|
By: Iqbal Mustafa
The writer is a consultant for agro-economy and organisational management to public and private sectors
The hyperbole buttered upon the visitors at the Expo 2005 portraying Pakistan as the land of milk and honey for investors was quite presumptuous in assuming that they don’t read newspapers nor watch television and their knowledge of regional current affairs is less than elementary. In the television interviews that followed the occasion, the foreign guests displayed a muted sense of guarded disbelief and amusement. It is almost derogatory to assume that international investors are ignorant about business opportunities in global perspective and need someone to lead them by the hand. The exercise seemed more to assure ourselves than outsiders that we are investor-friendly.
Expo 2005 stood out in sharp contrast to the backdrop of current events unfolding in the country and the region. The fundamental question that comes to mind is, "Why is the General opening so many fronts?" Leaving aside the macro-political issues of his legitimacy and a covert war on eastern and western borders, he has many immediate conflicts on his plate.
Wana is simmering away persistently. The local tribesmen have a direct economic interest in providing shelter and support to foreign settlers -- the remnants of the Afghan war and some Al-Qaeda operatives -- who provide handsome remuneration for housing, food supplies and local recruits for covert activities in Afghanistan. They have had this comfortable relationship for over a decade now without interruption from the Pakistan government. The Wana tribesmen are not in this for an ideological battle; they never were; its simple economics for them. Should they be expected to comprehend and accept the radical reversal in ideology or the foreign policy of the government without substitute arrangements for their income? If the matter was to be sorted out neatly in terms of dollars and cents (with deep US pockets), damage to life and property could have been avoided. Why such a militant approach? To score points with the U.S? That’s self-defeating.
The Balochistan front had unfinished business from the seventies that General Zia had brushed under the bed by mollifying the Sardars. Jamali resisted direct military intervention for some time but after his departure, sending troops in to the region was like showing the red flag to a bull. Now the region is ticking away like a wired bomb.
The issue of building more dams has been festering between provincial perceptions for many decades. Independent technical experts have not been able to present clear pros and cons in layman terms to the nation. The need for more fresh water relates to a multiplicity of other factors rather than simply building more storage. In the absence of a National Water Authority to develop a holistic view of water availability, consumption, transmission, distribution and pollution options, it seems premature to be deterministic about building more dams as a national imperative. Have there been quantitative studies on irrigation efficiencies, or agricultural versus urban/industrial requirements? Or environmental effects, especially on salinity/sodicity caused by ground water? Why has the General chosen to put his hand in this hornet’s nest now? And take the podium in Sindh wearing a figurative ten-gallon hat and a pair of six shooters in the holsters.
Finally, he has spawned the nebulous doctrine of ’enlightened moderation’ with rhetoric not backed by actions. In doing so he has provoked insecurity in religious political parties who perceive this as U.S. backed secularism being imposed on our society. While self-appointed authorities dish out medieval fatwa, live on TV stations on matters of social issues to the public, the madrasas continue to receive zakat and ushr funds, endorsed by the government as essential providers of social services, and extremist print media is free to spread bigotry and chauvinism, the General is propagating moderation in matters of faith. At Okara, last week, he implored the public to fight extremism in their ranks. At district levels, petty officials continue to witch-hunt performing artists in the name of Islam while the General inaugurates the Academy of Performing Arts in Karachi by claiming that it will project a softer image of Pakistan. The official syllabi in schools and colleges continue to distort history and reality with ideological slants that are in negation of ’enlightened moderation’. There is confusion galore in all this ideological mist.
To the General and his comrades it may seem that they are conducting a brave crusade for progress and stability of the country but to an outsider it appears absolutely to the contrary. The General seems to be opening new fronts continuously and government efforts are being diverted to fire-fighting internal conflicts.
In all fairness, all the blame cannot be assigned to the General alone; a large part is due to his advisors and political allies. He represents his constituency, the military whose institutional interests lie in expansion of its role, not in curtailment. Hence the quasi-democratic advice he receives from his constituency is for self-propagation through taking on more conflicts. Alignment with US policy to contain terrorism provides a useful role to the military, in the short run at least with generous compensations.
His political allies owe their current power and position to his dispensation and so are obviously averse to questioning his basic inclinations. Amongst them there is a predominance of urban industrial bias that has all the evils of feudalism and none of the virtues, for example, statesmanship. The bureaucracy has, over the years, been reduced to a shaggy dog on hind legs. Content in retaining the smaller share of the pie quietly with a mute scepticism, it would be last institution to share its limited wisdom in matters of statecraft.
His economic advisors are professional bean counters who view progress in a linear dimension of numbers, minus social dimensions; hence the skewed growth and unabated poverty levels. The para-state intelligence agencies have their own ’corporate’ agenda, a hangover from the Afghan war era that gels with General’s strategy only in so far as it provides them perpetuity of their secret domain. It is a potent tool that the Establishment cannot do without.
There are no independent think tanks to provide the General objective advice based on coherent political thought. What should he do under these conditions? I think he should ask himself in the quiet of the night, "Why am I opening so many fronts?" Hitler was a military genius but he committed the same mistake.
Email: mustafa@hujra.com; archives at www.hujra.com | 
