Pakistan Problems (Important Articles)

[Roshan wadhwani]

A country for minorities

March 3, 2012
By Mohsin Hamid

There are two ways of explaining why Pakistan was created. One is to say that the impulse for Pakistan was a Muslim-nationalist impulse. That is what we are taught in school and probably what most Pakistanis believe.

But there is another explanation. And it is this: the drive to form Pakistan was rooted in the notion of minority rights. During the haggling that preceded independence, most Muslim leaders initially wanted constitutional safeguards protecting the rights of a Muslim minority within Hindu-majority India. Only when they decided this would not be possible did partition become their aim.

Even then, British India did not necessarily have to become just two countries with a burning enmity: India and Pakistan. It could as easily have been split into several: perhaps a northwestern country that included not just current Pakistan but also the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir and Indian Punjab, as Jinnah himself had wanted; a northeastern country centred around a unified Bangladesh and Indian Bengal; and a variety of other countries between them and to their south.

Each of these countries would have contained large minorities of all kinds. But each could quite possibly have been more manageable and easier to govern than either post-partition India or the united Pakistan that included both our present country and what is now Bangladesh. The whole region might have avoided wars, focused on education and social services, evolved a common market, and got on with the business of co-existing and prospering together, as much of Europe did over the same period. (Then again, they might have slaughtered one another and descended into anarchy.)

In any case, the population of Indian Punjab is not leaping at the chance of joining Pakistan today, and the plebiscite that would allow Kashmiris to choose whether or not to do so has never been permitted to proceed. So the creation of a larger mega-Pakistan is not an option, and I do not bring up the preceding bits of twentieth-century history and imaginary what-ifs because I intend to propose it.

Rather, I mention all this because viewing Pakistan as a country founded on the principle that minorities must be protected from the predations of majorities is both useful and morally powerful, and because that notion may contain within it a way forward for our nation as a whole. It was our neglect of this principle in the years leading up to 1971 that caused our second partition, the creation of Bangladesh. (Yes, East Pakistanis were more numerous, but in terms of power and dignity they were treated as an inferior minority.) And it is our neglect for this principle now that has many in Balochistan clamouring for a third partition by the carving out of a separate country.

Yet an independent Balochistan would in itself solve little. Balochistan is almost half non-Baloch. What of the rights of the non-Baloch in Balochistan? And what, for that matter, of the rights of non-Pashtu speakers in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, non-Punjabi speakers in Punjab, non-Sindhi speakers in Sindh, non-Urdu speakers in Karachi? What of the rights of Pakistani Shias and Christians and Hindus and atheists?

The problem of Balochistan’s mistreatment within the federation is related to the problem of the mistreatment of minorities in Pakistan generally, a particularly perverse and vexing problem for our country to suffer from since all Pakistanis are minorities, our largest ‘group’ — Sunni, non-Seraiki speaking Punjabis — making up little more than a third.

But, as a nation of minorities, and a nation founded on the principle of minority rights, we could at last acknowledge that we have done enormous harm by withholding from our citizens the equality to which they are entitled, by resorting to force too readily against those who disagree with us, and by seeking for too long to centralise what more properly belongs not to the federation, nor necessarily even to the provinces, but to the cities and towns and villages, and to the conscience of each individual.

The fact that this week’s senate elections went ahead, despite all the machinations, is a victory for Pakistani democracy. And democracy, through constitutional amendment, is moving functions to the provinces, as one would hope. Over time, more should be devolved, and more revenue should be provincial as well. (And there will come a time when, to benefit areas that continue to suffer from neglect, we must consider the reconfiguration of Pakistan from four provinces to perhaps twice as many — though vitally this should be done on a geographic rather than linguistic basis.)

Yet devolution cannot stop with our provinces acting as mini-despots. Once the present changes have had time to settle, provinces will in turn need to pass functions along to local bodies. Faisalabad, to take one example, has the population of Uruguay, a sovereign state; there is no compelling reason why its governance should be coordinated through Lahore.

The federation’s center will of course remain important. We live in a rough neighbourhood, so we need a military to deter foreign threats. We share the same river systems, so we need jointly to plan reservoirs, irrigation, and dams. We sell certain products and services throughout Pakistan, so we need compatible regulations. And so on.

But overall the role of the centre will have to shift from trying to tell each of us what to do, from micro-managing our regions and our lives, to defending us from the predations of those more powerful than us. It must protect angry Baloch students in Quetta, and Urdu-speaking businessmen in Peshawar, and Pashtun bus drivers in Karachi, and, yes, Punjabi schoolteachers in Balochistan. It must stand for our right not to be shot without trial, held without notification, or tortured under any circumstances.

As the day-to-day administration of our country flows out of Islamabad, the role and professionalism of our federal court system, and our supreme court in particular, must increase, not to persecute us for imagined thought-crimes but to protect us from each other and from the state. And for internal security we will need to build an apparatus that functions within the purview of the courts, not outside it.

We are each a minority of one. The crisis in Balochistan is therefore a crisis for all Pakistanis. We must address it together, or we risk surrendering the idea of Pakistan to tyranny, an unjust state where every citizen is denied their potential and must squirm as an illusion in someone else’s dream.

The Express Tribune

[Roshan wadhwani]

Fallout of Pakistan’s lawlessness

March 4, 2012
By Farhan Bokhari

Friday’s elections for Pakistan’s upper house of parliament, known as the senate, remained an inconsequential event for the country’s mainstream.

Members of Pakistan’s ruling structure celebrated the outcome of this latest election as a landmark in the country’s democratic evolution, in an indication of the yawning gap between perception among the rulers and the reality.

The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), which leads the ruling coalition and has presided over one of the worst periods of the country’s disarray in the past few years, gained a larger control over the senate.

Tragically for Pakistan though, the PPP indeed has little to show by way of strengthening the country. While the economy remains surrounded by a growing crisis, ordinary citizens increasingly lament their failure to gain access to basic needs such as quality health and education, not to forget a reliable flow of electricity and gas.

