Shoddy performance

CONSIDERING the performance of the National Assembly one wonders what kind of democracy is Pakistan. As the law-making body, the parliament of a country is expected to initiate, study, debate and adopt bills. It is also designed to debate the policies of the government and fine-tune them to bring them in line with the security, political, social and economic needs of the country. Parliament also acts as a watchdog body to monitor the performance of government functionaries. These are very important functions entrusted to the National Assembly. To ensure that it works smoothly and efficiently, rules of business and procedures have been laid down that the presiding officer and members of the legislature are required to observe. These procedures also ensure that the dignity of the house is upheld.

An account of the National Assembly’s proceedings on the closing day of the third parliamentary year conveys the impression that this body holds no importance in the eyes of its own members and the government. There were reports of members speaking out of turn, many of them exceeding the time limit, the microphones being switched off to silence some speakers, and complaints from MNAs about issues not being attended to or members being cut short by the speaker. The only positive thing about the NA that has emerged in the last parliamentary year is that it managed to meet for 132 days — two more than the required 130 days. That is quite an achievement if one remembers that a major problem traditionally faced by the speaker is of lack of quorum because members, including ministers, fail to show up for a session. Yet the parliament did not hold a joint sitting of the two houses to be addressed by the president at the start of the year — again a constitutional requirement. This is a serious lapse in view of the fact that the president’s democratic credentials are widely questioned. By failing to show the customary respect for the National Assembly, the president can be said to have cast aspersions on this august body and the concept of a representative role.

Our legislators too have not always lived up to their role. Their parliamentary behaviour has at times left much to be desired. There have been occasions when the house has seen unruly scenes, with MNAs resorting to desk thumping, yelling at each other and tearing up bills so that the law-making body has looked like a comedy of the absurd. It is time this aspect of our parliamentary performance was taken seriously. Since most of the veteran and seasoned parliamentarians who conducted themselves with great dignity are no more there and our history of army rule has caused frequent interruptions in democratic rule, many of the younger politicians are not even aware of how to conduct themselves in the house. It is time the political parties addressed this issue by training their MNAs and MPAs on how the national and provincial assemblies should work and how the members should perform. Some women NGOs have been working with women parliamentarians to create awareness in them on how various issues can be taken up in the legislature and what their own rights and duties are. This work should be expanded so that MNAs, Senators and MPAs of both sexes could benefit.

Another short step

WHAT Ms Condoleezza Rice brokered on Tuesday is basically a tactical accord between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Extending her stay in Al Quds to clinch the deal, the US secretary of state made Israel and the PA agree to joint control of the Rafah crossing point. Rafah, it should be noted, is not on the Gaza-Israeli border but on the strip’s border with Egypt. Exit and entry there have always been a sticking point, because Israel wants to remain in Gaza one way or the other even after the withdrawal. It insists that it must monitor the entry of all goods and passengers because it fears the PA could import arms and ammunition and that militants may also enter Gaza and later move on to the West Bank and Israel. The Rafah crossing concerns PA and Egypt and does not involve Israel at all, because a revitalization of Gaza’s economy depends a lot on trade with Egypt. Under the deal brokered by Ms Rice, Palestinian and Israeli authorities will monitor the entry of passengers and goods through close-circuit television away from the actual entry point. The crossing is now scheduled for opening on the 25th of this month. The accord also provides for the movement of Palestinian convoys between Gaza and the West Bank across Israel within a month.

While Ms Rice’s intervention has solved a ticklish problem, the road to the strategic goal — the creation of a Palestinian state — is long and full of obstacles. America remains committed to a two-state solution, but there is no sign yet that Israel, too, sincerely believes in it. Proof of this lies not only in the continued expansion of Jewish settlements and the building of the separation barrier, but also in the statements which top Israeli leaders make from time to time. Until America puts its foot down and makes Israel amenable to the two-state goal, accords like those at Rafah will do little to ensure a fair and final settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Just a reminder

YOU hear the constant refrain, from the prime minister down, that the Oct 8 earthquake won’t hurt Pakistan’s growth, that it will not affect GDP growth, that it will only marginally affect the economy. The prime minister has said the earthquake’s impact will be limited because it struck one of the country’s poorest areas, without an industry and with only subsistence agriculture. The State Bank in its annual report warned that the fiscal deficit for 2005-06 could go up to four per cent of GDP, but balanced this by asserting that the reconstruction activity in the disaster areas could act as a catalyst for accelerated growth.

