| 03 September 2004 | Friday | 17 Rajab 1425 |
Slow progress in talks
High hopes of a better tomorrow
There is growing concern over the rapidly increasing incidence owing to distributive injustice. Hence, the need for poverty alleviation measures. Many international financial institutions ((IFIs) have introduced specific programmes to support this effort.
The Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) of the IMF is a case in point. Pakistan has also adopted poverty alleviation as a priority objective primarily to avail itself of the low-cost financial facility.
With the emergence of religious parties as a new political force, there is now a talk of Islamic welfare state in Pakistan. This will address the same problem as poverty alleviation.
The term welfare state has quite a history in developed countries, even though it is a waning concept. It essentially means a state catering to the basic needs of the citizens.
According to the concept, only the state is held responsible. The common man makes a contribution through taxes and levies for this purpose. This is generally known as social security. What is the Islamic view of it?
First, the Holy Quran describes an ideal society in these words:. "It is provided for thee that thou wilt not hunger, nor wilt thou be naked, and that thou wilt not thirst therein, nor wilt thou be exposed to the sun." (20: 119-20) This means food, clothing, shelter and water.
The Holy Prophet (PBUH) said, "A son of Adam is entitled to three things; a dwelling to live in, a garment to cover his nakedness, a piece of bread and water." (Tirmidhi) To this may be added education as this is to be acquired by every Muslim, male or female, as a duty.
The Holy Prophet introduced free education in his own lifetime. The enemy soldiers captured during the battle of Badr were allowed to win freedom either by paying ransom in cash or by educating a given number of Muslims. Many of them, who were literate, opted for the latter. (Bukhari)
He used to dispatch learned Muslims to other tribes to teach them the Holy Quran and other aspects of faith. They were not allowed to charge anything for that, not even to accept a small gift.
They would devote the day to collecting wood from the forest for their sustenance, prepare their meals and look after other personal needs. The spare time, mostly in the evening, was for teaching the Book and other things about Islam. Without health, a person cannot discharge his obligations whether in religion or worldly affairs. This is the essence of the basic needs approach.
Islam, in contrast to the modern concept of the welfare state, holds the individual as much as the state responsible for the welfare of all members of society, particularly those close as relatives or in physical proximity as neighbours.
It would thus be more appropriate to use the word society instead of the state. The joint responsibility of the state and the individual makes the system more effective and comprehensive.
The latter is needed not just in terms of providing physical needs but also emotional requirements that are quite pronounced in case of sick and lonely senior citizens.
Allah has specified, in the Holy Quran, the target groups that are deprived or underprivileged, along with the means to provide for them. The latter is in the nature of compulsory levy as the zakat.
In addition, followers have been strongly urged to undertake welfare activity on a purely voluntary basis. For this, only the sky is the limit. It is in the Holy Quran, "Never shall you attain to righteousness unless you spend out what you love; and whatever you spend Allah surely knows it well." (3:93) "And spend out of that with which We have provided you before death comes upon one of you and he says, 'My Lord! If Thou wouldst grant me respite for a little while then I would give alms and be among the righteous." (63:11)
Divine reward for charity is promised in the Holy Quran, "Surely, Allah rewards the charitable." (12:89). "As to the men that give alms, and the women that give alms and those who lend to Allah a goodly loan-it will be increased manifold for them and theirs will also be an honourable reward." (57:19) "But the righteous one shall be kept away from it (flaming fire), Who gives his wealth to become purified.
And he owes no favour to any one, which is to be repaid, Except that he gives his wealth to seek the pleasure of his Lord, the Most High. And soon will He be well pleased with him." (92:19-22) The Holy Prophet said, "Charity wipes out sins as water extinguishes fire." (Tirmidhi) "Only two persons are to be envied ...and he upon whom Allah bestows wealth and he spends in the cause of Allah through the hours of the night and day." (Bukhari)
It is not the quantum of charity that is important but the spirit behind it. Every Muslim, regardless of his means, is expected to participate in this act of virtue. It is in the Holy Quran, "Let him who has abundance of means spend out of his abundance, And let him whose means of subsistence are straitened, spend out what Allah has given him.
Allah burdens not any soul beyond that what He has given it. Allah will soon bring about ease after hardship." (65:8) "And they ask thee what they should spend. Say, 'what you can spare.'