Meanwhile, in their blind determination to be seen as guarantors of an ill-conceived democratic consolidation, Pakistan’s leaders remain clueless on the scale of the challenges haunting the country. On Friday however came just one of the many powerful and stark reminders of the gap between reality and imagination.

A group of human rights activists gathered at a street corner in Islamabad to hold a vigil in memory of Shahbaz Bhatti, a Christian politician and minister for non-Muslim minorities, who was slain in cold blood on a street of Islamabad, a year ago. Tragically for Pakistan, Bhatti has become just another number in a growing list of victims of senseless and bloody violence that has engulfed the country over the years.

While Pakistan’s top leaders, notably President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, were handed over a legacy of blood when they took power in 2008, to their discredit, they have done little to ensure a reversal of that legacy.

On Friday, a consolidation of the PPP’s control over the senate may have improved the numerical position of the party in the upper house of parliament. And yet, a pertinent question, which is indeed the way that this majority will be used to further the best interests of Pakistan, will continue to go unanswered as it was before the elections. As a follow-up to the senate elections, Zardari is expected to give his annual speech to a joint session of the two houses of parliament later this month.

For ruling politicians, Zardari’s likely last speech before elections to the federal and provincial parliaments will most probably set the pace for coming political events. And yet even Zardari may not be in a position to provide convincing answers to a growing number of Pakistanis who are increasingly sceptical about their country’s future.

Democratic framework

Going forward, the issues that will make a difference to the lives of Pakistanis will indeed be the ways in which the government is able and willing to tackle lawlessness of the kind that took Bhatti’s life a year ago. For many Pakistanis, if the government failed to protect the life of a cabinet minister, its capacity to protect the lives of its country’s ordinary citizens must be virtually absent.

Four years after the present dispensation came to power, Pakistan continues to function without a clear-cut security policy that has the backing of the parliament. Likewise, there is little progress that has been made in areas like a robust economic policy that is able to tackle the most challenging aspects of Pakistan’s economic malaise.

In a country where more than one-third of the population or approximately more than 60 million people live below the poverty line, the idea of a democratic framework functioning successfully simply doesn’t work in the absence of a robust plan to tackle impoverishment.

Going forward, the democracy whose roots are supposedly being deepened in Pakistan, does little to impress the mainstream population for it remains devoid of the ability to deal with real-life challenges.

In this environment, it is hardly surprising that while Pakistan’s rulers take pride in their so-called democratic achievements, the bulk of the country’s population remains unimpressed. It is also hardly surprising that many Pakistanis in their search for a more viable political alternative, are indeed turning to Imran Khan, the cricket star-turned-politician, as a possible next leader for the South Asian country.

Farhan Bokhari is a Pakistan-based commentator who writes on political and economic matters.

Source: Gulf News

[Roshan wadhwani]

The Pakistan water quality crisis

March 15, 2012
By Ahmad Rafay Alam

Water is essential for the survival of all living things. Without water, humans would die in a few days, crops would not grow and food would run short. In Pakistan, due to the increase in population, per-capital water resources estimated at the time of Partition at 5000m3/year are expected to fall below 1000m3/year in the near future. Pakistan will shortly become a water- stressed country. It is crucial, therefore, to consider the state of water quality.

Access to clean water is as important as access to water itself. The health and economic effects of polluted water are well-documented. It leads to illness, ailment and even death. Mortality and morbidity impose costs on individuals and families which, above the direct costs of treatment and medicine, may include loss of earning and impaired productivity. The Supreme Court of Pakistan has declared, not only that the fundamental right to life includes a clean and healthy environment, but that access to unpolluted water is the right of every person wherever he lives.

The Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources, which launched its National Water Quality Monitoring Program in 2001, documents the water quality situation throughout Pakistan and submitted its fifth and final Report in 2007. The report examines the water quality of 357 samples taken from 23 major cities, eight rivers, six dams, four lakes, two canals and one reservoir to analyse contaminants against an array of quality standards.

Every major city reported unsafe drinking water. None of the water sources tested in Bahawalpur, Kasur, Multan, Lahore, Sheikhupura and Ziarat was safe for drinking purposes. All of the 22 surface water bodies evaluated in the report were found to be contaminated with colioforms and E. Coli; 73 per cent had a high level of turbidity, three had high concentrations of irons and 27 per cent showed excessive concentrations of iron and fluoride.

Approximately, 60 per cent of Pakistanis get their drinking water from hand or motor pumps (in rural areas, this figure is over 70 per cent). It is estimated that as many as 40 million Pakistanis depend on the supply of irrigation water for their domestic use.

According to a United Nations Children’s Fund study, 20-40 per cent of the hospital beds in Pakistan are occupied by patients suffering from water-related diseases such as typhoid, cholera, dysentery and hepatitis and that water-related diseases account for one-third of all deaths. According to the World Bank’s 2006 Environment Assessment, Pakistan employs Daily Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) –– the years of healthy life lost to illness and premature mortality –– as the standard measure to calculate the economic cost of environmental degradation. It finds that poor water quality in Pakistan accounts for more than 2.5 million DALYs. Total health costs are estimated at Rs114 billion or approximately 1.81 per cent of the GDP.

Most surface water pollution is associated with untreated discharge of waste water from urban areas. Effectively, none of the estimated 2,000 million gallons of sewage discharged into surface water bodies in Pakistan daily, is treated. Industrial effluent, under law, is to be regulated by environment protection agencies through self-monitoring and reporting programmes under the Pakistan Environment Protection Act but, proverbially, enforcement is lax (and made more challenging after the 18th Amendment).

The water quality situation in Pakistan is an environmental catastrophe. Untreated waste water, industrial effluent and agricultural run-off is poisoning our water and people. However, the interest in taking this issue up, enforcing the law and making a difference does not appear to exist. Common political discourse seldom rises above accusation and short-term speculation. Simultaneously, we continue to spend our money on a huge army, an un-understandable war against terror, a gaping circular debt, corrupt and inefficient public sector enterprises and roads. By God, we can throw an overhead bypass up in three months.

