Hope in a fractured land

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21578059-building-normal-relationship-india-should-be-nawaz-sharifs-priority-hope-fractured

The Economist, London, UK

May 18, 2013

Pakistan

Hope in a fractured land

AMID some tough competition, Pakistan has a reasonable claim to the title of World’s Most Dangerous Nation. It has nuclear weapons, a large contingent of fundamentalists bent on wreaking chaos beyond its borders, a simmering conflict with the big power next door and a long history of unstable governments. The atomic armoury is there to stay; but, after an election on May 11th which propelled Nawaz Sharif to power for the third time, there are good reasons to believe that the place may get stabler, calmer and more prosperous.

Given Mr Sharif’s record, such optimism may seem odd. He was a dreadful prime minister in the 1990s—vengeful and autocratic, subverting the judiciary and undermining the press. Nobody was surprised when he fell victim to a coup led by the then General Pervez Musharraf; hardly anybody regretted Mr Sharif’s departure.

But even politicians can change for the better, and while in opposition Mr Sharif has shown himself willing to put country above self. There were several moments when the Pakistan Peoples Party government, led by Asif Ali Zardari, widower of Benazir Bhutto, looked as though it might be toppled by a peculiarly Pakistani phenomenon—a combination of judicial and military power, or the sudden emergence of a religious pressure group led by a Canadian-based cleric. Each time, Mr Sharif refused to help push his enemies out of power, on the grounds that they should serve their elected term.

His closeness to the religious right is a concern: his Pakistan Muslim League (N) party, which runs Punjab, Pakistan’s largest province, has failed to crack down on the extremist Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, and some of its candidates are believed to have links to the group. Critics suggest his closeness to the fundamentalists explains why more secular parties were attacked during the campaign and the PML-N was not. Yet links to militant groups could prove useful in reining them in.

That Mr Sharif is a successful businessman is probably good news. Militants aside, his party has done a pretty good job of running Punjab, and he understands Pakistan’s desperate need for electricity and roads. So long as his interest in money does not encourage him to pilfer the nation’s wealth, his competence should help it prosper. The markets evidently think so: share prices leapt when he won.

Mr Sharif’s victory was not the only election result worth celebrating. So was the defeat of many of the landowners and clan leaders who have dominated politics in the country since its creation in 1947. As Pakistan’s urban middle class grows, so voters are swayed less by tribal loyalty and more by a government’s policies and performance. That is how governance improves. But the most encouraging result of all is the enthusiasm with which Pakistanis have endorsed democracy. The Taliban said that voting was unIslamic. A 60% turnout said what the voters thought of that. For the first time in Pakistan’s history, one fairly elected civilian government has served a full term and, in the course of a fair election been replaced by another. Pakistani democracy has never looked stronger.

Troubles with the neighbors

None of this will count for much if Mr Sharif messes up relations with the neighbours. Pakistan is both vulnerable to the conflicts on its borders and guilty of stirring them up. In Afghanistan it has played a dangerous double game, helping the Taliban while taking American money to allow drone strikes against militants in its tribal areas. This has poisoned relations between the two countries: of 20 countries Pew Research recently ranked according to their enthusiasm for America, Pakistan came joint bottom, with Jordan. Mr Sharif must play a straighter game in future, helping America in its withdrawal and supporting rather than undermining the government it leaves behind.

But it is how things go with India that will do most to shape Pakistan’s future. That toxic relationship is behind most of Pakistan’s problems: the army’s dominance, the soldiers’ habit of ousting civilian governments, the imbalance between military and civilian spending, the terrorist groups spawned to attack India that have come back to bite Pakistan.

Mr Sharif’s election bodes well here, too. He knows that opening the sluices to trade with India would boost Pakistan’s pathetic growth rate. Last time round, he took a conciliatory line towards India. This week, even before his victory was confirmed, he had a long phone call with Manmohan Singh, India’s prime minister, and told his countrymen that he and Mr Singh would visit each other. Yet the lobbies with an interest in fostering conflict with India are strong. When Mr Sharif is deciding how to allocate his political capital, plenty should go towards normalising relations with Pakistan’s great neighbour. If he succeeds in doing that, much good will flow from it.

