Share this story!            

EDITORIAL: Welcoming President Zardari!

Mr Asif Ali Zardari has been chosen by the representatives of the people of Pakistan as the next president of Pakistan and to remain so concurrently with the parliament for five years, till 2013. His victory was a foregone conclusion because of the mathematics of support which he achieved at the centre and in the provinces. Fortunately, however, despite all the media controversy, the political system under the Constitution was much less stressed about his nomination than might have been imagined.

The result achieved by the PPP is owed to its political positioning after the 2008 elections. It would be far-fetched to say that this political placement was actually done to bring about the presidency of Mr Zardari, but one can’t ignore the deftness with which the party has been able to create a consensus of thinking in the provinces, except perhaps Punjab which coalesced first only to fracture as the PPP’s coalition alliance became loose and then fell apart. Incidentally, most of the TV channel cassandras spewing dire predictions are focused on the split that took place between the two big parties.

The fright is actually at the extraordinary powers of the president as they were left behind by President Musharraf, and most discussants keep referring to them because they think that Mr Zardari will use them recklessly to bring Pakistan’s political house of cards down. But the truth is that his relationship to Article 58-2(b) is completely different from the past presidents who were part of the system of power “troika” set up to diminish the powers of the prime minister in a parliamentary form of government and keep parliament in check. In fact, he can’t even be compared to the earlier PPP President Sardar Farooq Leghari because Mr Zardari is the top leader of the PPP rather than one who might nurse ambitions to become one. So he will not be in the presidency to water down the powers of Mr Yousaf Raza Gilani and parliament by stressing his relationship with the army chief as happened under the troika system. And this is an important consideration for the consolidation of the civilian system at the expense of the notorious troika that laid the system low in the 1990s.

There is some leeway in the “consultation” powers — as opposed to “advice” — he will have over the provinces, and those powers come from the 17th Amendment. By all accounts and his own assertions, he wants to undo the 17th Amendment, and the offended PMLN will have to help him do that in the parliament when the time is ripe and it is advantageous to the system rather than to any one or other party or leader. Meanwhile, the current ground reality is that the PPP will not benefit at all if it starts a battle in Lahore. Popular support in the province is not with the PPP after the long drawn out drama of the lawyers’ movement and the unpleasant denouement of the Murree Agreement signed at the heyday of the PPP-PMLN romance after this year’s elections. Indeed, that is why the PPP still wants the PMLN back in the coalition government at the centre! So the ball is in Mr Nawaz Sharif’s court. He should avoid confrontation with Mr Zardari and allow the transition to functional democracy to move forward.

One thing should be clear to both Mr Zardari and Mr Sharif. Pakistan’s policies will have to be informed by wisdom, as opposed to populism, in the coming days. The state needs a supple response from the PPP government; and Mr Zardari will have to achieve a measure of pragmatism ahead. A number of crises of the state have come together and are crowding around the government in Islamabad. The provinces need to be placated over their autonomy. Law and order is bad everywhere but there is global terror in the Tribal Areas and insurrection in Balochistan. Indeed, never was the centre required to give as many rights away to the provinces as now.

Last but not least, Pakistan will have to give up the habit of designating undefeatable enemies in the region and at the global level, and learn to promote its national economy in place of its role as a “challenger” state. President Zardari should demonstrate the practical wisdom to deal with the situation. He has given us a glimpse of it in the wake of the political scenario emerging after the martyrdom of Ms Benazir Bhutto. But now the buck will stop at him and he won’t be able to blame anyone else for failure.

A good way to kick off would be to promote people of merit and credibility and integrity in positions of authority and responsibility and shed the horrible stigma of cronyism attached to his team. Loyalty and merit are not mutually exclusive. Of course, even a hint of corruption would be disastrous for the regime because it would give fresh ammunition to his many detractors. *

SECOND EDITORIAL: Reacting to NATO strikes

Pakistan says it has suspended supplies to the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, according to a “senior official” who has cited “security reasons”. The Khyber Agency political agent says, “All Afghanistan-bound supplies for the International Security Assistance Force have been stopped as the Torkham highway is vulnerable”, dismissing the impression that the decision is a reaction to continued United States attacks in Waziristan.

The supplies going through Torkham are on halt but not those going through the Chaman border post in Balochistan. In all, over 400 trucks cross into Afghanistan daily from the two points. But no matter what the officials say, the stoppage conveys the anger felt by the nation over the Angur Adda incident in which 20 people were killed by the ISAF-NATO troops inside Pakistani territory. The National Assembly and the Senate passed resolutions of great outrage and the provincial assemblies are following suit. If the Angur Adda incident was a message, the stoppage of trucks is a message too. Beyond this, of course, reality must prevail and the two sides must agree to a better coordination before operations against Al Qaeda are undertaken.

The intermeshing of actions is already far too intimate to allow for a split at this juncture. According to the latest news, the US has transferred $365 million to Pakistan as reimbursement for the country’s efforts to fight terrorism in the Tribal Areas. Pakistan maintains about 120,000 troops in the area to combat Taliban and Al Qaeda militants. Under the arrangement, “Pakistan submits bills for expenses incurred during each quarter to the US Department of Defence which then reimburses the bills after proper scrutiny”. So the truth is that just as Pakistan relies on its cooperation with the US, so does the US need to carry Pakistan with it at every step of the way.

Pakistan’s top crises are terrorism and the economic downturn. The director of the IMF’s Middle East and Central Asia Department, Mr Mohsin Khan, says Pakistan’s economy needs a “substantial” injection of external funds if it is to improve the worsening economic situation. With $810 million coming in from the Asian Development Bank for the power sector, we should know which way ahead is right for us. What is required is steadfastness in the face of hardship and direction of policy in line with our national economic requirements. Note avoidance of the much-abused term “national interest”. *

Home | Editorial

Share this story!