Winston Churchill, when asked to cut funding for the arts during World War II to aid the war effort, denied the request thus: “What else are we fighting for?” When I compare Pakistan’s water quality crisis to the lack of attention it’s getting and where priorities are otherwise set, I ask myself the same question.

The Express Tribune

[Roshan wadhwani]

Why are we so afraid of our minorities?

March 26, 2012
By Syed Mohammad Ali

Injustices faced by minority populations remain a problem around the world, ranging from the plight of migrants in western countries, to Kurdish troubles in the Middle East, to the discrimination faced by the significant Muslims minority in India.

Leaving aside the plight of sectarian and ethnic tensions, Pakistan itself has but a miniscule religious minority, protecting the rights of which should hardly pose a significant challenge for the state. Yet, our track record in this regard remains dismal. A latest “Life on the Margins” study by the National Commission for Justice and Peace, is quite perturbing as well. Over 75 per cent of the surveyed women who work reported being subjected to sexual harassment. The literacy rate of these women was found to be 10 percentage points below the national rate (57 per cent) and the infant mortality rate among them was higher than the national average. It was also disconcerting to note that nearly 62 per cent of Hindu and Christian women fear that a majority of Muslims would not come to their aid if they were being discriminated against.

These fears are substantiated considering the prevalence of forced conversions to Islam and increasing incidents of kidnappings which have instilled a deep sense of insecurity amongst our minority communities. The Human Rights Commission’s Balochistan chapter has identified an ongoing exodus of Hindu families from Quetta due to the fear of kidnappings for ransom, yet the Balochistan government does not seem to be doing much to address this problem.

NGO reports indicate that over 568 FIRs for forced marriages were lodged last year across 40 districts of Pakistan, with the majority of such cases having been filed in Sindh. While many Muslim women and girls are also forced into marriage within our country, females in minority communities are even more vulnerable to such coercion since they face a ‘double jeopardy’ of being subjected to discrimination due to their sex and religion.

The government has taken some steps for empowering minorities by fixing a five per cent quota in government jobs, reserving four seats for minorities in the Upper House and declaration of August 11 as ‘Minorities Day’. It was also encouraging to note minority rights being discussed during the recent National Assembly proceedings and acknowledgement by incumbent parliamentarians of the need for enacting legislation to better protect minority rights and to particularly curb the phenomenon of forced conversions. Another proposal which merits further political support is helping minority women feel less alienated from the country’s politics by instituting a parliamentary quota to be established to resolve this discrepancy. Yet, the inclusion of one or two reserved seats for minority women within the national or provincial assemblies will hardly be enough. Much more needs to be done to ensure protection of the minorities as it is enshrined in our Constitution.

The judiciary and the executive also need to overcome their existing complacency and take a much more proactive stance in safeguarding vulnerable minorities from blatant incidences of exploitation and violence. Moreover, the silent majority within our country must also overcome its complacency or indifference and denounce this unbearable level of intolerance. Until this occurs, the existing myopia towards vulnerable minorities will just continue spilling over to further exacerbate strife perpetuated in the name of other divergences, be they sectarian or ethnic in nature.

The Express Tribune

[Roshan wadhwani]

23rd March, 1940, and the present Pakistan

Faheem Amir

The emergence of Pakistan as an independent Islamic state was the result of a long struggle by the Muslims of the Subcontinent. The Muslims rendered countless sacrifices for getting this land of the pure.
Many great personalities, like Mujadid Alfi Sani, Shah Wali Ullah, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Allama Iqbal and Muhammad Ali Jinnah, worked very hard to save the Muslims from the cruel clutches of the British Raj and the Hindus' dominance. These great men gave the idea of a "two-nation theory" for infusing a spirit of action and identity among the quiescent and dormant Muslims.

After the revolt of 1857, the Muslims of the Subcontinent lost the last vestiges of political supremacy and sank into torpor and degradation. The British blamed the Muslims for instigating the mutiny. They adopted vindictive policies towards the Muslims in every walk of life. The majority of the Muslims showed their antipathy towards the British by shunning modern and Western education. They limited themselves only to religious education. Many ulemas declared Western education as un-Islamic. In these gloomy circumstances, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and Allama Iqbal stressed on the Muslims the need for getting a modern education. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was the first Muslim leader who used the word "Qoum" for the Muslims and demanded separate electorate for the Muslim community.

The struggle for Pakistan took practical shape in 1906, when the All-India Muslim League was founded at Dacca on December 30, 1906. The Congress' antipathy and bigotry against the Muslims became clear in the Nehru Report in 1928. In this report, the rights of separate electorates and weightage, given to the Muslims under the Lucknow Pact in 1916, were rejected. In these gloomy times, the Quaid gave his famous fourteen points in 1929 and Iqbal used his gift of poetry to spread his revolutionary teachings among the Muslims. Iqbal urged the Muslims to shun their lethargic attitude and move forward to create their own new world. He gave the idea of creating a separate country for the Muslims of India in his address at Allahabad on 29
December, 1930. He said, "I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sindh and Balochistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India".

The rule of Congress ministries (1937-1939) gave a shock to the degraded Muslims and they started to think about their dark future under Hindu rule after the British Raj. They turned their eyes towards the Muslim League and the great Quaid to save them from this impending misfortune. The Muslim League availed this opportunity in 1940.

Dr. Ishtiaq Hussain Qureishi, a well-known historian and political thinker, writes in his famous book The Struggle for Pakistan: "So far ideas of Muslim separatism had been floating in the Indian political atmosphere, but none had dared give them a concrete shape. Iqbal had thrown out a suggestion and then relapsed into silence. Rahmat Ali was more consistent but less equipped. The smaller fry could only evolve schemes for their elders; they could not sell them to the public. An established political party must farther the idea by making it a plank in its programme. This is precisely what the Muslim League did at Lahore in March, 1940".

