Dawn Editorials (with Summary and Vocabulary)

 

https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaI6FJZ8aKvHuAImSF2o            https://wa.me/c/923554754711

DAWN EDITORIALS

February 21, 2024 (Wednesday)

Endless wait for a plan

Summary

Pakistan's Economic Woes:

• Financial crisis: High debt, unchecked spending, reliance on credit, poor credit performance, shrinking manufacturing sector.
• IMF loan uncertainty: Political turmoil and skyrocketing debt might hinder future funding.
• Elite capture: Wealth concentrated among few, subsidies benefit elite not common people.
• Austerity measures: Potential IMF deal likely brings more burden on ordinary citizens already facing inflation.

Future Outlook:

• Bleak: No plan to change the system, solutions likely ignored.
• Climate change: Worsening situation threatens agriculture, displaces people, increases famine risk.
• Default looms: If Pakistan doesn't get IMF loan, default possible.

Possible Solutions (mentioned but not guaranteed):

• Reduce business risk, improve fiscal discipline, attract foreign investment.
• Expand tax net, promote exports, rethink climate finance.

Article

THERE is no doubt that the first few years of this third decade of the 21st century have been filled by unexpected calamities across the continents. Covid-19 dealt such a blow to the world’s economy that even some wealthy countries faced recessionary conditions.

The less wealthy, naturally, were beset by even more troubled times when the pandemic knocked on their door. Many had to close down factories. Slowly, however, such countries are recovering, or at least have plans in place to strengthen their economy. In other words, they have acknowledged the truth that things cannot continue as they have been and some new approaches are required.

In Pakistan, in the aftermath of a contentious election — and even before — such plans and acknowledgement seem to be missing. The aftermath of the general elections has thrown the country into a greater miasma of uncertainty and fear, as a split verdict has emerged.

Last month, the State Bank confirmed receiving $700 million from the IMF — a part of the Fund’s ongoing Stand-by Arrangement of $3 billion. However, following the turmoil over the country’s political future and skyrocketing debt, the international credit rating agency Fitch has warned that uncertainty may hinder Pakistan’s efforts to conclude a deal with the Fund for securing further funding once the current bailout package expires next month.

While the agency acknowledged that the country’s external position had improved, with the central bank’s reserves going up from $2.9bn on Feb 3, 2023 to $8bn on Feb 9, 2024, it also warned that the increase was “low relative to projected external funding needs, which we expect will continue to exceed reserves for at least the next few years”. What was also of concern was its reference to “entrenched vested interests” in the country, which could resist another package entailing “tougher conditions”.

Apart from these international observations, in a well-researched report, the Islamabad-based think tank Tabadlab noted that the country’s unchecked spending and reliance on credit was simply unsustainable. The report noted that “Debt accumulation has been overwhelmingly used to continue fostering a consumption-focused, import-addicted economy, without investment in productive sectors or industry”.

One translation of this would be that successive governments have had a cavalier attitude and have done little to pull back on expenditures, allowing the same VIP culture of cars, lavish lifestyles, weddings, etc, to persist, thus creating a dumpster-fire that nobody is willing to put out for fear of seeing the ashes that will be left behind.

In the meantime, the country’s industrial sector which has fostered the growth of small-and medium-sized cities in Punjab in particular continues to suffer, battered by input costs, high interest rates, currency depreciation, energy sector woes and faulty trade policies. For the financial year 2022-2023, large-scale manufacturing shrunk by over 10 per cent in the country.

Pakistan’s poor credit performance means that its industrial sector has the region’s highest interest rate at a whopping 22pc compared to Malaysia at 3pc, India at 6.5pc and Bangladesh at 6pc. This comparison reveals that while all countries have faced the blows of similar global forces, including the pandemic, they are beginning to bounce back and are not at the dire level that Pakistan is.

The depressing prospect for the people of Pakistan is that there is no end in sight to their financial woes.

The second huge risk faced by Pakistan is related to the lethal impact of climate change. It is extremely likely that the continuing rapid rate of global warming will cause more catastrophic floods in Pakistan as glacial melt and climate conditions combine to create the certain storm. The consequences mean that agricultural production will also be severely affected, as is already being witnessed. Not only will climate change displace thousands, it will make the prospect of famine very real.

