A FULL page advertisement by the Ministry of Information on Nov 15 celebrated the completion of the constitutional tenure of Pakistan’s parliament — the first in our history. It highlights the economic stability achieved in the past five years.

Since then accolades have been heaped on the government of Mr. Shaukat Aziz (2004-2007), for his ‘landmark successes’ in economic development and his ‘unflinching pursuit’ of good governance. However, newspaper reports, on Nov 16, speak of wide gaps between the manifesto of the PML-Q and its performance.

It is time to look back, sift facts from fiction and attempt an objective appreciation of governance and development between 2004 and 2007.

First take a look at the longest serving National Assembly in Pakistan’s chequered legislative history. This parliament, perhaps, survived this passage of time due to the docility and personal aggrandisement of most of the members. One newspaper report reveals a healthy percentage increase in the personal wealth of legislators. It rarely rose above the level of a second rate debating society of half-baked intellectuals vying for photo-ops, from top to bottom.

This full term assembly adopted some 48 Acts of parliament, as against almost double this number of ordinances promulgated, precluding parliamentary debates. Public policy continued to be the handmaiden of the executive.

Not one major public policy articulation — health, education, welfare, environment or national security — was made through legislation. Suffice to say, the autonomous wisdom of the executive remain unperturbed by the counsel of the people’s representatives.

Good governance was the favourite mantra of the government. But not one of the governance measures initiated — whether resource management, right sizing, restructuring, devolution or police reform — is the product of parliamentary consideration.

The parliament endeared itself well to the establishment — hence its full shelf life. The majority in government always, and some of His Majesty’s loyal opposition when needed, nodded in the affirmative to the commands of the choreographer.

But the performance still did not commend itself sufficiently to receive a regular State of the Nation address from the President.

Mr. Shaukat Aziz is being applauded for his success as the economic manager of the country, having ushered in unprecedented development. The suave Mr. Aziz with a disarming charm is a corporate guru. He is a firm believer and practitioner of a banker’s corporate governance culture — ruthless with the weak and acquiescent to the strong.

For him development was digits without regard to substance. Profits were more important than the moral ground and the upfront influx of foreign exchange had more propaganda value than efficient preservation of the family silver. Increase in stock exchange indices is trumpeted as the greatest indicator of development. But is development really all about these figures?

Modern day economists, perhaps as competent and well known as Mr. Shaukat Aziz and Dr. Salman Shah, the finance adviser — Amartya Sen, Joseph Stiglitz, Dani Roderic, Daron Acemoglu, et al — tell us that real development is manifested in and caused by strengthening and preserving freedom, ecology and institutions — and even happiness. And on these counts, should the just departed government be congratulating itself?

Development can be recognised only when the social benefits of economic progress reach the least fortunate. Some fact-sheets released now inform us that in recent years, unemployment has gone up, inflation is continually on the rise and the poor are poorer. Are these indicators of unprecedented development?

The quality of public school education has eroded unabated. The constitutional guarantee of free and compulsory education up to the secondary level notwithstanding, more than 30 per cent of school education is in private hands for profit. While the vast majority of public schools are not provided with basic infrastructure and teaching environment, expensive public land has been allotted, in Islamabad, to private schools for a pittance.

These private schools serve only the most privileged — one of them charges a four year-old Rs.95, 000 for admission and Rs.7, 500 per month as tuition fee. Do such institutions deserve state largesse and is this development (higher fees helping GDP growth) of any benefit to the masses? This is while ghost schools in Sindh continue to haunt and there may be no reachable schools in Balochistan for the scattered poor population.

Indeed this is development of the few at the cost of many.

To recall freedom, ecology and institutions, where do we stand today as compared to 2004? The less said about freedom the better. The last weeks of the last government saw the cabinet appreciating and approving (?) the state of emergency and suspension of the constitution and the fundamental rights. The fourth estate, particularly the electronic media, given unspecified space first, has since been put in place – or put out altogether, in an equal and opposite reaction much to the chagrin of the people. Development indeed!

Preservation of environment did not even get the lip service it deserved from the government of Mr. Shaukat Aziz. Major projects were allowed to proceed beyond planning, even without cosmetic environmental impact assessments. The residents of Choa Saidan Shah cried in vain, but could not prevent the powerful business houses from establishing cement plants, endangering a history rich environment. These plants could easily have been located on the other side of the salt range.

New Murree project will hurt an already stressed environment, further denuding the forest cover and causing irretrievable loss to soil strength and will thus affect the social life of the poor common people. In the case of the Margalla National Park, law is violated with disdain by people with good government connections. Such projects reflect neither corporate social responsibility (a mere buzz word really) nor any far-sighted government commitment to sustainable development.

To cap its successes the crème de la crème government destroyed, by design, institutions that support the longevity of social benefits. The judiciary is suffering from understandable withdrawal symptoms due to relentless intrusion into its functioning. Politicised and made pliant, the civil service is merely dancing attendance to the personal whims of the political bosses. The rule of law is applied selectively; the elites have unlimited political and economic power; and only a fraction of citizens have access to quality education, credit and production opportunities. State institutions have withered more than grown in the last three years.

