Reform Democracy or Else

By Najam Sethi

President Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani have both recently said that they are sanguine democracy will not be derailed in Pakistan. Mian Nawaz Sharif, the opposition leader, has also confirmed his support for the democratic system at hand. The US Af-Pak envoy visiting Pakistan these days, Richard Holbrooke, has pitched in with continuing US backing for “civilian democracy”. Why is everyone suddenly so concerned about “democracy”? Is it under some sort of threat from non-democratic forces in the country?

Conspiracy theories are choking the airwaves. It is darkly rumoured that the military is weighing its options to “save the nation” once again from the “clutches” of “political vultures” operating under the guise of popular democrats. Credibility is attached to the judgments, no less than the courtroom remarks, of the judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which are increasingly eroding the legitimacy of the Zardari government. The scathing anti-democracy remarks of Altaf Hussain, the leader of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, exhorting “patriotic generals” to save the country through a “bloody revolution” are grist for the rumour mills.

“Political Game Theory” has overnight become a national pastime. One hotly debated option pits the Supreme Court and army against the government and parliament. Some people argue that, under Article 190 of the constitution, the SC can ask the army for “assistance” in compelling the government to implement its decisions, failing which it may approve its overthrow for “violating” the constitution! But this seems like a bizarre way of legitimizing a coup in advance. Others are now putting forward a novel “in-house” solution to the problem of a “dysfunctional democracy”. This is how it goes.

There are 342 members of the National Assembly. A majority of 172 is required to form and retain a government. The PPP has 127 MNAs, PMLN has 90, PMLQ has 51, MQM has 25, ANP has 13, JUIF has 8, FATA has 18 and there are 8 assorted ones. Two by-elections are pending. The current PPP led coalition government comprises the PPP, MQM, ANP, JUI and FATA. If the MQM, JUI and FATA were to pull out on a signal from the “coupsters” and launch a vote of no-confidence – for which 20 per cent or 68 votes are required –, the PPP government would fall unless the PMLN or PMLQ were to rush to its defense. Since the PMLQ is “the army’s party’ and is likely to fall in line with the anti-PPP move, everything would then depend on Nawaz Sharif. If he is ready to make a coalition government with the PPP, parliament can be saved. If he isn’t, fresh elections will have to be called. But here’s the rub. The SC can conceivably be petitioned to step in and postpone the elections on one pretext or another – as happened in 1988 after the death of General Zia ul Haq – and facilitate an interim government of technocrats, generals and judges to sort out “dysfunctional democracy” and “corrupt politicians” – especially in the PPP and PMLN – before enabling a better lot of politicians to enter the electoral stream.

The problem with this scenario is its critical dependence on Mr Sharif. Why should he opt for regime change and fresh elections if his own fate may hang in the balance? Equally, why should the “coupsters” launch a vote of no-confidence against the PPP if it ends up compelling the PPP and PMLN to embrace each other for the sake of their own long-term survival?

Whatever the holes in these theories, one thing is clear. Mr Zardari and Mr Sharif, notwithstanding their strategically antagonistic positions and competing claims, desperately need each other tactically in the short term. That is why they are both clutching at the coattails of the “moth-eaten democratic system” that is portrayed by the resurgent media as the bane of everyone’s life for failing to deliver on any count. The US, too, is lamely going along with the system because it cannot afford any disruption or instability that undermines the focus of the ruling party and army on the war against the Taliban in the run-up to next year’s deadline for some troop withdrawal from Afghanistan as pledged by President Obama. It is significant that Mr Holbrooke has indicated, in the midst of offering flood relief and reiterating support for democracy, the implicit approval of the Pakistan army and government for the increased number of drone strikes in North Waziristan (17 so far this month).

Meanwhile, the economy, which is supposed to be the mainstay of democracy no less than that of national security, remains shipwrecked. The one option that can lay at rest all conspiratorial options is not being sufficiently explored. Why can’t the government and opposition agree to jointly field a team of competent and honest politicians – and there are some who fit the bill admirably – to man the critical ministries that are bleeding? The appointments of the new finance minister, Hafeez Sheikh, governor of the state bank, Shahid Kardar, and deputy chairman Planning Commission, Nadeem ul Haq, are steps in the right direction. Next in line should be Commerce, Energy, Production and Privatisation. If a true reform agenda is undertaken, there will be no need of, or demand for, regime or system change. (Courtesy: The Friday Times, Lahore)