Army’s concerns
November 7th, 2012
As the country digests the army chief’s latest foray into, strictly speaking, non-military matters, it appears that Gen Kayani’s comments on Monday were directed at his prin-cipal constituency: the armed forces itself. The discomfort within the rank and file and the leadership too in recent weeks is not very difficult to fathom. Mehrangate, the NLC scam, inquiries into a luxury resort in Lahore, and myriad other questions about the army’s political role and management of security affairs have all combined to probably create a sense of siege. For an institution as proud and domestically predominant as the army has been over the decades, it may well be bewildering to be subjected to the kind of scrutiny and commentary that non-uniformed leaders have long been used to. So Gen Kayani’s words — targeted as they appear to have been against the judiciary and sections of the media, and not really the civilian political leadership — were probably intended to allay concerns within the armed forces that somewhat legitimate criticism of narrow problems, from the army’s perspective, were growing into wanton and gratuitous criticism of the entire institution.
Questionable as the army’s concerns may be — those never subjected to intense scrutiny will always resist a changing order — it is perhaps a sign of the times, and a good one at that, that the army chief chose tough words instead of strong action. In eras past, a discreet phone call or a public swipe would have been enough to tamp down criticism and make unwanted investigations disappear. So perhaps in time, even the dubious use of the ISPR to put out such controversial statements will be a practice curbed.
For the long road to civilian control of the state to be travelled, however, one of the key elements is the question of who determines the ‘national interest’. Gen Kayani was correct in saying that “no individual or institution has the monopoly to decide what is right or wrong in defining the national interest” and that it should emerge through a “consensus”. But in truth, it must go much further than that in a truly democratic polity. While other institutions do have some role to play, the central pivot has to be the civilian leadership that represents the will of the people through parliament. It cannot and must not be forgotten that the internal and external instability the country faces today is largely rooted in policies pursued by the army itself in the name of the national interest. But if a few court cases and investigations so unsettle the armed forces, can they really be willing to cede control of the ‘national interest’?
Development projects
November 7th, 2012
Any way you look at it, Balochistan is in dire straits. On the political front, the air is murky especially following a Supreme Court interim order last month which led to the current predicament of Chief Minister Aslam Raisani and the crisis over the convening of the Balochistan provincial assembly. (An assembly session has now been called for Nov 13.) On the law and order front, matters are even worse. Many commitments and expressions of good intent later, there has been no improvement in the security situation. The missing have yet to be traced; minorities continue to be targeted; and the average citizen remains under threat from several quarters. It could have been hoped that matters were better where development is concerned — this would have gone a long way towards putting balm on old wounds. But that, it seems, is far from being the case. The blame for this rests squarely on the shoulders of the provincial administration.
On Monday, several Balochistan senators and Planning Commission officials told a sub-committee of the Senate that none of the 32 federally funded development projects initiated in Balochistan over the past decade have been completed. All these projects had been handed over to the provincial administration for completion. Together, they are worth some Rs60bn. The list reads like a roll of shame: a technical college in Gwadar completed some years ago by the federal government but now derelict because access roads and facilities were not built, and teachers never appointed; the Pat Feeder Water Sector Project launched 15 years ago by Wapda and then taken over by the provincial government, but completion remains around 10 years away — these are just two examples of numerous others. To be fair, some Baloch senators have accepted the onus of responsibility; however, that is hardly enough. If the crisis in Balochistan is to be turned around, here is the simpler part of the solution: develop the province, raising education and employment rates and thus pierce the environment of resentment. If the provincial administration cannot do that, it would be dangerously undermining its own position as the people’s representative.
Still no YouTube
November 7th, 2012
Almost two months after the government blocked YouTube, the video-sharing site remains inaccessible to Pakistanis. Google and the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority have failed to reach an agreement over blocking links to The Innocence of Muslims, despite the fact that such arrangements have been made with other governments, and as a result the PTA has stuck to its convenient solution of putting in place a wholesale ban on the website.
In some countries Google is more willing to comply because it has large, localised operations and banning certain videos in those countries would not block the same videos elsewhere. But if the Internet giant is not going to budge on the issue, surely the Pakistani government should be trying to find a way to block specific videos, even if that requires buying more staff or new technology.
The fundamental question is this: after the massive strides Pakistan has made towards freedom of expression, will it continue to take a step back every time someone irresponsible in some part of the world posts something offensive on the Internet? Pakistanis now have the ability to generate and consume a profusion of content through traditional media outlets, social media, and websites and blogs, giving them more space to express themselves than ever before. That has been one of Pakistan’s defining achievements over the last decade. And yet in its populist or moralistic zeal, or simply for security reasons, the government continues to take clumsy, arbitrary actions that block large chunks of the Internet when banning specific material becomes inconvenient or challenging. In today’s globalised world, there will always be something online to take offence at. The PTA needs to find a way to target its efforts so that it can stop depriving Pakistanis of a fundamental right they are becoming increasingly accustomed to.