
Now what has this got to do with Mian Nawaz Sharif? Net hope in his second tenure was positive, high and rising. It was 31 per cent in 1997, 32 per cent in 1998 and 49 per cent in 1999. The numbers for his first tenure are not available. But perceptions were much the same. There was a wave of optimism on the economic front. Investors thought there was money to be made. Businessmen were seen discussing future projects. The official policy stance was perceived as business friendly. Ordinary folks hoped there would be jobs. “Animal spirits”, as Lord Keynes — a distinguished economist — would have put it, for capital accumulation were high.
Mian Sahib has kept a safe distance from the game of musical chairs being played since the MQM threatened to quit the ruling alliance. He has also not been part of the endless meetings of the strangest of bedfellows after the exit of Maulana Fazlur Rehman of the JUI. Much against his nature, he has pocketed the insults of being the saviour of a corrupt set- up. There is no evidence of any interest shown by the PML-N in a hurriedly cobbled alliance to topple the government. Nor does it seem interested in an establishment-sponsored takeover. What has not been noticed is its lack of interest in the Namoos-i-Risalat build-up.
All this suggests that Mian Sahib expects to regenerate the positive and high net hope in a solo flight. Negative net hope has, in general, been associated with bad governance. This cannot be any different in Pakistan. Add to it the PPP’s bad-to-average economic performance during its turns in power, and the popular perceptions of a worsening future become stronger. The fifth shuffle in the economic team is not seen to be the last. As net hope continues to plummet, there is an eventual dividend to be made by keeping the merchants of despair in the saddle. Rarely has the art of the possible seen such an optimal mix of principle and power.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 24th, 2010.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