Flaws in US Perception of Pakistan's "Democracy" by Syed Mustufa Kamal

In the past five years, time and again, the armed forces of Pakistan and the US administration have both said that they are committed to supporting democracy in Pakistan. And, according to them, the current regime and the political system in Pakistan does fulfil democratic norms. In order to support and encourage the current so-called democratic system, the US has provided $1 billion over and above the $1.5 billion that is to be given to Pakistan under the Kerry-Lugar Bill (of course, this is notwithstanding the current suspension of $800 million in military aid).

A rationale for releasing this aid is that the US president has to certify every year that all the attributes of democracy exist in Pakistan. One should not have any doubt about the good intentions of both the Pakistani establishment and the US administration for democracy in Pakistan, but allow me to differ very respectfully from the concept of democracy which the US has about Pakistan.

Democracy in Pakistan is not of the people, by the people or for the people. On the contrary, it has been dominated for the last 63 years by 35-40 feudal families, big landowners and industrialist families. Pakistan’s political parties are mostly dynastic in nature and only family members make it to parliament, or become ministers or attain the post of prime minister. And, in most cases, the situation of ordinary people in their constituencies does not change for the better.

Mr Altaf Hussain (founder and leader of the party that I am a member of) calls this a game of musical chairs, and argues that this should not be mistaken for democracy. This rotten and corrupt political system will again cultivate dictatorship in the country, so much so that people will get tired of it and welcome any change, even if it is unconstitutional. The US seems to be happy with what is clearly a shallow and unreformed democracy in Pakistan.

Can the honourable US President Barack Hussein Obama imagine cities being run without any elected local government in his democratic country? Can he imagine his democratic country having rulers who take billions from banks and don’t ever return the money, and yet claim to be loyal leaders of the people?

Can he ask the rulers of so-called democratic Pakistan whether they know anything about the problems faced by the general public regarding the delivery and provision of basic services and civic facilities? Or how so-called democratic rulers have allowed the holding of elections in some parts of the country where women, by agreement of all main political parties in that area, are forbidden from casting their votes? Can Mr Obama imagine a federal government that does not delegate its powers and authority to the states or local counties/districts in a democratic country?

As for the military, General Kayani’s efforts to restore democracy and support the current regime for the last three-plus years is well-known. However, the current military leadership is not going to last forever. The circumstances that Pakistan presently finds itself in could give rise to a situation where the military may have no choice but to intervene. And, assuming that the intervention takes place, what if the military general has a mindset and ambitions like General Zia? One can only imagine the impact that this would have on Pakistan and on the world.

To prevent this from happening, we need to listen to what Mr Altaf Hussain is saying, in particular his call for the abolition of feudalism through drastic land reforms in Pakistan and a system where ordinary Pakistanis can hope to be elected to parliament. Complete autonomy should be given to the provinces without any interference from the federal government, and each province should have full rights to its wealth and full financial and administrative powers. This system should also be put in place in Fata.

Corruption Inc. By Mehreen Khan

Corruption, over the past three years, has reportedly reached a figure which defies hyperbole. Transparency International estimates that Rs3 trillion has been bled out of the economy by the Zardari-Gilani government. It seems such a fantastic number, almost too large to even comprehend. Yet this news story did not even make the front pages, indicative of a society now inured to dishonesty and wrongdoing.

Irrespective of whether the figure is correct or not, it is instructive to examine how societal values became so degraded that such a news story provokes not even a functional denial from the government nor a whimper from civil society. The current government, led by the PPP and in which several friends of the president have high posts, knows that no matter how much the media bleat on about graft and financial scandals, it does not matter one bit because the public remains unmoved and no entity has the ability, the courage or the resources to take action. The chief justice and the Supreme Court, despite their huffing and puffing, have been unable to blow the house down on corruption, cronyism and abuse of power. Opposition parties, including Nawaz Sharif’s, also tarnished by sleaze, disingenuously use corruption as a stick to beat the government with. Yet they have no desire for any substantive change in the system, of which they themselves aspire to be beneficiaries when ‘their turn’ arrives.

How did our society become so tolerant of such blatantly corrupt practices? Was it always like this? You ask the elders of society and they narrate that in the 1950s and 1960s making a living was hard. The new nation was beset with millions starting new lives, a nascent economy and negligible infrastructure or industry. Unemployment was very high. Young men were desperate for jobs. People preferred to eat only two meals a day but would not countenance running a household on the proceeds of crime or corruption.

Yet such solid values, the fundamental creed that you live on what little you have but you never steal or cheat to get ahead, seem almost apocryphal now. Instead, we live under a system where people are let off for wrongdoing because of their family ties, their baradari, their connections. The lack of consequences for wrongdoing permeates every sphere of our lives. There are no legal consequences for breaking the law and there is no social disgrace for being corrupt. In fact, being corrupt is socially acceptable, even as an aspiration to becoming wealthy quickly, by any means necessary. It is seen as an achievement, an acceptable route for success, of gaining social status, worthy of emulation, even envy.

