| May 10, 2008 | Saturday | Jamadi-ul-Awwal 4, 1429 |
|
Deciding by committee
MY long experience in the bureaucracy has taught me that whenever politicians want to avoid taking a decision, they refer the matter to a committee.
Committees, by their very nature, can safely be counted on to drag things out until people have forgotten about whatever it was they were asked to deliberate on. Or, if somehow they do arrive at some kind of closure, varying views are presented, thus making it difficult to act.
The third possibility is for them to come up with a unanimous conclusion, and in this case, they can safely be blamed for the consequences. In each of the three eventualities, politicians can emerge unscathed.
In the current high-pressure negotiations over the judiciary, it will be difficult for the legal committee set up by Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari to pronounce unanimously. Nor can they drag out their deliberations indefinitely. But the recommendations are bound to cause controversy. Already, Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, an honourable, upright man, has resigned from the committee.
Here in England, I have been asked by friends what the fuss is about. They, like most Pakistanis, had hoped that after a long, turbulent year, the result of the February elections would allow the country to settle down. Another hope was that with a stable coalition in power, we would get a measure of political stability after a long time. Dream on.
The common assumption is that the coalition is on the brink of divorce because the PPP does not want the chief justice-in-limbo, Iftikhar Chaudhry, to be reinstated. Underpinning this theory is the notion that he would reopen the NRO that has removed a raft of charges against politicians and bureaucrats. One of the major beneficiaries of this ordinance is Asif Zardari, so the presumption is that his position would be untenable should the NRO be thrown out by a reborn and reactivated Supreme Court.
The corollary to this theory is that Musharraf’s job would be on the line as a number of petitions against his re-election by the last parliament would be taken up by Iftikhar Chaudhry. And since Musharraf issued the NRO to allow Benazir Bhutto and Asif Zardari to return to Pakistan, the latter is repaying his debt to the president by blocking the reinstatement of the chief justice.
The other side of the coin is that the return of the suspended chief justice would suit Nawaz Sharif. He has been adamant about Musharraf’s removal since his return, and sees Iftikhar Chaudhry as the best person to rid him of his nemesis. He understands that an effort to impeach the president could be a messy and long-drawn out affair, so what better way to sack him than through a Supreme Court decree?
Clearly, then, the aim of both leaders is widely divergent, and there is little chance of a compromise that would save the coalition. What then? The PPP would enter a shaky partnership with the PML-Q and the MQM, and be subjected to a lot of arm-twisting and outright blackmail. Musharraf would be back on centre-stage, and Nawaz Sharif would rule the roost in Punjab. But as we know from experience, it is not possible to run the country with a hostile provincial government in Lahore.
In this scenario, we are in for another long period of instability and chaos. These are the perfect conditions for extremists to push their agenda. But even more crucially, the problems of the country recede into the background when the government is trying to survive at any cost. So the PPP leadership must ask itself if it really wants to pay such a high price to stay in power.
The reality of Pakistani politics is that it has evolved into a two-party system, with the PPP and the PML vying for power. The Q faction was an aberration that is rapidly disintegrating. I have little doubt that soon, it will go the way of other alphabets that were once attached to other, long-defunct factions. The real rivalry is between a populist PPP and a right-of-centre PML.
Another reality is that all politicians want to get into power, and will use any trick in the book to get there. As the route via GHQ is currently out-of-bounds, the path through the Supreme Court is being explored by both parties.
A third constant is that Nawaz Sharif does not wish to be in Asif Zardari’s shadow forever. Forget about the warm embraces both exchange when they meet: both are manoeuvring for political advantage. Although the PPP did as well as expected in the February polls, the PML-N did far better than anybody thought it would. In fact, Nawaz Sharif is the real winner of the elections. He is boss of Pakistan’s biggest province, and is free from the NRO’s taint. And he has few political debts to repay.
All he has to do is to stand his ground, and if the PPP does not agree to reinstate the deposed judges, he can sit back and allow the coalition to collapse. He knows that sooner rather than later, the alliance of disparate parties like the PPP, PML-Q and MQM will disintegrate, leading to fresh elections. He will then be poised to gain an outright majority.
Thus, for Nawaz Sharif, it’s a win-win situation. But this wheeling-dealing spells bad news for the country. With the rupee in free fall, food and fuel prices rocketing, and the tentative peace talks in Fata stalled, the last thing we need is yet another bout of political shenanigans leading to fresh elections.
After the February polls, many observers were hugely impressed by Asif Zardari’s maturity and wisdom in forging a broad-based coalition in Islamabad. He combined this with quick-footed moves in the provinces that led to stable partnerships. Having done so much to repair his damaged reputation, he is running the risk of being blamed for the possible collapse of the coalition.
Whatever the reality behind the scenes, ultimately politics is about perceptions. And in this battle for public sympathy, Nawaz Sharif is winning without having to do anything beyond sticking to his original demand to reinstate the judges who were sacked by Musharraf last year. It is a demand that resonates deeply with the public, and the PPP would do well to remember that no matter how troublesome a proactive Supreme Court might be, the present stalemate is far more damaging to its future prospects, as well as to the rest of the country.
