Six options on Governance
The state of continuing crisis requires serious consideration by concerned citizens of various options of governance on Chester Bowles theory that “Government is too big and important to be left to the politicians” unquote. The major problem facing the Bhutto regime among a host of others being economic, to raise revenues to the satisfaction of the IMF, Bernard Berenson’s quote “Governments last as long as the under-taxed can defend themselves against the over-taxed”, would be very appropriate.
The primary option must be that the Bhutto regime, even though it has tainted its own democratic credentials, completes its full term. For democracy to become a permanent fixture of this country’s socio-economic culture, the Constitution mandated terms of governance must last the full period. No system of government is infallible, yet all systems of governance have inherent potential to function effectively provided internal and external forces do not actively conspire to sabotage the process. Most of Ms Bhutto’s problems, internal and external, are self-created and even though she has also shown remarkable propensity to compromise, she has shown an equal enthusiasm for confrontation. It is also doubtful whether she has the ability or the will to rein in the forces of nepotism and corruption unleashed on this nation. Not that governments before her were saints descended from heaven, the scions of the then mighty and influential who now wallow in wealth did not have their largesse given to them by angels but from their fathers skimming off public funds, finessed into a fine art by members of this regime.
Nepotism and corruption aside, the present Government of Pakistan (GoP) is in serious trouble with respect to the economy, in particular a failure to control non-development expenditure or recover non-performing advances by the nationalised financial sector. In her defence, one must acknowledge that she seems to have started a recovery process in earnest, though sullying this exercise at the very outset by political overtones that smacks of vendetta. The flight of capital from the country’s economy does matter but not so much if it is plowed back to bolster the economy as in Indonesia and Malaysia. Pakistani commission agents have shown no great propensity to bring money home, their penchant is for islands, castles and mansions abroad. Regretfully, fault lines have developed in the body of every institution, the only ones that have fought back with some credible success seems to be the Army (alone among the Armed Forces) and surprisingly, the judiciary (in this case, for how long?). The attempt to subvert their integrity or defame them continues on a real-time basis. Bhutto’s tendency to opt for confrontation over compromise was manifest in appointing her much-vilified husband Asif Zardari as “Minister for Investment” (and not “Minister for Investments Abroad: as some wags have it). Given the “Sahib’s” talents on display in which he has, despite his rather humble educational credentials, created his own “Sahibaan”, i.e. loyal followers (whom he really looks after and who make up virtually a State within a State), why should he not be a properly anointed Deputy Prime Minister? This way the remaining bit of ambiguity about his predominant role in the PPP and the regime will disappear and we can call a spade a spade while Murtaza Bhutto can maintain the farce of being a “pretender to the throne”, albeit a well-paid one. Benazir Bhutto is a PR dream as a potent political campaigner but a relative disaster as a competent administrator, she should stay with politicking and speech-making, letting her “Sahib” run the affairs of the State so that things get done up front in the same effective manner as he manages from behind the scenes. The responsibility and accountability thereof which comes from being a signing authority will formalize the existing anomalous situation where his wife is the political face of the government he runs quite effectively. Given that a wife-husband duo may find this country as tolerant of nepotism as the ASEAN countries, this is perhaps the last option Ms Bhutto can muster for her regime’s survival. Her biggest plus point must remain ridding Karachi of a major part of terrorism, a singular achievement of counter-guerrilla urban warfare without parallel in any democratic history. She deserves full credit for giving her Minister of Interior full control and then letting this honest, forthright man do his duty without interference. She could perhaps use this non-interference model in other spheres. Ms Benazir is right in her assessment that people are out to get rid of her and Mian Nawaz Sharif from the body politic of Pakistan but the making of right assessments is no substitute for making the right reforms to her rule. She vociferously preaches what she herself seldom practices, this has led to a severe loss of credibility and she shows no inclination to go the compromise route. In the absence of such an initiative, one must conclude that her period of governance may be fast coming to an end.
