Pakistan, at the moment, is in dangerous territory where the two sources of power—the people and the army—may be on a collision course. Regardless of who comes out ahead, the country would be the loser.
This suggests Pakistan is suffering from a serious illness. The question arises: can the illness be cured?
The simple answer to the question is: yes, but it is highly improbable. Let me explain.
I use the medical word “cure” because, in medicine, cure follows “diagnosis,” which is what we need to understand to determine what has gone wrong with the country. A correct diagnosis can help determine whether the disease is curable. If it can be, it can also inform us about the medicine required to cure it.
In an effort to diagnose, I spent many years researching Pakistan’s history to write my novel Islamabad: A Tale of War and Love, recently published by Mascot Press, USA, and available in paper and digitally on Amazon.
Why write a novel, rather than an academic book on Pakistani history? Because a celebrated author once said that there are some harsh realities of life that can only be communicated effectively through fiction. Fiction allows us to feel for the characters affected by those who control a country’s fate, and communicate more effectively what is really at stake.
In my diagnosis, there are two fundamental structural flaws afflicting Pakistan.
Continuing with the medical analogy, if we consider Pakistan’s birth as the birth of a child, this child was born with a hole in its heart. The Muslim League argument--and let’s accept it at face value--that Hindus are bad to Muslims, does not suggest the creation of a homeland for the Muslims of India. As a Muhajir Punjabi character in my novel laments: “a country for those who didn’t need one and none for those who did.” Following the logic of the stated anti-Muslim rationale, Hindus would be bad to Muslims in regions where Muslims are in a minority and not where they were in huge majorities.
One option to consider is for the current source of power, the army, to take a leadership role and work with appropriate experts to firmly establish the three required ingredients for success and then walk away from power
So, what did the Muslim leadership do? Create a country where there was no risk to Muslims and leave those at risk behind in India at the Hindus’ mercy—we are now seeing the proof of that. The bottom line is this: those parts of India that became Pakistan were not a “nation” and those leaders who created the country had no understanding on how to run one. Read political science and it will tell you the three fundamental ingredients for a successful country are: a nation; appropriate governance structure; and strict accountability of those who run the affairs of the country. Pakistan didn’t have any of these ingredients when the country was born.
Second, the country, after its birth, could have reflected on what was needed to make it a success and find the best doctors and medicine to cure a child with a hole in the heart. But a second structural flaw has never allowed that to happen: those in a position of power—the army, the bureaucracy, politicians, the business elite—all have an inherent incentive to not allow the creation and strengthening of any institutions that can hold them accountable. The result has been the destruction of all institutions of state and a lack of proper governance. Those who have won this year’s Nobel prize in economics have all spent their lifetimes showing with their research that successful countries are the result of strong institutions. As one great philosopher remarked: good leaders create good institutions and good institution then create good leaders in a virtuous circle.
With Pakistan missing all three elements required for a successful country, can it be cured?
Nothing in life is impossible so the answer has to be: perhaps.
But what is going wrong at the moment and how can the three essential ingredients be put in place?
I would suggest a good read of my novel Islamabad.
But let me share some thoughts.
The country is going in a direction opposite to where you want it to be to set up the three requirements. Take as an example the need for accountability. It seems to me those running Pakistan have never understood what a constitution is. It lays the principles--and mechanisms to achieve them--for how a country should function to achieve success. It drives what can and cannot be done and it is not easily changeable. In Pakistan it is the cart before the horse: its masters decide what to do first, and then change the constitution at will to achieve that. Even one man—a military dictator—can change it when even large majorities in civilised countries can’t change theirs.
A better option is for the current source of power, the army, to take a leadership role and work with appropriate experts to firmly establish the three required ingredients for success—ensuring there is a nation, appropriate governance and mechanisms for accountability—and then walk away from power to never return again. If the army does it, they will be the heroes, never to be forgotten. If you need an example for what the country needs, study Canada.
As I said at the very beginning of the article: given the task, it is improbable that Pakistan can be cured but it is possible.