Nawaz for a strong Premier

WITH THE adoption of 15th Constitutional Amendment during the second (though eventually disastrous) term as Prime Minister, Mian Nawaz Sharif became the most powerful head of Government with the President reduced to the position of a figurehead. In our republic, we have lacked a system of checks and balances essentially required for exercising a check on the powers of the Executive. Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had unbridled powers in his a second tenure and with the scrapping of the 8th Amendment empowering the President to dismiss the Parliament and the Government if in his view the matters were not being run according to Constitution, the “safety valve” which 8th Amendment had provided disappeared paving the way for a military take-over.
No one should disagree with Mian Nawaz when he opposes a “toothless” Prime Minister. Obviously, an elected leader should have unfettered powers but his authority should be exercised in accordance with the Constitution and law of the land. Former Prime Minister Mian Nawaz Sharif disclosed at a press conference in London on Thursday t that he had advised Mohtarma Benazir against accepting the position of a “toothless” Prime Minister. In a democracy, the elected representatives of the people are supreme. Mian Nawaz Sharif s concern may be attributed to reports that Mohtarma’s party was about to strike a deal with the present Government and was willing to participate in general elections under President General Musharraf. Mian Nawaz Sharif wants a united front of all Opposition parties. He strongly supports the idea of all Opposition Members of the Assemblies to resign simultaneously so as to bring pressure on the “establishment”. It appears his efforts are not succeeding as quite a few Opposition parties want to carry on their struggle against present dispensation inside and outside the Assemblies.
Mian Nawaz Sharif s call for an All Parties Conference (APC) to discuss the issue of collectively resigning from the Assemblies has received mixed reaction. Some Prime Ministers in the past have tended to introduce civilian dictatorship. Our political leadership must in the first instance lean to respect the rule of law which is an essential ingredient of a functional democratic set up. The democratic mindset is missing in our polity.
To have “teeth” the Prime Minister must know the limits imposed by Constitution and law on his powers. Unfortunately, our political leaders do not want any checks on their authority. As and when they learn to respect rule of law, Prime Minister will cease to be toothless. Our elected Governments must run the affairs according to law and rules. Elitist culture must be done away with. All citizens should be treated as equal before law. Quotas and reserved seats must be abolished. We had enough of lip service to merit-based decisions. The Government leaders and functionaries must religiously follow the rules and the law. As and when a democratic culture is evolved, Prime Minister will have “teeth”. Till we should remain content with controlled democracy. Mian Nawaz and Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto should reflect in hindsight as to what efforts they put in to promote the rule of law during their two tenures each in the 90’s.

Spin Vs. reality

George Bush has shuffled up reluctantly to the truth that the US military is not winning in Iraq. It was clear two years ago to all but the most blind that thanks to its total lack of post-invasion planning, control of events was fast slipping away from the United States. But this is not a president who confronts reality until it lies in a puddle of blood on his doorstep. And even now he is hinting that the strategic review due next month could see the deployment of yet more US troops.
This is because Bush still thinks, in the face of all the evidence, that his GIs can win a military victory. Beleaguered in their compounds and bombed and shot at when they go on patrol, the US military is hardly in control of the future of Iraq. The occasional big security operation with elements of the Iraqi army may interdict a terrorist attack, slay insurgents and disrupt terror organizations but as soon as the US troops withdraw, the tempo of violence resumes. Though US troops continue to take casualties, it is Iraqis who are paying the daily price thanks to bombs and death squads. Indeed the bitter reality is that at present Washington is dedicated to fighting the insurgency to the very last drop of Iraqi blood.
For three years a further tissue of falsehood has sustained a military operation that was born out of WMD lies and rhetorical conflagrations involving 9/11. Bush and his people have only listened to the reports and advice they wanted to hear. As the whole misbegotten venture turned ever more sour, the White House persisted in denying that there was a problem, let alone the extent of that problem.
Perhaps the whispering armies of America’s political spin doctors have much to answer. Repeating a lie enough times on Fox News may be effective at fooling the general American public, but the politicians who echo them are not supposed to actually believe them. Maybe the prime source of Iraq’s tragedy is that America has a president who broke the rule about believing his own propaganda.
Enmeshed in its own web of disinformation, the White House has never been able to recognize an opportunity to change course. By staking everything on the brute power of US weapons technology, Bush passed up chance after chance to understand the complexities of Iraq and the wider region and recognize clear and invaluable linkages. Had he driven hard for a Palestinian settlement, even without immediate success, he would have won significant respect and robbed his enemies of one of the most potent propaganda weapons of their own. Friends and allies in the Middle East urged this on him. He did not listen. Now like an injured animal that cannot understand its pain, Bush is casting around helplessly for something to end his discomfort. It looks like it will be a commitment of yet more troops, “additional sacrifices,” as he said recently, because he insists that US military withdrawal will make Iraq a haven for terrorists. He is wrong. The US invasion of Iraq has already achieved that.

—Arab News