By Ali K. Lashari

District autonomy, a revived civil service, and the transformation of local assets into regional economic opportunities are the key to a successful outcome.

Governments, institutions, and political parties all seem to be at odds amid Pakistan’s current political turmoil. Everywhere you look, people are talking about elections, coalitions, constitutional conflicts, and political confrontation.

But there’s a more fundamental issue at play here: The Pakistani state is overly bureaucratic, cuts out the middlemen, and fails to deliver on its promises to the people.

The question of who should have ultimate authority remains open. Why is there so little real power accessible at the bottom? That may be a more pressing concern.

Another convoluted political experiment is not always necessary to solve Pakistan’s problem. Because of this, we need to reconsider the role of the state.

Empowering the districts, professionalizing and adequately compensating the public sector, and building local industries around local resources are three changes that might serve as a practical foundation.

Reduce the Federal Government to a District Level

Pakistanis have long discussed the possibility of establishing additional federal entities and provinces. There is a more expedited change that can bring the government closer to the people without necessitating a total reorganization of the federation, while these discussions may have their own constitutional and political virtues.

Make the districts stronger

Dividing provinces into more manageable districts is a good idea when the population, topography, and administrative needs support it. However, just making virtual districts is insufficient.

To be able to make decisions on its own development, a district needs legitimate administrative power, sufficient funding, and the ability to establish itself.

Planning and implementation of a wide range of services—including healthcare, education, agriculture, municipal services, local infrastructure, and economic development—should be carried out as near to citizens as is practically feasible.

You can see the reasoning behind it

Decreased direct responsibility is a natural consequence of decision-makers’ increasing distance from the public. It becomes more difficult to disregard local issues when the decision-maker is physically close.

Administrative restructuring should not be the only definition of decentralization. Responsibility, resources, and accountability should all be transferred simultaneously.

An officer in charge of a district should be able to take charge when things go wrong and own up when things don’t work.

For the average citizen, this is how the state manifests itself.

Reforming the Civil Service via Penalties Alone Is Ineffective

The second issue, the state of Pakistan’s public service, is just as critical.

Officers of the state are expected to decide matters pertaining to public treasury, property, development initiatives, taxes, regulations, and basic services. Public employees under a lot of pressure, have a lot of duties, and are expected to perform to a high level; nevertheless, their pay does not always reflect this.

Embezzlement of funds is not justified by this.

Cronyism, misuse of power, or embezzlement of public funds are never acceptable justifications for a salary.

Institutional incentives are important, but we must grasp this if we are to construct a professional state.

Considerations such as salary, opportunities for advancement, working conditions, respect from peers, and job security are only natural when a bright young professional weighs the pros and cons of a career in the public sector vs the private sector.

Read: Governance Crisis in Pakistan — Causes, Consequences, and the Way Forward

When top talent leaves the public sector due to a lack of professional opportunities, the state suffers.

Consequently, Pakistan’s public sector remuneration system requires a thorough evaluation.

Government workers ought to get competitive pay that is tied to their level of responsibility and how well they perform. Suitable benefits, including healthcare, training, and career paths, should be available to them.

Yet an analogous principle is required:

Accountability must increase in tandem with salary.

An officer’s level of honesty and productivity should be significantly higher if they are well paid for their work.

A professional bargain should be established by the state:

Your professional dignity will be respected, and we will offer you a career path in addition to reasonable compensation. In exchange, we anticipate honesty, proficiency, and quantifiable results.

The public sector can reclaim its former glory in this way.

These days, the public has a tendency to equate the term “government employee” with corruption, incompetence, and delays.

That view needs to shift.

Any well-qualified public servant deserves the utmost respect from their peers.

Refrain from Shipping Raw Materials Out of Low-Income Areas

Economic issues are addressed by the third reform.

The districts of Pakistan are a treasure trove of human, cultural, agricultural, mineral, and environmental capital. However, the communities that provide these resources often see little to no economic benefit from them.

Think about the fundamental economic chain.

An agricultural good is made in a certain area. For further processing, packaging, and marketing, the raw material is sent to a different location. Much of the better employment opportunities and higher-value economic activity takes place in other parts of the world.

Mineral resources and building supplies are not an exception to this rule.

This model has to be revised.

The resource’s location should serve as the starting point for the value chain, taking into account both economic and environmental considerations.

The food processing, cold storage, packaging, and export sectors should be developed by agricultural districts.

As an alternative to being solely dependent on raw material extraction and transportation, mineral-producing districts should foster enterprises that responsibly process and add value.