The just departed government practised governance like private banking; totally personalised rather than institutional; whimsical rather than principled; autocratic rather than consultative; and, covert rather than transparent. Shall we play a requiem to it, with the prayer, that the future governments will not emulate this governance culture?

EVENTS do not necessarily unfold according to plans. This is certainly the case in countries where institutions are weak and decisions are made by a few people who hold the reins of power.

General Pervez Musharraf took a leap in the dark by proclaiming a state of emergency on Nov 3. His intention was to smoothen the way to his re-election as president and to install a political regime he felt comfortable with. It did not work out that way. He and his associates must have been surprised by the response to the draconian measures that were adopted on that fateful day and those that followed later.

Much of the commentary on the emergency has dealt with its political consequences. While these are important it is also critical to take a close look at the damage the proclamation of emergency is likely to do to the economy. The economy will pay a heavy price for the actions taken on Nov 3. One to two percentage points may be shaved off the rate of growth in GDP if the emergency continues. This will happen because of the caution external players will use in bringing capital to Pakistan.

This is unfortunate for the country as well as the regime that took a great deal of pride in the way it had managed the economy. There was some substance in that claim especially when the rates of GDP growth of recent years are compared with those attained in the decade before General Musharraf took office.

The growth rate in GDP had perked up largely because of the inflow of foreign capital, some of it provided by the members of the affluent Pakistani diasporas. One reason for the impressive performance of the economy in the last five years was the access to foreign capital for domestic investment. Funds for investment as well as consumption came in from a number of sources. Among them were the large savings of the four to five million people of Pakistani origin who are living and working abroad.

The combined income of these people is $80-100bn, almost close to the size of the country’s GDP. The amount saved by the diasporas is perhaps as much as $20bn a year, considerably more than that available from domestic sources. It is therefore important that this source continues to yield capital to the country.

One unintended result of the way the leadership in Pakistan has handled politics in recent days and weeks could be the serious alienation of the Pakistani expatriate community. President Musharraf has travelled the world widely and on each of his foreign visits he made it a point to touch base with the Pakistani communities there. I attended some of these meetings and I was impressed with the way he approached these people. He did not ask for their charity but for their investments.

His message was clear: that under his watch, Pakistan was seeking to become a player in the international global economic system and the Pakistanis living abroad could help in that endeavour. If they did they would help the country and also help themselves. There was money to be made in Pakistan by those who had a good knowledge of how the country worked. The diasporas had the knowledge and the money.

This message resonated with the Pakistani communities and a steady flow of investment began to arrive. Some of it went into real estate, some into such modern service sectors as information technology and telecommunications, some into the stock market. The confidence the Pakistani diasporas had developed in the country of their origin has begun to fray. That is one very unfortunate consequence of the actions taken on Nov 3.

As reported by the press in both Pakistan and abroad, the members of the Pakistani diasporas have been upset by the imposition of the state of emergency in the country and by the use of excessive force by the authorities to deal with dissent. They are unhappy since it goes against the political values they have acquired living in their adopted homelands. Large demonstrations were organised in London and Washington by the Pakistanis living in Britain and America.

Much of the capital that comes into the country comes from these two countries. Will the communities of Pakistani-British and Pakistani-Americans react by reducing the amount of money they are sending back to the homeland? Pakistan, ever reliant on external flows for augmenting low levels of domestic savings, cannot afford to have this particular source of funds to dry up.

I have written frequently in this space about the contribution diasporas make to the development of the countries from which they come. For long this was a neglected subject in development literature. It was also neglected by public policy. It is only recently that economists and development institutions have turned their attention to the roles migrants play in promoting the development of the countries of their origin.

A recent study published by the Inter-American Development Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development provides some interesting insights into both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the remittances sent by the various migrant communities scattered around the globe. Researchers found that some 150 million people who have left their homes and live and work abroad originate from 162 countries.

For analytical purposes the researchers divided these countries into ten groups. Among these, the South Asia region, with receipts of $114bn, was the largest beneficiary in Asia, India with $24.5bn, was the largest recipient. Mexico was second with receipts of $24.2bn. These flows are now much larger than the amount of official development assistance provided to the developing world or the amount of foreign direct investment that is received.

Pakistan was estimated to have received more than $6bn in 2006. Counting the contributions in kind as well as those made for charitable purposes when the members of the diasporas visit the homeland, the amount of money that comes in from this particular source is much larger than the official estimates. It is perhaps as much as $10bn or seven to eight per cent of the gross domestic product. Or, putting these numbers in a different perspective, the expatriate Pakistani community is responsible for more than one percentage point in the growth of GDP.

Some of this flow is now in jeopardy as the people who have been involved in it are not likely to countenance the political moves made by the regime in recent days. It takes a long time to build a relationship of trust with potential investors but it takes very little time to break that trust. Unfortunately that is precisely what President Musharraf has done. What was he thinking when he decided to take such a leap in the dark?

