Search
 
Write
 
Forums
 
Login
"Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; they are the ones to attain felicity".
(surah Al-Imran,ayat-104)
Image Not found for user
User Name: Ghayyur_Ayub
Full Name: Ghayyur Ayub
User since: 26/Jul/2007
No Of voices: 302
 
 Views: 1860   
 Replies: 1   
 Share with Friend  
 Post Comment  

The coalition partners

 By

Dr Ghayur Ayub


For a long time, PML was the only major party at a national level. It was bruised now and again by splinter groups but never faced a serious threat from another party. Then in the late 1960s, PPP surfaced and instead of adopting two-party politics in the country, they went for a head on collision, intensified frequently by the intrigues of agencies. In line with the national psyche, the division widened and the party's detest turned into personal despise between the leaderships reaching its crescendo in the late 1980s that brought the late Benazir Bhutto against Nawaz Sharif. The rest is history.

The process, by default or by design, exposed politicians as people of no conscience with no principles. The notion still holds true. This may not be true in all cases. Yes; at times, they take actions which look unprincipled in broader terms but they usually fall within the framework of party policy. Every party runs on certain policy principles which are not hidden from the public. Remaining within those principles, sometimes politicians give statements which seemingly make them look unethical. (I am not talking about corruption) Similar principles apply to partners in coalitions. The difference is that before they announce formal coalition, the leaders agree on a Minimum Common Program (MCP) which becomes the principle policy by which they run future governments. India, at times, had 36 coalition partners and if my memory serves me right, at present there are 27 partners in the present government.

In Pakistan, on the other hand, this practice became a handicap in the politics of coalition. Except for the "˜controlled democracy' of Musharaf, (a term supportively used by the White House and militarily used by Gen Ayub Khan) coalitions always broke before they could nurture to maturity. The reason? The partners failed to draw a prior MCP as a policy tool for future governance and if they drew one; a partner or two decided to disown it. 

Moreover, unlike the rivalries of parties in western democracies, the politics of Pakistan hinge on the mood of the party leadership. This is because our society is primarily based on hero worship. We make our heroes, polish them as ideals and nearly worship them, refusing to hear even positive criticism about them. This concept gets exaggerated in the case of dead heroes. Politicians don't miss a chance to use their names as strategic tools to gain political mileage. The irony is that the vast majority of the public fall in "˜Pidar-e-Mun Sultan Bood' trap, ignoring the moral ailments linked to the incumbent leaderships. This is the gist of coalition politics in Pakistan where 'hero-worship' and nonviable MCP become the forces that steer governments.

Keeping these two factors in mind, let us assess the state of the coalition between the two major parties, PPP and PML-N. On leadership, Nawaz Sharif has been a tested player having served the country twice as prime minister. Whatever his style of governance; he is known to be the only leader from Punjab who stood against two presidents and two army chiefs on an issue of principle, when he found them attacking democracy. On the other hand, Asif Ali Zardari, after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, played a tremendous role keeping the federation intact by appearing somber and wise. In a short span, he won the hearts and minds of a lot of Pakistanis when he opened his arms for reconciliation. They saw a new dynamic leadership emerging in PPP sweeping aside the stalwarts such as Makhdum Amin Fahim et al. His benign looking smile was not far behind the seasoned grin of the peace loving Dalai Lama.

Against this background, the parley between the two leaders created a ray of hope in a desperate nation. All eyes were fixed on them. Having a signed CoD in their back pockets, the two didn't have much difficulty in joining hands and agreeing on a MCP in the shape of the Murree Declaration. The two leaders signed it under the flashing lights of the world media, fulfilling the hopes of many hope-deprived people. Everyone was content - lawyers, civil society, human right activists, students, doctors and of course the partner politicians. I suppose a few might even be smiling in the presidency for their own reasons. One article of the MCP was made time-barred and that became a sticking point. For unknown reasons, AAZ took a U-turn by unilaterally changing the policy frame of the document into a political casing, dismantling the principle of MCP and igniting a band wagon of distrust. In the process, at one stage, MNS also took a "˜semi U-turn' calling it a "˜bitter pill', but soon he reverted back to his original stand.

In such a situation, the first and the second line leaders of the two parties, instead of roping each other with 'and', (PPP and PML-N) started distancing themselves by using 'or', (PPP or PML-N) or even 'versus' (PPP v PML-N), when discussing issues of common interest. This was a sign of the erosion of the bond of CMP, which made the hopeful public confused and even disenchanted. They were already under the heavy weight of the rapid price hike and the worsening law and order situation. The frequent American interference in the political scheming did not help cool their anger. Rather the opposite.