All of us collude and contribute to this erosion of basic truths. Corruption is unethical, dishonest and immoral. Period. Justifying bribery as ‘understandable’ in some cases, such as policemen or public servants, whose salaries are a pittance, is a travesty against those who eke out an existence on that very pittance, making do and supporting families until old age. There are tens of millions of such people, office workers, junior grade public servants, ordinary folk who support their entire families on the same salaries that others use as an excuse to indulge in blatant bribery and dishonesty.

Those who accept and advance such mitigations for corrupt practices have corroded the precepts of right and wrong in our society. They are responsible for inculcating dishonesty as a socially acceptable way of life. Excusing bribery, corruption and crime on the basis of economic need is an insidious disservice to everyone, especially those it claims to empathise with. It has culminated in a society where the rule of law is just a silly rumour and a government which is unashamedly scaling the heights of sleaze. The ruling party now seems to practice corruption as a valid aspect of governance, a privilege of power, a right since it is in power. The result is ‘Corruption Inc.’, a publicly-owned company, which we bought shares in the day we failed to challenge our fathers, uncles and friends for living on the proceeds of dishonesty and deceit.

Education - Doing The Doable by Marvi Memon

To reform Pakistan requires will, ability and direction. However complicated the issues, without the above-mentioned components any reforms will be a non-starter. The reason one has been suggesting that the current dispensation step down is because the country’s exchequer is not infinite and the patience of our suffering millions is not boundless. Those who don’t spend their time in drawing-room analysis but on the streets of Pakistan will know that the ground reality is that chaos reigns supreme and there seems to be little semblance of the government’s writ.

It is imperative that we develop an alternative government plan, with a clear policy consensus developed for each key area, in order to have some direction before the next elections. To date, no policy discussion by the current political leadership has taken place on such matters. Frankly, most Pakistanis who understand the objectives of the current political leadership also accept that those who are part of it simply do not have what it takes to carry out any meaningful reform. It is for this reason that those eager to be part of the reform team for Pakistan must join hands now, so that by the time elections come around, solutions can be provided to the electorate. The agenda for political alliances must be based on clearly defined policies so that no compromises on principles are made at any later stage.

The foremost task is to set some goalposts for each of these key policy areas. Since education is the most critical fuel for a knowledge-based economy, we need to develop a ‘new deal’ on it. This is the need of the hour because long-term growth will not be possible, no poverty reduction strategy will succeed and no development will occur unless literacy levels are high.

The following list of recommendations might seem basic to some cynics, but these measures have not been taken by any government:

1) With the consensus of the provinces, unify the system of schooling, syllabus, curriculum and examination. This should also apply to degree-awarding institutions for various levels of higher education.

2) Establish a basic minimum standard for a school’s premises/infrastructure and teaching staff. Penalise those who have acquired posts in education administration through nepotism and connections.

3) Undertake mapping of all existing schools in every district of the country so that a ‘gap analysis’ can be carried out on deficiencies. This should include the identification of all ghost schools and absentee teachers. This can rectify shortcomings, which should be done on a war footing by according it the highest policy/implementation priority.

4) Accomplish the linking of education with the general public, through employment generation. Some kind of mechanism should be set up so that the demand for various kinds of degrees in the job market vis-à-vis demands from employers is coordinated with what our universities and colleges are teaching.

5) Secondary education should be made mandatory before social security benefits from the state can be received.

6) A link should be established between research in agriculture and improvements in the agriculture sector.

7) Vocational training should be encouraged so that labour productivity is enhanced.

8) Women, minorities and ethnic groups should be given equal opportunities to education.

9) Centres of excellence should be set up and promoted, with links to international institutions.

10) Funding for education should also be found from international sources and this should be linked to the academic performance of the respective institution.

This list is not based on any drawing-room analysis. It is based on travelling in the field, talking to teachers and lecturers and other educational staff, the National Commission for Human Development employees and so on. The condition of our schools is terrible and this decay in our education sector is having a negative impact on society. The above is doable but it requires immediate focus and the will to do it.

Money For Nothing & Cheque For Free by MIranda Hussain

Could it be that Pakistan has finally been written off as a bad investment by the US, the country’s largest financial benefactor? Or that Washington’s attention has simply moved on? Much of the musings in recent days has surmised that while Pakistan-US ties have plunged into the trust deficit abyss, both sides somewhat reluctantly recognize their mutual dependence in fighting terror. But this may just be wishful thinking.

Washington is suspending its annual military aid to Pakistan by a third, due to concerns about the latter’s dubious cooperation record on the anti-terror front. And to be sure, American grievances are not without substance. Osama bin Laden was infamously found holed up in Pakistan. Soon after, US officials alleged that intelligence-sharing with Pakistan resulted in terrorists at bomb-making factories being tipped off before any strikes were made.

Thus far, the US State Department has made moves to assure Islamabad that civilian assistance will continue, yet how long this will hold is anyone’s guess. Admiral Mike Mullen has said — without elaboration — that the Pakistani government “sanctioned” the murder of journalist Saleem Shahzad. It is unlikely that the top American military officer could issue such on-record comments without a green light from Washington.