There ought to be suitable local processing and manufacturing capabilities in regions abundant in building materials and stone.

Responsible heritage tourism, museums, conservation businesses, research institutes, and local hospitality economies should flourish in districts rich in cultural and archaeological artefacts.

Extra extraction is not the only goal.

Making better use of what we already have is the goal.

An Economic Plan Has to Be in Place for Every District.

All of Pakistan’s districts might benefit from an Economic Development Plan.

A basic question should be asked at the outset of every plan:

In what areas does this district excel?

The answer might lie in renewable energy, agriculture, minerals, fisheries, tourism, heritage, heritage, manufacturing, or a mix of these and other fields.

After that, you need to ask:

The economy relies on raw materials; how can we transform them into something of more value?

Following that:

To achieve that goal, what resources (financial, human, and others) will be needed?

The current method of development planning would be drastically altered by this.

Each area may compete for investment based on its own economic capabilities rather than waiting for a development plan to be crafted in the provincial capital.

An agricultural processing center could emerge in one area.

Still another could focus on minerals only.

One more could turn into a historical and touristic site.

Still another option would be to establish dairy and cattle industries.

One more might turn into a manufacturing or logistical hub.

Instead of attempting to standardize the entire country, the government would focus on strengthening each region based on its unique strengths.

Invest in Your Community by Using Local Resources

The link between local resources and development needs to be strengthened as well.

Communities should get a fair amount of the advantages when a district makes a substantial contribution to the national economy through resources such as agriculture, mining, tourism, or anything else.

Education, healthcare, water, roads, environmental protection, and skill development are just a few local concerns that could benefit from a District Resource and Development Fund that is created with care.

An effective social compact might be forged using this process as well.

When citizens witness the positive effects of responsible economic development firsthand, they are more inclined to back it.

Shifting from Hierarchy in Government to Financial Decentralization

Having too many political conversations might not be Pakistan’s biggest problem.

Maybe there isn’t enough good leadership in the areas where people actually reside.

We have centralized political and administrative authority and then pondered the question of why the general public does not feel involved with their government.

Increasing the number of government agencies is not always the solution.

The goal is to streamline and improve current institutions so that they are more efficient, effective, strong, and accountable.

A more robust district system, a more professional civil service, and economic development with roots in the community can all support one another.

Investment can be facilitated by a competent district administration.

Jobs can be created by local industries.

Work opportunities can mitigate migration.

Local markets can benefit from higher wages.

More efficient regulation of these activities can be achieved through a professional public service.

The tax base can be expanded as a result of thriving local economies.

There is no easy solution. However, this path toward systemic change is feasible.

Developing Pakistan from the Ground Up Is Necessary

Whoever controls the center is the central question in Pakistani political discourse.

We need to start with a new inquiry:

How can we equitably bring more resources, including money and power, to the people?

At that point, change can start to take place.

It is unnecessary for Pakistan to have all its decisions made in Islamabad or any of its provincial capitals.

Wherever the issues are, decisions must be made.

It is unnecessary to have a larger civil service.

A competent, well-compensated, technically savvy, and unwaveringly accountable civil service is essential.

Additionally, it is unnecessary to continue extracting raw materials.

It should make better use of the resources it currently has.

Even though the political turmoil is all anyone can talk about today, the fate of Pakistan will be decided by changes to its governance.

We can start creating a state that people can see, access, and trust if we give authority back to the districts, make public service respectable again, and turn local resources into local businesses and labour.

Pakistan’s future cannot be constructed solely by those in positions of power.

Building it from the ground up is the best approach.

Read: Rewire Your Brain, Transform Your Life

_________________

Ali K. Lashari is an Archaeologist & Cultural Heritage Advocate 

The post The Crisis of Governance in Pakistan first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Ambassador M. Alam Brohi    

As put by a fellow columnist, a leader can say that the system has collapsed. It sounds like an admission without holding anyone accountable. The question is whose system, which system has collapsed, and at whose hands it has collapsed. The odd political experiments and political electoral engineering surpassing those practiced by us since the inception of the country could only be found in the evolutionary odyssey of African or Latin American states. We have left no system untried, oscillating between Martial Laws and authoritative Presidencies, semi-presidential, parliamentary, and quasi-parliamentary governance, and a unique hybrid rule marked by informal power sharing by military and civilian leaders, with the former at the wheel. All these forms of governance have collapsed. Why is it so? It is not difficult to find the answer.