In this scenario, it is reported that Mr. Asif Ali Zardari has asked Mr. Nawaz Sharif to tell his colleagues not to give public statements which could further damage the deteriorating relationship between the two coalition partners. In the light of this request the following points keep distracting the thinking minds;

First; does it mean PML-N should compromise on the two principled stands and remain quiet on the issues of restoration of judges and ouster of Musharaf? After all, the PML-N candidates took an oath to pursue the case of the restoration of judges to the position of November 2, 2007. The issue of Musharaf's ouster is equally important as it became "˜Awaz-e-Khalq' during the election campaign and PML-N took it as "˜Naqara-e-Khuda' and called "˜Labaik' to it when they went out to get votes. If we take the chronological ratings of Musharaf's popularity from 2006 to present day; we see a rapid fall from 62% in 2006 to 14% two weeks ago. A fresh survey report only a day earlier stated that 100% of people want Musharaf to quit.

Second; one should remember, that AAZ's primary interest is to uplift the PPP to the peaks, and that is not possible if PML-N stays popular in the public. We all know that politics run in reverse equations between the two opposing parties even if they are coalition partners in a government.

Third, the state of indecision by Nawaz Sharif will create an impression among the public that he is towing the line taken by Asif Ali Zardari (though differently) and that might drag down his popularity for the benefit of the latter.

Fourth, some even believe, it is in the interest of AAZ to keep the two major issues alive not because he has made commitments somewhere else, (that may be so) but because in a status quo, he can retard the progressive steps taken by the revolutionary mind of Shahbaz Sharif in the most populous province of the country. His high speed action-orientated politics is not good for PPP in Punjab.

Fifth, some expect chaos in the country if the coalition collapses. This may not be true, provided the major parties in the center and the provinces wisely sit in opposition and don't get trapped by mosaic intrigues of the agencies as they did in the past. A relevant clause in this regard is already in place in the CoD document. This will also pave the way for the formation of a two-party system at the national level.

Finally, whatever the reasons, one thing is obvious; the present lethargy in the governance is damaging the coalition partners and their leadership in more than one way. The earlier they take a decision on the two major issues, the better it is for democracy and for the country.

The end

 Reply:   Pakistan's ruling coalition mu
Replied by(Noman) Replied on (5/Jul/2008)
On these erudite pages, and elsewhere, there has been much ado about the fact that now the ruling coalition should split in response to the great betrayals perpetrated by Asif Ali Zardari. I

Pakistan's ruling coalition must not splinter

Thursday, July 03, 2008

Raza Rumi

This Op-ed piece was published in the NEWS, Pakistan 

On these erudite pages, and elsewhere, there has been much ado about the fact that now the ruling coalition should split in response to the great betrayals perpetrated by Asif Ali Zardari. In classic machismo laden bravado, the honorific narratives have been urging Nawaz Sharif and his party to take the bold step and stick to their "principled" stand. What is interesting about these exhortations is the brazen rendering of political discourse in black or white terms.

Many a former ambassador, the recent cohort to jump into the fray of political activism, has found a great post-retirement vocation. Once the plush tenures are over and all that could be extracted from the holy state cow, now is the time to speak the truth and condemn military dictatorships. Convenient and most opportune! This low-risk strategy is paying its dividends: a great whitewashing of all that they were a party to, and all that they let happen in front of their red-taped offices. The ex-servicemen whose record is even more dismal are even more vociferous in their advocacy for a democratic Pakistan.

Therefore, the confused citizens with a shred of historical sense are simply bewildered. Gen Chishti, the key player in toppling Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's government and unleashing of eleven years of mediaeval darkness, talking about resistance to army rule. Surely, the realisation took three decades of lasting damages and fissures within the body politic. Another retired Army chief, Gen Beg, is also at the forefront. His vitriole cannot hide the years when he actively sabotaged the democratic process, admitted before the Supreme Court that he had "advised" a bench not to restore Junejo's government; and disbursed astronomical sums of money to undermine civilian government raised through another shady character heading a dubious financial institution.

And let us not forget Air Marshal Asghar Khan, who urged Gen Zia to hang Bhutto at Kohala Bridge and that Army intervention was legitimate in national interest. His well-meaning son, the bright Omar Asghar Khan (may his soul rest in peace), joined Musharraf and heralded the dawn of a new era with the last army takeover. Inconvenient: Mea Culpa?