What kind of dispassionate talk is this? Being optimistic is all right, but it is ridiculous, at this stage, to chortle in statistical terms that the earthquake will not affect the economy. Whole habitats have been wiped out, towns have been destroyed, nearly 100,000 people have been killed, the number of unemployed has swelled, those crippled have had their futures blotted out, countless children have been orphaned and have yet to realize what’s happened to them. Isn’t that an economic setback as well as a human tragedy of colossal magnitude? Is a national catastrophe only to be measured in terms of GDP? It might be worthwhile for our leaders to remember something that Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has said: “Development can scarcely be seen merely in terms of enhancement of inanimate objects of convenience, such as a rise in the GNP (or in personal incomes), or industrialization, or technological advance, or social modernization. These are, of course, valuable — often crucially important — accomplishments, but their value must depend on what they do to the lives and freedoms of the people involved. We have reason to focus instead on reducing the unfreedoms and insecurities of various kinds that plague human lives.” Perhaps a greater focus on the quality rather than the quantity of growth and on the social dimension of the earthquake may stand us in better stead at the moment.

Afghanistan’s transition to democracy

AN anatomy of Afghanistan’s new parliament — accurately dubbed as a curate’s egg — leads one to the conclusion that the phenomenon of warlordism remains a stark fact of life in the turbulent country.

The official results of last month’s legislative elections, hailed as a landmark in the nation’s troubled transition towards democracy, are indicative of the influence wielded by gunmen, traditionalist clerics and jihadi commanders, who account for more than 55 per cent of the lower house. The same goes for the provincial councils.

What is heartening is that 68 progressive women have also made it to the Wolesi Jirga which, on the face of it, is a sharply divided house. Their success has spurred hopes for a gradual transformation of the largely conservative Afghans into a polity that has embarked on the exercise of rethinking its position on key issues like gender equality and challenging the status quo that some vested interests are seeking to perpetuate.

Being part of a heterogeneous lower house affords the women lawmakers an ideal chance to translate into action their plans to empower the other half, play their part in addressing gender-sensitive issues and promote female literacy in a milieu dominated by men with a deep-seated misogynist mindset.

In order to emerge as a political force to be reckoned with, the women MPs will be constrained to bank on support from their male colleagues. Both sides will have to work hard on issues like women’s education, economic emancipation, female quota in public-sector jobs and the dismantling of private militias and jails.

Over the last four years President Hamid Karzai has done far too little to end the culture of impunity and exploitation, which has earned his government public ire. This inaction on the president’s part flies in the face of his oft-reiterated vows to address questions crucial to his nation’s future. Frustrated with his indecision, Ali Ahmad Jalali quit as interior minister soon after the polls. Although Jalali, one of the very few leading lights in an incompetent administration, said he wanted to pursue an academic career in the US, insiders insist he stood down owing to the president’s dithering on action against his “near and dear ones tainted with graft and drug business.”

A dispassionate look at parliament, some members of which should have been in the dock for masterminding gruesome war crimes, inevitably creates a feeling of negativity. Though idealists believe that parliamentarians with a criminal past will eventually undergo a metamorphosis from dreaded gunmen to conscientious leaders, hard-edged realists maintain that no amount of spin or sophistry can change the predatory nature of those thriving on anarchism.

At this point, it will be unrealistic to expect them to dismantle their private militias, espouse democratic ideals, uphold the will of the long-suffering masses or learn to co-exist with their female counterparts. Both Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission and the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan admit that the commanders pose a grave threat to the country’s fragile security.

Ordinary Afghans complain there has been no perceptible change for the better in their lives during the last four years, which saw billions of dollars in aid pumped into their country for a lopsided reconstruction effort whose impact is hardly visible on the ground. Disenchanted with windy promises of a better tomorrow held out by their rulers, they wonder why criminals have been allowed to stay ensconced in power, and political parties kept out of the democratic process.

A significant aspect of the poll outcome — suggestive of an unexpected swing in voter mood — is the outright rejection of Taliban deserters in an electoral battle that witnessed several political heavyweights falling by the wayside. Among the principal losers are Taliban foreign minister Wakil Ahmad Mutawakil, minister for the promotion of virtue and prevention of vice Maulvi Qalamuddin, deputy trade minister Abdul Hakim Munib and intelligence chief Mullah Abdul Samad Khaksar.

Routed at the polls and bereft of whatever platform they had before parting ways with the former ruling clique, the Taliban renegades have practically had a double whammy. Their predicament has given rise to the assumption that President Karzai has played a masterstroke in engineering sharp divisions in the Taliban leadership and keeping the turncoats out of the loop at the same time. But analysts, familiar with Afghanistan’s rough and tumble politics, caution the “smart move” could be counter-productive in that the president has underestimated the “might of these men”.