In the event of failure of the elected government, the second option is the constitutional route ie. change through the elected Assembly. Some of her “horses” once belonged to Mian Nawaz Sharif, they have shown a remarkable proclivity in the past to being “traded” to the highest bidder at an opportune moment. Our legislators are quote capable of shifting loyalties in keeping with their happy tradition of doing so whenever they see the writing on the wall. In the face of rapid decline of the rule of law, the looming economic disaster and a Nero-like obduracy of celebrating the regime’s “achievements” instead of accepting the facts of life, this may be the next viable proposition. The powers-that-be that usually act as a catalyst for change may not find the obvious Mian Nawaz Sharif alternative any more palatable.
The third option would be if the President of Pakistan should decide that enough is enough and national considerations outweigh loyalty to the PPP. It is no secret that Farooq Leghari has grown into the job and despite himself becoming a victim of scam artists like Younus Habib who led him up the garden path in the land scandal that never was, he has conducted himself extremely well. His finest decision must certainly be the selection of the present COAS but he needs to be also commended for not knuckling down to motivated brow-beating and histrionics over dismissing the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who refuses to submit or be submissive. President Farooq Leghari cannot be oblivious of the (1) impending economic doom (2) a rapid breakdown of institutions within the country and (3) a series of disasters in our foreign policy considerations. As Supreme Commander he must be aware of the restlessness within his command, particularly in the Army, at the non-stop shenanigans going on in every institution of this country. Bhutto may even now be readying her legal defences on the lines of the Ishaq-Mian Nawaz encounter in case of an adverse Presidential move. One expects her to try and neutralize the judges of the Supreme Court by doing a 180 degree turn and an early implementation of the SC verdict. Bhutto’s handicap is that she does not have the overwhelming massive support of the populace that Mian Nawaz Sharif had when taking on Ishaq who was universally disliked, in comparison the likable Farooq Leghari has built up an impressive reputation just by doing the right thing, mostly.
In the event that President Leghari remains a party man in utter exclusion of the destruction of this country, there may be a situation where even he may have to leave along with the PM, in the same manner as in 1993. Obviously this cannot take place without the Army giving up on him, that would go against the evidence of the respect they presently have for him. However, if this far-out eventuality does take place then the appropriate way to legalize things would be for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to take over as President and the Chief Justice of the Provincial High Courts to take over as Governors of the Provinces, the Bangladesh experiment in 1990 at the fall of the Ershad Government serving as an example to forestall a vacuum. In this fourth option, the Chief Justices can then appoint Caretaker Governments of national and provincial consensus from those people who confirm they will not be participants in the ensuing elections.
The fifth option would be to have a Caretaker government under either of the two aforementioned options for a much longer period than the mandated 90 days so as to effect meaningful reforms. The Moeen Qureshi Caretaker solution promised much but did little in actual practice because of the limited time, even the election process was later discovered to be flawed by being weighed in favour of PPP by a combination of heavy handed methods (keeping the MQM’s 14 seats at the NA level out) and a sophisticated computer subterfuge of the IBM-kind. Meaningful reforms in the country must include (1) majority vote to decide candidate in each constituency (2) proportional representation in order to ensure women and minority representation in the Assemblies (3) a direct vote for all offices from the lowest tier to the President’s and (4) strong Local Bodies having full financial powers in a direct relationship between taxation and spending thereof.
The very last and (very avoidable) sixth option would be for the Army to impose martial law in a world environment where it is out of fashion in a global village of proliferating effervescent democracies. The post-cold war era is not entirely free of martial-law origin “democracies” being tolerated as in Indonesia. However, authoritarian governance in countries like Pakistan may not be acceptable by the west on the same equation as they do for ASEAN countries and the Middle East. The worst type of democracy is better than the most benign martial law but having a martial law is better then having no country at all. This last-case scenario damages the credibility and effectiveness of the Army, diverting from its primary mission. However, by drawing from a vast reservoir of retired ex-servicemen and ex-bureaucrats to run the day-to-day affairs in a Martial Law, this must remain a reluctant but viable option. If a stage comes where the last option is the only viable one left, then we are in serious trouble with respect to governance. Why should not Ms Bhutto, who remains a leader with a vast mass following, take stock of the situation and let things not slide past the first option?
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