The Lahore Resolution, commonly known as the Pakistan Resolution (the Hindu press had dubbed it as such) was a formal political statement adopted by the Muslim League on the occasion of its three-day general session on March 22-24, 1940, at Minto Park, Lahore that called for greater Muslim autonomy in British India.

The Muslim League, for the first time, adopted the idea of partition as its final goal. The resolution was presented by A. K. Fazal-ul-Huq and Muhammad Zafarullah Khan.

The Pakistan Resolution not only spurred the Muslim middle class to unprecedented political action, but also caught the imagination of the people of all ranks of Muslim society.

Dr. Ishtiaq Hussain Qureishi writes, "From now onwards the Muslim League policy was clear and unmistakable. It did not want one India with a clear and inescapable Hindu majority, which through a parliamentary system of government and a so-called democratic process would nullify Muslim rights and interests. India must be split. There was no alternative. The Muslims wanted this and would not be satisfied by anything less. The way lay clear and open to Pakistan…The Quaid's presidential address is a landmark in the history of Muslim nationalism in India, for it made an irrefutable case for a separate Muslim nationhood and for dividing India into Muslim and Hindu states".

The Quaid said: "Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature. They neither inter-marry nor inter-dine and indeed they belong to two different civilizations that are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their concepts on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is the foe of the other, and likewise their victories and defeats overlap."

He further said, "We are a nation with our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, names and nomenclature, sense of values and promotion, legal laws and moral code, customs and calendar, history and tradition, aptitudes and ambitions, in short we have our own outlook on life and of life. By all canons of international law we are a nation."

In short, the Pakistan Resolution is based on the two-nation theory, which means that the Muslims are different from the Hindus in terms of religion, culture, language and values. The Muslims wanted to have an independent country, where they would be free to practice their religion and preserve and nurture their culture.

The Muslim League, under the very able and dynamic leadership of the Quaid-e-Azam, took only seven years for gaining an independent Islamic sate for the Muslims of India.

Stanley Wolpert, an American political thinker and historian, pays tributes to the Quaid in the following words:-
"Few individual significantly alter the course of history. Few still modify the map of the world. Hardly anyone could be credited with creating a nation state. Muhammad All Jinnah did all three".

It is very tragic that while Pakistanis, celebrate Pakistan Day across the country with traditional zeal and enthusiasm to commemorate the passage of the Lahore Resolution passed 72 years ago, we have already lost East Pakistan. Our "Land of the Pure" has turned into a place where the war on terror has cost us $69 billion and the lives of around 36,000 innocent people.
Even on 23rd March, a suicide attack at a mosque in Tirah Valley of Khyber Agency killed 13 people. Separately, a bomb hidden inside a radio exploded on a military base in Wana, killing a paramilitary soldier and his 10-year-old son, while four personnel of the Balochistan Frontier Corps were killed and three others injured in a pre-dawn attack by militants on a paramilitary checkpost in Shirani district.

Sectarianism is killing many innocent people daily in Pakistan. Karachi is bleeding. The situation in Balochistan is very precarious, where dejected and frustrated people have revolted against Pakistan. The people of Pakistan are living in abject poverty. Electricity shortfall has reached 6,500MW. Protests are being held across the country against prolonged load shedding.

Corruption has become a part of our culture; even the Senate elections have seen the power of money. All the institutions like the PIA, Pakistan Railways, Pakistan Steel Mills, etc., are on the verge of collapse due to corruption and mismanagement.

Around 15,000 people have committed suicide due to poverty and other social stresses during the last five years.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan's (HRCP's) report on the State of Human Rights 2011 says violence is increasing against women. According to the report, at least 943 women were killed in the name of honour in 2011. Of the 943, 93 victims were minors, seven Christian and two Hindu women. It says 517 people became victims of extra-judicial killings. 173 abducted and murdered in Balochistan while 1,715 killed in the Karachi violence. At least 2,307 people were killed and 4,341 injured in terrorist raids, including suicide and sectarian attacks. The report said that an overwhelming majority of nearly 78,000 people being held in Pakistani prisons were under trial. Some 92 inmates died in prisons across the country in 2011.

This report shows the real plight of the poor people, whose forefathers won independence from the British Raj and Hindus after giving untold sacrifices. It is not the Quaid's Pakistan.

The Daily Times writes in its editorial: "Given this unsavoury reality, we can only apologise to the Quaid today for the mess we have made of his vision, and vow once more to combat the forces of darkness that he in his lifetime had little time for and we his successors must combat before they engulf what little remains of the original élan of the new state".

Our corrupt leaders have utterly failed to follow the advice of the Quaid for making Pakistan a real social-Islamic-democratic country.
In one of his speeches, Jinnah had identified some basic problems facing the new born country and then gave advice to the people of Pakistan as the Father of the Nation:-

"The government's foremost duty is to maintain law and order... One of the biggest curses from which India is suffering is corruption and bribery. That really is poison. Another curse is black marketing. You have to tackle this monster. The next thing that strikes me is the evil of nepotism and jobbery... Now what shall we do? If you work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community, colour, creed or caste he belongs, is first, second and last a citizen of this state with equal tights, there will be no end to your progress. In course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, Muslims and Hindus, will vanish.... You are free to go to your temples; you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of your worship. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed - that has nothing to do with the business of state. You will find in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in religious sense because that is the personal faith of each citizen, but in political sense as citizens of the state."

It is very unfortunate that our leaders have not acted upon the advice of the Quaid and the message of the Pakistan Resolution. This is the sole reason that Pakistan is marching rapidly towards becoming a failed state. If we want to see Pakistan a stable and real social-Islamic-democratic country, then our leaders should follow the golden teachings of the Quaid.

http://www.weeklycuttingedge.com/index.html

[Roshan wadhwani]

Police and the Rule of Law in Pakistan:
A Historical Analysis

Kalim Imam

http://berkeleyjournalofsocialsciences.com/August3.pdf

[Roshan wadhwani]

Power to the people

April 6, 2012
By: M A Niazi

The joint sitting of Parliament had been specifically summoned to debate recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS), so that it could accord approval to the anticipated restoration of Nato supplies, suspended since Nato gunship helicopters attacked the Pakistani checkpost, but it abandoned this task the day after power protests had resulted in the death of a protester in Lahore.

