Daily Times

Four weeks ago I decided to take some time off from writing my column for this newspaper. Not because there was nothing that I wished to write about but rather what I wanted to write was starting to become bitter and angry and clearly I needed a respite. So I took off for the land of the free and home of the brave for after all it is my other home. Now as I sit here a few weeks later in the great state of New Jersey, and after having met my children and many good friends and former colleagues, my thoughts wander back to Pakistan.

From this distance it is possible for me to look at Pakistan in a slightly more objective fashion. The US is going through serious crises. The economy is in a free fall, the political hierarchy is being vilified and President Barack Obama is the object of scorn and considerable derision from both the right and the left. Suddenly the situation in Pakistan does not seem all that bad in comparison. Indeed, most Pakistani politicians act like a bunch of headless chickens running around without purpose like much of the US Congress. But I have a newfound respect for President Asif Ali Zardari.

Zardari, for all his faults, has kept the PPP-led government at the Centre in place and has avoided what many were sure would be a military takeover a couple of years into his presidency. However much one might decry the state of affairs in Pakistan, the fact is that the country has survived under a real ‘democratic’ dispensation for a longer period of time than it did, except under Liaquat Ali Khan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

Democracy is a messy business, the present situation in the US and the four days of social catastrophe in the UK being prime examples. But ultimately democracies find a way out from whatever problems they confront without resorting to military interventions or going to the extreme of dictatorial decrees. If it does not ‘kill me’, it will only make me stronger is true of most democratic systems. If Pakistani democracy, however flawed, survives long enough to go through another election, it will emerge stronger, not necessarily better but definitely stronger.

Does it mean that things are fine in Pakistan? Of course not. The three major problems facing Pakistan are terrorism, corruption and governmental incompetence. Perhaps the one problem that might be amenable to improvement is that of incompetence. Frankly, there are enough people in Pakistan at all levels of government that under the right circumstances could provide a competent administration.

From my perspective, competence takes precedence over corruption and once those in positions of power and authority actually try to do a good job, things are bound to improve. Much of terrorism and the unstable law and order situation in Karachi is a result of bad governance rather than some inherent societal weakness. In a country with religious extremism and rampant poverty, there will always be some level of disaffection with the power structure and this will result in occasional breakdown of law and order but if law and order is treated as such rather than a political or religious problem, it can be effectively tackled.

While on the subject of competence, I have learned a thing or two about it during the last couple of weeks I have spent in the US. If we take the example of President Obama, here is a man of considerable intelligence, devoid of any serious character flaws (except for smoking cigarettes) and totally dedicated to his job. Yet, in less than three years of his presidency the US has gone from one crisis to another. His opponents — both on the right and the left of the political spectrum — accuse him of rank incompetence. This perhaps is an object lesson for us in Pakistan who pray for an honest leader.

Just before I left Pakistan last month there was a lot of ‘buzz’ about Imran Khan as a saviour, and also some were talking of a party made up of honest politicians. The Obama situation in the US clearly demonstrates that honesty is not enough to run a country properly. For the first 10 years of Pakistan’s history, every prime minister was honest and even the much maligned first president of Pakistan, Iskander Mirza, was never accused of corruption. But collectively they led the country to the edge of disaster and brought in our first martial law.

So in my opinion it is not fiscal probity but rather competence that matters. Competence is a complicated quality. What it requires in a leader is an appropriate mixture of intelligence, an ability to handle circumstances — however difficult and complicated — and the trust of both the people as well as the bureaucracy that effectively runs the country. The only form of honesty that is however imperative is of the ‘intellectual’ sort where the ‘leader’ is capable of introspection and the ability to accept that he or she may not be right all the time.

When I think of President Zardari, what he lacks is the last of my stated requirements. He has proven to be a competent political leader, he has the trust of the people in his government if not of a majority of the people of the country but it is introspection and the ability to accept that he might be wrong that has marred his presidency. The problem of course is of sycophants and toadies that surround him like every politician who comes to power in Pakistan. But then it is after all up to him to find competent and objective advisers and not just ‘yes men’. Whether he can do that will essentially determine where Pakistan goes from here onwards.

Finally, everything said and done, I would rather be in Pakistan than the US, mangoes and all.

The writer has practised and taught medicine in the US. He can be reached at smhmbbs70@yahoo.com