A wake-up call for the regime
By Khalid Mahmood
RECENT reports issued by certain well-known institutes have indicated the government’s failure to inspire confidence in its ability to provide a framework for policy strategy to address growing public fears regarding the economic crisis and security threats. This has led to comments that the clock will start ticking for the government unless it puts its house in order.
The International Institute for Strategic Studies recently issued a report titled ‘Pakistan on the brink’ predicting that the economic crisis, political turmoil and growing militancy could rock the country’s foundations and force the army to step in although it would be reluctant to do so “having lost so much prestige during the nine years of Musharraf’s rule”.
Also, a new study by US intelligence agencies titled ‘Global trends 2025 — a transformed world’ projects that Afghanistan will continue to demonstrate a significant pattern of tribal interaction and conflict and that the future of Pakistan is uncertain with the NWFP and tribal areas probably continuing to be poorly governed and sources of cross-border instability.
One of the key areas of worry is the economy. A lot of things have gone wrong with disturbing indicators giving the impression that the government particularly its economic policymakers had gone on vacation as seen in the budget document of June 2008 where projections are unrealistic. The period of the lame-duck economy may cause a huge setback to the economic prospects of Pakistan in the coming years.
Even though we have reached an agreement with the IMF, one hopes we will not be lulled into complacency thinking that this will provide the much-needed stabilisation and economic growth. In fact, growth in the next two years is going to be a modest affair.
There does not seem to be signs of a solid strategy aimed at improving the tax-to-GDP ratio which in Pakistan is one of the lowest in the world or one that addresses the structural problems of the economy including the promotion of export potential. The worst in the world’s economic slowdown may yet happen in 2009 and this would adversely affect prospects of trade and investment for Pakistan. The government needs to put in place an effective policy framework and an implementation mechanism.
Much needs to be amended on the political front as well. The government must come clean on its policy pertaining to the war against terrorism. Despite the in-camera joint session of parliament some time ago and the emergence of a consensus resolution, the concerns of a large number of Pakistanis have not been addressed.
To be fair to the government it inherited a policy bereft of any terms of engagement. The state of denial and deceit that characterised this policy was best illustrated two years ago when Hellfire missiles unleashed by what locals said were US drones struck a religious school — the official claim was that it was a militant camp — in Bajaur killing a number of people. The Pakistan military denied outside involvement and it was asserted that the attack was carried out by the country’s army.
Some commentators have even suggested that the insurgency in Bajaur may have been triggered by this attack which the government handled so ineptly.
It is evident that despite denials by the government there has been a tacit deal on air strikes between Pakistan and the US. Without intelligence, such strikes cannot be successful and if so then who is providing it? Steve Coll, the author of Ghost Wars, in a piece in the New Yorker recently wrote that “in public the Pakistani government denies its involvement because the attacks are unpopular; in private it approves them in the hope that it will keep the US off its back and perhaps throw the Taliban off balance…. The raids provoke humiliation, anger and nationalism among Pakistanis.”
Nato troops in Afghanistan may see a military surge in 2009 while there is a need to engage the Pakhtuns who are conservative and have historically looked to the religious leadership in times of crisis. Nato should also provide Afghanistan with long-term and focused assistance in various sectors of nation-building as a way of providing an honourable exit for itself and giving the people of the region a sense of relief. The grave situation demands that the government review its policy and address the issue of counter-insurgency in a coordinated manner rather than appear to be weak and insincere.
Faced with threats to the country’s existence, what is important is not only what the government is doing but how it is doing it. A political party in power has to serve a national purpose. It has to promote national security and development which depends upon respect for the rule of law. Statecraft is not about holding occasional meetings and making off-the-cuff remarks. Leadership requires discipline, recognition of the challenges and the government’s response to these through its policies. The government’s articulation has to be credible. People long for a coherent, well-thought-out future strategy which can win their hearts and minds.
The government should be seen to promote the common good. If it is not seen to be putting its house in order, then any wake-up call might be too late to ward off what has unfortunately come to be seen as the beginning of the end of Pakistan’s democratic interlude. Reverting to a military dispensation is not the solution; it has always ended up being a part of the problem in Pakistan.
kmahmood07@yahoo.com


Seeking private life
By John Hooper
THE sons of the Sicilian mafia’s jailed “boss of all bosses”, Bernardo Provenzano, on Monday made an emotional appeal for what one called “the right to live like any other member of the public”.
“We have lived, and continue to live, as if we were Big Brother contestants,” said Angelo Provenzano. “We have been actors in the biggest reality show on Cosa Nostra.”
He complained bitterly of police surveillance and media pressure. His younger brother, 26 year-old Francesco, said: “Every activity I get ready to set up is scotched because it is [defined by the law as] a ‘product of the laundering of illicitly obtained assets’. I ask myself, when will I be able to have a life of my own.”
As a language and literature graduate, he said he had won a scholarship to teach Italian in a Germany university. But he added: “They took it away from me because someone said I could not represent Italy abroad. As if I were the ambassador.”
His elder brother, aged 33, added: “We always try to make ourselves known by our Christian names, and not by our surname. I always introduce myself as Angelo and only if it is necessary do I add the rest.”
The two young men denied they had been instructed by their father to give the interview, carried by two Italian dailies, La Repubblica and La Stampa. But police and prosecutors can be expected to pore over every word in a search for possible coded messages — all the more so since Angelo Provenzano used the interview to play down the crimes of the mafia. A spokesman for relatives of the mafia’s victims said his declarations of love and respect for his father were “an insult”.
Bernardo Provenzano was arrested in 2006 after 43 years on the run. His elder son spent the first 16 years of his life also in hiding. “I was born and brought up in captivity,” said Angelo, who refused to discuss his childhood on the run.
In 1992, the boys and their mother returned to their home town, Corleone, when “my growing-up began”, he said. The son of the “capo di tutti i capi” acknowledged he had found it “difficult” to integrate with the rest of society. At least as difficult was the surveillance to which the family were subjected after 1992. “They monitored every setting, every space — the living room, the car, the bathroom, the windows,” he said. “Whether they still monitor us, I don’t know. We certainly behave as if we were [under surveillance].” He suggested that behind the mafia’s operations lay manoeuvres by the authorities, and claimed two of the organisation’s most famous victims, the investigating magistrates Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino, had been sacrificed “on the altar of raison d’etat” (national interest).
But he admitted that he had “curbed his curiosity” and had never asked his mother direct questions about his father. “I concede certain mitigating circumstances to my father”, he said, “so I have nothing to admonish him for.”
The brother of a journalist murdered by the mob said in an open letter to the Provenzano sons: “There is no need to renounce your father, but [only] to disown his role and condemn decisively his criminal actions.”
— The Guardian, London


