|
| May 25, 2008 | Sunday | Jamadi-ul-Awwal 19, 1429 |
The delay continues
Children — the vulnerable lot
OTHER VOICES - Indian Press
Abuse and misuse of democracy
Four runners to war or peace
SUSPENSE, mystery, thriller; these are some of the adjectives being used to describe the wheelings and dealings of the paired kingpins of Pakistani politics i.e. Messrs Zardari and Sharif. The drama, which has completely engrossed the whole nation and reduced it to a state of ‘to be or not to be’, has reached a somewhat whimpering end.
ONE cannot fail to note the strong resemblance between our leaders and the band of disparate adventurers in ‘The Guns of Navarone’, who launched their exploration for gold with some of them suspicious of others, each linked to his ‘enemy’ throu-gh a friend or a friend of a friend. Unlike at least the film version of the novel in the 1960s, each one of our leaders has chosen to fight the other by proxy.
THE monetary-tightening measures announced by the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) on Thursday do not come as a bolt from the blue. For over a year, the central bank had been cautioning the government against galloping inflation, fiscal and current account deficits, excessive government borrowing and erosion of the value of the rupee. The federal and provincial governments, preoccupied as they have been with the pressing issues of politics, have scarcely had the inclination to give a thought to the economy. As a result, the ruling party has earned a lot of flak for its failure to address the brass tacks in the economy that are affecting the life of all Pakistanis, especially the under-privileged classes.
Not surprisingly, the SBP has been forced to step in. The increase in the key discount rate to 12 per cent from 10.5 per cent and a raise in the Statutory Liquidity Ratio (SLR) and Cash Reserve Requirement (CRR) are intended to mop up excess liquidity, tame inflationary pressures and arrest the depreciation of the rupee. The SBP has been frank in its criticism of excessive government borrowing from the central bank which has escalated to Rs950bn — the highest ever in the country’s history — and needs to be reduced to prudent levels. Dr Shamshad Akhtar, the SBP governor, has also advised the government to go for anti-inflationary borrowing. Industry is up in protest contending that a rise in interest rates would increase the cost of production and also reduce credit flow to the private sector, which in turn will slow economic growth. It is perhaps fairly correctly believed that the measures announced by the SBP would scarcely be able to tackle the surging inflation fuelled by soaring international oil and commodity prices. The central bank is, however, convinced that the measures it has adopted would help curb a fresh bout of inflation.
From June 1, it has been made mandatory on banks to pay a minimum profit of five per cent on savings accounts. That may help in channelling money in circulation into banks and encourage savings. Regardless of the banking industry’s expression of shock over the unexpected move, it seems only fair that the banks should be made to share with small savers some of their fortunes of years of booming banking business. The SBP has come under criticism from the corporate sector for imposing a 35 per cent margin on letters of credit. Oil and selected food items have been kept off that list. Given the scary widening of trade and current account deficits, discouraging unnecessary imports should do the country good. Is it too much to ask the rich to put brakes on the import of expensive cars and Havana cigars?
IF one were to go by gestures alone, then the release of Shahzain Bugti from Mach jail on Friday could be perceived as a good omen for the government-backed reconciliation process in Balochistan. After all, the release of Bugti — a grandson of the late Nawab Akbar Bugti who was killed in a military operation in 2006 — follows close on the heels of the release of Akhtar Mengal, a high-profile political detainee. However, progression on bringing normality to the province and easing Baloch grievances has been slow. With the government preoccupied with issues such as the judges’ question, there has been little attempt to address the neglect of and halt the conflict in Pakistan’s most underdeveloped province. What, for instance, one can ask has happened to the all-parties conference that the government had promised in late April to hold in the beginning of May? And what measures have been taken so far to bring doubting nationalists to the negotiating table? True, the PPP has been lagging behind schedule in other matters as well, such as the judiciary’s restoration and the government’s 100-day reform plan. But it is about time that the current lot of political leaders realised they cannot afford to delay any longer action on the resolution of crises that endanger the integrity of the federation.
In this respect, the Baloch insurgency is one of the most potent threats. The battle-hardened Baloch nationalists will only accept peace when there are greater signs of provincial autonomy and a significant decrease in the number of military personnel and installations in the area. Otherwise, militant groups like the Balochistan Liberation Army will continue to attack gas pipelines, railway tracks and military targets. In all this, there will be no let-up for the Baloch people already deprived of basic living facilities.
