Accountability and the PPP
IT was dramatic and confusion-ridden in a way that harkened back to a previous era of tumultuous politics. The return of Sharjeel Memon, former Sindh information minister and close ally of Asif Zardari, from self-imposed exile and his brief detention by the National Accountability Bureau have sparked a war of words between the Sindh government and the federal accountability regime of the PML-N government at the centre. That the accountability process needs an overhaul is patently obvious and accepted by all sides, including the political class. NAB’s operations are neither transparent nor entirely plausible. Indeed, on many an occasion, including in the incident with Mr Memon, there is a sense that NAB is more interested in burnishing its public-relations credentials than strictly following the law. To be sure, the sudden return of Mr Memon smacks of backroom manoeuvring and deal-making by the PPP. Indeed, a link between the PPP’s eventual willingness to help revive military courts and the hectic efforts to rehabilitate the inner circle of former president Zardari cannot be ruled out.
Whatever the flaws with the NAB regime and the mysterious circumstances in which Mr Memon was detained and released, there is an undeniable lack of interest on the part of both the PPP and the PML-N to address the accountability challenge. Since the latest furore centres on, and has been accentuated by, the PPP, consider the party leadership’s role in fostering a culture of impunity. In the nine years since a return to democracy, there has not been a single PPP leader who has been disciplined by the party itself. This despite being the ruling party for five years, the largest opposition party in parliament for nearly four, and with an unbroken spell leading the government in Sindh. The record in Sindh is particularly damning. While Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah attacks the centre for its interference in Sindh, what steps has his government taken to tackle corruption and graft? It was Mr Shah, after all, who came to power mid-term vowing to clean up governance and address the dismal public perception of the party when it comes to corruption.
As for the PML-N, with the Sharif family caught up in an anti-corruption probe by no less than the Supreme Court itself, the party appears unwilling to address clean governance as anything other than a matter of politics. Consider the amount of time and energy the PML-N has expended in countering the PTI over the past year. Had even a fraction of that time and effort been channelled into legislative reforms and strengthening of administrative oversight and accountability, the government could have by now overhauled the system to the extent of the first big names being caught and punished. What the PML-N and PPP seem to forget is that democracy is about more than winning the elections.
Linguistic diversity
LANGUAGE is identity, and it is especially important to acknowledge that in a multi-ethnic society such as Pakistan: a failure to do so can have far-reaching consequences. So while it may have taken five years in coming, the KP government’s decision to at last implement the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Promotion of Regional Languages Authority Act, 2012, is a case of better late than never. Starting with the next academic year which commences in April, government primary and secondary schools will begin teaching regional languages as a compulsory subject in the areas where they are spoken. These languages include Pashto, Hindko, Seraiki and Khowar, while Kohistani, which is also among the five officially designated regional languages of the province, will not be part of the curriculum because of a dispute among its speakers over differences in dialect.
The history of this country illustrates how language is seen as a vehicle of political power, or the lack of it. The protests soon after Partition in what was then East Pakistan over the central government’s decision to declare Urdu the national language arguably sowed the seeds for the Bengali nationalist movement. In the early 1970s, Sindh saw language riots between Sindhi and Urdu speakers. In Balochistan today, neither Balochi nor Brahui are taught in government schools — even as an optional subject. It is telling, therefore, that at Turbat University, located in an area where the insurgency is the strongest, far more students opt for Balochi as their major than any other subject. Even aside from the obvious political connotations, to give regional languages — especially those spoken by smaller, less empowered groups — their due is to celebrate and preserve diversity in its most fundamental form. Language is after all the repository of a people’s collective memory, the heritage that makes each ethnic group so unique. The authorities at the federal and provincial levels have been apathetic in their duty on this score. A 2014 parliamentary paper on the subject pointed out that of 72 languages spoken in this country, 10 are either “in trouble” or “nearing extinction”. Meanwhile, as a conference in Peshawar earlier this year pointed out, the speakers of dozens of other languages are also dwindling rapidly. Among these is Hindko, which makes the KP government’s recent move very timely. For the federal government to declare the major regional languages as national languages would be even more appropriate, not to mention far-sighted.
Syrian imbroglio
THE reports emerging from Syria over the past couple of days are worrying, and the faint hope of a negotiated end to this brutal war is fading fast. On Monday, government forces pounded rebel-held parts of Damascus, a day after militants had launched a surprise attack on the Syrian capital. Moreover, the Israeli defence minister made a reckless announcement on Sunday promising to “destroy Syrian air defence systems” after reports had emerged that Israeli jets had struck targets inside Syria. The Syrian government had claimed that it had shot down the Israeli intruder. Last week, nearly 50 people were killed — most of them reportedly civilians — after American warplanes hit a mosque in Aleppo province; the US denied it had hit a mosque and claimed it had targeted Al Qaeda militants instead. All this makes for a grim build-up to the Syrian peace talks, sponsored by the UN, that are due soon in Geneva.
The key problem is that in Syria, there are far too many parties creating problems. The civil war, which has now completed its sixth year, was internationalised when the West, Turkey and the Gulf states saw an opportunity to topple Bashar al-Assad’s regime. On the other hand, Mr Assad’s allies — Iran, Russia and Hezbollah — were not ready to see the government in Damascus fall. In the middle of all this, sectarian extremists gained ground and now threaten the security of the region. Israel — long a force of instability in the Middle East — has also not helped matters with its arrogant rhetoric and irresponsible forays into Syria. Already, hundreds of thousands have been killed in the Syrian war, while millions have been displaced. A once functioning country has been turned into a hollow shell of its former self. It is hard to be optimistic about Syria’s future in such circumstances, but it must be said that regional states — Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia particularly — need to go the extra mile and make greater efforts to resolve the conflict to avoid further destruction and suffering.
Source: Editorials
Published in Dawn, March 21st, 2017