Daily Times

The British June 23 vote to leave the European Union (EU) is the latest example of the failure of governments to govern. This column has long argued that the greatest threat to mankind is not global warming, violent Islam and terrorism, a resurgent Russia or emerging China, or even fragile economies. Instead, this overriding danger is failed or failing government that exists from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, with Baghdad, Brussels, Islamabad and Washington in between.

The British vote and subsequent meltdown of the Conservative and Labour parties are exhibits A and B of the failure to govern. First, David Cameron was catastrophically wrong in attempting to resolve a split in his party by holding a referendum on the EU. Secondly, he was equally wrong in believing he could win such a vote without a powerful campaign to educate Britons on the costs and benefits of staying and leaving — arguments that if made would have produced a different outcome. And last and incredibly, neither those who wanted to remain nor those who wanted to exit made even a single plan for the contingency of leaving.

These are examples of governmental dereliction and abdication of duty and responsibility to govern. And the world at large is likely to be a worse place for this vote. Yet, Britain is not alone in the failure to govern, failures that in many, many countries are causing publics to turn against the establishment and those in charge.

The current state of American politics is a further example of this failure. Roughly, two fifths of Americans voted in the primaries against the establishment. Donald Trump won his party’s nomination because of this fear and loathing of the so-called establishment. Bernie Sanders gave Hillary Clinton a very good run for the money on the other side. The result is two very flawed candidates, and an election in which many Americans will cast a vote against and not for either of the nominees.

Sadly, this same paradigm of the failure of government is alive and thriving in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The nature of divided executive authority in Afghanistan with President Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah represented the inability to decide and reconcile the last election. As a result, government in Kabul remains divided and divisive. With the drawdown of NATO forces and the reduction in money that came with these forces, Taliban and other terrorist organisations were granted a new lease on life. As a result, governance and a measure of physical and economic security have not taken root throughout much of Afghanistan, and the future appears in increasingly peril.

In Pakistan, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has been exceedingly fortunate in that lower oil and energy prices granted a temporary reprieve to a faltering economy. And the army’s heroic campaign into Northern Waziristan to root out Pakistani Taliban terrorists (TTP) has reduced perhaps temporarily the reign of terror that has menaced the nation. Yet, the Panama Papers have exposed Nawaz’s family to possible legal action, and so tarnished his reputation that his prime ministership could be endangered.

Worse, US-Pakistani relations have disintegrated to even lower levels than after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, and the infamous Raymond Davis case in which this CIA officer’s murder of two Pakistanis was resolved with blood money and Davis was set free. The drone raid that killed Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Akhtar Mansoor inside Pakistani territory, and the impasse over American funding and transfer of F-16’s have further exacerbated these already fierce tensions. And US support of India joining the Nuclear Suppliers Group have not gone down well in Pakistan.

Meanwhile, very senior former American officials have made strong cases to isolate Pakistan further unless greater assistance is given to neutralising Afghan Taliban. Clearly, Inter-Service Intelligence has had a long and complicated relationship in Afghanistan as well as with Lashkar-e-Taiba, the latter as a counterweight to India. But many in the US see those relationships now as unacceptable. Reportedly, Chief of the Army Staff General Raheel Sharif (no relations to the prime minister) met with the Chairman of the US Senate Armed Services Committee John McCain to discuss these tensions.

As far as the political opposition, the Pakistan People’s Party is still rebuilding. Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf is still quite marginal. So in an election, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz is likely to win a plurality, but with a leader whose future is very much clouded in scandal. All this is happening while the Islamic State and al-Qaeda are expanding their terrorist reach beyond Europe and America to Turkey, Bangladesh and elsewhere. And what can be done?

Outwardly, two of the strongest leaders irrespective of their country’s ability to govern are Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jingping. Whether this suggests an inflection point in which democratically elected governments no longer are able to govern or the assent of multitudinous problems and crises no government can successfully resolve is debatable. Yet, failed and failing governments remain on the top of the list as dangers to society.

For the West and despite the hype over a revanchist Russia, there are no existential threats. IS and al-Qaeda can be contained. While terrorist attacks will continue, they are not geostrategic forms of incurable cancer. That of course is not true in regions where these groups are more actively involved.

For Pakistan the choice is clear: can democracy work in a country that is still politically feudal? Pakistan has grappled with this question almost since its inception. The solution is reform of at least one of the political parties that will lead to economic reforms, and more importantly, to the realisation that terrorism of any kind must be eliminated. More importantly, and far more difficult must be the realisation that rapprochement with India is vital. Unless a real peace with India can be reached, the outlook in Pakistan is not good.

The writer is UPI’s Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist, serves as Senior Advisor at the Atlantic Council and at Business Executives for National Security and chairs two private companies. His latest book is A Handful of Bullets: How the Murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand Still Menaces the Peace