Searching for a saviour

Perhaps it stems from religious and cultural beliefs, from the undefined, hazy set of factors that make us who we are, from our history and our interpretations of it, but the fact is that we appear to remain constantly in search of a saviour; someone who will miraculously rescue us from our difficulties and lift us to a new and better place.
As a result we see potential saviours everywhere, filling in outlines to colour in the contours till they, in our minds at least, resemble the mythical heroes of legends and the books of fairytales almost all of us read as children, some perhaps with more passion than others.
It was in this context, against this background, that so many saw Imran Khan as a saviour. Certainly he fit the popular image: coming across as a warrior, a bold knight in arms who would change our world. His past as a sporting superstar of course helped as did the accompanying rhetoric churned out by his party. The desperation for such a figure helped. Many sought an escape from the inept, corrupt, uncaring politicians who have for too long held on to power.
Perhaps Imran could have fit the bill. Charismatic leaders have risen suddenly in other nations and brought in sweeping change. But for us this was not destined. As a politician whose party amassed the third highest number of National Assembly seats in 2013, Imran stood well poised to make an impact. He and the PTI have largely squandered this, the subject of countless jokes, most notably after the ‘35 punctures’ affair and Imran’s casual mention that he had simply picked up the information from a tweet – and then raised a huge public ruckus over it. He made no apology to the man he had repeatedly maligned, terming his statement a ‘political’ one.
These are the kind of politics we do not need. Far too much time has been wasted by the PTI’s dharnas, the suspicions as to who prompted it and the falling out we see within the party. Imran Khan then has not worked out as a hero. Some of his supporters see this, for others it may take more time. But the PTI story has not played out to script, and yet another hero has proved he was not quite what he had seemed to be. For a country desperately in need of a true hero, this is sad.
Others look for other heroes. Crisp, khaki uniforms and peaked caps, accompanied by plenty of braid and badges, also fit in with the popular image of a saviour. We have turned to these men again in our history, and we do so once more today, hoping the man in uniform will hold corrupt politicians to account, clean up the massive mess in Karachi and generally stack things up neatly, creating order from chaos.
The military may like order; it is built on this as are militaries everywhere. But, while we may admire the COAS’s gestures after that school massacre in Peshawar, his words against terrorism and his endeavours against wrongdoing, we forget it is not the military’s duty to perform these functions. Its role is quite clearly spelled out in our constitution: its primary duty is guarding our borders, and when institutions stray away from their mandated roles the doors are left open for confusion and trouble.
Intervention in running the affairs of a nation, no matter whether well intentioned or not, amounts to a distinct over-stepping of role. It weakens civilian authority, and yes, while this authority may be inept, it cannot benefit from being dominated by another force.
By now we should have learnt this. There have been plenty of examples in our history to teach us, but it appears we do not learn quickly, repeating the same mistakes over and over again, and judging people or their institutions on the basis of single acts rather than the framework of law and principle that must apply if we are to ever have a functional, working state.
We have searched for saviours often, and sometimes in unlikely places. We saw them in the form of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry or General Pervez Musharraf. We saw them in other shapes – even the Taliban. Something that forms a part of us apparently compels us to peer around every corner searching for a messiah, a superhero who will swoop in and rescue us.
There is a problem. These figures will not descend from the skies and wipe out the ‘bad guys’, politicians, mafia bosses, militants, whoever else we place in that category. We will need to deal with this ourselves, even though that may be a slower, more arduous and distinctly slower process.
As the dark, dank waters of crisis continue to creep higher and higher, we are forced to ask if a saviour will arrive in time. If she or he can pull us onto a lifeboat before we sink. The argument has also been made that we as citizens need to act to save ourselves. Perhaps there is validity in this, and across the country valiant, committed organisations and individuals have performed extraordinary work in different sectors. Of course these efforts make a difference. Of course they are important. But essentially we have a weak civil society, badly fractured across class, ethnicity and belief. In such a society change that occurs through independent effort is unlikely to take place.
Of course men like Abdul Sattar Edhi are heroes. Their contributions are immense; Edhi’s own especially so, but even they cannot alter a nation or solve all its problems. These problems exist in multiple areas and need to be addressed as a part of a holistic policy spread out across many years. There can be no instant solutions.
Only a government, one elected by the people, can set about such a task and attempt to achieve it. It may take many successive governments to attain anything that resembles success. But even in our state of impatience and desperation, perhaps we can draw up a very rough blueprint.
First of all people must be involved; they must be pulled into the task of decision making and empowered to make decisions for themselves. People are good at this; they know what they want: food, education, healthcare and order. Working towards these goals could give government direction and structure. Of course the problems are not easy to solve, and the question is how they are to be solved.
Some possible answers are available. In the first place it is important governments be able to function without a constant sense of threat from other institutions. The unfortunate results of this have been seen again and again. For this working within the legal framework is essential; departure from this a potential disaster. Uncertainty never makes for good leadership. Such a sense of the ground being unsteady makes it hard to put in place policies, or pursue a direction, and while opposition is essential to democracy it too must exist within the law.
When a search begins for heroes – for saviours – these basics are too easily forgotten, driving us closer to the storms and upheavals we have witnessed in the past, with no magical figure emerging at the end of it all to lift us out of crisis.
The writer is a freelance columnist and former newspaper editor.
Email: kamilahyat@hotmail.com