A State of Confusion

Pakistan seems destined to enter uncharted and dangerous political
waters as the general disillusionment against Nawaz Sharif and his
government turns into a sense of despair at the growing levels of
misery, which his policies have wrought for Pakistan. In nearly two
and half years of his second tenure as Pakistan's democratically
elected Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif has displayed a remarkable
aptitude from stumbling from a bad crisis into an even worse one. If
the last two and a half years of his term of office are seen in
hindsight, they have been nothing more than a textbook example of
crisis management practiced in its most perfect form. In this regard,
Nawaz Sharif's tenure in office has been faithful to Pakistan's past
experiences of electing leaders who, instead of living up to their
pledges, ended up proving their own inability in dealing with the
complex problems associated with the realities of running a modern
nation state. It has been the ill fate of Pakistan that it has been
cursed with leaders whose primary and commonly identifying trait has
been that they all have been politicians and not statesmen like in
their political visions for Pakistan's future. According to Sir
Winston Spencer Churchill, who appeared to have disciphered the
distinction between the two, a statesman is someone who looks ahead to
his country's future, while a politician is someone who just looks
ahead to the next election.

In the case of Pakistan, it would seem from the historiography of its
past mistakes and lost hopes, that its cadre of politicians are not
interested in the general well being of Pakistan in particular, but
rather in their own political survivability. From the collective
experience of Pakistani politicians, it would seem that their rallying
cry for political office is exactly the opposite of what President
John F. Kennedy, in his inaugural address, suggested; do not ask what
you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you! It
is this lack of foresight on the behalf of Pakistan's
political elite for the country's future that has created,
instilled and favored a political climate which thrives on
opportunity at the expense of the nation's strategic
priorities. Leaving the Pakistani politicians' personal vested
interests, disguised as paeans to public service, aside for a moment,
it is extremely difficult to curtail such political behavior, because
of a lack of an institutional framework of checks and balances, which
would temper such excessive personal ambitions of Pakistani
politicians. It has been the inestimable misfortune of the Pakistani
nation and its people that those destined to govern over it have done
so as if it was their own personal fiefdom. In some instances, as the
case has been, Pakistan has been considered as a military recruit, by
those who ruled it. They believed that the country could be bullied into accepting orders without
questioning the authority or validity of those orders.

In the course of instituting such personal autocracy, the political
institutions of Pakistan have been systematically dismantled, because
they posed a tangible threat to the rulers' own power interests and
thus, had to be destroyed. The end result of these policies of
self-aggrandizement have been that Pakistani politics has come to
resemble a Hobbesian state of nature, where the rule of law and order
has been replaced by, what the Germans once used to refer to as, "der
fuhrer diktat", or the leader's will. This sort of personal autarchy
in a society attempting to revive its democratic credentials is
highly destabilizing. This is not because of its crippling effects on
the emerging nature of democracy itself, but in a more critical sense,
because it offers no credibly acceptable way of peacefully and legally
transferring power between governments, which is sine qua non of a
democratic society. In Pakistan's case, the majority of its transfers
of power, which have occurred, have been non-democratic and
extra-constitutional in their intent and the in manner of their
execution. It has been a habit of Pakistani politics to remove
governments through non-democratic means: military coup d'etats,
summary dismissals based on constitutional excuses and through
creating public disapproval through mass agitation and acts of civil
disobedience. Through such actions, it is hoped, the military would
step in till a care-taker government could be installed to pave the
way for the next elections and then everyone concerned could wait a
few years for the cycle to repeat itself.

Pakistani politicians, in the interests of the nation, have to stop
using such extra-democratic tactics to remove governments, because
though their intentions might be laudable and their reasons justified,
such actions only help in de-legitimizing the very democratic
institutions which these politicians are claiming to
uphold. Democracy in Pakistan will prosper and flourish when its
politicians develop a healthy respect of its democratic institutions
and stop trying to remove or voice their opposition through
extra-democratic means. This penchant of Pakistani politicians to
seek the removal of governments via creating conditions, which make
its stay in power problematic, should be actively discouraged. This is
especially true in the wake of a general strike, against the policies
of Nawaz Sharif and his government, which was used to register a vote
of mass protest against the government's policies. Many opposition
groups in Pakistan are heralding it as a vote of no confidence against
Nawaz Sharif's government and are calling for the government's
resignation based on this display of public disenchantment, and for
elections to elect a more representative government to power.