According to the report The Three Ps of Inequality: Power, People, and Policy, released by the UNDP a few years ago, approximately $17 billion were allocated for subsidies for the elite, which include the corporate sector, feudal elites and the political class. Elite privileges included tax breaks, cheap input prices, higher output prices, and preferential access to capital, land and services.

The report also found that the country’s richest 1pc own 9pc of the total income of the country and that the feudal classes who still do not pay taxes on agricultural income make up 1.1pc of the population and own 22pc of arable agricultural land. The military was mentioned as the “largest conglomerate of business entities” in the country.

The depressing prospect for the people of Pakistan is that there is no end in sight to their financial woes. No figures have emerged in the country’s history that show a plan for changing the system. And while that sort of revolutionary change is a tall order, the current concern is that even if a funding arrangement with the IMF is once again successfully concluded and the country does not default it will not end the misery of ordinary Pakistanis. If funding is approved, it will almost certainly bring more austerity measures, which have already contributed to inflation that is making it virtually impossible for millions of families to feed themselves.

There are solutions, but they will likely be ignored as they always have.

The Tabadlab report notes that “de-risking the business environment, adopting fiscal discipline and effective expenditure management, increasing foreign currency inflows for capital development through creation of special funds and partnerships to bring in capital for important projects, making internal recalibrations by management of state-owned entities and expansion of the public-private partnership ecosystem, expanding the direct tax net, establishing an export-oriented industrial policy and rethinking climate finance through leveraging debt-for-nature swaps” are all good strategies.

It is a pity that like before, like always, none of them will be adopted, pushing the country forward on a path of no return.

Hybrid rule 3.0?

Summary

Pakistan's political landscape is in turmoil after a controversial election:

• No clear winner has emerged, leading to difficult coalition negotiations.
• PTI challenges election results and remains a formidable force.
• PML-N and PPP in talks to form a government, but face disagreements.

Military's influence remains, despite attempts to sideline them:

• Election seen as a vote against military's role, but they likely still hold power.
• Pressure on PPP to join coalition, potentially creating another "hybrid" government.

Governance challenges ahead:

• Divided government with different parties ruling provinces could create friction.
• Difficult to address critical issues like economy and security in this environment.
• Overall future seems uncertain and potentially unstable.

Article

IT is a right royal mess that is hard to clean up. A hung parliament through a controversial election has pushed the country deeper into the mire.

It has been almost two weeks since the general elections were held on Feb 8, but as yet, there is no sign of a new dispensation taking shape. A thick cloud of uncertainty continues to hang over the country’s political landscape.

While the PTI is still not out of the race, the two other major political parties — the PML-N and PPP — are engaged in hard bargaining for the formation of a new coalition arrangement, amid widespread protests against alleged poll rigging. The confession of the Rawalpindi commissioner, who resigned from his post, about his role in vote manipulation has raised more questions about the legitimacy of the entire electoral process.

It is certainly not the outcome of the long-awaited polls one wanted to see. It is the unravelling of the entire political power structure. But re-engineering work is on to prop up the old order already rejected by the electorate. The intermittent shutdown of social media seems to be a part of the effort to stifle opposition voices. One is, however, not sure whether these efforts will bring any political stability to a country in deep turmoil.

With the official result of the elections now almost fully compiled, the PTI-supported independent bloc is clearly ahead of the other political parties in the next National Assembly, despite the alleged electoral manipulation.

The PTI’s latest decision to merge its parliamentary party with the Sunni Ittehad Council in the House is supposed to be part of its tactics to get its share of some 70 reserve seats, thus keeping the group in the race to form the new government.

Re-engineering work is on to prop up the old order already rejected by the electorate.

Moreover, the PTI leadership also seems hopeful of snatching some more seats by challenging some controversial results in court. But it will still be difficult for the party to get the required number to form the government at the centre on its own. The party has already declared it will not enter into any power-sharing arrangement with the PML-N and PPP.

Yet its formidable presence in the National Assembly could present a constant challenge to a prospective PML-N-led coalition government. The PTI’s decision to stay in the game seems to have frustrated the plan that aimed to completely sideline the party.

