Kafkaesque set-up
THE emerging contours of our new set-up depict a murky labyrinth hiding the conflicting pulls of the elite interests of multiple power centres, none of them aligned with the public interest. Given these deep cracks, can the byzantine set-up last and deliver?
A structure’s strength reflects that of its base. This set-up’s weak base is rigged polls. Over it, a huge ivory tower has been built by the actual powers to house willing elites to project a strength they lack. Each faction has conflicting interests that increase the set-up’s instability. The interests of the establishment — the proverbial elephant in the room — include pulling us back from doom’s edge, where its past actions got us, while retaining its political and economic sway, with other elites footing the costs of reform.
Then there is the PML-N, the ‘lion’ and main ruler, which is actually a façade for the new hybrid dispensation and its weakest cog, given its dubious mandate, infighting and 20th-century mindset. Its aims are to protect its empire and that of allied Punjab elites. But it sees the wrath of the masses and wants to drop them enough crumbs to win next time.
By foxily avoiding the cabinet, the PPP wants to hunt with the hounds and run with the hares. It will hug the set-up when it does well, but oppose it when it doesn’t. Its aims are to protect its own empire and allied Sindh and Balochistan elites and seeing Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, the crown prince, enthroned soon. The fox alone can topple the lion at the centre but only if the establishment agrees. The smaller parties need crumbs too.
Internal conflict and poor capacity can stymie performance.
There are groups outside the Leaning Tower of Pisa pushing to join the party inside or topple it. The PTI, the main one, represents populist middle-class fantasies and assorted elite interests. The cornered tigers want to rejoin the real powers while evicting the lion, or topple the tower if rebuffed. There are religious lobbies (the Jamaat-i-Islami, the JUI and TLP) with nuisance street power. The banned TTP and Baloch militants aim to topple it outright. Many global actors and events can harm it too, for example, India, Afghanistan, Middle East wars and Sino-US tiffs.
The set-up can defeat all these threats only if it performs very well. Unfortunately, internal conflicts and poor capacities can stymie this task.
The prime minister is better at supervising local projects than leading federal policy work. He may not have control over the three key posts: finance, interior and foreign. The interior ironman is a newbie, said to have been picked by the establishment — apparently, to clamp down on the PTI, militants and progressives. Dar lacks the experience or finesse for his job and will toe Nawaz Sharif’s line, not the prime minister’s, but will be checkmated by picks like Jilani. The finance guru has no loyalty to PML-N and his selection, too, is supposed to have been influenced by non-political elements.
For many, Muhammad Aurangzeb is the new saviour we want to transform our economy. Economic progress needs macroeconomic stability, productivity/ growth, equity and sustainability. The last two will barely hit the agenda. But can he even deliver stability and growth? Ensuring stability requires solid macroeconomic credentials and public and IMF experience (like Shamshad Akhtar’s), which he lacks. He may outshine Dar, but experimenting with inexperience with a very shaky economy is risky.
We only chase macroeconomic stability once we are in the midst of a full-blown crisis via IMF’s austerity menu. But durable stability comes by creatively expanding exports, industry and investments. This re-
quires able persons in commerce, industry, investment, IT, etc, with dynamic global experience that the incumbents badly lack. Aurangzeb has good credentials in these business areas. Can he alone transform our non-dynamic economy?
One can answer this hard query about the future via a simpler one about the past. Like Pakistan, its banks non-dynamically make money by investing in safe public debt. Did he put his bank on a new, dynamic investment path? No. Can he do that then for a much bigger, complex and politicised economy?
With productivity and growth ruled out by poor cabinet appointments, we will again chase stability via IMF’s menu. This will harm elite interests and more so the masses. Each faction will try to avoid the cost of inevitable reform as per its power and guile, possibly leading to conflict. So, this tower may implode in a few years. The PML-N can avoid all that by having able hands in a dozen key economic and social ministries to ensure productivity and equity before it’s too late.
The writer is a political economist with a PhD from the University of California, Berkeley.
Published in Dawn, March 19th, 2024