Foreign policy: a headless wonder
The geographic contiguity to Afghanistan makes Pakistan a vital element in the West’s most expensive war fought out of the European theatre. The US defines Pakistan as its core policy concern, even if at present Washington is struggling to keep its ties on an even keel in the aftermath of the Raymond Davis case. China sees Pakistan as a fundamental ally. India calls it a perpetual thorn in its side. Kashmiris see it — yes, they still do — as their only friend.
Then being the second-largest Muslim state, Pakistan’s internal developments cause ripples in the over one billion Muslim population across the globe. And yet, incredibly, for a third week running this very important country is without a foreign minister.
In the heap of other more immediate, headline-grabbing issues this might appear as a small omission. In reality, the absence of a foreign minister and the lack of any anxiety on the part of the government to fill the gap make a more important point, showing the upside down priorities of the PPP. This also shows that others like the PML-N are no better.
There are reasons for the relegation of foreign policy concerns to the lowest level of attention. The more obvious one is an all-consuming and increasingly self-defeating political wrangle that the entire political class has entangled itself in.
Practically every second of every day is being spent on winning the tug of political war. The PPP is preparing for the endgame with regard to its present stint in power. It has positioned all its cards for the mid-term elections. It is digging its heels in Sindh’s heartland.
The imagined assault from the army on its political base is making the PPP leadership issue clarion calls to its workers. While Punjab’s stalemated political arena is the main story, the real worry preoccupying everyone in the PPP is the possibility of a ‘constitutional coup’. Foreign policy is the last thing on their minds. Not having a foreign minister is the least of their concerns.
The cabinet head, the prime minister, has an additional set of problems. His family’s alleged corruption scandals have begun to compete in publicity with those of the more notorious of his comrades. His son has put up a valiant but late-in-the-day defence of his newly displayed assets, including a bulletproof vehicle. (The ease with which Gilani-2 rattles off the fake history of his ancestral wealth and privileged background is breath-stopping.) However, the prime minister’s name is still at the centre of the blighting accusations of financial misconduct.
In these unremitting circumstances, he, like his party, needs wily speakers with jaws of steel to lay counter punches into opponents. His first agenda is to have Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan around. Finding a suitable replacement for Shah Mehmood Qureshi can come later.
Normally, an agile opposition would have made a fuss over the critical cabinet posts being kept vacant and would have reminded the prime minister of his glaring neglect. However, the present-day opposition is just as engrossed in playing farcical politics as the government it hopes to undo.
The entire thrust of the PML-N’s activity is centred on cornering the government politically and scoring debating points. Nothing else is materially important to it.
Except in the context of Raymond Davis, even pro forma statements on foreign policy concerns have been missing from the opposition corner. No one has expanded on the symbolic as well as actual implications of a cabinet without a foreign minister. This is one subject that does not interest the opposition leadership. This is a low priority area.
The other reason for which politics has taken over foreign policy relates to civil-military relations that are in a state of disrepair. PPP leaders first complain that the army-led establishment has created an exclusive domain in foreign and defence policy, but then heave a sigh of relief in the same breath.
This arrangement saves them the trouble of taking controversial positions, helps them avoid locking horns with important foreign countries where their financial interests are being looked after rather well, and as a bonus frees up time to visit their constituencies to indulge in the politics of crumbs and cronies.
The truism that every elected politician knows by heart is that incumbent foreign ministers seldom win elections. But the general explanation they offer for casually treating foreign policy runs something like this: ‘What difference does it make if a federal cabinet has a foreign minister? He, at best would be a formal façade to a reality that everyone knows — with or without a foreign minister, the brass runs foreign affairs.’
Whether the generals sideline civilians or civilians abdicate their responsibilities and become marginalised is a circular argument that can last forever. (Though one can legitimately ask why have the defence minister when the generals’ power is the maximum in this realm.)
However, for an elected government in charge of arguably one of the world’s most important countries to keep the foreign minister’s post vacant is indefensible. While Hina Rabbani Khar (known mainly for copious note-taking in meetings from her previous assignment as minister of state for finance) is an improvement on her predecessor, she cannot step up to the task of representing Pakistan in a complex world.
Pakistan needs a full-time foreign minister. This vacancy reinforces the impression that this government simply does not understand how crucial these times are for the country.
The writer is a senior journalist at DawnNews.
No comments:
Post a Comment