Unfortunately, this seems lost on the Pakistani civilian leadership, which appears to be outsourcing responsibility to keep the dollars flowing. The ISI chief was dispatched this week to Washington to meet the interim CIA director. At the same time, General Petreaus, who is set to take over the CIA, was in Pakistan to meet the army chief. 

Yet none of this may actually mean much. The US has demonstrated that it does not need Pakistan’s cooperation in taking out high-level al Qaeda operatives based in its territory, as underscored by the Osama bin Laden raid. This will likely prove equally true when it comes to the new al Qaeda chief, Ayman alZawahri, whom the US believes is in North Waziristan. The Pakistan Army has refused to go into that tribal area, opting instead for Kurram Agency. Thus, from the US perspective, if it is doing all the heavy lifting, what need is there to pay Pakistan for a deal not done?

The most significant indication of the American take on the bilateral relationship has come from Leon Panetta, the former CIA director, who is now defence secretary. True, he may have sounded like a broken record when, in Kabul, he yet again declared that the US was in reach of “strategically defeating al Qaeda”. However, this time a new verse was mixed into the long play. The greater threat to the US, he said, hailed from Yemen and going after these targets was one of Washington’s top priorities.

The US first launched a covert drone programme in Yemen in December 2009. US sources credited nearly a decade of intelligence gathering in Pakistan, making the task in Yemen that bit less daunting. Indeed, it could be said that the Pakistan foray has proved a constructive learning curve in other ways too. Like Pakistan, Yemen has also been accused of diverting US military hardware, as well as a US-trained counterterrorism unit, from the fight against al Qaeda. And like Pakistan, the Yemeni president agreed to CIA drone strikes, while publicly lying to his people about the programme’s existence.

 

Panetta has also singled out Somalia as a target for taking out al Qaeda. Local militant group, al Shahab, which the US considers a terrorist organisation, has aligned itself with al Qaeda elements in the country. It is also believed to be sheltering the masterminds of the 1998 US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. But while it remains to be seen whether Yemen and Somalia will become the new AfPak, one thing is clear. Islamabad has failed to recognise the dwindling currency of its geostrategic importance to the US. It has also spectacularly failed to learn from past lessons; when this happens, the dollars almost immediately dry up.

Impact: Evolution Rather than Revolution by Ahmed Mughees

Impact: Evolution Rather than Revolution by Ahmed Mughees: "It has rather become a custom, a fashion to proffer quixotic solutions like a sudden political putsch, or some sort of knee-jerk change as..."

Evolution Rather than Revolution by Ahmed Mughees

It has rather become a custom, a fashion to proffer quixotic solutions like a sudden political putsch, or some sort of knee-jerk change as a viable solution to otherwise extremely intricate problems occupying our national matrix.

This approach is simplistic and the result of a well-intentioned but misplaced hopefulness, a sort of self-deceptive naivety. Before making such statements what we all should ponder is whether an abrupt change is the real solution to the multifaceted problems we as a nation face. Will sudden replacement of the present setup usher in a new era of prosperity overnight? Will that become the panacea for all the ills plaguing our national fabric?

The air is filled with much talk of revolution. For saner minds, a more pragmatic assessment reveals that all idealism and yearning for a change aside, political maturity and national stability come through a prolonged and sustained democratic process. Democracies are never perfect. They will never be. But we as a nation have to show some patience and let this process evolve into a self - sustaining and self perpetuating mechanism in which the common man, in the long vistas of time, will wield real power, the power to cast his vote according to the call of his conscience at the right time.

Some media hawks and overzealous political whiz-kids, inspired by recent uprisings in the Middle East are demanding a change on the same patterns. It is juvenile to say the least. Pakistan is not Tunisia, neither is it Egypt. We have an elected government, an elected parliament, an independent media, and an active judiciary. We can air our grievances openly, we can vent our spleen without any fear, we can criticise any wrongdoing and we can take our pleas to the judiciary.

We have a lot of room to breathe, whereas in Middle Eastern countries the suffocating despotism sparked violent unrests. In those countries, long-entrenched potentates had suppressed their people so much and for so long that people had no choice but to rise up. We need not travel down the same road. It leads to mayhem and bloodshed. We already have our plate of national challenges full, we need not bring more issues on to it.  So what is the way forward? Should we keep whining and grousing?

What are our options? Our options are very much clear. Soon we will have new elections. This is going to be the second time that an elected government is going to fulfil its mandated tenure. It will go down as seminal achievement in the democratic history of Pakistan and will help the tradition of democracy in taking root.

In our quest for long-term stability, we should support this peaceful and regular process instead of standing up for some unknown, irregular and spasmodic changes. History has witnessed even vanguard revolutionaries being hoisted on their own petard by the disruptive masses.  For us the solution lies in the evolution of the democratic setup and not in some sort of revolution whose ramifications are invariably unpredictable and uncontrollable.