Politics and Economics
Political affiliations throughout the world are made primarily on the basis of mutual beliefs and economics should normally dominate all other perceptions by a long mile. It is only in South Asia that personalities dominate ideology so much that one has a myriad number of parties with the same election plank. Despite the lengthy manifestos of the various parties, the basic requirements of the people are simple and it involves food, shelter, medicine, education and clothing to start with, the 60’s expectation which brought PPP to power now standing revised by the addition of electricity, water, gas and public transportation to the wish-list, not necessarily in that order. The underlying theme must be that the foregoing should not only be easily available but economically within reach of the common man. If there is any political party which is not promising all this, they should seek votes on the moon because they are not going to get anywhere in Pakistan.
Opposition to Gen Zia attracted a number of heterogenous elements, personality and ideology-wise, into the same melting pot, an association born out of a common animosity as much as a sense of collective security, many of them having their own separate axes to grind. With Gen Zia no more on the scene, the raison d’etre for the combined opposition is gone and only the momentum (or inertia) of long association is keeping these disparate forces together. Politically much more wiser than in 1986 when she opted to go alone and thereby suffered the consequences of the loneliness of a long distance runner, Benazir is playing a yeo-woman’s role in maintaining a semblance of unity.
On the international front, we are faced with an effervescent situation in a number of areas, prime among them being the winding down of the war in Afghanistan. Faced as we are with acts of desperation, bombing of our cities by air not precluded, one is hard put in keeping one’s cool. That Pakistan has been responsible to an extent for the Soviet Union’s greatest defeat is more than an accident of history and it does not matter whether Zulfikar Ali Bhutto or Gen. Zia was the Head of State, Pakistan’s support for the Mujahideen could never have been open to debate, the singer not so consequential as the song which would have remained the same. The presence of Russian troops on our borders spelled a terminal threat to our existence and the means to send them back had to be found. It is a tragic paradox of history but the foundations of the present Afghan policy was laid by the PPP regime, most of the present Afghan Mujahideen leaders being looked after by Pakistan many years before Russian troops ever entered Afghanistan in strength by end 1979. The long and short of it is that this policy will continue, in varying cadence perhaps, but with the same ultimate aim, Afghanistan as a truly neutral and buffer state, coinciding with its historical geo-political position. Our relations with India have undergone no fundamental change, it has only gone from bad to worse to bad again, SAARC notwithstanding. With Indian Punjab aflame as befits disturbing an hornet’s nests, the real possibility exists of the buffer state of Khalistan coming up eventually on our eastern borders.
Whatever our policy is towards that eventuality, it is extremely unlikely that any future government will be able to exercise restraint on the Sikhs, even if they tried, that is. The nuclear race with India will continue, luckily we have not yet been forced to eat grass a la Zulfikar Ali Bhutto but if that stage ever did come to pass, no doubt we would have acquired a taste for it. As regards Iran, people seem to forget that the Shah of Iran’s askance look at our Nizam-e-Mustafa movement in 1977 was born out of a complex mix, a wary though contemptuous perception of his own problems with Islamic clergyman led primarily by a virtually unknown Ayatollah in exile in Iraq, Ayatollah Khomeini, who got quite an uplift from our own Islamic aspirations. Our present policy towards Iran is as much an extension of the recognition that our Islamic roots needed to be rejuvenated as much as it recognizes regional imperatives. It is an excellent policy, restrained somewhat as it is by our ties with the Arabs, but any future government will have to continue the process, for regional, economic and other reasons.
The emphasis on Islamisation will have to continue on the national scene, maybe in a lower frequency than adopted by Gen Zia, but progressing apace nevertheless. The more orthodox perceptions may fall by the wayside but that would be welcome as it would clear the universal misconception that Islam is a religion of extreme bigots, an unholy image for one of the most moderate and accommodating religions in history, easily adaptable to modern times. No political party will be able to alter this process and they will have to live with it, some grudgingly perhaps, albeit modulating it to fit with their own political objectives.
In the end, as stated earlier, it will all boil down to basic economic factors, prime among them being the control of inflation, providing more employment opportunities, making housing and education available universally, provision of food and medicine within reach of the common man, along with basic amenities like water, electricity, etc. Economic policies at the Federal level will concern the following (1) to accelerate the process of de-nationalisation (2) to re-nationalize or (3) to maintain the present status quo. Like the spate of nationalisation by the PPP Regime, Gen. Zia’s 11 years saw de-nationalisation reach its peak and whatever Government comes to power can only, with some exceptions, maintain the status quo.
Who are the voters likely to choose? At the present time as the political kaleidoscope unfolds, the choice is between the Right Wing, led by the PML(F), JI and the NPP on the one hand and the Centrists composed of the PPP with PML(J), slightly right of centre, making a Centre-Right Coalition at the Federal level. MQM will form the decisive swing vote for the Coalition and will probably go along with PML(F) because of Jatoi and the SNA factor. The big losers in either case will be the extreme Left, some elements of the PPP among them, as they have no future in present-day Pakistan. The Right-Wing Coalition will definitely maintain the status quo while adopting populist slogans to please the electorate whereas the Centre-Right Coalition will completely halt the de-nationalisation trend while looking in depth at certain instances for possible re-nationalisation. The nationalised banks will remain in public hands and that is as it should be, the only change being to try and improve the customer services image on a commercial basis which can only happen when you bring the employee-service conditions into line with that of private commercial banks. A more pragmatic course will have to be conducted post-election to attract investment in industry, a far more imaginative and innovative economic policy will have to be annunciated by whoever comes to power, if the political leadership is serious about ameliorating the lot of the common man and does not follow the usual pattern of having solicited the vote on tall promises only to pander to special interest groups, whereby the faces of some power brokers never change in any regime.