HUNDREDS of people, including armed militants, security personnel and a few civilians, are reported to have been killed within five days of a full-fledged military operation mounted recently in Swat valley. Intriguingly the military operation coincided accurately with the scheduled visit of the US Deputy Secretary of State John D. Negroponte.

Mass migration from the affected areas has become a norm and a curfew-like situation prevails across the region. The latest to leave is the Wali Ehad (crown prince), Miangul Aurangzeb, of the former state of Swat, and the son-in-law of late General Ayub Khan. He owns a house in Islamabad and has now permanently shifted there on account of the militant insurgency, though none of his family members have ever been targeted. Other elites have been attacked and have also chosen to move out.

Markets, shops, police stations, schools and colleges are deserted. The people of the valley wonder what is in store for them and their homeland when this operation ends. Not long ago, the turquoise waters of the majestic River Swat with its tributaries flowing across the valley mingled with the fragrance of apple and apricot orchards spread over the length and breadth of the valley. They have witnessed numerous epochs since the Aryans migrated in the fourth century BC. The existence of archeological sites, which date back to the Buddhist era, bears witness to the rich cultural heritage of the land.

One might make a few assumptions before drawing up a likely scenario in the valley after the military operation ends. One commonly held assumption is that the threat of militancy is real and indigenous. This assumption might readily be challenged keeping in view the history of the Swat valley and the socio-cultural institutionalisation of the people who lived under a benevolent autocracy which had developed an enviable infrastructure for healthcare, education, transportation and communication along with a responsive judicial system.

The second assumption is that the military would carry out targeted operation against only those who have disrupted peace in the valley and challenged the writ of the state in an attempt to establish a Taliban style Islamic sharia against the wishes of the people of the valley. The operation, it is assumed, will end by December as the government has announced. Damage to the civilian population, infrastructure, archaeological remains and natural resources will be kept to the possible minimum level. The third assumption is that the wave of militancy will remain confined to the bounds of the valley and the government would not allow the scenic valley to be targeted over and over again in future.

It is now a well-known and well-documented fact that these assumptions might be misplaced. Extremism of any kind that leads to militancy cannot be curbed only through a military operation. Killing people has never resolved a conflict of this kind. The political parties working in the valley have to accelerate their efforts to help the affected population rehabilitate themselves, both physically and mentally. Before and during the recent crisis in the valley, the track record of all political parties especially that of the religio-political ones, has been far from commendable.

They have to respond to the socio-economic aspirations of the majority of the population of the valley if they want to ensure their survival and defeat religious extremism.

The government has to help establish and rebuild the broken roads, schools, colleges, hospitals and bridges as soon as the operation is over. It has to help establish institutions for mental and physical post-traumatic treatment of the affectees on an urgent basis. The provincial government and local administration have to start developing a comprehensive plan to deal with the post-operation issues, the most prominent of which is the constitutional and political status of Swat. The proposed plan must be developed in consultation with the local population through political parties, civil society organisations and respective union councils. The government also has to work on the rehabilitation of the depleted natural resources—River Swat, forests, flora and fauna—with the help of local civil society organisations. The archeological and cultural heritage like statues, stupas and remains right from Barikot to Kalam are at risk of being destroyed in the crisis. The government has to plan their preservation even as the war rages on.

The national and international donor agencies had adopted a development strategy in the Swat valley that was insensitive to the local culture and unsuitable in terms of the universally accepted paradigms of development. Millions of dollars were poured into the valley when the Kalam Integrated Development Project was undertaken and recently, when the Malakand Rural Development Project was launched but instead of ameliorating the situation in the valley, both the projects contributed to the deterioration of the valley. Both of these projects had two visible flaws. Firstly, the projects did not take the developmental requirements and the indigenous knowledge of the people into consideration. Secondly, the projects excluded the Swat people from the consultative process. One can see the devastating results of both these projects on all cultural, social and developmental levels.

The civil society — teachers, lawyers, doctors, local elders — has to become active in advocacy if they wish the valley to be restored to its previous grandeur. The non-governmental organisations have to unearth and utilise the native erudition of its people as well as reach out to the poor and powerless. They have to ensure that their development strategy leads to the empowerment of these people, especially the marginalised.

Why were Sufi Mohammad of the Tahreek-i-Nifaz-i-Shariat-Mohammadi (TNSM) and Maulana Fazlullah, the firebrand cleric whose supporters are fighting the military presently, successful in disrupting the peace of the valley? They succeeded simply because they were able to count on the deprivations of the subalterns. The traditional elite of the valley, the government, the civil society, the political parties and the NGOs have failed to respond to the deprivations of Swat’s denizens in general and the marginalised in particular. They will now have to address their needs if they want to combat extremism in Swat valley.

The writer is a socio-political analyst based in Islamabad.
khadim.2005@gmail.com