Misleading dramatics

Courtesy:- Rustam Shah Mohmand
Thursday, March 22, 2012

The joint session of parliament has been convened to formulate a new policy for the government that will henceforth govern relations with the United States. A parliamentary committee has prepared a set of recommendations for consideration and approval by the joint session.

The event marks the beginning of a new practice in governance where the executive branch of the state is seen to be abdicating its authority to the elected chamber in the realm of decision-making in vital national sectors. The idea, however, is not to seek the involvement of public representatives in decision-making but to create a wider, institutionalised justification for the resumption of Nato supplies through Pakistan.

Formulation and implementation of policies in all sectors like national security, education, health and foreign policy is the exclusive domain and responsibility of the cabinet and the ministries concerned. This is the practice in democracies all over the world. Parliament debates such policies and criticises either the content or the execution of such policies. The members’ observations and speeches are deemed to be reflecting the voices or aspirations of the electorate that they represent. Such debates, suggestions or criticisms enable the government to make adjustments, provide remedies and modify or make changes in policy.

In the aftermath of the Salala attacks that killed 24 Pakistani troops last November it was the government which took the decision to suspend Nato supplies through Pakistani territory. The cabinet could have taken a decision on the terms of engagement with the United States. Parliament would have debated and discussed the various options and made recommendations to the government.

There was no need to dramatise the issue and involve parliament in decision-making, especially when the decision has virtually been taken to resume Nato supplies. It appears that the whole exercise actually aims at “seeking and finding” a basis for the restoration of supply lines. The move shows the limits of Pakistani defiance in face of the American pressure. It also tellingly reveals the lack of any principled stance on issues where national honour is at stake. Linking the restoration of supply line to taxes and funds for repair of roads is tantamount to a humiliating expediency.

Legislators would recall that a similar joint session of parliament had in October 2008 adopted a charter for the government. That resolution was unanimously adopted by the joint session. In other words, it was supposed to be reflecting the wishes and aspirations of the 180 million people of Pakistan. But was any step taken to implement it? And did the legislators ever raise the issue of complete and total government indifference to the recommendations of the charter? Was it then a colossal display of hypocrisy or simply a cleverly crafted trick to gain sympathy and show symbolic adherence to the norms of participative democracy?

The only laudable recommendation that the parliamentary committee has made is with regard to relations with Pakistan’s neighbours. It is time the nation embarked upon a new, bold policy that helps Pakistan improve its foreign relations, particularly with Russia, India and Iran. The Iran pipeline project must now become a priority with the government. The country and the region are faced with huge problems like poverty, illiteracy, hunger, shrinking water resources and a population explosion. Only through promotion of trade, reduction of defence expenditures, creation of human capacity, resolution of boundary and water disputes, promotion of cultural exchanges and liberalisation of visa regimes can we hope to turn our economies around.

Normalisation of relations between Pakistan and India is at the core of this approach. Our salvation lies in forging harmonious and cordial relations with all our neighbours. The people of Pakistan and India do not want to remain hostage to unresolved disputes for centuries. They are focused more on poverty-alleviation, jobs, security, quality education, healthcare, access to justice, better sanitation and a safer environment. They are not fixated on the “core” issues which are the staple of a small, privileged segment of society.