Perhaps, the most noticeable thing about the protests was that they were taking place in spring, which meant that with worse loadshedding due in summer, the protests were not yet over. Another thing to be noticed was that the President and Prime Minister were both abroad. That meant that the protests were not aimed at them at any rate. It also begged the reason of why they were not at home, while the power crisis was shaking their government. Moreover, it pointed up the fact that they were both away, while the joint session was debating the PCNS recommendations. Not only were the treasury members prevented from impressing either with the brilliance of their speeches, but also the opposition members could not impress either with their fiery speeches.

The timing of the protests were worrying for two reasons. First, the season was not yet one where fans, air conditioners and room coolers were being turned on, something which would have added to the demand for electricity. Thus, the protests were not fuelled by the rage brought on by the effects of heat. Second, the Arab Spring, which had seen protests in virtually every Arab country, and which had seen regimes falling in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen, and which were not yet over in Syria despite a massive bloodletting, had occurred just over a year before. The PPP government apparently did not see its way to surviving long enough in office, in the face of such protests, to let the elections due less than a year from now, take place.

The protests were enough to cause Parliament to put off the debate on the PCNS recommendations. After all, power seemed more of a topic that aroused public concern than foreign policy. It was easier to debate, as a subject which MNAs and Senators found easier to deal with than foreign policy, about which they were given to understand they were ignorant. MNAs and MPAs were portrayed as ignorant backwoodsmen, who would do best to leave such complicated matters as foreign policy to the experts, a category comprising both military men and diplomats. This meant that the petrol prices were something that members of Parliament were better able to discuss, not so much because they were more knowledgeable about it, as because they were more used to discussing it.

It must not be forgotten that both the ruling PPP and the opposition PML-N have equal reason to be afraid of the consequences of the power protests, for if they are unleashed to their fullest extent, they would jeopardise the very elections that the PML-N hopes will take it into power.

At the same time, there has been a highlighting of another issue that the PML-N would like to take along, that of the petrol price hike. This has a relationship to the power crisis through two sources. One is the direct one of furnace oil, used by thermal generation plants, mostly independent power producers (IPPs) and rental power plants (RPPs), and through PSO, Pakistan State Oil, which supplies these RPPs and IPPs with furnace oil after importing it. When petrol prices go up, so do furnace oil prices, adding to the generation cost. There is a huge pile of circular debt, and PSO would long have stopped supplying furnace oil if it had not been owned by the government. However, the ordinary consumer is not concerned about whether the circular debt has crossed the trillion-rupee mark or not, but whether he is getting electricity or not.

This brings us to the second commonality between the fuel and power crises: The deep interest of the international finance institutions. Whereas the Government of Pakistan has said both unequivocally and repeatedly that it is not interested in another programme, it has apparently kept its powder dry, and is keeping those institutions engaged, following their instructions, as if in preparation for a future loan. On the one hand, they insist on an end to fuel subsidies and, on the other, they insist on the so-called ‘power sector reforms’ with the emphasis on ending circular debt.

However, the international finance institutions have not accommodated within their conception of the power sector of it as not just an engine of growth, but as a prerequisite of production, with the natural implications for job creation and maintenance, and for exports. To put it bluntly, loadshedding means factories closing and workers losing their jobs. The loss of orders is an earlier stage for exporters, but the net result is that the national economy suffers.

One of the more interesting solutions has been put forward by the PML-Q, that the provincial governments allow the diversion of the money they would receive under the National Finance Commission Award to pay off the circular debt. That the money is to pay for current expenditure as well as development, and reflects a federal ire at money it collects going to the provinces, because the PML-Q is a coalition partner of the PPP. Also, since the PML-Q would like to rule in the Punjab, it has an interest in making the PML-N, which rules there, look as if it was not taking a step that could solve the power crisis. Otherwise, the responsibility lies, as the joint sitting showed, entirely on the central government.

One problem that is infrequently mentioned is that both power and fuel are in private hands. This shows the dangers of putting utilities in private hands, and should give pause to those who wish to sell off functions like solid waste management to the private sector. Also, this quasi-privatisation has meant the ignoring of the Saying of the Holy Prophet (PBUH): People share in three things – water, pasture and fire.

These are the three most common things people had, and introduces the concept of a second kind of state ownership, where it is a trustee over certain things, including sources of energy (fire). This means that oil and power must be given at cost, and the bloated profits enjoyed by oil companies and IPPs cannot be allowed.

It is a paradox that this Saying cannot be implemented even though the Muslims control the majority of the world’s sources of power, because they are divided into nation-states, which are ruled by dynasties that profit from the oil wealth which they rake off a share from, in return for letting it fuel the capitalist economies of the world.

The government seems caught in a dilemma. It wants the joint sitting to authorise the restoration of Nato supplies, and it wants the power crisis to disappear. However, it should not expect people used to being cooled in summers from forgiving breakdowns easily. Therefore, it should either somehow bring power to the public, or be ready for a long summer of loadshedding to be followed by elections. The way things are going, the holding of elections would be an achievement. It must acknowledge that the power shortage is not caused by the enemies of democracy, but themselves.

The writer is a veteran journalist and founding member as well as Executive Editor of The Nation.

Email: maniazi@nation.com.pk
-The Nation

[Roshan wadhwani]

A besieged country

Raoof Hasan
Friday, April 06, 2012

Even a cursory glance at what is happening around us on a daily basis would make us feel that Pakistan is a besieged country while its leadership is trying multiple remedies only to plunge it deeper into haemorrhaging. So, should one surmise that there really is no cure after all, or should all this be grudgingly construed as a precursor to the much-vaunted change that the people have incessantly hoped for?