Notwithstanding the alleged manipulations, the elections have changed the country’s political dynamics making it extremely hard for the ubiquitous security establishment to set its own rules. Its leadership seems to have come out bruised in the process.

It has been a vote against the military’s role in the political powerplay as well as its overarching presence in almost all aspects of state. Yet there is no indication of the generals taking a back seat. Instead, the meddling of the security establishment in politics is likely to be enhanced, given the fragmented electoral mandate. Its reported role in pushing the PML-N and PPP to reach an agreement on the formation of a coalition government has not been denied.

While there appears to be consensus among the PPP and smaller parties to support Shehbaz Sharif, the PML-N nominee for prime minister, there is no agreement yet on the power-sharing formula.

The PPP, whose support is crucial for any future set-up, is playing hard to get on the issue of joining the cabinet, while bargaining for key constitutional positions, including the post of president. The PPP has maintained its control over Sindh and is also poised to lead a coalition government in Balochistan, raising its stakes in the power game.

Past master in the politics of wheeling and dealing, Asif Ali Zardari is trying to extract maximum advantage for his party before finally agreeing to the PPP joining the government. The party has already made it public that Zardari will be a candidate for president. The issue seems to be a sticking point in the ongoing negotiations between the two parties.

Meanwhile, there also seems to be establishment pressure on the party to be a part of the incoming administration rather than supporting it from the outside. If a deal is struck, the future ruling coalition will not be different from the previous Shehbaz Sharif-led hybrid administration, with the security establishment having a significant role in all policy matters.

Most interesting, however, is Nawaz Sharif’s decision to stand down as candidate for prime minister. In fact, the party’s entire election campaign had revolved around his return to power. It seems that his party’s failure to achieve even a simple majority was the main reason for the withdrawal of his candidature. It is apparent that he didn’t want to lead a coalition government that would include the PPP.

So, Shehbaz Sharif, who has worked well with the military as well as other political parties in the past, is considered the right choice to lead the future coalition government. Nawaz Sharif has, however, made sure that the mantle of Punjab chief minister will go to his daughter and heir apparent Maryam Nawaz.

Being the largest single party in the Punjab Assembly, the PML-N may not have any difficulty in forming the government in the province, with the support of some independents not associated with the PTI. Some of them have already jumped onto the PML-N’s bandwagon. Maryam Nawaz’s nomination marks the continuation of the dynastic control of the Sharif family over Punjab.

What is most problematic, however, is the issue of different political parties ruling the provinces. While the Sindh government, led by the PPP, can coexist with the ruling coalition at the centre, it will not be easy for the PTI government in KP to work with the PML-N administration in Islamabad.

These inherent problems would make it extre­mely difficult for a minority government at the center to deliver on the critical problems related to governance, economy and internal security. There is no way the system can work in this atmosphere of confrontation. The future doesn’t look that good for the country, post-election.

Parallel travesties

Summary

• Alexei Navalny, a Russian opposition politician, likely died in prison, and Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, faces extradition to the US. Both men are seen as threats by powerful figures.
• Navalny exposed corruption in Russia but had a controversial past. There's speculation about why Putin might have wanted him dead, but no clear answers.
• Assange published classified documents revealing US war crimes, angering the US government. He faces 175 years in prison if extradited.
• Both Navalny and Assange's situations are seen as violations of freedom of speech and press freedom. The author urges the UK to stop Assange's extradition.
• The author criticizes the US for its foreign policy, particularly regarding Israel and the conflict in Gaza

Article

AT the time of writing, almost five days after the Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny was reported to have suddenly died in an Arctic penal colony, his mother was still searching for his remains.

Yesterday, the UK high court was scheduled to begin a hearing on whether WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange could have the right to appeal the decision to extradite him to the US, where he faces 18 charges that could potentially lead to a 175-year prison term.

Navalny emerged as Vladimir Putin’s most visible challenger little more than a decade ago. He was previously better known as a stalwart of the ethno-nationalist right who, in a 2007 video, compared immigrants to cockroaches. He subsequently shifted his focus to the Putin clique’ [a group of individuals who share similar interests] extravagant corruption, which broadened his local appeal and turned him into something of a blue-eyed poster boy for Western liberals desperate for an alternative to the status quo in Moscow.