The country has been ruled by a combination of civilian and military leaders supported by a well-trained cadre of bureaucrats. We maintained the federal nature of the country hardly up to 1954, and moved over to a unitary state by forming one bigger province of West Pakistan to maintain parity with the former East Pakistan with mala fide intentions. This backfired, not only refuelling Bengali nationalism but also estranging the smaller provinces of Sindh, KPK and Balochistan by depriving them of their political and economic autonomy. They regained their separate geographical and cultural identities when the West Pakistan province was dissolved on the unanimous demand of the political parties in July 1970.

The first general election on an adult franchise basis was held on 7 December 1970 after over 23 years. One provincial general election was held in the former East Pakistan in March 1954, in which the United Front of A.K. Fazal trounced the All Pakistan Muslim League, winning a thumping majority. He formed his provincial government in April 1954. His government and the Assembly were dismissed by the federal authority after two months, levelling charges of treason and anti-Pakistan activity against the person who had played a conspicuously prominent role in authoring, presenting, defending and adopting the Pakistan Resolution in 1940.

His was not the only elected provincial government dismissed by the federal regime. The provincial administrations of Dr. Khan Sahib in June 1947 and that of Muhammad Ayub Khuhro in April 1948 were dismissed. Khuhro was punished for resisting the en masse settlement of migrants in Karachi. Khuhro, as the President of the All India Muslim League, was instrumental in adopting the resolution in favour of Pakistan in the party’s annual provincial session of 1938, presided over by Muhammad Ali Jinnah. This resolution, with minor changes, was adopted in March 1940 in Lahore. Khuhro was brought back as Chief Minister to have the resolution of One-Unit passed in the Sindh Assembly in 1954, though he was under EBDO for ten years. The foundational stone was laid wrongly.

General Ayub Khan not only abrogated the 1956 Constitution and imposed his Constitution on the nation, adopted through an administrative decree, but also introduced the Basic Democrats system, reducing adult suffrage to 80,000 local councils distributed equally between the two wings despite the majority of the Bengalis. He ruled the country as an authoritative President for over a decade and handed over power to his Chief of Army Staff. He could have proved the saviour of this country, following the footprints of Kemal Ataturk Pasha or General de Gaulle. Time and tide wait for none. He ensconced himself in the limbo of history.

General Yahya Khan held the general election in December 1970. In contrast with his expectations, the general elections catapulted Shaikh Mujeeb Ur Rehman as the majority leader with 162 seats from East Pakistan, and Z.A. Bhutto as the representative of the West Pakistan wing with 80 seats. Mujeeb should have been invited to frame the constitution and form the government. He was in contact with many nationalist leaders from West Pakistan, including National Awami leaders, Khan Abdul Qayum Khan, and had the political sympathies of some independents from Sindh. The military junta failed to transfer power to him, which resulted in political agitation, insurgency, military operation and war, and finally, the death of Jinnah’s Pakistan.

The disgrace and humiliation we suffered should have set us on a path to serious introspection and course correction. Power was transferred to the late Bhutto as a result of rebellious agitation by a young cadre of army officers against their seniors in many cantonments. Bhutto worked hard and literally collected the pieces of the broken ship, repaired it and steered it to safe shores. Within a short span of time, he restored the confidence of the heartbroken nation, reinstated Pakistan as a viable and vibrant country, giving it a unanimous Constitution and a parliamentary system of governance. He resolved the post-war issues with India and reset bilateral relations with both superpowers.

This system was allowed to function from April 1973 to July 1977. Bhutto’s rule was not ideal. However, the system he had so assiduously put in place was adopted by Parliament through a consensus vote. This system was wrapped up and thrown into the dustbin of history. What we received was Martial Law, lashes, strong censorship, a ban on fundamental rights to expression and assembly, Majlis-e-Shura, a non-party Assembly, constituency-based development funds, and a mutilated 1973 Constitution, lame-duck parliamentary governments overshadowed by civilian Presidents vested with executive powers through the Eighth Amendment.

The third country-wide Martial Law, as a result of differences between the Prime Minister and the Chief of Army Staff, was imposed on 12 October 1999, plunging the country into the American anti-terrorism war, a quasi-parliamentary form of government and a new district government system instead of established local governments and district councils with separate jurisdictions. We lost over 80,000 civilians and security personnel in terrorist attacks from 2000 to 2008, including the iconic Benazir Bhutto. She had lost her father under the previous Martial Law government and was full of resolve to rid her country of terrorists, and she herself fell victim to terrorists.

(To be continued)

Click here for Part-1, 

______________

The writer is a former member of the Foreign Service of Pakistan and has served as Ambassador for two terms. He is the author of five books.