Thus Allah makes His commandments clear to you that you may reflect, upon this world and the next." (2:220) The Holy prophet explained this by saying, "He who has an extra mount should give that to the one who has no mount, and one who has surplus of provision he should give it to the one who is without it" According to the companion (RA) who reported it, "He made mention of so many kinds of wealth until we were of the opinion that none of us has any right over surplus." (Muslim)
Practical experience shows, there is no dearth of problems to be confronted by the state when it assumes welfare functions. Bringing in individual to lend a helping hand makes the system more effective, thus preserving the self-respect and dignity of the recipients. It, however, adds many new dimensions to management such as coordination so as to avoid duplication of effort and to ensure that there is nothing amiss.
The general tendency to pass the buck and conflict of interests should be watched very carefully. Allah, in His infinite wisdom, has in great detail explained His directives on issues of a permanent nature. Zakat is a prime example.
For problems that could arise in the future and not be comprehended at that time, Allah indicated the basic principles leaving the detailed mechanics to time. Of these, the relative role of the State and the individual in instituting and managing the welfare system comes to mind.
A whole host of literature on experiments for making the state welfare system, sans the individual as one of the purveyors, really effective is available. Here is a challenge for Muslim scholars to devise a system in accordance with the dictates of Islam in their true spirit.
Islamic institutions cannot deliver without the Islamic spirit providing the real motive force. The current experience with the zakat funds provides ample evidence of their improper use, leaving the genuinely deserving in the cold, as the spirit is lacking. The present bureaucratic system of management in the public sector, ruling over rather than serving the public, a deeply ingrained legacy of the Raj, will not do.
The British adopted the regal style in order to awe the natives, and could easily afford it as it was not paid by them. Their style of living and management back home, where they had to pay through their nose by way of taxes was totally different. The powers that be in Pakistan, instead of adopting austerity as preached by Islam, have set new records of wasteful expenditure just to satisfy their ego.
When talking of the Islamic system, the standard set by the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and the righteous successors (RA) is worth keeping in view. It could be argued that resource constraints during the Prophet's time dictated austerity.
Wealth poured in torrents after his demise, particularly during Hazrat Umar's time but this did not change his proverbial simple lifestyle. Hazrat Hassan (RA) once, during a Friday sermon, counted no less than 12 patches on his shirt. (Tabri)
When Hazrat Umar (RA) travelled to Jerusalem to sign the peace treaty as a conqueror and the head of the then mightiest and wealthiest Empire, his entourage consisted of just one servant with whom he shared the only mount they had, riding by turn.
Some Muslim generals wanted him to be more presentable but he refused, saying, "We are the people whom Allah has honoured with Islam. We do not want any thing except Allah." (Ibn Kathir)
The Islamic welfare society, for that matter any effort in the name of Islam can never see success without the implementation of basic Islamic values of life. The most important of these are unshakable faith in the existence of the All-Power ful God - Allah, transitory life on earth, accountability of every thing big or small on the Day of Judgment, and reward by the All-Aware according to the real motive of every human action.
For this, the followers have ample guidance in the Holy Quran and the perfect role model of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). There is no room for corruption of any kind. Fear of Allah, honesty, merit and justice must rule the roost.
The world has recognized after a long and bitter experience that these are essential pre-requisites of a civilized society and has turned to good governance. Islam has been very emphatic about it for the last more than fourteen centuries.
Slow progress in talks
Despite the hope expressed by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz for a "cooperative and friendly relationship" between India and Pakistan, the reality is that the ongoing composite dialogue appears to be degenerating into yet another exercise in futility.
If the slide is not stopped, the dialogue will prove to be neither substantive nor purposeful, contrary to what the prime minister would want it to be. The form at of the dialogue is admittedly still intact. The foreign ministers of the two countries will meet in New Delhi, as scheduled in the first week of September.
The foreign secretaries will have their meeting even earlier and duly present a review of the ground that has been covered in the first phase of the dialogue. However, anything significantly more than a proforma restatement of their known positions on the Kashmir issue is most unlikely to be presented.
At the outset there were clear indications that both sides will demonstrate a marked degree of flexibility and that their attention will be focused equally on all outstanding bilateral issues and not merely on Kashmir.
However, now Pakistan has made it clear that a bilateral meeting without discussing Kashmir will be like talking of Himalayas without the Mount Everest or of Kashmir minus the Dal Lake.
In the meantime India's national security adviser, J.N. Dixit, who hardly ever loses an opportunity to be somewhat contemptuous where Pakistan is concerned, has called Pakistan's position on the disputed state as virtually ridiculous, maintaining that the whole exercise (of a composite dialogue) was hardly anything more than a 'theatre' belying hopes that the two sides would eventually agree to move forward.
