August 14th is a day to rejoice the birth of this truly God-given country. Paradoxically, though, it is also an occasion for much hand-wringing and anguish. Whither Pakistan? Unfortunately, even after 48 years, there is no consensus within our ruling elites over a host of troubling questions.
The problem derives from our obsession with the past. This compels us to search for meaning in the momentous circumstances of our birth. But the birth of Pakistan was a unique experience in the annals of world history. It did not derive from the compulsions of a bloody war of national liberation or a long drawn out and organic political struggle for independence, two elements which have formed the backdrop of most modern nation-states. Consequently, the Pakistani State appeared long before the Pakistani nation was formed in the crucible of history.
Pakistan, thus, was born a state-nation rather than a nation-state. The implications of this have been far-reaching. Instead of a developed Pakistani nation democratically and constitutionally determining the development of the new state and building an appropriate social contract, the boot has been on the other foot: the strong and well-organised state has autocratically thrust its own exclusivist priorities on the disorganised political parties and largely illiterate citizenry of this country. Even when there has been a semblance of democracy and constitutionalism, as during 1973-77 and 1988-93, the periods are marked by Bonapartist politicians (who emerged from the womb of the state like Zulfikar Ali Bhutto) or were radically influenced by the highest functionaries of the state (like Ghulam Ishaq Khan and General Mirza Aslam Beg).
The 1993 elections were the fairest since independence. Therefore they should mark the beginning of a genuine watershed in Pakistani history during which the praetorian state can be compelled to retreat in the face of strong democratic impulses in society. But if this opportunity to set a new nation-building agenda for Pakistan in the 21st century is once again squandered by the civilian elites, the state could be tempted to postulate the state-nation equation all over again. In particular, if the state’s perceptions of national security are not promptly and adequately addressed, it may be provoked to adopt an interventionist stance all over again.
Pakistan’s national security concerns demand a consensus in society over five imperatives: (1) A professional army which can suitably defend the country against attack by India. (2) A vibrant economy which can sustain defence preparedness without sacrificing the social infrastructure of society. (3) A political system which conforms to “the genius of the people” so that civilian governments can function with a modicum of stability, integrity and efficiency. (4) An end to sectarianism, ethnic strife and terrorism so that hostile foreign elements cannot exploit divisive passions in Pakistan. (5) A foreign policy designed to integrate Pakistan into the comity of nations without jeopardising its sovereignty or self-respect. How are we disposed to addressing these concerns?
Rather badly, we fear. On each count, we are in trouble. The conventional military balance between India and Pakistan is increasingly moving against us, partly because the US has stopped mollycoddling us and partly because the economy is in a mess. We just don’t have the cash to shop around for new weapons as well as pay our debts and have sufficient money left over for improving the plight of the people. The political system is still hiccuping along, partly because the government of the day lacks the required degree of commitment to political integrity and economic efficiency and partly because the opposition is determined to undermine the system and render it unworkable. Domestic divisiveness is at a peak partly because various mullah parties have put on the warpaint and partly because the MQM is bleeding itself and the city of Karachi to death. Finally, our foreign policy is in a shambles, partly because of the legacies of the past and partly because domestic political confrontations preclude the search for new directions and departures.
A National Security Council comprising members of the government and opposition would have been ideally placed to break this logjam. But that must be ruled out for the moment because the opposition is not prepared to put the national interest before party political compulsions. Are we then doomed to limp along and wait for the various crises of governance to come to a head?
Not necessarily. There is no better guarantor of national security than a vibrant and liberal economy backed by the rule of law. Prime minister Benazir Bhutto should therefore take some bold steps to hasten privatisation, widen the tax net, haul up defaulters, stop leakages and wastage, rein in corruption and launch a process of accountability.
She must also go the whole hog in attracting foreign investment. One pre-requisite is improving law and order. Another is projecting a modern, forward-looking and liberal image of Pakistan abroad. You cannot have a liberal economy without a liberal polity. For too long we have been hurt by images of violent mullahs and terrorists rampaging the streets of this country. A start must be made by putting such miscreants firmly in their place.