Judges on the offensive
by
Javed Hafiz |
I normally confine my comments in each column to one subject. Due to limitations of space, it is difficult to do justice even to that subject. For that reason, the columns have to be summarized. Brevity, they say, is the soul of wit. And everybody cannot perfect that art and I certainly have no claims to perfection. However, often there is so much happening around us that topics start competing. Although, several developments have taken place this past week, I shall confine my comments to two of them.
Their lordships, the Supreme Court judges literally burnt midnight oil last week to nip a perceived evil in its bud. Seventeen judges sacrificed their sleep in order to pre-empt a government attack on their jobs. Three private TV channels had given the news that the government was about to withdraw the executive order that restored the judges last year. Their lordships said, loud and clear, that any attempt to that effect would be considered treason. The Prime Minister refuted the news. But the judges insisted that the prime ministerial negation must be given in writing. The Prime Minister politely refused saying that his verbal pronouncements were as good as the written ones.
Nobody was prepared to take the prime ministerial undertaking that the rumours had no basis, at its face value. When a government does not honour even its written undertakings, it loses credibility. In this age of advanced technology, the TV channels, within no time, showed a number of clips of government promises that had not been fulfilled. Gone are the days when rulers could promise moon to the electorate and then forget about it.
Information officials and the TV anchors were made to explain their position. The anchors refused to divulge the source claiming that it would be professionally dishonest. The Chief Justice said that the rumours had some basis. It would appear that the government did make an attempt to remove some judges and for that purpose contacted their colleagues. The judges contacted by the government refused to do its bidding and spilled the beans. An embarrassed government has no choice but to claim innocence. But all is well that ends well; a crisis was averted.
Second seminal development of the week is the third round of Pak-US strategic dialogue in Washington DC. In my diplomatic service, I have not seen bilateral dialogues in such quick succession. Three rounds have been held in one year. This points to the fact that there is so much to be discussed between the two countries. Secondly, at this crucial juncture of war in Afghanistan, the US is keen to keep Pakistani in good humour. Thirdly, the dialogue, at its upgraded foreign ministerial level, is over-arching and covers thirteen areas of co-operation. Till last year, the strategic dialogue was mainly confined to defense matters.
I was invited to the PTV for a discussion on the subject. I started by saying that Pak-US relationship, which has come under strain, is vital for both countries. Secondly, the word strategic had been worn out by over-use. Strategic means crucial and vital. In this round, for example, the subject of nuclear co-operation was not on the official agenda. Now energy is crucial to the Pakistani economic development which is vital to national survival. Therefore, for me, it is important bilateral dialogue but to call it strategic would be a misnomer.
The mere fact that seven federal ministers and the army chief went to Washington for this three day set of meetings shows its importance. Even though the dialogue is now multi sectoral, security issues still dominated. General Kiyani was certainly the person most sought after by the American leaders. What else would explain his one on one meetings with President Obama or General Powel? The war in Afghanistan is already in a crucial phase and the US needs Pakistani help. Pakistan is not willing to go all out to accommodate US urgings to do more as the objectives of the two are not always identical. Pakistan has to protect its core interests rather than blindly follow the US line. It will help only to a certain extent but even that partial Pakistani help is vital.
This relationship is so vital that both countries should try to reduce the strains quietly. Public allegations or urgings to do more only exacerbate the strains. Pakistan needs US economic help as its economy is visibly much weaker than it was say three years ago. And open-ended US assistance cannot be taken for granted. Pakistan must also try to stand on its own feet, as advised by Secretary Clinton. Pakistani society and economy are both very resilient. It is only the parasitical elite that has let it down more than once.
As I was writing these lines, the US government announced, subject to the congressional approval, military assistance worth two billion dollars between 2012-16. Analyists here are calling it peanuts considering that US spends 100 billion dollars in one year in Afghanistan. We shall discuss that some other time.
(Javed Hafiz is Pakistan’s former ambassador to the Sultanate)
|
Other comment for Javed Hafiz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NEWS UPDATES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