-----Original Message-----
From: ndatta <ndatta@aol.com>
Sent: Sun, May 19, 2013 5:12 pm
Subject: Re: THE SHARIF ‘SIAPA’ - Analyzing Sharif Third Term in Pakistan Reign

Dear Omar,

It is true that Nawaz Sharif hasn't an exemplary background. Nawaz Sharif, the politician, was a creation of that infamous dictator, General Ziaul Huq, to keep the PPP off balance. Sharif's two terms in office were anything but inspiring. Limited as Sharif's interrupted terms in office were, his bloopers were not all that limited.

But Sharif had seemed refreshingly sincere in the Lahore summit with his Indian counterpart in 1999. The summit, unfortunately, got sabotaged by his generals behind his back even as the talks were going on in Lahore.

As for the military chiefs in Pakistan, they most certainly belie the description in the article you emailed - "thorough professional with zero interest in politics ready to support [Sharif] in every way."

Today's Los Angeles article by Peter Tomsen (in the opinion section) has been far more perspicacious in the following passage:

Sharif's greatest challenge — as he knows all too well — will be ending the Pakistani military's outsized influence on foreign and defense policy, which is implemented largely through its powerful intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence. In 1999, the last time Sharif served as Pakistan's prime minister, he attempted to improve Indo-Pakistani relations and replace the head of the army, Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Instead, the army ousted Sharif in a coup, and Musharraf assumed power. Since 2008, Pakistan's elected leaders have tended to cede key decisions to the military in order to survive.

Nibir

-----Original Message-----
From: Omar Huda <omarhuda@aol.com>
Sent: Wed, May 15, 2013 11:41 pm
Subject: THE SHARIF ‘SIAPA’ - Analyzing Sharif Third Term in Pakistan Reign

THE SHARIF ‘SIAPA’

http://www.zoneasia-pk.com/ZoneAsia-Pk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10900:the-sharif-siapa&catid=70:free-talk&Itemid=84

‘Siapa’ is a wonderfully expressive Punjabi word almost impossible to accurately translate into English. It means a development or situation full of interconnected problems, difficulties, contradictions and intrigues — not easy to resolve and not easy to live with. Why should the elections that catapulted the Sharifs to power be a ‘siapa’?

For starters there is the track record of their past stints in power. The first time around they had a President who was a thorough gentleman dedicated to democracy and ready to help them govern. There was also an army Chief who was a thorough professional with zero interest in politics ready to support in every way. The elder Sharif went into totally unnecessary confrontations with them egged on with the sycophants and jesters around him. He took the situation to the point where there was a ludicrous confrontation between the institutions that were a phone call away from each other. The result was an Army brokered arrangement with both the President and the Sharif departing ignominiously.

The second time around there was an equally supportive and gentlemanly President and an equally professional Army Chief. In addition there was a Chief Justice who wanted to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law. Once again the elder Sharif with the same motley crowd around him confronted each one to the point where each left in disgust. With no sense of reality and amid much victorious chest thumping the Sharifs thought they had it made — their own President, their own Chief justice, and horror of horrors, the perception that by ignoring seniority and making an Army Chief of their choice they had finally conquered the military. This perception was rudely shattered when the ‘man of their choice’ proceeded to endanger the country’s security and then sent them off to jail. The next 10 years are directly attributable to these shenanigans of the Sharifs. An editorial in the London Economist of May 20, 1999 makes interesting and instructive reading. It also points to the horror that awaits us if the Sharifs are unchanged — Allah forbid. A nuclear test may be a notch in the belt but it can be a millstone around the neck if you cannot secure the country!!

The wish is that instead of hare brained schemes and incompetent sycophants the Sharifs will now bring competent teams for policy making, for governance and interaction abroad. We also know that if wishes were horses beggars would ride. The elder Sharif publicly prayed that he be given a mandate so that he did not have to deal with a messy coalition. He got it. But he had also got it in 1997 and blew it. Not only did he and his family go down but more importantly the country once again went down into the dungeon of military rule. What the Sharifs have never understood is that the mandate given to them is not for testing their manhood but for guiding this country and its hapless citizens to security and prosperity. They have to serve and not lord it over everyone and no one wants them to assemble a cast of minions, lackeys and sycophants. These can be left in the farmhouse in Jati Umra and trotted out for entertainment there.