The post Smaller Provinces Will Not Fix Misrule-2 first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• The incumbent government would be better advised to address the concerns of smaller provinces over a range of burning issues.

By Ambassador M. Alam Brohi

Nations effectively use an old-age ideology, nationalism, as the most motivating slogan to assert their supremacy over others and motivate the entire nation to defend their country’s political, economic, and social sovereignty against any foreseeable aggression.

The concept of nationalism developed from earlier primordial tribalism and ethno-symbolism, which were limited in nature and scope and could not serve the purpose of modern states. The nation-states as we know them today date back to the Westphalia Treaty of 1648. Nationalism signifies the fundamental right to freedom, self-determination, and sovereignty of ethnically homogenous people or a cluster of ethnically heterogeneous people living within a defined geographical territory bound by a common language, culture, and history, a sense of pride in their historical heritage, and shared aspirations for grandeur and prosperity.

Nationalism is not synonymous with patriotism. While nationalism is a tool for the state to deal with external situations, patriotism is employed to overcome internal difficulties within a state. Instead, patriotic feelings are whipped up to strengthen nationalism in a given situation.

Nationalism is also different from sub-nationalism in its connotation. The former is ignited by apprehensions of foreign military aggression, ideological and cultural invasion, economic sabotage, or overpowering acquisitive designs for territorial gains and financial resources. The latter is a ramification of the former and fueled by the unjust, arrogant, disdaining, and condescending attitude of the majority ethnocultural and religious community towards the relatively more minor components of a nation of society.

Nationalism as an ideology gained prominence in the eighteenth century. Much earlier, the Westphalian Agreement of 1648 had ended the 30-year-long wars in Europe and defined states and the principles governing the coexistence of nation-states—big or small—by geography or population—and their independent right to political development and economic prosperity.

The Westphalian concept of the state as a sovereign entity sustained political coexistence for quite some years but always remained vulnerable to the hegemonic designs of major countries. Finally, it gave way to the growth of nationalism and wars within Europe, which were triggered by irresistible expansionist designs or access to economic resources.

The European continent is once again veering towards nationalism or ultra-conservatism

The devastating military conflagrations that included the Napoleonic wars pulverized Europe. The defeat of Napoleon in Waterloo by the General Willington-led grand military coalition brought respite to Europe but failed to extinguish the smoldering embers of nationalism. It resurged in the form of disastrous Nazism and fascism and triggered the two World Wars to the detriment of humanity and human civilization. This proved the tendency of nationalism to transform into military aggression, economic avarice, ethnic chauvinism, and cultural arrogance – unbounded by any faith, morality, or principle.

The two World Wars compelled nations to realize the dangers inherent in nationalism as an ideological concept. This resulted in establishing the UNO as a means of collective responsibility to help sustain the international order emerging from the ashes of the Second World War.

Unfortunately, the European continent is once again veering towards nationalism or ultra-conservatism. The recent wave of nationalist or populist politics posed formidable challenges to the mainstream political parties on the continent even though massive migration has transformed many countries in North America, Europe, and the Pacific into multi-language, multicultural, and multi-ethnic states.

There are many ethnocultural groups living in different countries against their will, which harbor strong feelings of nationalism but do not possess separate territories or occupy their territories. These ethno-cultural groups are bound by common descent, language, culture, and history. Given their pride in their language and culture, these ethno-cultural nationalists resist assimilation into the mainstream polity, causing fissures in the society.

The South Asian subcontinent is well familiar with the phenomenon of nationalism and sub-nationalism. The rise of the people of the sub-continent for freedom from the colonial yoke was stirred by feelings of nationalism

The states require political, economic, social, and administrative systems to blend such sub-nationalists with the national stream. The example of Scots, Welsh, Catalans, Bosque, Andalusians, Sicilians, and Ire landers in Europe, Twaregs in West Africa, Sub-Saharawis in North Africa, Kurds in the Middle East, Uighurs in China, Kashmiris and Baloch in South and South-West Asia could be well cited to explain the ethnocultural nationalism. These people, at some stage in the evolutionary history of nations, have had independent entities and continue aspiring to regain their past status.