Despite the frivolous nature of his own observations he has had the good sense to recognize that India, being the bigger of the two countries, has the greater responsibility for making the dialogue purposeful.
The Pakistan foreign office spokesman, who unfortunately always seems to speak in a tone which sounds unduly authoritarian, has once more "demanded" the participation of the representatives of Kashmiri people in any discussion of the Kashmir question.
India, on its part, continues to insist that with 'elections' being held in the occupied state and a Kashmiri Muslim at the helm, the participation of the Kashmiri people is virtually there. It goes without saying that unless something radical happens to change the present outlook, the composite dialogue will be nothing more than idle polemics.
One redeeming feature in the scenario has been the exchange of 55 prisoners between India and Pakistan, despite some last minute delay. The detention of the Indians in Pakistan and of the Pakistanis in India, often on some technical ground, poses a major humanitarian problem for both countries.
Hopefully, even though the composite dialogue is making slow progress, the problem would be minimized. The impassioned plea by Rajni Kant, one of the Indian prisoners who had been in detention in Pakistan and has now been handed over to the Indian authorities, must be heeded. He called upon the authorities on both sides to do.... maximum for the prisoners, a large number of whom are rotting in jail.
Although India would want the Kashmir issue to be treated as the country's internal problem, the world community's concern in the matter is no secret. The Amnesty International, described as the watchdog of the human rights situation among the world community, has called upon India to be "more serious" about New Delhi probing into the human rights situation in the Indian-held Kashmir.
In a recent statement it noted the "disappearance" of people in the occupied state and regretted that very few security force personnel have been prosecuted for the illegal killing of people who are described as missing.
It maintained that only a small handful of security personnel had been subject of official investigation. Several dozen members of the Occupied Kashmir- based Association of Parents of Disappeared persons staged a silent protest demonstration in Srinagar last Monday.
With the insurgency in Kashmir continuing to be the major challenge for the Indian security forces, India has continued to hold Pakistan responsible for reinforcing the ranks of the insurgents by helping in their cross-border movement. With the start of the composite dialogue there has been a significant drop in the number of such incidents.
The cease fire on the LoC imposed last year has also apparently helped in keeping the cross-border movement under control. However, there have also been reports in some sections of the Indian media saying that even before the drop in the incidence of cross-border movement, an unprecedented crackdown by Pakistan on the 'jihadi' groups had produced a significant decline in the level of violence in the occupied territory.
The late Nikhil Chakravartty who was editor of Mainstream, an Indian journal held in the highest esteem, once wrote in a commentary on Pakistan: "One gets the impression that... Kashmir evokes diverse response in different segments of Pakistani public opinion.
For instance some people look upon the present Indian predicament (over the insurgency) in Kashmir as a rebuff, if not revenge, for India's help to the Bangladeshis in 1971 which led to the slicing off the eastern wing of Pakistan.
This is natural in the case of the old army hands... At the same time it needs to be emphasized that in all circles (in Pakistan) that one met, the prospect of a full-scale war with India is ruled out. The continuation of the low-intensity proxy war is more or less taken for granted."
Nikhil Chakravartty wrote that several years ago. In the context of the composite dialogue which has been launched regardless of the hurdles to be encountered, even the low- intensity proxy war could disappear.
Only if the interlocutors of India and Pakistan continue with the dialogue in the spirit in which it was undertaken at the outset and meet the agenda as planned.
High hopes of a better tomorrow
Much of the talk in various circles revolves round whether the new prime minister, Shaukat Aziz, would succeed in his lofty objective of putting Pakistan on the road to progress or just meet the fate of his predecessors.
Undeniably Mr. Aziz has many personal and professional attributes. He has been a highly successful banker and his stint as finance minister won him many laurels. In this, favourable external circumstances were a major contributory factor for reviving Pakistan's macro-economy.
An impressive personal and professional record of an incoming PM is always a great asset for any nation and, in the Pakistani context, backing of the military and American support are a vital element for retaining high office and that too he enjoys, at least for now, in great measure.
But given the structural and intrinsic weaknesses of the existing system, will it be a sufficient condition to pull us out of the lingering political quagmire? Is it not also true that ever since October 1999 President Musharraf and Mr. Shaukat Aziz have been the two most powerful individuals in Pakistan? So what would be different this time that will reverse the tide and take us to the road to prosperity.
