Guess who came to lunch?
Economy as a subject is extremely interesting but hardly amusing for third world countries with burgeoning populations and large budget deficits. When the people of such nations elect their leaders, they do so in the hope that ameliorating their miserable lot will be the prime mission, that the elected representatives will buckle down to solving the abject poverty and deprivation widespread among the masses. The people have a right to expect that their economic problems have a greater priority than ill-advised raids and missed lunches. Whatever the provocation, leadership imposes great responsibility on one’s actions, each measured against an unforgiving scale of socio-economic achievement. The two great examples in the last decade or so have been the leaders of China and Russia, life-long communist ideologies having converted onto freer market practices more commonly capitalistic, paying a necessary price of swallowing the bitter pill of opening up their closed societies in order to draw in western financial aid and expertise. The raison d’etre for this volte-face has been the sorry state of their economies, compounded over the years by an inefficient, greedy and immovable bureaucracy devoted to building up their own unapproachable empires within an empire. As an abject example of the horrors of over-centralisation of planning and state control, the communist system exist as living models for not only avoiding the same route but as the major reason for the emphasis now being placed on freeing the economy, to the extent of going totally against the fundamental grain of their ideologies.
The Centre-Punjab tussle is rapidly degenerating from a tragi-comic farce into a political fiasco, the repercussions of which will not be palatable to democratic forces, opening up areas of concern for all genuine patriots but leading to measures which may not be entirely conducive to nationhood. All democratic forces in the country must pull together to ensure that such an apocalypse does not recur as the last thing this country needs is a non-representative government, but the Catch-22 is that if the country’s existence is threatened by the rapid deterioration of the rule of law, our politicians will have to reconcile themselves to spending the next decade or even more out in the cold. It won’t then matter whether somebody turns up for lunch or in fact whether the invitation was issued after giving due deference to protocol. The MRD, with all its sacrifices over the last decade, remained for the most part a luncheon and dinner group in the face of Gen Zia’s strong rule. During this period, accountability took a back bench as the people’s choices of representatives only intermittently made it to a stage managed political platform and in this void the bureaucracy reigned supreme, having a field day botching up the country’s economy, not so much by any malafide action but more by benign inaction.
Compared to their more affluent first world counterparts, our masses may well be living for the most part in the Stone Age. In parts of Pakistan, they still do though our living standards are by far above all in the South Asia region. While political infighting is more than acceptable (and even admissible) being part of the democratic process, an election is a good enough examination, and the publication of the results should ensure some sort of political peace, if only to give the maximum emphasis on economic problems. Given that the democratic process has hardly had a voice over the last decade, one can’t go through life just enduring a never-ending election campaign. There are more important issues for our new leaders to come to grips with and all these actively concern the people’s welfare. Dissent within a political party should not be taken as a revolt because such checks and balances are the essence of a democratic system giving every individual the right to disagree, the alternate being civilian dictatorship, worse than the military kind.
The President has an active role to play, the situation rapidly deteriorating to the point that if he does not move now, the Centre-Punjab confrontation will give way to immature actions spreading to the masses, with streets on fire, running with the blood of innocent people caught up in this maelstrom. The media has an active part also, dampening the passions which have been lit by interested parties to sabotage the democratic process and which will certainly harm the very existence of Pakistan. More than the aforementioned, respected politicians (like Nawabzada Nasrullah) devoted to the democratic process have to make their presence felt and give wise and sane counsel, calling in their IOUs with both the sides. A stage has now reached where the elected must be allowed to govern, whether in the Centre or the Punjab, as their fiat of authority is representative of the will of the people and it is in the public interest to get on with the job of government. More particularly, prophecies of impending political demise of the Federal Government or that of the Punjab must cease, particularly forbearing the espousing of the 60-day limit being promised by opposing forces, it being taken for granted, in the para-phrased words of Mark Twain (with due apologies) that rumours of (their) demise are greatly exaggerated.
With all due respects to the elected representatives, one could not imagine that having been thrust into the National or Provincial Assemblies by the will of the people, they are for the most part purchasable commodities available to the highest bidder, as it is now being implied. Both the PPP and the component parties of the IJI have been harping on elections on party basis, giving tickets to their own party stalwarts, it is ludicrous that within 90 days some of them seem to be about to jump the coop, forgetting their party affiliations or the fact that it was the will of the people for a particular programme, rather than their personal popularity in most cases, which brought them into the seats of power. In all honesty and if they are men (and women) of conscience they should resign their seats and again seek the people’s verdict from the platform they now espouse, otherwise one can infer that they have sold out their respective consciences — and the trust that the public imposed in them, at the altar of greed. While giving them the individual right of dissent within their own parties, the democratic right of good debate, it is inconceivable that they should bolt their respective parties and seek succour (and wealth) in the other camp at their own sweet will. One of the prime reasons given by Martial Law governments to perpetuate their over-extended stays is the implied fickleness of politicians, frequently changing their political affiliations for personal profit. It is not the PPP or the IJI which will suffer because of any defections contrived or otherwise, democracy will, because these defections will be held out as a great and lurid examples of the failure of democracy in Pakistan. Sometimes third forces step in, despite their will, into areas where angels fear to tread.
Whereas it would be a good idea to have a political moderator present when launching a dialogue between each other, the heads of PPP and IJI would do even better in having no one else but their closest advisors during the meeting which must take place without further ado or delay. One could start the process (maybe over lunch) by first noting the issues which makes common ground for agreement, prime among them being the existence of the nation. Then one could note down those points on which they may not be entirely in agreement with but on which both sides have shown some flexibility to accommodate the other’s view- point. In the last stage are the hard issues on which no commonality may be immediately available but in the national interest due deference may be paid to each other’s views. Pakistan expects no less from them.
There is nothing more important for the public then that the leaders must come to grip with the economic issues. Society functions on the premise of the betterment of the quality of life. Our leaders are young and qualified, charismatic, well-educated and gaining in experience by the hour. We look to them for our individual and national prosperity, they have been entrusted with great responsibility by a 100 million people. How well they can live upto that responsibility will be a measure of the core of their real greatness. The question arises, do they have the maturity to get on with the real business of government, the rejuvenation of the economy or will it be a round of missed luncheon dates and ill-conceived searches?
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment