Most readers of this paper would agree that TFT has been at the cutting edge of critical journalism. We have pointed out the challenges facing Pakistan and investigated the failings of the powerful without fear or favour. This we have done at some risk for nearly nine years but it seems to us now that this is not enough, given the despair that engulfs Pakistan today. We must begin to address the issues that are central to the survival of our country. On top of our list is the crisis of leadership and the necessity for reform.
Since the passing of the founding fathers, pygmies, demagogues and thieves have ruled this land. Nearly all have made promises of reforming the outdated and unjust relationship of land, labour and capital, of streamlining the institutions of governance which are disintegrating under the weight of corruption, mismanagement and obesity, and of reorganising the delivery of deprived citizens of necessities such as water, housing, literacy and peace. None have fulfilled a fraction of the promises made to Pakistan’s hardworking, honest and abused people. Betrayal by the leadership has been our primary national experience.
Pakistan is unique amongst countries which gained independence after World War II. With India, it was the first to be decolonised. Unlike India, it was quick to re-establish the bonds of dependency with an imperial power. Yet security eluded it, and 25 years after its creation, Pakistan disintegrated, the first decolonised nation to do so. Uniquely, it was the majority which separated from the minority to form Bangladesh.
Uniquely too, our leaders learnt nothing from this tragedy, and continue to pursue the same self-serving agendas which caused the first breach. We know the menaces that surround us. We are daily witnesses of mayhem. Hence our sense of anxiety, of angst. While a vast majority are deprived of all the rights of citizenship, the privileged minority is stricken with alarm and complains incessantly. It is as though 50 years of Pakistan has been a single season of discontent.
Historians view discontent as the motor of change. With us it has produced merely a culture of carping. The irony is that every promise of reform has elicited the peoples’ enthusiastic response. Ayub Khan was welcomed because he promised governance and a modern future. He delivered neither, and went down in the storm of our discontent. Bhutto followed with stirring promises but delivered theatrics. Zia promised an adaptation of the Rashidun only to brutalise us in the male of Islam. In the last decade, we have taken turns between Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, between kleptomania and megalomania. Why has it been so? How can we break out of this vicious circle? We do not have all the answers. We intend to seek them as best we can. Knowing, we know is not enough. Doing is essential.
Here, some verities ought to be acknowledged. One, states and governments reflect the nature of the governing class. In Pakistan, this is a narrow elite of landed rural, affluent urban and educated middle classes. That’s us, you and me. There is amongst us a recognition that reforms are necessary. But we remain a comfortable lot not yet compelled to make the connection between principles and their implementation.
Two, the working people of Pakistan remain inherently powerless. They have the greatest stake in an agenda of reform for, as producers of primary goods and services they suffer from the fundamental injustice of not being able to adequately feed, clothe, shelter or educate their own. This scandalous state of affairs exists because they do not control the land they till, nor have a say in the process of industrial production, nor even participate in the governance of cities, towns and villages. Their empowerment is essential for only they can invest the energy of common interest to sustain a reformed order.
Three, the state apparatus which we inherited from the Raj had some virtues; it was rational, required adherence to regulations, and instituted the rule of law. In one respect it was unsuited to the needs of a sovereign people. Its purpose was the accumulation of surplus for colonialism and its collaborators. Pakistan’s postcolonial rulers have divested the colonial state of its strengths while greatly augmenting its failing. The state is now associated with rapacity, abuse of power and disregard for rules.
Four, ideologically this is an entrapped country. From 1947 to this day we have embraced many versions of the “Pakistan ideology”. None took hold because every leader’s approach was opportunistic and without commitment to any governing principles. A state without a functioning ideology, without a broadly subscribed set of contemporary values and principles, is like a train without an engine.
Therefore, to define an ideology that is both contemporary and congruent with Islamic values may well be our greatest single challenge.