Closely related to this is the uncertainty that arises from the chronically troubled relations with India. In the creation of Pakistan, the assumption was that it would lead to a stable South Asia where India and Pakistan could exist peacefully. That, unfortunately, has not happened and the lingering dispute over Kashmir exacerbates tensions. Currently, a stalemate exists and the doctrine of no war and no peace seems to be operative, where both nuclear-armed countries realise the dangers inherent in war, but are unwilling to move towards peace. For the fulfillment of the unrealised dream as visualised on March 23, 1940, we have to boldly confront the failures that we face today and work relentlessly in finding ways to succeed.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 25th, 2015.