Pakistan’s misery can be traced to the incompetence, woeful lack of sincerity, an inherent defiance of the rule of law and deep-rooted corruption of its rulers who have adorned its throne playing out a ghastly sequence of masquerades. Projection of the ‘self’ and patronisation of a system that keeps springing up increasingly inept leaderships have been the core ingredients of their concept for survival and possible advancement in the political realm. This is so because a system that is conceived to work on the basis of exploiting an economically-captive electorate can be easily exploited to bring forth a coterie of people who control their purse strings.

In the rural sector, it is the feudal big-wigs who lord over their subjects and, in the sprawling urban slums, it is the connection network nurtured along social, ethnic and sectarian divides that affords a bulk of the people with possible avenues for economic survival. Having come through the corrupt way, the ‘elected’ leadership is willing, even eager, to make compromises internally for their survival and further promotion by recruiting a bunch of sycophants as their lieutenants, and externally for gaining the support of powers looking for paid ‘agents’ to promote their vested agendas. Nothing really has changed in this broad mix in the sixty-four years since Pakistan has been there as a so-called independent country. What is worse is that the plunge has only become more macabre, more sordid and more infuriating with the passage of time.

Today, Pakistan is a besieged country in the hands of its leadership and their crude machinations solely crafted and unleashed for their vile advancement. Can this mess ever be untangled?

Only a while ago, one thought so. That was the time when the dream of an independent judiciary was realised and we had a set of justices in whom the country could rest its case and the people their fate. One also knew that the challenges ahead would be immense and the path would be strewn with potholes – both natural, but mostly man-made because, after all, it was the illegal and hollow ascendency of a bunch of corrupt leaders that an independent judiciary would pose a threat to. The picture looked even more promising because this independent judiciary had come in the wake of a truly memorable struggle and it also needed to urgently nullify a reputation of having been an institution that had repeatedly affixed its approval on the intrusions of dictators and despots.

Agreed, it did not have any guns to fire with, or instruments to force subservience to its edicts. But, it had a surfeit of moral authority and the active public support to back it if the need for that ever arose. Dealing with an eternally-errant government taking pride in its open and wilful defiance of the judiciary, there was no dearth of adjudications emanating from its various benches. From benefits accrued from an inherently flawed and deceitful NRO to countless instances of wilful and abject abdication of governance, plundering of state resources, denuding of its institutions and a host of other criminal failings, there were countless opportunities for the judiciary to assert its authority through a combination of issuing expeditious judgements and following up on their implementation through the use of constitutional powers vested in it. It is on both these fronts that the judiciary has been found wanting.

The delay in issuance of decisions and the inordinate time-frame allowed to various state institutions and functionaries to implement them defies logic. Take the case of the NRO. After declaring the ordinance void ab initio, and facing a defiant government, the apex court took over two years to constitute an implementation mechanism which, inevitably, led to the prime minister being hauled up for contempt of court. Even now the time being given and the manner in which it is being given to the errant party in its bid to dodge the punishment show an enormous bit of dithering.

Does this reflect an unseen weakness on the part of the judiciary itself, or the lack of support extended by other institutions which should come by way of fulfilling the relevant provisions of the constitution? Whatever it may be, it has made the judiciary look weak. Consequently, the dream of the judiciary becoming an instrument of change is fast waning.

As a consequence of this failing, the proponents of the corrupt status quo have become more daunting in their misdemeanours, thus adding to the woes of a beleaguered people most of whom are incessantly fighting for a few miserly morsels every day. Electricity is extinct while petrol and gas are beyond every common person’s reach. Education, health and other basic needs of every family come at a heavy price which a bulk of the population cannot afford. The ‘madrassas’, the only avenue available for educating children for a fair number of people, are churning out deeply indoctrinated and grossly demented minds who believe in the ‘divine goodness’ of their cause.

Cities are being ceded to criminal mafias mostly coming as offshoots of political parties. The SC judgement on the situation in Karachi was an eye-opener, but nothing concrete has been done to arrest a deterioration that poses a grave existential threat to the country. There are no-go areas sanctioned by the political parties and enforced by their militant wings as a complicit government looks the other way simply because it needs their support in the parliament to continue its plunder.

The killers and looters are wearing the masks of aggrieved people. They demand the arrest of individuals whom they paint as perpetrators of a crime while they shield their own brigades of murderers and extortionists who are let loose on a distraught people to further perpetuate the fear syndrome in which they thrive. A brutal and systematic radicalisation of the society, deepening obscurantism among its rank and file, increasing intolerance and excessive violence are just some of the gory symptoms of a potion that is being prescribed as a cure to our ills. It is an ideal recipe to self-destruct!

State institutions are being abused to serve the interests of the ruling mafias. Grave financial corruption aside, the so-called political ‘heavyweights’ suffer from an incurable intellectual corruption as they change allegiances as a matter of whim and opinions as a convenient means to greener pastures without suffering any regret or compunction. They flaunt their shift as a ‘principled’ move, thus plunging their ‘new-found love’ into a nosedive. They are corrupt mavericks on the loose with no sense of shame. They are the ultimate ‘winners’ in this game of lust and deceit.

It is as if we are caught up in a vortex of currents that can be seen and felt, but that is beyond remedy because its reins are being controlled by an illicit alliance forged between the powerful and the mighty among the ruling echelons who continue to indulge nonchalantly in indiscriminate loot and plunder in spite of the constitution, in spite of the parliament, in spite of an independent judiciary and in spite of an increasingly harassed but combative people. Anarchy seems on the anvil. We call this democracy and wait for the next elections!


The writer is a political analyst. Email: raoofhasan@hotmail.com
The News

[Roshan wadhwani]

Rebuilding Pakistan: challenges and opportunities

April 8, 2012
By: Dr Zafar Iqbal Qureshi

About four decades ago, I was teaching at the Punjab University. In those days, one used to witness a lot of youthful energy and hope across all segments of the university population. Forty years later, that energy had dissipated and the hope has turned into hopelessness about Pakistan’s future.
Today, any assessment about Pakistan’s future leads to a cleavage between the pessimists and the optimists. Given this cleavage, the essential question begging an answer remains “can we rebuild the peoples’ Pakistan?” This article is an attempt to reach an answer to this question.

