The much-delayed All-Parties Conference on national security, finally held on Monday, seemed to confirm that we have run out of ideas on how to deal with the Taliban. The joint declaration issued after the APC was merely a reiteration of talking points that our politicians have been reciting for years. Drone attacks were condemned as illegal, terrorism was blamed on blowback from the Afghan war and, in the only major policy announcement, all the major political parties endorsed holding talks with the Taliban. The idea of negotiating with the Taliban is neither original nor one that is certain to work; it is simply the last option left for a state that is weary of a war it hasn’t been able to win. The idea of talks, though approved at the APC, still has a long way to go before it becomes reality. So far the TTP has shown no inclination to negotiate with the government or agree to cease attacks if and when talks are held. The government has also not told us what conditions it will agree to and whether they will include completely unacceptable points like completely withdrawing the military from the tribal areas rather than agreeing to a temporary ceasefire. The devil, as always, is in the details but as yet we have only been given a vague outline. Only once we know what the government is willing to give up can we decide if talks are a good idea.

On the matter of drones, the APC was correct in pointing out their illegality and saying that the matter will be taken to the UN. But we should not delude ourselves into thinking that will amount to any more than a PR exercise. The UN has been powerless as the US readies itself to go to war in Syria; it certainly won’t be able to stop drone attacks. The APC also devoted some time to the law-and-order problems in Karachi and Balochistan but had little to say beyond recommending that the provincial governments use their authority to tackle those situations. We do not as yet know what the intelligence chiefs told the political parties at the APC since those sessions were conducted in-camera. As news trickles out it will be interesting to know if the military is also keen on negotiations. Past experience shows that talks with the Taliban are at best a short-term, stopgap measure. Neither the government nor the military has been able to explain why this time things will be different.



Things have happened as they should. As one president bowed out of office, his successor, Mamnoon Hussain, elected to power on July 30, took oath to take over the highest office in the land. The oath, at a ceremony marked by expected tradition and dignity, was administered by the chief justice of Pakistan. Alongside the prime minister, the army chief and other dignitaries, the outgoing president, Asif Ali Zardari, also attended the ceremony. This is a truly unusual sight in a country with as unsteady a relationship with democracy as ours.

For now, though, all attention remains fixed on Mamnoon Hussain, the 73-year-old businessman from Karachi who, it is widely believed, has been rewarded for his consistent loyalty to the PML-N. Mamnoon’s entry to the presidency will also give some representation in power to Sindh, helping maintain federal equilibrium. Mamnoon himself has emphasised that he intends to act as a symbol of the federation and to strictly adhere to the constitution in all matters. These are welcome words. A role such as the one the new president has defined is just what our state needs. Right now, democracy needs to establish a still firmer footing so it cannot be dislodged as easily as has happened time after time in the past. The spirit that Mamnoon Hussain brings to the presidency, the tone that he sets, and the way in which he acts will be closely watched over the coming five years. It is true that following the passage of the 18th Amendment, the president now has few real powers. But he still determines to a very large extent the kind of face the country puts out before the world and how it is seen by it. The new president will also need to wipe away old blemishes left on the presidential office. Asif Ali Zardari’s tenure was a controversial one. A fresh start needs to be made, the slate wiped clean and a new era allowed to begin.



In approving a further bailout package of Rs2.9 billion for Pakistan Steel Mills (PSM), the Economic Coordination Committee took the total amount of money pumped into the enterprise over the last year to more than Rs50 billion. The PSM is clearly floundering and becoming increasingly poor at serving its main function – to reduce our need for imported steel. It is currently functioning at only 15-20 percent capacity and as a result our steel imports have been steadily increasing. The PML-N government, if it had its way, would ideally like to privatise the PSM but it is facing many hurdles in doing so. First, for now the PSM is so unprofitable that it would barely fetch the federal government any money in a sale, although the thousands of acres of real estate attached to the mills is worth billions. In order to receive a decent price, the government would first have to throw a lot of money at the PSM and hope for better efficiency. Then, there is major opposition in the form of the PPP, which is opposed to the sale of such large-scale state assets. The PML-N would also have to contend with the Supreme Court, which blocked the sale of the PSM during the Musharraf era. For now, privatisation seems to be off the table.

The problems with the PSM, which was designed to use imported raw materials like coal and iron ore rather than local ones, are quite a few. The federal cabinet, with the prime minister’s approval, appoints the head of state-owned enterprises. This has led to nepotism, with people patently unqualified for the job and having no relevant experience in the field being tapped to head the PSM. As with all other government industries, jobs at the PSM are seen as rewards for the party in power, leading to a situation where it employs 20,000 people but needs only half of that. This latest bailout is mainly going to be used to pay the salaries of these workers. The situation, should it continue to be so dire, may conceivably lead a future government to consider shutting down the PSM, selling its machinery for scrap and actually making money off the valuable land on which its situated. That, or finally making the steel industry efficient, are the only two options we have left. The irony is that given a corruption free, efficient management, the PSM can stand on its own feet.