Navalny does not seem to have formally recanted [to announce in public that your past beliefs or statements were wrong and that you no longer agree with them] his xenophobic [dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries] past, and he appeared to share Putin’s views that Russians and Ukrainians are essentially indistinguishable, although he opposed the war that enters its third year this week. He was also resistant to the idea of a broad anti-Putin coalition. His videos exposing the venal [showing or motivated by susceptibility to bribery] elite that helps to prop up the crème de la Kremlin are a useful resource, but their influence was largely restricted to Moscow and St Petersburg.

There is speculation about why Putin might have wanted Navalny dead at this juncture, but none of it so far is convincing. Only an independent forensic examination of the 47-year-old’s corpse could reveal the immediate cause of death, little more than three years after he barely survived an assassination attempt by poisoning. His choice of returning to Russia for almost certain incarceration after treatment in Germany was undoubtedly brave, and possibly foolhardy.

Assange must not suffer Navalny’s fate.

Even if he hadn’t been imprisoned, there is little Navalny could have done to thwart Putin’s re-election next month. Perhaps the only possible explanation for Putin’s paranoid intolerance of even the mildest resistance is some kind of psychosis, His next term could propel him past Joseph Stalin’s 29-year record as dictator. Stalin had a lot more blood on his hands, but Putin keeps striving to catch up.

But why would ‘Genocide Joe’ — as US President Joe Biden has been dubbed after refusing to take action to halt Israeli atrocities in Gaza, and striving to expand the Middle Eastern conflict — wish to add Julian Assange to his lengthening list of victims?

The crux of the case against Assange hinges on the Iraq War Logs and Afghan War Diary that WikiLeaks helped to publicise almost 15 years ago. The massive trove [a store of valuable or delightful things] of documents exposed the sordid [involving ignoble actions and motives; arousing moral distaste and contempt] reality and immoral grounding of the twin conflicts spearheaded by Washington under false pretences — echoing the Pentagon Papers, which had, back in 1971, laid bare the egregious [outstandingly bad; shocking] lies that kept the Vietnam War going.

Barack Obama’s vice president absurdly labelled Assange a “high-tech terrorist”, but the administration wisely chose not to pursue charges, as that would have entailed also charging The New York Times and other respectable media outlets that worked with WikiLeaks to highlight US excesses and hypocrisies. Donald Trump was exuberant when WikiLeaks released internal Democratic Party messages broadly highlighting the deficit of democracy in a floundering political system, and specifically the dedicated efforts to deny Bernie Sanders the presidential nomination in 2016.

It’s open to question whether those revelations tipped the balance in Trump’s favour, but he was briefly a WikiLeaks enthusiast until the outlet spilled the beans on some of the CIA’s egregious global practices. The whistleblower in this instance, Joshua Schulte, was sentenced this month to 40 years in prison for leaking classified information. Chelsea Manning, the Iraq/ Afghan whistleblower in the instance pertinent to the pending case against Assange, faced humiliation, torture, and a 35-year sentence, but Obama pardoned her after seven years.

Biden has so far seemed incapable of even that modicum [a small quantity of a particular thing, especially something considered desirable or valuable] of decency, despite bipartisan parliamentary representations from various American allies as well as the US Congress. If the travesty [a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something] continues to unfold, the effect on journalism globally of the US persecuting an Australian conduit for uncomfortable truths whose publishing venture was based in Europe will be chilling.

Just as many who disagreed with some of Navalny’s inclinations are appalled by his fate, almost everyone who was rubbed the wrong way by Assange agrees that his unrelenting persecution is an abomination. The British justice system can liberate him in short order after seven years of confinement and five years of brutal imprisonment. It’s too late for Alexei, but Julian must walk free.

Better democracy

Summary

Pakistan's electoral system faces challenges:

• Low voter turnout in some elections indicates public skepticism.
• Transparency and trust issues exist, with concerns about rigging and the Election Commission's impartiality.

Possible solutions:

• Introduce proportional representation (PR) in local government elections for more inclusive representation.
• Undertake other reforms like judicial reforms, decentralization, and strengthening transparency.
• Learn from diverse electoral systems globally, like Canada's consistent system or Germany's mixed-member PR model.