People like Mr Stephen Cohen of the Brookings Institute, an acknowledged scholar and authority on Pakistan had in his recent book described some scenarios about the future of Pakistan in the next 5-7 years. Doubtless, he had presented a very balanced picture of where we stand today and what could be some of the possibilities for our state.

According to Mr Cohen “Pakistan is marinated in crisis.” And, that our important institutions including key state enterprises, if not collapsing, are critically sick and should be in the ICU. Some estimates suggest that three state enterprises are incurring a cumulative loss of Rs 200, 000 per minute. Second, that the current unbearable inflation is eroding people’s purchasing power by the day. Third, our GDP growth for the past many years had been dismal hovering around 2 percent. Fourth, our tax to GDP ratio of 8.6 % is lower than that of Afghanistan.

Fifth, there are fewer taxpayers in 180 million population of Pakistan than the number of taxpayers among 14.4 million population of Guatemala. Sixth, our debt servicing is equal to 120 percent of the total federal government revenue. Seventh, our expenditure on education has been floating between 1.5 and 2%.

Our governance practices like rule of law don’t make us any proud. According to Transparency international our corruption rating according to 2011 Corruption Perception Index stands at 134 out of 182 countries. Our national leadership doesn’t inspire any confidence either. Considering the above facts, yes, the pessimists have a strong case in predicting a “gloom and doom” picture.

What about the optimists? Do they have equally sound and solid arguments to counteract what the pessimists say? The optimists would say that we had had our bad luck in the forms of major earthquakes and floods. No one could anticipate these. Further, surely our state had been enfeebled due to the unforgivable follies of our rulers. But can this situation be turned around and would we continue to muddle through like in the past.

The question now is whether we can rebuild and put Pakistan together in some new order. But this will only be possible if we can turn our challenges into opportunities. And, to turn our challenges into opportunities a reference is made to the work of Jim O’ Neill, the Chief Economist at Goldman Sachs.
Mr O’ Neill had become famous for coining the term ‘BRIC’. In coining the term, he predicted the rapid growth of Brazil, Russia, China and India. He constructed, what he called, a Growth Environment Score (GES) to make his projections about the BRIC countries. The GES consisted of a few macroeconomic indicators and some microeconomic variables. These included the followings:
1. Macroeconomic Indicators: Inflation, Public Deficit, Investment spending, External Debt and the degree of Openness.
2. The Microeconomic Variables : Use of Cell Phones, Use of Computers, Use of Internet, Education, Demographics/ Life Expectancy, Rules of Law, Corruption, and Government stability.

Using his GES, O’Neill is now making some new projections based on his empirical evidence. And, he has presented his new projections in the form of a classification of what he had labeled as N-11 counties. Happily, Pakistan is included in this N-11 category. What sort of silver lining is Mr. O’Neill seeing on the horizon as regards Pakistan’s future?

Even though on a scale of 1 to 10 Pakistan’s current GES is rather low (about 4 +), it has the potential for faster growth if it were to exploit some of his potential. What are current those strengths? Let’s look at these.

The optimists suggest that Pakistan of today has four key strengths: Geography, Geology, Demography and Democracy even though ‘luli langri’. This means that our democracy has not yet fully developed and that it is passing through an embryonic phase. Doubtless, that our country is strategically positioned and we can leverage this advantage in any negotiations with foreign powers. Also, our country is a mineral treasure of sorts and we need to exploit this treasure to protect our economic interest with a view to substantially reduce our dependence on the debt which has increased astronomically.

Our current demographics indicate that almost 2/3rd of our population is below the age of 30 years. This is a potential reservoir of human energy and equipping our people with the right quality technical and vocational education we can significantly enhance our per capita productivity. This will provide a strong boost to not only our GDP growth but, in all likelihood, it will help reduce our alarming unemployment rate.

To rebuild peoples’ Pakistan, it will be pertinent to focus on a few most pressing challenges. These will include: fighting inflation on a war footing, making government operations less costlier and more efficient, reducing our reliance on debt whether internal or external, fighting corruption, making the working of government more open, improving rule of law by respecting the decisions of the superior judiciary, and most of all rebuilding the edifice of our educational system at all levels.

Can we adopt such an agenda? I think we can and so do the optimists. While our state may be weaker, we have a very resilient and vibrant society. To exploit our vibrant society, however, it all depends on our governance system and quality of leadership. It is rather sad but the fact remains that our present leadership had failed to create an environment in which both institutions and individuals can reach their maximum potential.

Our leaders need to have a sense of urgency about the current situation. What they need to do is to have a focused national agenda to work relentlessly on fewer fronts with a view to improve the daily existence of the common man. In the meantime, those of us who believe that Pakistan can be turned around need to rekindle the hope amongst people. The hope that may defeat the fear, fear of poverty, extremism and that Pakistan can be rebuilt given its present strength and the society.

The writer is a visiting professor at LUMS
-Pakistan Today

[Roshan wadhwani]

Scenarios for the future

April 10, 2012
Dr Maleeha Lodhi

Can Pakistan escape its chequered political past to chart a hopeful way forward? Can it overcome its faultlines to build a better future? Is Pakistan fated to repeat the past rather than learn from it?

Analysts looking beyond the immediate to evaluate the country’s longer-term prospects offer varying answers. Scenario building about Pakistan’s future has been something of a growth industry in western countries that see their interests tied up with the country’s fortunes. But even when foreigners have war-gamed the country’s future they have often relied on the expertise of Pakistani scholars or practitioners.

Among such projects three are noteworthy. All pick a Goldilocks ‘middle’ way to predict something in between success and failure as the country’s most plausible outcome.

