Leaders or schemers?

The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad. He is a Rhodes scholar and has an LL.M from Harvard Law School

There is a growing public perception that the PPP-led government is floundering and yet refusing to learn from its mistakes. But would it not be scarier if the repeated indiscretions of the government were not misconceived actions but rather considered policy choices of the Zardari-led PPP? Various explanations have been ventured by analysts to explain the recent ISI debacle, most of which conclude that it was a product of sloppiness and recklessness. Let us take a flight of fancy and consider the theory that the decision to change the reporting line of ISI from the prime minister to the Interior Division was taken with full knowledge that it would need to be reversed under pressure from our omnipotent military.

What good would exposing its own impotence do to the PPP government is the obvious question. There are two possible explanations. One, the prime minister was on tour this week to beseech the US to support the PPP-led government. For the US, the alternative to partnering with the PPP government in the war on terror is to continue to work directly with the military – after all the one Pakistani institution that the US has traditionally invested in is the Pakistani Army. Further, there was widespread expectation that during the prime minister's US trip American officials would share with him evidence of the ISI's covert support for the Taliban. The PPP government's failed attempt to change the reporting line of the ISI clearly establishes that our premier intelligence agency isn't squarely within the control of the civilian government.

At the expense of some embarrassment and despite the depiction of weakness, the prime minister would thus have been able to argue that the PPP government should not be held accountable by the US for the actions of an agency that fell within the province of the military. Given that the transition to democratic rule is still in its infancy, the US should pressure the military to clean up the ISI and allow it to be placed under civilian control, the prime minister could argue. And two, for purposes of domestic consumption, the ISI decision and its reversal highlights a reality that goes largely unnoticed when the face of the government is civilian: the military in Pakistan is still all-powerful and its interference in politics and governance is disabling the PPP government from pursuing popular demands like impeaching General Musharraf and removing his coterie from the Establishment.

Further, by reversing the decision on the military's insistence, Mr Zardari would like to believe that he has won himself a bargaining chip in his negotiations with the military over the rest of his wish list. And Mr Zardari is adept at scheming of this sort. For example, one of the first decisions that the PPP government took in its early days was appointing Dr Shoaib Suddle as the IG of Sindh Police. This was done despite the fact that PPP had decided to give a shot to forming an alliance with the MQM and with full knowledge that the MQM would go berserk over Dr Suddle's appointment as IGP. In the PPP-MQM negotiations over forming the government in Sindh, Mr Zardari effectively used the appointment and its reversal as leverage. Once the purpose was achieved, Dr Suddle was quickly appointed DG of the Intelligence Bureau.

Call it smart negotiation skills or talent in conniving, Pakistan's foremost misfortune at the moment is that scheming minions are now masquerading as leaders. Can our wheeling-dealing politicians be cured of their propensity and preference for crooked underhand deals? What are the compulsions of power that prevent the Zardari-led PPP from governing this country in an upright and principled manner?

Probably never before has a regime exterminated hope for a better future from a land as swiftly as the PPP-led government has done in Pakistan over the last couple of month. This nation is glum not merely because subsistence is posing a challenge to a majority, but because people have no faith in the intentions of the PPP-led government to change things for the better. Pakistan is confronted with serious challenges and it needs bold decision-makers, and not plotters.

Take the ISI decision for example. Our intelligence setup has transformed itself into a monstrosity that needs urgent reform and civilian supervision. There is a gaping hole between the legal structure and reporting line of the ISI and the practice of the agency. There is no principled reason or legal basis for the ISI to have a direct or dotted reporting line to the army chief. The ISI falls under the effective control of the army because there is an unwritten rule that it will be headed by a serving general, who then reports to the army chief. Also the ISI's work relates to defence and security policymaking that the military treats as its exclusive sphere. The practice thus contradicts the law, according to which the ISI falls under the control of the prime minister.

Further, the rules of business empower the prime minister to change the reporting line of the ISI and place it under the control of the Interior Division. But the legality of a decision is one thing and its merits quite another. Had the PPP been serious about intelligence reform, it would pursue a three-pronged approach: a. ensure that our legal framework enables our intelligence agencies to perform their functions effectively, and the agencies, in turn, do not overstep their legal mandate; b. revamp the structure and reporting line of the agencies to strengthen their internal system of checks and balances and make them accountable to the civilian executive and the parliament; and c. facilitate greater coordination and information sharing between the various state actors involved in decision-making, so that intelligence can be used as an effective policy tool.

How would the concerns related to the ISI – including that it is out of government control and running amok – be addressed by subjecting it to Rehman Malik's supervision? To say that our security czar is a man of some notoriety is probably an understatement. Thus, even if placing the ISI under the control of a ministry was the panacea for all its ills, the choice of Rehman Malik for the job was certain to evoke the reaction that it did. It is true that there is an amount of crookedness intrinsic to politics the world over. But the Zardari-led PPP has introduced double-speak and scheming to the affairs of the state in a manner that has deprived the government of all credibility.

Mr Zardari signed the Murree Declaration and later reneged on his promise to restore the judges. While the PPP still claims to be committed to restoring the judges through its ignominious constitutional package, Farooq Naek is leaving no stone unturned to sabotage the lawyers' movement and lure deposed judges to be "reappointed" to their Nov 3 seniority. Privately even the PPP leaders acknowledge that Mr Zardari has no intention of seeing Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary return to his mantle.

The approach to the General's impeachment is no different. Between privately alluding to the fact that the army won't allow Musharraf's removal, and publicly stating the decision to impeach him has been reached "in principle," the PPP's policy towards the General couldn't be more equivocal. Similarly, the description of the PPP's policy towards the war raging in the tribal areas vacillates, depending on the audience.

Can a country remain hopeful about its future if its citizens start to disbelieve everything they are told by their government? Salvaging the dismal situation and getting back on track might still be possible for the PPP government, but only if it wakes up to the realisation that bold and candid decision-making, together with effective governance, will help sustain its rule, and not its existing scheming ways. If the Zardari-led PPP won't restore the judges or stamp out Musharraf and his cronies, it must stop blowing sand into the nation's eyes and come clean. What is worse than a bad policy is the PPP's present policy of measured ambivalence. While the skies are not about to cave into Pakistan (contrary to what our "controlled democracy" enthusiasts would have us believe) the coterie of ruling politicians is certainly making it harder to defend the need and viability of democracy in Pakistan.



Email: sattar@post.harvard.edu