PR in Punjab's local government elections could be a pilot:

• It aligns with global practices and Pakistan's political needs.
• It could foster a more stable, inclusive, and prosperous democracy.

Overall:

• Strengthening Pakistan's democracy requires overcoming electoral challenges and adopting innovative solutions.
• Starting with PR in Punjab and strengthening the Election Commission can create a more participatory future.

Article

PAKISTAN’S electoral history is a tale of evolving political consciousness, as evidenced by voter turnout oscillations. The dismally [in a gloomy or depressed manner] low 44 per cent turnout in 2008, a manifestation of public scepticism, contrasted sharply with the more than 60pc turnout in 2024, indicating perhaps improved faith in electoral politics. Despite this progress, significant challenges persist, especially in transparency, trust, and inclusivity. Let’s explore the potential of proportional representation (PR) in local government (LG) elections.

Key issues in Pakistan’s elections include the transparency and trust crises. Allegations of rigging and doubts cast over the impartiality of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) erode public confidence, undermining democracy’s essence, limiting societal participation and putting the legitimacy of poll outcomes in question.

Pakistan faces daunting challenges, yet these are not entirely new. It is becoming increasingly urgent for us to adopt both emergency measures for immediate relief and long-term strategies for sustainable solutions. Pakistan can draw on experiences globally, tackling these difficulties with self-confidence and determination. Despite internal conflicts and power struggles, the strength of its Constitution provides hope. The document offers a comprehensive governance framework, emphasising the separation of powers between the legislature, executive, and judiciary, which allows for amendments and adaptations to meet evolving national needs. Key to overcoming these crises is adhering to the Constitution, in letter and spirit, and seeking solutions within its framework.

To improve governance in Pakistan electoral reform is necessary, with the introduction of the PR system as a first step. While on its own it won’t resolve all governance issues, it would still be a move in the right direction. Effective governance also hinges on undertaking simultaneous reforms, including judicial reforms for efficient justice, decentralisation of power, strengthening LG, and ensuring transparency and accountability in administrative processes. These reforms are vital for establishing a robust governance framework that can respond to the needs and challenges of modern Pakistan.

Diverse electoral systems provide helpful lessons.

Parliament’s role is crucial in these electoral reforms. Systemic change faces resistance from those benefiting from the status quo, but inclusive dialogue and consensus can pave the way. This prioritises governance improvement and fulfils democratic potential.

Globally, diverse electoral systems provide helpful lessons. The first-past-the-post (FPTP) system, in countries like the UK and India, can overlook minority voices but the PR system, popular in many European countries, ensures inclusive representation of minority and smaller parties. A dependable electoral system is key to fostering public trust. Pakistan’s frequent changes in electoral regulations have created confusion and distrust. Canada and Sweden, with their consistent and transparent electoral systems, exemplify public trust. Germany’s mixed-member PR model is compelling, for blending direct and PR votes to ensure local accountability and overall proportionality.

Strengthening LG elections is vital for grassroots democracy. India’s LG offers a commendable model. In Pakistan, a similar structure could bridge the gap between government and local communities, fostering a more direct and participatory approach to governance. Decentralisation could spur socioeconomic development.

Pakistan’s current electoral system, though efficient, often omits minority and smaller party voices. PR could ensure inclusivity and reduce unrest from underrepresentation. Critics fear fragmentation and unstable coalitions, but Pakistan’s political landscape might find stability in PR. Implementing PR requires consensus and constitutional recognition. A hybrid system, blending FPTP and PR, could suit Pakistan’s unique context, considering its political and demographic fabric.

Punjab, with its diverse population and intricate political dynamics, is an ideal candidate for testing PR in LG elections. A successful pilot model could lead to broader adoption nationwide, significantly contributing to democratic evolution and an effective electoral system. This initiative, drawn from successful international models will truly mirror the aspirations of the Pakistani people, fostering a more stable, inclusive, and prosperous democracy.

Fortifying Pakistan’s democracy entails overcoming electoral challenges and providing innovative solutions. Starting with PR in Punjab’s LG elections and strengthening the ECP can create a more participatory future — one that aligns with global practices and Pakistan’s political ethos [the characteristic spirit of a culture, era, or community as manifested in its beliefs and aspirations], and promotes a representative, empowered democracy.