In a 2010 study, Jonathan Paris, a London-based American analyst, looked at a one to three year horizon to suggest three scenarios. After reviewing a number of variables including the economy, civil-military relations and ‘Islamist trends’ he concluded that in confronting imposing challenges, Pakistan will ‘muddle through’ rather than find a ‘pathway to success’ or become a failed state.

In a recently published book, Stephen Cohen sets out seven scenarios for the next five years. He argues that the most likely is some form of ‘muddling through’ in what he calls ‘an establishment-dominated Pakistan’. In this outlook “the state is always in transition but never arrives.”

His six other scenarios are explained by their titles: emergence of parallel Pakistans, democratic consolidation, breakaway and breakup, civil or military authoritarianism, an army-led revolution, and what he calls a post-crisis scenario, in which a major calamity pushes the country on an unpredictable path. He does not regard these as likely in the near term but sees a combination of ‘muddling through’ and ‘parallel Pakistans’ as Pakistan’s probable future. ‘Parallel Pakistans’ refers to provinces or regions charting their own course on governance, economic development and accommodating Islamist and regional forces.

A workshop organised in 2011 by New York University’s Centre for Global Affairs suggested three broad outcomes: Radicalisation, Fragmentation and Reform. It discussed variations of these three futures to consider where Pakistan would be in 2020. In the radicalisation scenario a rather fanciful trajectory is mapped in which spiralling economic losses, political infighting and perceived military threats ignite nationalist populist sentiment that leads to the election of a conservative military officer. A radical Islamic agenda is adopted by the new regime, which seeks to strengthen Pakistan by reinforcing bonds with the Muslim world. The study hastens to add that none of its scenarios describe the most likely future, only plausible developments. None assumes Pakistan will attain stability by 2020.

My scenarios for the country’s near term future are outlined in the book I edited and published last year*. I suggested five possible scenarios for the next few years. The first is more of the same or muddling through. I see this as more dangerous in its consequences than other writers because it can lead to economic collapse, uncontrollable social unrest and even fragmentation.

Political and economic dysfunction feed on each other in this scenario. Politics remains stuck in a stagnant mode unable to represent a changing, more urbanised Pakistan, or the aspirations of a growing middle class and youthful population. The political system also fails to reflect the dynamics created by a shift in the country’s economic centre of gravity. There is little change in patronage-driven governance and in the character of parties built around families rather than issues.

This leads to avoidance of urgent decisions to stem the country’s fiscal crisis. The ‘fire fighting’ approach and policy drift that characterises this scenario fails to reverse the country’s downward spiral. Far from being benign, the muddling through scenario poses a danger to the country’s stability. Not only does business as usual compound the governance vacuum and result in economic breakdown but it also culminates in unprecedented public unrest and lawlessness.

The second scenario figures in political conversations and in fears voiced by many politicians. But that does not make it plausible. This is a phase of military backed civilian technocratic rule ushered in to implement urgent structural reforms and avert a financial breakdown. This is an improbable scenario, as any such course of action will lack public acceptability and be fiercely opposed by all political parties. Any extra-constitutional intervention would be open to certain and successful challenge from an independent judiciary and a powerful media.

If the past is a guide, the shortcomings of this option have already been exposed in terms of both performance and legitimacy. Experience also suggests that political management in this scenario closely mirrors that in the ‘muddling through’ one. Cooption of the same elites stymies rather than spurs much needed reforms.

A third scenario frequently peddled by outsiders is social breakdown under the weight of mounting challenges, leading to state collapse, and possible takeover by those labelled as Islamist extremists. This alarmist scenario is based more on fear than objective assessment of critical variables. It mistakenly assumes that ‘Islamist’ forces are monolithic or unified and fails to recognise the country’s size and diversity. It also underestimates the capacity of countervailing forces – the predominantly ‘moderate’ character of traditional society and a disciplined military – to prevent the state’s capture by radicals. Despite its atrophying authority the state possesses sufficient capacity and coercive power to avert such an outcome.

The fourth scenario is one in which one or more of the established parties, fearful of losing political ground to changes in the social and economic landscape consider adjusting to these new dynamics. They start shifting from patronage to issue-based politics and modifying ticketing policies to embrace urban middle class members and professionals. They also formulate serious policy platforms to tap changing popular aspirations. What makes this scenario somewhat implausible is that these parties’ capacity to remake themselves is inhibited by their dominating characteristics: dynastic or hereditary leadership, clientelist bases of support among biradaris and tribes, and patronage-focused activity that oils their operation and rewards their supporters.

The fifth scenario is the most promising for its transformative potential to break from a past that has hindered Pakistan’s progress. This is of a middle class-led coalition galvanising a reform movement to fundamentally change the way the country is governed. Its aim is to make governance responsive to people’s needs, not just the interests of privileged elites. This coalition mobilises higher public participation in politics and spurs the large non-voting electorate to vote for change. It builds wider support in the cities as well as the countryside, reaching out to the young.

Changing economic and social dynamics become drivers to transform the basis of representative politics and in time, governance. Factors that can be a force for change include greater urbanisation, shift in the structure and location of economic power (indicated by the sharply declining share of agriculture in GDP), rise of a sizeable middle class, spread of modern communications and public awareness brought about by an energetic media.

These changes offer an unprecedented opportunity to align politics with the energy and dynamism of a more urbanised Pakistan and the public yearning for change. The lawyers’ movement of 2007-09 was an early indicator of the possibilities of urban-led politics. But this single-issue campaign dissipated once its goal was achieved.

In this scenario a coalition is built to pursue a broader agenda and extricate representative politics from sterile and moribund practices, ultimately replacing the politics of patronage with that of public service. The coalition either allies with a party that is persuaded to adopt a reform agenda or organises its own to push this agenda.

Prospects for realisation of this scenario may not appear strong in the immediate future. But it would be a mistake to underestimate the stirring for change that manifests itself across society today and resonates almost daily in the media. This may take time to crystallise but could eventually morph into a new kind of politics.

*Pakistan: Beyond the crisis state, (Hurst/Columbia University Press/OUP, 2011)

-The News