As the government officially accepted Ajmal Kasab as its citizen, we must gauge the events leading up to this acceptance and what it entails for our future in the comity of nations. Pakistan’s credibility has suffered a great deal from the consistent official denials in the past of Indian reports that he was a Pakistani citizen. Even when a report from a UK-based newspaper had confirmed that Kasab hailed from Faridkot and had also stated that his name was on the electoral list for the region, it was stated with confidence by the government that NADRA had no record of him. Mr. Rehman Malik, the Adviser to the Prime Minster on Interior went to great lengths to prove that Kasab had no ties to Faridkot or Pakistan whatsoever.
It will be suggested by the anti-Pakistan lobby now that the Pakistanis had tried to downplay the significance of Mumbai attacks and the hurt it inflicted on India by refusing to accept responsibility for the actions of its citizens. The case for declaring Pakistan a terrorist state, which is the dream of the majority of Indian politicians, has won a few more supporters. Even worse, it will be said that the Pakistanis only call a spade a spade when immense pressure is put on them, which is not only diplomatic pressure but also pressure to use force. It will deplete our international credibility to a great extent. Only if our decision makers had tagged all along and avoided answering yes or no to the question as to whether Kasab was a Pakistani and perhaps refer to further investigations which were required to ascertain the same, we might have averted this embarrassing situation. A part of our media also helped propagate the government’s policy of denying responsibility for the attacks and de-linking the elements involved in it from Pakistan.
General (R) Mehmud Ali Durrani, the National Security Adviser to the Prime Minister was sacked for revealing the fact that Kasab was a Pakistani. It was irresponsible that such an important official admission, should have come from him without taking the Prime Minister on board. His sacking is a good way to impress upon all members of the cabinet the importance of the Prime Minister’s office, which cannot be bypassed in such important matters, merely to gain cheap publicity or the credit for breaking news, which has its attractions in the midst of the mushrooming of dozens of private television channels in the country. It is the prime minister, who is the chief executive in a parliamentary system of governance, who must be the ultimate decision maker as to the timing of such disclosure to the public, if at all it is required in the national interest. Given that Pakistan is in such a precarious situation at the moment, with Indian forces threatening to replicate the surgical strikes that U.S. drones carry out in our tribal areas, the issue gains vital importance and the elected prime minister must be given the prerogative of dealing with the situation as he thinks best.
The National Security Adviser, as the word ‘adviser’ implies, must not execute policy decisions which fall under the ambit of the highest executive of the country. In the United States, even at a time when Mr. Henry Kissinger, who is considered one of the most influential National Security Adviser, was holding the office, he used to consult President Nixon before briefing the press on major issues. It is another thing that Mr. Kissinger’s importance and influence was enhanced at a time when President Nixon was embroiled in the domestic scandal of Watergate, but that was a peculiar situation which is not faced by all Presidents at all times in the United States.
It is yet to be seen whether the sacking of Mr. Durrani ensures that members of the cabinet do not try to be heroes in the future and behave responsibly and collectively as members of the government should do, rather than randomly and issue statements without recourse to conventional practices of good governance.
Another matter which should be discerning for Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani is no more than his party co-chairperson and the President Asif Ali Zardari himself. Mr. Zardari is engaged in a game of “statesmanship” and “governance” of his own which bypasses the cabinet system of government as well as the Prime Minister’s office. His latest preferred method of diplomacy is conferral of Quaid-e-Azam awards to United States officials. Of late, Assistant U.S. Secretary of State, Richard Boucher has just been awarded this award and the U.S. Vice Presidential in waiting Mr. Bidden is about to receive it soon. How conferral of such awards would serve Pakistan’s cause or how far Mr. Boucher had helped Pakistan as a ‘friend’ is debatable. What is clear however is that the award did not deter him from issuing a statement detrimental to us by urging Pakistan to do more and stating that Pakistan had not done the needful, right after he had received the award and proceeded to India.
Mr. Zardari must not seek to establish his superiority over the prime minister’s role in the governance and diplomacy of this country. The Prime Minister in turn, must not allow himself to be reduced to a mere figure head like Shaukat Aziz. Both the Prime Minister and the President must ensure that low level U.S. officials are granted their due protocol and nothing more. One-on-one meetings with the U.S. ambassador by both the officials are also a weak sign no matter what the discussions may be about. If reports that the meeting was about the sacking of Mr. Durrani and the displeasure of the Americans is true, they should be politely asked to refrain from interfering in the internal matters of Pakistan. It is noteworthy that the request of the U.S. ambassador to address the parliament and the special committee of the National Assembly was turned down, which was a positive development yet the President and the Prime Minister are maligning the state of Pakistan and their offices by continuing to meet the U.S. ambassador in this fashion. This practice must be abandoned. What is worse is barring the media from such meetings which gives rise to all kinds of speculations as well as increases the significance of the U.S. in the internal affairs more than any sovereign nation might be willing to accommodate.
The Prime Minister of Pakistan must prioritize the problems that the nation faces today and there are certain that are dire and could fatally damage the country. It is imperative that he comes out with a broad plan, if he has not done so already, and address the nation explaining how he intends to decrease their miseries as well as restore Pakistan’s credibility in the international arena. It is high time that rather than talking about Benazir Bhutto and her martyrdom anymore, the present leadership of the Pakistan Peoples Party seeks to implement her vision of a prosperous and respectable Pakistan and let the people know about how they intend to do it. For a Prime Minister who faces enormous challenges, the cabinet should devise plans and advise him about the strategies and the plans for development that they have. Such a Prime Minister should not be burdened with an extra load of a rogue member of cabinet or a President who is anxious to assert his presence in domains which only the Prime Minister should have control of.
No comments:
Post a Comment