Prime minister Benazir Bhutto, it appears, has had enough. She is fed up with “wily” Manzoor Wattoo and “terrorist” Altaf Hussain; she is fed up with “anarchist” tribals, “murderous mullahs” and “cheating” businessmen; she is fed up with the “mischievous” press. In fact, there is hardly any significant group in the country which hasn’t tested Ms Bhutto’s patience. Bruised and angry, the prime minister has reacted by unleashing the organs of party, government and state, in particular the Ministry of Interior, FIA and CBR, in order to put all these “miscreants” in their place. Has she done the right thing?
To be fair, Ms Bhutto’s ire is not altogether misplaced. Take Mian Manzoor Wattoo’s case. Over the last two years, he has broken his promises time and again. At every stage he has frustrated Ms Bhutto’s efforts to extract an equitable deal for her party in the Punjab. Now, with the local bodies elections scheduled for December, how can Ms Bhutto sit back and watch her party being wiped out in the Punjab?
Ms Bhutto’s confrontation with the MQM can be explained in much the same manner. Notwithstanding the authenticity of several MQM demands, how can anyone condone terrorism as an act of political strategy in a democracy? Likewise, there is absolutely no justification for the existence of blackmailing tribal lashkars and religious vigilantes in the north western belt of Pakistan. Isn’t it time that the writ of the civil state extended to all parts of Pakistan without fear or favour? As for the trading community and the press, which are up in arms against Ms Bhutto for imposing taxes, the government’s point of view doesn’t seem too outrageous. Islamabad is severely strapped for revenues, yet the monied classes generally remain averse to paying taxes. If some of us are using mobile phones, or sending our children to elite schools or taking holidays abroad, why shouldn’t we admit as much to the CBR, unless our aim is to hide our true income and evade our share of tax? For that matter, why should the press in a free market economy insist on special, duty free privileges for itself when other sectors of the economy are allowed no such concessions?
If Ms Bhutto’s arguments have some weight, does this mean that all those who are agitating against the government are hopelessly wrong? No, it doesn’t. Karachi desperately needs a political and economic package to alleviate its suffering. Since Mr Altaf Hussain is the city’s sole spokesman, Ms Bhutto cannot shrug away his party by calling it the “Altaf Group”, nor depreciate her government’s responsibilities by pretending that the root cause of the MQM’s terrorism is an “anti-state” sentiment in a small section of the mohajir community.
Similarly, the periodic uprisings in the NWFP are rooted in the painful transition from an anarchist, tribal way of life to a modern civil society based on a uniform code of law. This process cannot be accomplished overnight by executive fiat or at gunpoint. The government’s fault lies in failing to prepare the economic, political and sociological pre-conditions necessary for such a transformation. You cannot one day wake up to the deleterious effects of the 50 year old Afghan Transit Trade or the drug business by altogether banning one and extraditing leaders of the other to the United States without radically upsetting the established order of that society and provoking widespread unrest.
Nor can Ms Bhutto treat the trading community in a cavalier fashion and expect to get way with it. Businessmen would be less inclined to resist the imposition of taxes if the landowning classes which make the laws were prepared to levy taxes on themselves as well. Equally, the uproar against CBR officials would be less justified if the state’s tax collectors were not prone to the worst forms of corruption and high-handedness. How much tax do the prime minister and her spouse, arguably the richest couple in the country, pay? How much tax do CBR officials and bureaucrats, many of whom are amongst the most affluent sections of society, pay? Has any government ever exposed the great lie about the state’s burgeoning bureaucracy?
Similarly, the demands of the newspaper industry need to be treated with sympathy and understanding rather than gleeful threats and fulminations. If the free market argument is to be taken to its logical conclusion, what justification is there for the Ministry of Information’s numerous levers of control over the press? Disband the Information Ministry, we say, bring government advertising rates up to commercial rates, pay our bills on time, stop patronising “dummy” publications, abolish the Wage Board and then you can think of treating us at par with other sections of industry. In the meantime, dear prime minister, please don’t cripple us by refusing to ameliorate the adverse impact of a rise of over 400 per cent in the cost of imported newsprint.
Ms Bhutto’s bullishness is therefore not justified. If she is determined to impose harsh, new conditionalities on large sections of society, she should begin the accounting exercise at home.