Under these circumstances, quick action is of paramount importance. The government — and not the army and intelligence agencies — must be seen to be in control and willing to concede and address legitimate Baloch demands and grievances. These would include giving the Baloch a far larger share of their province’s resources than they have now, getting on with development work and rehabilitating the displaced. It must also locate and procure the release of the scores of political detainees taken away by intelligence agencies and held incommunicado, or otherwise, for months on end. Their numbers must not be limited to sardars and nawabzadas but include all activists. Only then will Balochistan’s long-festering wounds begin to heal.
“THE crisis will get worse before it improves,” is the verdict of Unicef and other international organisations in respect of the food inflation that has hit the world. They have pointed out what we in Pakistan can already observe — the far-reaching impact of sky-rocketing global food prices. It is the poorest of the poor that are worst hit in this low-income, poverty-ridden country, though the ripples of this crisis reach out to everyone. Speaking at a news conference in Islamabad on Friday, Unicef regional director for South Asia David Toole broached an important aspect of this phenomenon — the vulnerability of women and children. He pointed out that the food crisis was making it an arduous task for the lowest segments of society to feed their children.
Out of an estimated population of 160 million, 36.3 per cent is under 15 and, according to Unicef, a third of them are chronically malnourished. With food becoming inaccessible, children will be further deprived of important food and nutrients thus stunting their physical and mental growth. Charles MacCormack, president and chief executive officer of Save the Children, pointed out that not only will food consumption be directly affected but parents may pull out children from schools, reduce expenditure on healthcare and make their offspring work in order to cope with rising food prices. It is vital to note that in Pakistan, the poor spend a substantial proportion of their income on food. Since poor nutrition already causes 50 per cent of child deaths in Pakistan, which also has a high infant mortality rate, Unicef’s warning that the burgeoning food prices may impact adversely on the mortality figures should be taken seriously. While the government is expected to address food inflation generally, it must devise strategies that focus on saving the children. Output subsidies may provide relief to the poor in terms of prices while shortages should be attended to in a speedy manner. Thought needs to be given to measures such as food rationing, the rationalisation of the existing infrastructure such as utility stores and vouchers for the children of the poor.
Thinking big about movies
The Asian Age
THE clutch of deals signed with production firms of iconic Hollywood stars announced by Anil Ambani’s Reliance Big Entertainment … has opened the floodgates for Bollywood’s biggies to enter the Hollywood production arena. Hitherto … India was used more as an outsourcing hub, particularly for animation of some of the biggest blockbusters. Three cheers to the … group for showing the way and heralding that India has arrived on the global entertainment scene.
The Ambani group has changed the game to India being a serious player…. [T]he global production space is being redefined and they want India to be at the forefront. It is an ambitious plan with a roadmap of 69 films on the anvil, of which 30 are already under negotiation in nine languages, giving rise to opportunities for diverse talents. This venture is expected to provide a platform for what could emerge as the cinema of the 21st century. Convergence is no longer a pipedream. What is needed is tenacity of purpose, and since the group has shown that one can think big, one can expect all other big Indian players to follow suit. One big hurrah for Indian movies. — (May 22)
Civilian questions
The Indian Express
EXTERNAL Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s … mission to Pakistan had three important objectives. To assess the altered political environment in Islamabad, establish rapport with the new government, and find out if the civilian leaders share the assumptions of the peace process that India had constructed with President Pervez Musharraf.
…At the end of his visit, Mukherjee expressed confidence that Pakistan is ready for a comprehensive normalisation of bilateral relations. Not everyone in New Delhi might be convinced. Rightly so. We heard Mukherjee’s interlocutors oscillate between talk of a ‘grand reconciliation’ on the one hand and disturbing rhetoric about UN resolutions on J&K and a renewed emphasis on the ‘aspirations’ of the Kashmiri people on the other.
…India should be ready to clinch new cooperative agreements wherever it can and intensify the back-channel talks to pin down Pakistan’s position on Kashmir. At the same time, New Delhi should be bracing itself for nasty surprises, for the sources of Pakistan’s current ambiguity are deep and structural. — (May 23)
In other words, we have a deadlock which actually means everyone ends up with less than before.