Contrary to what the opposition may claim, the strike, though a
symbolic vote of no confidence, does not matter, because Nawaz Sharif
enjoys a parliamentary majority and to remove him for office the
opposition has to engineer a vote of no confidence on the floor of the
parliament. If the opposition wants to remove the present government
it should work within the framework of democracy and it should not
resort to removing the government by force, because it could be
susceptible to such a power play itself. Right now there exists an
opportunity in Pakistan, which if handled properly, could increase the
political autonomy of institutions in Pakistan and further strengthen
democracy in Pakistan. However, if it is wasted, then Pakistan will
continue to suffer from a chronic lack of political stability as a
result of dealing with governments which are transient in nature and
thus, devoid of any real legitimate authority to enforce a meaningful
change in the Pakistani polity for the betterment of all concerned.

There is absolutely no scintilla of doubt that Nawaz Sharif, who came
to power with a huge parliamentary mandate to revive Pakistan's
failing fortunes, has squandered his legitimacy to govern over
Pakistan due to his government's sheer incompetence in dealing with
the issues and problems which confront the Pakistani polity. Nawaz
Sharif is not to be blamed for all that ails Pakistan and for creating
all the problems in its society, but his sole responsibility and mea
cupla lies in his inability, as its elected leader, to rationally,
effectively, democratically and judicially deal with those problems as
they arose. The main opposition resentment against his government's
policies appears to be directed at his style of governance which is
centralized and not open to the idea of provincial autonomy and is
unwilling to accept any criticisms of its policies from any quarter of
the country. These points raised by the opposition groups, which have
formed an alliance to remove Nawaz Sharif from power, are serious
allegations questioning the legitimacy of the government to continue
its tenure. These allegations, by the opposition parties, against the
misconduct of the government, are valid questions, which the
government must answer to justify its continued stay in power, because
they do cast a pall of doubt on its ability to improve the
progressively worsening conditions in Pakistan.

It would seem that though the opposition parties have raised serious
issues, it is not truly reflective of their real intentions. The real
wish of the opposition parties, in seeking the removal of Nawaz
Sharif, is not motivated by a desire to improve the life of an average
Pakistani citizen, but to stake a claim of their own to the political
pie in Pakistan. There is no denying the fact that this government has
been an abysmal failure, but a change of governments, no matter how
desperately needed, will not amend the existing conditions in Pakistan
for the better. To justify a change of government, the opposition
parties clamoring for Nawaz Sharif's early exit from power have to
offer a credible alternative to his rule and have to seriously answer
the question why they would be a better option than the present
government. The simple reason for this is because the people of
Pakistan are crying for a real leader, who would have the foresight,
commitment, legitimacy and a sense of political accommodation to
govern Pakistan and unite the federation, not fracture it further via
insecurity driven policies.

At this stage in its history, the problems of Pakistan will not be
necessarily addressed by a change in the government. They would be addressed
by a government willing to pay attention to the details which matter
such as education, minority/women's rights, building the
infrastructure, legal and constitutional reform, social welfare,
equitable taxation and collecting outstanding financial loans and
punishing the defaulters. Pakistan needs a leader who has the moral
and physical courage to tackle the issues and not to shy away from the
hard choices by externalizing his internal difficulties and blaming
India or the West for the problems, which haunt Pakistan. Pakistan
needs a leader, who will make the economy and education his top
priority and one who understands that a robust economy and a sound
educational system is the bedrock upon which would rest the future
well being of the nation.

Hence, the question, which Pakistan needs to answer, to improve its
lot in life, will not be determined by a change of the present
government for another but what that new government has to offer to the
people of Pakistan in return. The people of Pakistan do not want to
hear more false promises from their political leaders. The people of
Pakistan want honest answers about issues which affect their lives
and how those lives could be made more bearable. The people of
Pakistan are not interested in another government, as they are
interested in securing their future; a future based on harmony,
prosperity and liberty for all the citizens of Pakistan.