Despite Gen Zia’s penchant for Islamisation, the TRIAD that he depended upon to sustain his rule was composed of the Army and Bureaucracy forming one point of the triangle, the feudal hierarchy in the rural areas forming another point of the triangle, the last corner being taken up by the business community composed of industrialists and traders. All this has resulted in a very large middle class to sustain the structure. Throughout his 11 years, Gen Zia successfully kept his main pillars of support happy by pursuing pragmatic policies designed to foster the confidence of his supporters without driving the populace into taking to the streets. The Junejo Government, except for certain populist slogans designed to dazzle the electorate with Nai Roshni, continued to implement Gen Zia’s general policies till their ouster on May 29, though it must be said that Mr. Junejo had started showing flashes of being effective. A month or so before the sacking of the PM, Dr. Mahbubul Haq triggered off a controversy about the Defence Budget when he stated that it had increased 14 times since 1977, failing to mention that the Indian Defence Budget had increased substantially manifold during the same period. Scarcely had Mr Junejo retreated for soul-searching to Sindhri, when the good doctor started talking about imposing agriculture taxes, thereby shaking the confidence of Gen Zia’s other sound pillar of support in the feudal class. To confound all concerned, his subsequent scathing attack on the business community in the Federal Budget eroded the confidence of the remaining pillar of Gen Zia’s support. Coming from his most trusted civilian aide, a man who was virtually his de-facto PM, it sent the economy into a tail-spin, with spiralling prices leading to inflationary tendencies across the board, an unreal plank to launch an election campaign from for the caretaker PML, particularly when one considers that it is the common man’s economic perceptions, rather than his understanding of constitutional nuances, that will decide his voting preferences. The businessmen’s confidence remains shaken, seen by stock market gyrations, basically downwards and the first action of a representative government will be to shore up the investment atmosphere, a difficult task to accomplish in the face of populist slogans which will be the electioneering order of the day. Dr. Mahbubul Haq’s known brilliance has been ill-used, increasingly erratic in the recent past and it is tragic but he is now becoming heavy political baggage, the last nail being his extremely ill-advised release of the list of duty free cars on personal import, a potential for scandal that turned out was not a scandal at all as most of them were meant for official use, but the unnecessary adverse propaganda did cause specific damage in the public mind that could have been avoided.
The post-election Government has to address the economy as its most important priority. The complete spectrum of our present economic malaise and the causes thereof have to be analysed in depth. Would-be economic leaders should start an indepth study already so that the economy may be tackled on the run if they should come to power. Tinkering with the economy has to stop and changes must be well-thought out and efficiently executed. Ours is essentially a rural-based economy and further industrialisation must be geared to maximising our potential in this respect. Pragmatic policies must be annunciated for concrete steps in defence production, particularly buy-back schemes. All schemes meant to provide housing and shelter must be used to regenerate commerce by acting as force-multiplier instead of being a drain on the economy e.g. avoid Kutcha Abadis by making Pucca Abadis with cement and steel. Cooperative schemes must be encouraged across the board, whether in agriculture, housing, industry, etc with emphasis placed on evolving cooperative leadership from among its members rather than those supplanted by the bureaucracy from among its members, a non-starter highlighted by the present comparative failure of cooperative schemes.
The constitutional role of the Pakistan Army as annunciated clearly by the Chief of Army Staff should act as sound tonic to the economy. Steadfastness in the face of temptation (and some grave provocation) can only be beneficial to the country — and the economy because ultimately it is the Pakistan Army that acts as a guarantee against anarchy. Under conditions fostered by the military leadership, the political process has to succeed. All pragmatic national policies are essentially dictated by economics and our political leaders would do well to steer clear of populist slogans which will arouse expectations but will be frustrating in its non-consummation. However, one can hardly expect “gloom and doom” politics to succeed with the electorate so the alternative is to exercise restraint while promising the moon by describing the steps and phases in the interregnum. One cannot make prophecies but it will be extremely beneficial to Pakistan to have the Coalition Government that will be formed in November 1988. A weak Coalition, kept in check by a strong and vocal opposition, will be a great antidote for nepotism and corruption and God knows we need respite from the national pastime of the blatant misuse of official power. By 1990, the political Coalition (whichever) should eventually fall out and form much more binding political alliances. We could then expect fresh elections, corruption having been controlled to a great extent provided the media helps this process along. Whatever Government comes to power this year will be on trial in the economic court of the people and whereas in 1988 an interim verdict will be given based on economic promises, it is in 1990 that the people will give a firm mandate to those leaders who shall take us into the 21st Century.
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