The South Asian subcontinent is well familiar with the phenomenon of nationalism and sub-nationalism. The rise of the people of the sub-continent for freedom from the colonial yoke was stirred by feelings of nationalism. The mainstream parties spearheading the independence movement failed to prevent this nationalism from steeping into ethno-communal nationalism. Three strands of nationalism emerged from this fragmentation – Hindu nationalism vying for Swaraj and now Hindu Rashtra, Muslim nationalism aspiring for an independent country comprising north-western Muslim majority territories, and Bengali nationalism asserting itself in Bengal and Assam. These national feelings were so strong that various constitutional schemes – some very feasible – for having one successor state after the departure of the British failed to mollify them.

Finally, the subcontinent was partitioned into two states. The original scheme of the partition of the subcontinent, envisaging the entire Punjab in Pakistan and the whole Bengal and Assam as a separate country, was conspiratorially altered at the last moment by the British Viceroy, Mountbatten, in connivance with the Congress leaders, dissecting Punjab and Bengal. The mutual antagonist communal, national feelings have since continued to mar bilateral relations between the two successor states.

Both countries have had to grapple with the sub-nationalist feelings of many ethno-religious groups like Sikhs, and ethno-cultural and linguistic sub-nationals like Kashmiris, Tamils, Goanis, Nagalandis and Assamese in India, and Bengalis, Sindhis and Baloch in Pakistan. A veteran Indian intellectual, MJ Akbar, in his book, ‘India: a Siege from Within,’ has elaborated well on the growth of ethnocultural nationalism in India. He credits democracy as the shock-absorbing tool to prevent ethno-religious and ethno-cultural nationalism from fragmenting India.

The other ethnocultural nationalists might have been pacified, but the valley of Jammu and Kashmir has now been annexed to the Indian Union, removing its autonomy. Kashmiris have made it abundantly clear that nothing less than self-determination is acceptable to them. Scores of precedents in recent history show that people so determined and so resolved to achieve freedom have finally succeeded in realizing their dreams. The precedent of Bosnians, Albanians, Kosovars, South Sudanese, and East Timorese will be pertinent to quote here.

The genuine demands of the ethno-cultural components of the nation from Bengal to KPK, Sindh, and Balochistan were termed as anti-Pakistan by the ruling aristocracy and the arrogant establishment

Pakistan has also suffered from ethno-cultural nationalism. It was in its infancy when Bengalis challenged the declaration of Urdu as the national language of the country; the Pashtun ethnonationalism manifested itself in the slogan of Pakhtunistan; the Baloch demonstrated their anguish on the unjust treatment of the Khan of Kalat by revolting against the central authority; the Sindhis rebelled against the demotion of their well-developed language, the declaration of Karachi as a federal city, the imposition of One-Unit and concentration of political, economic, and administrative powers in the central authority.

The genuine demands of the ethno-cultural components of the nation from Bengal to KPK, Sindh, and Balochistan were termed as anti-Pakistan by the ruling aristocracy and the arrogant establishment. From the beginning, Bengalis, Sindhis, and Baloch were stereotyped as non-martial races, unintelligent, incompetent, and anti-state. Unfortunately, this mindset of the establishment remains unchanged.

Read: Agreement signed to hand over 52000 Acres land in Sindh to Army-owned Company

The subsequent years laid bare the disastrous repercussions of the political and administrative schemes imposed by the ruling aristocracy in utter disregard for the sub-national aspirations of the federal constituents. When this realization dawned on the establishment, it was too late to save Jinnah’s Pakistan. The skies would not have fallen had Bengali, Sindhi, Balochi, and Pashto been declared national languages along with Urdu. As a result of these wrong policies, we had to use the state’s coercive power from time to time to suppress ethno-cultural aspirations. Baloch bore the brunt of four military operations.

The restoration of the 1973 Constitution and the unanimous adoption of the 18th Amendment have primarily resolved the issue of the distribution of financial resources from the divisible pool among the provinces and the thorny question of provincial autonomy. Sindhis and Baloch still harbor apprehensions against the annulment or non-implementation of the 18th Amendment, ignited by the non-serious attitude of the previous governments.

The incumbent government would be better advised to address the concerns of smaller provinces over forced disappearances, NFC Awards, distribution of waters under the Water Accord of 1992, and adoption of provincial languages as national languages as in India, Switzerland, and many other countries. This will curb centrifugal tendencies in the country and defang sub-nationalism. We should admit that Pakistan is a federation of four distinct national, cultural, and territorial nations that were separate and independent regions before the advent of British India.

Read – EXPLAINED: Pakistan’s economic crisis and default risk

_____________________

The author is a former member of the Foreign Service of Pakistan and has served as Ambassador for seven years.

Courtesy: South Asia Magazine – September 2024

The post Pakistan: Four in One first appeared on Sindh Courier.