THE four-month-old government of Prime Minister Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan in Azad Kashmir has so far been unable to make its mark with its performance on both domestic and foreign fronts. Ask any person how he views the working of the new set-up and his prompt reply will show the general thinking about the government. The government has failed to prove that it exists on the ground, is the prevailing opinion.

There are a number of factors behind such an assessment, but the dominant one is the alleged lack of team spirit in the ranks of the government. The supporters of Sardar Abdul Qayyum, who is president of the (reunified) Muslim Conference, feel they have been or are being pushed to the wall. Sardar Sikandar could not establish the impression that he was giving equal importance to MC workers, irrespective of their affiliation with any of the party faction during the days of its split.

As regards the performance of the prime minister on the foreign front, a sizable number of people believe that it also needs much more improvement. He could not properly utilize his recent tour of the United States and the United Kingdom spanning over 15 days. He spent maximum time in the UK and that too with the Kashmiri expatriates belonging to his own party. There was no interaction on his part with parliamentarians and media people. If at all it was, no one knows here about that.

On the contrary, one cannot help but say that Barrister Sultan Mahmood, leader of the opposition in the AJK assembly and chief of main opposition People’s Party, made the most of his recent tour to several European countries and the UK regarding projection of the Kashmir issue.

But let us take a look first on what situation is developing within Azad Kashmir. Although the Muslim Conference leaders may find it hard to admit publicly, the fact is that the alleged differences between the supporters of the top leaders, Sardar Qayyum and Sardar Sikandar, are again picking up momentum. These differences did not surface overnight and were brewing insidiously from the very first day of the government. But now these are surfacing with every passing day.

The first public display of these differences was the reshuffle of the portfolios of Shah Ghulam Qadir within three months of the formation of the cabinet. Mr Qadir was the secretary-general of the Muslim Conference (Qayyum) and held the same office for the interim period after the party’s reunification. Word is that Sardar Sikandar did not induct him in the cabinet at his own, but on the strong recommendations of Sardar Qayyum and the quarters that matter the most these days.

Initially, he was allotted the portfolios of finance, food, auqaf, zakat and ushr, but in the last week of October the prime minister replaced food, auqaf, zakat and ushr with revenue and rehabilitation departments. The people close to the prime minister fed reports to a section of the press that these departments were withdrawn because Mr Qadir was favouring “unjustified” payment to a food department contractor. But insiders have a different story to tell.

According to them, the main “discredit” of Mr Qadir, apart from his strong affiliation with Sardar Qayyum, is that the army had proposed his name during the process of the formation of the government in Azad Kashmir for the office of the prime minister. What served as fuel to fire was a proposal put up by Mr Qadir as minister for zakat and ushr whereby a certain amount was also fixed from zakat profit fund for the president and the minister concerned as their discretionary funds.

The issue of the contractor’s payment was merely a pretext, on the basis of which the prime minister wanted to sack Mr Qadir. But, the prudent president disproved the move, following which Mr Qadir’s portfolios were interchanged with another minister. Mr Qadir was about to tender his resignation, but Sardar Qayyum and others advised him to avoid the extreme step, as it would expose the friction in the party.

Mr Qadir is not alone, there are some other ministers as well who complain in private that their hands are tied and they are unable to exercise their authority. They believe that the prime minister has directed the heads of the departments, allotted to them, not to follow their instructions.

Recently, a minister found himself helpless in cancelling some of the transfers of grade-14 employees, which were made by a bureaucrat of his ministry without taking him into confidence. Interestingly, the minister ordered the cancellations after being requested by colleagues in the cabinet and parliamentary party. But the bureaucrat abruptly refused to reverse the transfers. This reflects the state of affairs in the government.

And perhaps it was why the ministers seemed least interested in defending the government at the recent session of the legislative assembly. Lack of coordination in the ruling party was observed by all and sundry on a number of occasions during the longest session in the past several years. The opposition cashed in on the situation. For example, on the issue of the appointment of Mumtaz Gillani, minister for works, as “acting prime minister” without his prior designation as senior minister, the opposition gave tough time to the treasury benches. And when senior opposition leader Sahibzada Ishaq Zafar, during the heated debate on the issue, sarcastically commented that the prime minister Hayat did not trust his ministers, no one stood to contradict his assertion and defend the prime minister.

Barrister Sultan Mahmood, who remained prime minister for the past five years, expresses much optimism about the fall of the Sikandar government, saying that it is a matter of weeks. Notwithstanding his manoeuvres for the change, it goes without saying that the opposition everywhere is in the habit of making such claims to keep the morale of its workers high.

But what takes one by surprise is that many ruling party leaders in Azad Kashmir are also making the same prediction. In the whole situation, Sardar Attique Ahmed Khan, the talented leader of the Mu