The PML-N did not want the PCO judges, the PPP did not want an unrestricted Iftikhar Chaudhry, and the public did not want an adulterated mixture of a pre-/post-PCO judiciary. However, that is what happens when you are looking to please everybody and appease no one.
In this chaotic climate of conspiracy, the two men who matter the most with regard to the positions they occupy, i.e. the president and the prime minister, have apparently mattered the least. The president, visibly weakened, is now hanging on to the last political straw playing his American card to survive, while the prime minister, knowing that his days may be numbered, is unwilling to look beyond 100 days to make any meaningful commitment. Both are busy securing themselves, rather than concentrating on bailing out the country from the terrible crisis it is going through.
This unholy alliance — where the philosophy of all-for-each and each-for-all prevails — is a recipe for the convergence of vested interests and manipulations. This surface convergence hides deeply rooted differences of direction and vision which will keep on surfacing as the political heat is turned up from time to time. The postponement of the by-elections with the apparent collusion of Rehman Malik and Musharraf was just the beginning of a provocation which led to unresolvable differences between the two mega stars of this soap opera titled ‘Democracy’.
Democracy does allow differences of opinion. As long as there is a common goal and purpose, differences of opinion actually lead to synergistic benefits where each party ends up with more than it could have if it were alone. That is precisely why the PPP and PML-N had done so well in the elections. The common goal was to come into power by winning a majority in the elections.
However, the elections were not an end but a beginning — the beginning of seeing differences surface over many issues. The reason for this friction is that the commonality of purpose has disappeared. While the PML-N is hugely anti-Musharraf and pro-Iftikhar Chaudhry, the PPP is averse to the chief justice and ready to compromise with the president to appease certain foreign forces.
The beauty of democracy is that it gives an opportunity to the people to vote for a government and thus to have a say in selecting their representatives and influencing all decision-making. This supposedly makes the government representatives accountable and answerable to the people.
However, this process requires a mature public which carefully assesses the pros and cons of every decision. Democracy is not a foolproof system and is especially vulnerable when its principles are challenged.
Authority belongs to the majority, but where the majority is unsure, divided and desperate, the choices it makes may not be in its own or the nation’s interest. This is what the PPP is hoping to cash in on — thus for it, democracy still means ‘divide and rule’.
Mr Zardari and Gen Musharraf do share some common interests. Both the PPP and Musharraf are inclined towards the White House and would like to toe the American line. It is clear that Zardari and Musharraf would not risk having a chief justice like Iftikhar Chaudhry who could challenge any decision they took and would rather have a docile figure bending all laws to accommodate their many illegitimate designs.
However, alliances based on protective and insecure grounds normally end up on opposite sides, as neither party has any real intention of creating a genuine winning situation for the other.
Thus Zardari and Musharraf, who have a lot of skeletons to hide in their political cupboards, are just performing a rearguard action to ward off the uncomfortable intrusion of the media, judiciary and civil society to cover up a past riddled with moral deviations.
The uncommon yet common interest of all three players is the acquisition and retention of power. However, Musharraf will shamelessly claim ‘Pakistan first’, Zardari ‘roti, kapra aur makan first’, and Nawaz Sharif ‘justice first’. They are all now truly on test to prove whether democracy is a game of compromising on principles or one that entails sacrifices.
Mr Sharif has taken the lead to prove his point by removing himself from power. Only time will tell whether that is a short-term political impulse or a long-term principled stand. The good thing about Mr Sharif’s move is that the true colours of each party will be on display when the immediate issue of justice reaches its compromised solution. Shallow characters lead to personality cracks which reveal the snarling faces and clenched fists of these very people who have been smiling ear to ear and thumping hand in hand. There is great danger of these grins turning into grimaces and of mudslinging and the blame game resuming.
Democracy is not a term for compromising on principles, neither is it a game of getting on with all and sundry. It is not a licence to agree with the disagreeable; it is not about allowances for chronic bureaucracy; it is not a justification for non-performance; it is not an excuse for breaking promises. Democracy does not mean empowering the already powerful. It means empowering the people who have entrusted the leaders with power, and respecting and honouring their aspirations and expectations even if it means sacrificing personal interests and taking on local and foreign power-brokers. It is the misrepresentation of democracy which has given rise to the belief that in this country democracy cannot work — a philosophy which each autocrat loves to promote. The fault does not lie in the democratic approach but in its twisted manipulation and implementation.