Since Pakistan's inception the politicians, not the best to begin with, were, portrayed as the evil characters. The first decade of democracy 1947-58 witnessed SEVEN prime ministers with an overarching establishment fiddling and rocking the boat each time. So politicos were given a bad name and ousted in 1958 for nearly twelve years. We know well what happened during 1970-77 and eventually the 1977 coup, led from the front by Gen Chishty, depicted Bhutto as the worst thing to have happened to Pakistan. In the process, half the country was lost and institutions sabotaged even before they could take root.

The most recent decade of democratic rule 1988-99 was yet again marked by similar games of power, betrayal, military interference culminating in martial rule that is still refusing to go away. Among others, the key lesson of this decade was the willingness of the political elites to play the game, rules of which were set by power centres. They were hostage to their own limitations and the instruments of the state represented by opportunities for corruption as well as the witch-hunting organisations that ostensibly conducted accountability.

Prior to the mobilisation of the middle classes and the new components of an expanded bourgeoisie, something unique had taken place through the Charter of Democracy. This document was a Herculean achievement by the major political players, if we were to exclude the tonga parties, that is still alive and no party has backed out of it.

This is momentous. A coalition, that too of former adversaries, will not be an easy process to manage. It will stumble, falter and swirl; and it should. Political maturity is neither gained through pompous declarations nor pious accords. It is the experience of governance and the ability of conflict-resolution and problem-solving that makes coalitions work. The Indian case is the closest to our context. In the last two decades the Indian political class has learnt the art of managing coalitions and even now this is far from a smooth ride.

The current hysteria against the villainous nature of Zardari and his real and imagined misdeeds is nothing but a desperate call for the old order "“ of the 1950s, 1970s and 1990s "“ to return in full force. Like the polarised polity of Bangladesh, where the army had to intervene in January 2007, to "save" the country from chaos?

The old order has beneficiaries: political underlings who can switch and become pegs in the power game; retired bureaucrats who can pledge loyalty for favours; journalists who can broker power and gains, and so on. This time it is difficult: who to demolish as a "security-risk" and whom to term as a born-again Jinnah. And, above all, a vigilante media, a highly charged civil society led by the lawyers cannot be appeased or tricked into these little games.

One can detect some measure of frustration, almost a panic, as to why Nawaz Sharif has not condemned Zardari and called him a chor. And why has Zardari not lashed out against the Sharifs for their inflexibility on the judges' issue. It is a separate matter that the way a 100-days reign of this government has been judged is not even remotely akin to assessments of Musharraf's eight years.

Yes, the PML-N has signed off on the increase in the total number of judges to twenty-nine. Yes, it is reluctantly ready to accept PCO judges. This is pragmatism of governance as opposed to the fiery materials for political rhetoric and high posturing. We simply cannot allow the ruling parties to part their ways and demonstrate to the future authoritarian figure that politicians are incapable of governance and they "fight amongst each other."

Political sagacity and vision require that lumberdar-behaviour, Mullahist puritanism and sloganeering must give way to a calibrated means of dispute resolution. In case the constitutional package is the only way out for the PPP, then coalition partners and advocacy groups must focus on that. I have yet to read a single informed critique of the package that is inherently transformational and holds the potential to undo mis-governance of the past. Instead, the voices that want the coalition to break away reject the package with the one-liner that it is meant to sidetrack judges' issue. Was this impasse and tribal behaviour worth eight years of democratic struggle, the death of Benazir Bhutto and sacrifices of people who died in the lawyers' movement? The answer, plainly, is in the negative.

Mian Nawaz Sharif is a changed man. His steadfast commitment to the renewal of the truncated democratic process has been exemplary. Zardari has already tasted the bitter pills of politics, jail, media trials and miscarriage of justice. Who would know better than them that their split will only benefit their tormentors? And if they don't know that, then God save us all.

The coalition must not splinter. In fact, the challenges require shared governance, collective experience for many years to come. Those advocating Sharif's exit are serving no one's cause.

The coalition has to stay. Let us not revive the beleaguered forces on the retreat.



--
Whiz News provides news, views and interesting articles from various sources and all perspectives.
 
Please send your suggestion/submission to webmaster@makePakistanBetter.com
Long Live Islam and Pakistan
Site is best viewed at 1280*800 resolution