close
Thursday March 28, 2024

Consistently living up to low expectations

By Mosharraf Zaidi
April 12, 2016

The writer is an analyst and
commentator.

At least we can say this about Pakistani leaders: they are consistent. Standing resolutely at the apex of summits constructed on the sycophancy and lies of darbaris, both Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and not-Prime Minister Imran Khan continue to be the less impressive versions of themselves – exactly when Pakistan could use better. It would not be cynical to look at the waves created by the Mossack Fonseca scandal or Panama Leaks and groan with frustration, because here is what we know.

First, we know that the PM and his family should not have their names on lists like that. It is inexcusable. He should have been more contrite in his address to the nation, certainly not a great moment for him, and he should have instructed his hyperactive defenders to tread around carefully on issues where he and his brand have no chance of successfully undermining organisations like Shaukat Khanum Memorial Hospital. Inexcusable.

Second, we know that as undignified as it is for Pakistanis to see the First Family being implicated in such a scandal (and reacting as it did), there is almost zero likelihood of either a resignation, or any kind of impeachment. That is not how Pakistani democracy is built – partly because Pakistani democracy never gets a chance to be strong, and muscular and beautiful. That is because Pakistani democracy keeps getting ambushed, partly through the corruption, nepotism and incompetence of democrats, but mostly because the Pakistani military prefers handling the country itself, because it knows everything better than everybody else, because apparently second-division matric-pass brigadiers are smarter than board topping joint secretaries, and market-leading CEOs and seths. Bottom line: Pakistani democracy is not robust enough, yet, to be able to punish inexcusable errors of judgement (at best) and fiduciary malfeasance (at worst).

Third, we know that the circus is back in town. After over a year of feasting on humble pie, we know that Imran Khan can, once again, command large press corps turnouts for his press conferences, and that the PPP, that paragon of virtue and good governance, can demand more transparency and accountability from this prime minister. The jesters will be out in full force across our television screens, wailing, arms flailing, lashing out uncontrollably. The mainstream public discourse around the alleged corruption of the prime minister is a circus, and it will amount to higher TV talk show ratings, and more advertising revenue for the networks. It will also amount to more airtime for darbaris on all sides of the equation. And then, like all circuses, it will wrap up and go home, to recharge for the next performance.

In summary, we know three things: one, the PM should have done better than to leave himself exposed to something like Mossack Fonseca. Two, he will survive this scandal, because it is not even close to representing a scale or depth of scandal that can undermine his legal position, or his position in parliament. And three, the reaction to this scandal will be a cacophony of noise that will amount to almost zero impact on public policy – ie it will be a circus.

In all this, where should our deepest disappointment reside? Who should we be angriest at? Should it be directed at the prime minister – who should have known better? Should it be directed at the military – whose past and sometimes present ends up weakening democracy, and rendering such scandals meaningless? Or should it be directed at the political opposition to the prime minister, principally Imran Khan and the PTI, but also, tangentially at least, the PPP?

One would argue that since it is the prime minister who won the 2013 election, fair and square, and it is the prime minister whose financial matters have ended up on the pages of the international and national press, then we should reserve our strongest criticism for the prime minister.

Indeed, that is exactly where our ire should be focused. The reason is quite simple. This prime minister has actually done a reasonable job as prime minister thus far, handling complex domestic and international challenges with more adeptness and adroitness than any recent government in memory, and certainly better than he is given credit for. For PM Sharif to have allowed the Panama Leaks to not only ‘happen’, but to allow it to be sustained now for over a week, and with little end in sight, is perhaps the worst part of this whole saga. By mishandling the Mossack Fonseca issues, PM Sharif imperils the good work done on his watch.

Let us review what is at stake in this – PM Sharif’s third term as prime minister.

The first is the economy. Pakistan’s economy is managed essentially by one man: Ishaq Dar. This is rife with problems. Yet Daronomics has worked. He has stabilised the economy, managed the IMF, widened the foreign reserves cushion, and convinced everyone from Bloomberg to The Economist that Pakistan is open for business. It is far from perfect, but more credible than any era of economic management in recent memory.

The macroeconomic stability has enabled two vital national projects under this government, one is Project Megawatt, which is to expand and improve the electric grid in the country, and the second is Project Build, which is the construct transport infrastructure. That the government has been able to frame these two projects within the canopy of China’s friendship as the CEPC is a bonus. All of this has produced short-term economic gains, and contributes to the potential for much larger longer-term economic gains.

The second is national security. PM Nawaz Sharif selected General Raheel Sharif as COAS, and despite ceding ground to the military on a range of vital issues where he and his team should have been able to deliver more (such as trade with India), the PM has walked a fine balance, and kept civ-mil relations from collapsing. That this was managed in the era of the August 2014 to December 2014 siege of Islamabad aka Dharna, is all the more impressive. Operation Zarb-e-Azb and the National Action Plan, whilst imperfect, have created the momentum for vital victories against terrorist groups, particularly in Fata.

One doesn’t need to be a genius to know that much of this is driven by the military, but one also does not need too much IQ to realise that the PM could have been a disruptor, rather than an enabler of these gains. That he chose the latter is a sign of his growth from the version of Nawaz Sharif that we knew in 1998. Moreover, he has tried to build bridges with Afghanistan, India and Iran – an effort not without peril, especially in complex times.

The third is inclusiveness and pluralism, or really the culture of democracy. Through symbolic events, like Diwali festivals, the PM has highlighted the need for engaging minorities. Through supporting landmark legislation for women’s rights, the PM has highlighted the need to protect and cultivate women as equal economic and social actors in the country. Through increased support for the Benazir Income Support Programme, and a national health insurance scheme, the PM has underscored the need to ensure that public policy addresses the poorest and most vulnerable. These are real gains, in difficult times, by a man not expected to be able to deliver them.

Why is it important for us to remember this prime minister’s achievements in the wake of the Panama Leaks, when we should, quite rightly, be more angry at him than we are at anyone else? Because the prime minister’s achievements are a glimpse of the realm of the possible. Because by allowing the circus to come to town, these minor and tenuous gains are at great risk. Because, in a growing democracy, it doesn’t matter what happens to individuals holding office – it matters what happens to the work of those offices.

The PM has handled Mossack Fonseca poorly thus far. This is to be lamented, not because we must adore this PM. This is to be lamented because we must abhor any damage to the capacity of any PM to perform well and serve this country. This scandal has certainly done that. The least we must expect from the PM now is a measured and competent damage control. A nascent democracy should not have to be reduced to such low expectations.