At least, two Taliban defectors — a general and a former governor — have been able to score massive wins in Zabul and Samangan. In Zabul, the victory of Mullah Abdul Salam Rocketi, who played an active role in the jihad against Soviet invaders, has stunned watchers of the Afghan electoral scene. He acquired the nickname Rocketi because of his extraordinary ingenuity in handling all manner of rockets, grenades and bombs. On the other hand, Maulvi Mohammed Islam Mohammadi was the governor of Bamiyan where the Taliban dynamited the 5th century Buddha statues in 2001 shortly before they were ousted from power.

Much to the dismay of human rights activists, many candidates linked to the wholesale massacre of unarmed people during the civil strife have also romped home in the elections against the will of moderate Afghan voters, who are convinced their country needs a committed leadership to lift it out of grinding poverty, the straitjacket of warlordism and crony capitalism.

In private, government officials admit the comeback staged by Burhanuddin Rabbani, Younus Qanuni, Mohammad Mohaqiq, Abdul Rab Rasool Sayyaf, Pacha Khan Zadran, Rashid Dostum’s spokesman Faizullah Zaki, Hekmatyar’s follower Khalid Farooqi, Commander Perum Qul, Hazrat Ali, Syed Mohammad Gulab Zoi and Dr Ibrahim Malikzada runs counter to all democratic and parliamentary norms.

Former ministers including revered technocrat Ramazan Bashar Dost, Mustafa Kazmi, Syed Mohammad Ali Javed, Mohammad Arif Noorzai and Shakir Kargar have emerged triumphant. However, ex-lawmakers Taj Mohammad Wardak, Siddiq Chakari and Ahmad Shah Ahmadzai — known for firing broadsides at the Karzai administration all too often for showing untenable leniency to drug barons — tasted shock defeats.

Their internal bickering notwithstanding, Pashtuns have fared excellently by capturing the largest number of Wolesi Jirga seats. Astonishing gains reaped by Pashtun women have contributed in no small measure to the robust electoral performance of the biggest but fragmented ethnic group. They have done well in Kandahar, Nangarhar, Kunar, Helmand, Ghazni, Faryab, Laghman, Logar, Kabul, Nuristan, Paktika, Uruzgan and Zabul where the security situation has been extremely grim.

By virtue of their strong unity and a high level of awareness, the Tajiks have swept the board in Badakhshan, Badghis, Balkh, Farah, Ghore, Kabul, Herat and Takhar to finish second behind the Pashtuns. Despite their numerical weakness, Hazaras are in the third position — no mean achievement for a minority long struggling for political survival. The Uzbeks, loyal to Rashid Dostum and Pashayees and lending their weight to Hazrat Ali, are at the rock bottom of the result sheet.

In Kandahar, former minister for tribal and frontier affairs Arif Noorzai, communist-era leader Noorul Haq Uloomi, Qayyum Karzai (the president’s brother), former gubernatorial spokesman Khalid Pashtun, Haji Amir Lalai, Fariba Ahmadi Kakar, Shakiba and Rana Tarin have officially been declared winners.

Many fear the immunity, powers and privileges stemming from their electoral gains will provide the fearsome men a licence to kill ordinary mortals, legitimize the grave human rights violations they perpetrated in the last 25 years and make a mockery of the rule of law. However one phrases it, the ascendancy of the warlords — now masquerading as democrats — will in no way help Afghanistan’s uneasy quest for peace.

History has that eerie tendency of repeating itself, more so in a land stalked by abysmal poverty, a dismally low literacy rate, unemployment, a run of bad governments and felons of the darkest dye. How can one expect legislators — whose barbaric past is illustrated by six mass graves discovered recently near Paktika’s capital Sharan — to exhibit any sense of responsibility towards their voters? The mass graves containing the remains of hundreds of communist-era soldiers have prompted an outpouring of criticism from different quarters, but the involvement of the dreaded commanders in the bloodletting is a roadblock to a fair investigation.

It is no coincidence that Karzai’s close allies like Abdul Rab Rasul Sayyaf and Prof Rabbani and the president’s brother have been the target of strident denunciation for organized rigging, voter coercion and bribing election workers in their respective constituencies. International observers, however, contend the flawed elections would sooner or later inspire Afghans into turning over a new leaf in their chequered history.

With the Bonn process formally over, donors are waiting with bated breath for parliament to stake out its position on institutional reforms, building a new economy for a country almost entirely reliant on foreign financial assistance, plans for streamlining an inefficient system of collecting state revenues, raising security forces and defining a clear governmental structure. More than anything else, progress in these areas will be of enormous significance to post-election Afghanistan.