It is time that the people of this country did not spare the abusers of this approach and ensured that all these fake democracy claimants were exposed, blunted and made politically impotent. This may be difficult and tedious, but it is possible if the voice of the nation shows determination to put an end to this trend. n
The writer is a consultant and CEO of Franklin Covey.
andleeb@franklincoveysouthasia.com
All four of them — Asif Ali Zardari, after he seized the PPP’s baton following Benazir Bhutto’s death, President Pervez Musharraf, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and Nawaz Sharif — as public perceptions went, started off with remote controls in their hands, engaging one another through their advanced troops, at times making it difficult for people to put two and two together.
The president appeared to withdraw increasingly to his base in Rawalpindi, his bidding done by a few trusted lieutenants not all of them wearing the Q-League tag. He also used his good relationship with the army high command and the Americans to drive home the message that he was firmly in the saddle. Justice Chaudhry, when he did not have the all-out support of the N-League leaders, relied on the thousands of lawyers who vowed to battle on for their ‘chief’.
Mr Zardari chose to do his politics through a presentable group assigned to run the party’s front office as he fixed orders from all around in the backroom. Mr Sharif concentrated on the lawyers from a distance and was gracious enough to name people for ministries and other crucial jobs while he preferred to stay outside parliament.
Those who sought all-out war to reach a solution and those who backed the tougher option of rapprochement were certain that their wishes could only materialise once the four key actors had shed their mocked aloofness from the scene and took on one another openly. By Pakistani standards, the two sides had to wait for long, but their moment seems to have arrived at last.
Mian Nawaz Sharif indicates that he is poised to give parliament a shot. He has filed nomination papers for contesting a seat from Lahore in by-elections scheduled for June 26. On the side he reminds all around that he had put his weight behind the PPP unselfishly and by way of a good deed in the name of Allah.
After holding on to his cards for long and in the aftermath of the dismissal of the last of the court cases pending against him, Asif Zardari has used the services of the media to finally hit out at President Musharraf. The honourable Justice Chaudhry has been moved by circumstances to praise a certain unknown political party which has sacrificed its ministries in the march for a greater cause — the cause of a free judiciary.
This has cleared much of the mist in the minds of all those who wouldn’t believe anything until they had heard it first-hand. All that was needed now was an angry statement of intent by the low-lying president, and the pursuers of war and rapprochement could go their respective ways.
Reports from the president’s camp on Friday said that Mr Zardari’s interview with the Press Trust of India has done the trick as it got Gen Musharraf thinking. The president is said to have decided to end his ‘backdoor’ contacts with the PPP co-chairman, who is effectively the ultimate authority in the party.
In the peculiar way that things have been moving in this country, Mr President and Mr Zardari may still sort this matter out and continue to act as each other’s cushion for some more time. Having said that, Mr Zardari’s calling President Musharraf a relic of the past is symptomatic of how vulnerable their partnership is to the force of public demand which the head of a party of the people cannot remain indifferent to.
As has been the case with some other recent occurrences, this latest development doesn’t reflect well on the president. He may be enjoying the backing of an institution, the most powerful of them all, yet in the domain where politicians operate, he has been in recent times reduced to investing in individuals in the hope that they will salvage his position and pride.
The so-called attempt to replace the leadership of Gen Musharraf’s own creation, the Q-League, is a case which, to the public eye, shows the dwindling of his power. For days on end, the media predicted an imminent change of command in the Q-League. The fact that this didn’t happen was taken by people to be a sign that President Musharraf’s grip on the proceedings was loosening.
Then remarks by his old comrades, the Chaudhries of Gujrat, that the president had no business interfering in the affairs of the party hardly helped undo the damage. Chaudhry Shujaat, who heads the Q-League, has since been heard pledging to help the PPP stay in power should the N-League opt to part ways with Mr Zardari. He may have spoken on the president’s behalf but only after adding to the public’s sense of Gen Musharraf’s isolation.
Despite the passage of time and the many hurdles they have been faced with, the feeling is that Mr Zardari and Mr Sharif are too intricately aligned with each other at this moment to separate. The chants for President Musharraf to quit have a greater purpose to them than ever before, even if a reading of his record suggests that right now he may be pondering a show of strength of his own. He is surely in need of a party to carry it out for him.
