The power conundrum in Pakistan

2008-06-09T05:56:00.000-07:00

Musharraf continues to hit daily headlines.....wondered why despite quitting from the post of the Army Chief of Pakistan and losing the February 18, 2008 general elections, he appears still to be the central political figure, overshadowing Asif Ali Zardari and Nawaz Sharif? From the masterminding of the Kargil intrusion in 1999 to the ordering of the coup to oust then premier Nawaz Sharif from power, from giving US it's vacillating support in its war on terror after 9/11 to his directive to storm the Lal Masjid in Islamabad in 2007, from removing judge Iftikaar Mohammad Chaudhary from the post of Chief Justice of Pakistan in the same year followed by his reinstatement under tremendous public pressure to the proclamation of Emergency in November to avert an adverse decision from the superior judiciary on the legality of his election to the post of President, his eight year reign has been, to say the least, eventful.
A bitter animosity with Nawaz Sharif after the coup has come back to haunt him. Nawaz was deported with his family from Pakistan to Dubai under an agreement, not recognised by the pak judiciary later, to not return for another 10 years. Keen to make a comeback to Pakistan politics, Nawaz landed in Pakistan last year only to be deported from the Islamabad airport. He was allowed to return home only after Benazir in self imposed exile for nearly 9 years was allowed to step on his home turf under a purported agreement brokered by the US between Benazir Bhutto and Musharraf and after the first woman Prime Minister of an Islamic conuntry was granted amnesty for graft and corruption charges slapped on her. The reason projected by the govt. then was Musharraf's inclination to re-establish democracy there.
Now a democratically elected coalition govt. is posing a threat as fierce to the battle-hardened President as the lawyer's agitation for the reinstatement of deposed Iftikhaar Mohammead Chaudhary. Nawaz wants to return the favour to Musharraf. He wants to be his nemesis. He's stressing on his impeachment by Parliament knowing fully well that the ruling coalition has the required two-third majority to do that. PPP has proposed a set of constitutional amendments to clip his powers which he acquired after last year's imposition of Emergency, like dismissing the PM, dissolving Parliament at will, appointing army chiefs and governors of provinces and controlling the National Command Authority which controls the use of nuclear weapons. Unless his powers are clipped, he can veto an impeachment resolution.
Isn't it only logical that the parliament of a country enjoys the powers it is authorised to in a democracy? Should there not a balance of power between the Presidency and the Parliament in Pakistan so that power is not centred in one person, but balanced between two institutions? and I ask of Nawaz why gun for the occupant of the post when he can be given an honourable exit, why revive the "politics of hate" and give Musharraf the ammunition of colluding with the Army with US backing and do much damage even before the current dispensation is able to cause him any harm? What should be Musharraf's fate and what should be the modalities of re-instating deposed Pak SC judges are two questions that are today threatening the stability of the new Pakistan government.
There are many security problems and issues of economic development that need urgent attention in the wake of rising food prices, Pakistan's increasing energy requirements and unabated terror attacks, despite peace deals between the NWFP govt. and Pakistani Taliban. On the other hand, the involvement of Inter Services Intelligence, Pakistan's external intelligence agency and the encouragement by the Army to militants in Pakistan is a reality that India is contending with, but what is not clear is whether the present govt. is playing to the galleries of this menacing ISI-military-militant collusion for it's survival or not. If this is true, is this another precursor to a military-backed govt.?and will there be a revolutionary democracy installed ever in the midst of the power conundrum in Pakistan are questions that i continue to seek answers of.

The Reservation Debate: Private Sector vs Govt

2007-08-18T09:47:00.000-07:00

The reservation debate has raged in India since the days of the Mandal Commission. While it's advocates have hailed it as an opportunity for the impoverished and backward classes in a casteist society to empower themselves and represent themselves in positions of power, it's detractors have vociferously attacked the electoral mindset of our political class which favours reservation for the benificiaries and even more for potential beneficiaries on the basis of caste so as to ensure the power hungry an uninterrupted supply of votes.

In an era of privatisation and disinvestment, the no. of public sector units have shrunk. So the reservation debate has expanded it's scope from the public to the private sector.

The opinion of the leaders and luminaries of the private sector is not very divided because most advocate"selection and benefit on the basis of merit". The govt. of our welfare state wants affirmative action by the private sector and wants it to be an active promoter and representative of the discriminated and the under-represented. It wants the no. of benificiaries to increase across the private sector and not face the brunt of modern-day privatisation.

The private sector's rhetoric that affirmative action should be voluntary and not forced or mandatory is cutting ice with the govt., with PM Manmoan Singh eager to ensure that steps be taken soon and a mehodology be adopted without wasting much time to voluntarily implement affirmative action.

The private sector's concern still is whether meritocracy will take a backseat or whether the govt. will arm-twist it to do as it pleases.

But while the debate on whether there should be reservation in the private sector or not continues, what's the most pertinent question is whether reservation is the best way to give representation to the voiceless and faceless. And if it is, is reservation in education after 12th standard and govt/non-govt. employment the best place to enforce it. This can be judged on the yardstick of the benifit it is providing to its benificiaries, the no.of benefiaries, whether the creamy layer is mostly repeatedly benefitted or not, what is the best way in reaching out to maximum no. of the deprived and should there be a time-frame for this provision.

Also what should be essentially analysed is whether this reservation is creating an equal society which it envisions to or if it has a cascading effect (practical or perceived) on other socially forward sections of society by exacerbating the resentment and the caste division (for instance the meena-gurjjar clashes in Rajasthan) or should it be accepted as the price for bringing equality.

The aim in my opinion should be to ensure a society where caste does not determine who gets how much education, who occupies which position, who lives in whose neighbourhood and who marries whom and thus create a level-playing fied in the true sense of the term.

If reservation sets out to achieve this, it's a step in the right direction . If not, let's just do some introspection.

Pulse of Sense.....

The power conundrum in Pakistan

The Reservation Debate: Private Sector vs Govt