Articalista Post Your Articles For Free
Goes without saying: we are a nation de-tracked — socially, politically and economically. When did it all begin is obvious. Who all contributed to getting here from a level of weak normalcy, but normalcy of some sort, is now quite evident. Mistakes happened. Hindsight informs certain steps could have been avoided and weak normalcy is better than no normalcy just as some democracy is better than no democracy. It remains a measure of relative stability and correlational performance. Weak fundamentals else will give out weak results regardless of who sits at the helm. And finally, there is no magic in moving things forward other than clearly conceived policy and strategy followed by its persistent implementation.
One more dictum needs to be repeated: “when you invoke your ‘strategic reserve’ you have already exhausted other options”; a precarious situation. When and if you need to use force or the threat of force to resolve domestic political and social problems things are already precarious and out of control. Force domestically like the strategic reserve is not to be expended unless it is part of a plan. Hopefully not, in which case matters are already awry.
Matters are awry and political capital has been sadly inadequate to keep it altogether as much as it has been responsible for breaking it all up around its tribal interest and egotistic preferences. Personalities rather than national interest dominate the discourse and its narrative, and this includes all parties and its stakeholders. The opposition in the parliament was able to convince the ‘dominating power-wielders’ in the country that they had answers to all of Pakistan’s problems, but they only played to the fears of a dismantling socioeconomic order in a dismal global economic environment. Through it they contrived a chance to exercise their deep held resentment and even out with a cavalier and unconventional Imran Khan who was intent on hounding them out with legal action and possible exclusion from the political process with long sentences.
Elite culture, weaker institutions and a poor tradition of selective application of law have however meant that those targeted were able to escape the gauntlet. The DG ISI, when first reporting to IK on assuming charge, was asked by IK what he thought was the number one problem of Pakistan. Given the rather intellectual bent of aging military officers (pun intended) he ventured: economy. No, he was told by IK. It was the opposition. That says it all. And the game opened up from that moment on. Except that easy suckers is not what intellectual minded should become. It shall need even greater rigour to know and understand when the sly slide by their side.
How IK got into power is equally tragic and a repeat of Pakistan’s compromised politics. His was a minority government stitched together by the same power wielders who were led to believe that an ‘honest’ IK at the helm will be able to work it all out for the country. Except that politics is a very complicated enterprise and there are just too many non-linear forces at play confounding how might a result deliver. Naivete and lack of nuance have little place in politics especially parliamentary. Even in the presidential form legislation cannot be ordered; it needs wider consultation outside one’s own party and involves frequent and hefty give and take — what we know and understand of presidential form of governance is patently dictatorial. The only difference between ‘us’ and ‘them’ is that we seek personal or tribal favour; they settle for favour of constituents and what accrues is appropriately declared.
Politics is about working things out. When someone claims principles and fails to work through an issue, sometime as big to place national existence at stake, it is only convenient subterfuge and crass diabolism. It fails democracy. Bypassing such cooperative and coexistent representative regimes is only possible in autocratic kingships or dictatorial arrangement. Unless we slide into one at a consequential cost — the last time we lost half the country — we shall have to learn to coexist and cofunction as a democracy.
Consider the amount of rupture in our national system: politics is totally polarised and has taken the garb of open enmity leading to absolute intolerance of the other — IK was recently attacked as a manifestation of where polarisation has led politics; media divided along political cleavages is conveniently targeted by opposing sides — one highly popular mainstream journalist was ruthlessly murdered (jury is out on who did it but he shall be lost to this meaningless maze of power-hungry politics); a barely literate society is given to easy manipulation of their sentiment by deceitfully created half-truths serving the cause of one or the other; country’s military has been reduced to an object of jest as politicians gaily ridicule it blackmailing it into submission for patronage for power. A tanking economy lays bare the cumulative consequence of a system gone under.
The road hereon, if such degradation is not stymied, is a certain path to failure of a state and a system. What might replace it and in what shape is anyone’s guess. Yet the way out of this dysfunction is as simple. To some easier said than done but only if other motives drive us than genuine national interest. The system needs a reset. In representative democracies it comes through elections when conducted fairly under rules agreed and respected by all. Ours are stipulated in the constitution. This simple act when and if announced will stop the decay and move us towards normalcy as a first step. Constitutional provisions must be strictly adhered to under a transparent mechanism where stakeholders are regularly briefed. Rules of the game must be clearly enunciated and strictly implemented. Anyone in violation must face legal action and be disqualified from the electoral process. Election results must be respected, and tenets of democracy and parliamentary politics diligently practiced.
Outside intervention can stop only if fortress democracy is robust enough in function and in structure to appear impermeable. Its practitioners have failed it more than the often-blamed military establishment for its haughty influence. This is only half-true.
How do we get there? From where we are no imaginative solutions are necessary. Let the process prevail without making space for a special provision of one or the other kind. Those that must retire on due dates must retire on those dates. There is enough resident professional capital to work with in the bona fide and remaining but kosher options. Any decision which reeks of political manipulation around appointments and positioning of key individuals at the helm shall continue to smell foul for their period of engagement. We cannot taint our critical institutions by such devious intent. It shall be another stab at discrediting and weakening what is crucial for this country’s security against growing threats. We tried it once and it backfired badly with consequential regression across the board. Let’s not be stung twice from the same hole. The country, it’s military and the people will be the net losers in any imaginative resort to serve patently political objectives. It is equally a test of how the military and its leadership can negotiate this game of snakes and ladders.