The answers to all these questions are not easy to find because of the complexity of our existing situation and a deeper appraisal would be necessary. In areas where Mr. Aziz is allowed to exercise his authority independently, he is likely to do well - routine business of the government, taking decisions on matters of a non-political nature and not involving high policy.
It would, nonetheless, be a great achievement if within these limitations his government could improve security of life for citizens and provide services of health and education to the common man.
Steering the course of the nation and handling major defence and foreign policy issues will obviously fall outside the ambit of his jurisdiction. De facto, he will remain the finance minister of the country with the some additional responsibilities of governance with the title of PM and the president functioning both as president and prime minister in areas of his choosing.
It is also understandable that Mr. Aziz having won his seat through the courtesy of the leader of the PML and being the nominee of the armed forces will have to work under heavy constraints even within his limited mandate to satisfy both these constituencies even if it means compromising governance for expedient reasons or sheer survival in office.
It is obvious that the PML-led coalition as a political entity would pull him in different directions. Mr. Aziz will have to reconcile the conflicting interests of the disparate groups to retain the party's majority in the parliament by working closely with each group and the PML chief.
A more important challenge, however, would be adoption of policies that benefit the people. A major weakness of the current military-led government has been that, irrespective of the merit of their policies, the people never owned them and the cleavage between the rulers and the ruled widened enormously.
This phenomenon will not go away; in fact, it is expected to aggravate as there will now be the president and the PM, the two most powerful people, operating in a political vacuum.
Mr. Aziz having served in the senate for five years and having a streak of political ambition can claim some experience in politics, but is surely not in a position to engage with the public directly to reduce the void.
The attempt on his life has made this task of mobilizing public support even more difficult. He would thus rely heavily on the media for public relations, similar to what the president has been doing for filling this vacuum.
He will also be facing the onslaught of the combined opposition because from their point of view he is a softer target and obstructing him or his functioning would not draw the same reaction from the establishment.
Many of Pakistan's problems stem from failed or weak political institutions and inflated political role of the army. For this reason the whole value structure of society is in deep disarray.
Pakistan's vulnerability lies in years of distorted civil-military relationship, constant undermining of the political institutions by the military and civilian leadership and the creation of tailor-made systems that are supported by a coterie that generally use power as an end in itself.
The current military and civil leadership in power, however, does not consider this an issue. In fact, from the policies being pursued by President Musharraf, it is apparent that he wants to retain the dominance of the military institutions.
Under the military's watchful eyes he promotes economic growth, undertakes infra-structural development and shapes and reshapes the political process and political institutions for the future. In this contrived framework of governance, from President Musharraf's perspective Shaukat Aziz fits in exceedingly well.
Personalities aside, the central question that comes to mind is whether this approach can be termed strategic prudence or a strategic error? Can a country without a genuine framework of democracy in the 21st century acquire social cohesion, remain stable and move towards economic prosperity? And can a strategic error be corrected through constant tactical moves, something that we have been witnessing in the form of frequent, and at times, bizarre change of prime ministers.
The most favoured argument advanced for military interventions has been that the civilian political leadership, whenever given a chance, has miserably failed to deliver. Some civilian politicians were corrupt, inefficient and even anti-democratic in the past.
This is probably true, but mistakes have to be overcome through the self-corrective mechanism of democracy by strengthening the institutions of judiciary and parliament and not by resorting to punishing the nation and overturning the system for the misdeeds of some.
Democracy can never be imposed, although there are a few exceptions. After World War II America used military means as an occupation power to bring democracy to Germany and Japan and did succeed.
The reason for their success was that America was determined to bring these two major powers in their fold against the Soviets and develop in these countries their shared values to fight communism.
It is unfortunate that for the America's security and short-term goals have pushed democracy in Pakistan on the back burner and in a choice between security and democracy the former always takes precedence.
With the current leadership not allowing democracy to return and Americans pursuing their own goals, the restoration of viable civilian institutions in Pakistan remains a distant goal.
Only time will tell whether the new PM is able to create an environment where we can promote science and technology to propel the economy. While investors, both domestic and foreign, could invest in the infrastructure of energy, transport and communications the small and medium-size industries can become the engine of growth for a "new" Pakistan.
Or, like his predecessors, Shaukat Aziz will get bogged down fighting terrorism, pacifying the resurging forces of nationalism and tackling religious and ethnic conflicts.
The writer is a retired lieutenant-general of the Pakistan Army.