Prime Minister Gilani stirs hope

Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani could not have embarked upon his prime ministerial odyssey in a more dramatic setting. Having won the parliamentary endorsement as leader of the house in a 264-42 vote he was spared the rigour of going through the exercise of winning the vote of confidence on Saturday when all the opposition parliamentary leaders took the floor of the National Assembly and said they had full confidence in his leadership. This is unprecedented for the Pakistani politics, but this gesture of unconditional support to the Prime Minister by the opposition is a measure of the enormity of the challenges that presently beset Pakistan. Indeed, the realisation seems to have dawned on both sides of the political divide that single-handedly salvaging the country from the deep crisis it has been consigned to, thanks to various factors some beyond the control of the previous government and others consequent to its poor governance and misrule, is not possible for the new government. How long this bonhomie would last one would not offer a time frame, but the fact remains that the words spoken by Prime Minister Gilani in his 45-minute address stirred hope of bouncing back from the abysmal depths of despair and uncertainty and mercifully brightened faces on both sides of the aisle. Not that the Prime Minister did not order any thing to be done instantaneously but he generally skirted the temptation of promising quick fixes like what his government would do in its first 100 days. His address contained both the instant orders and long-term goals, but what really sets it apart from what we have been hearing over the last eight years or so was his deep peep into the hearts where so much of pain resides. He was talking in terms of redressing the wrongs done to the people; they may be living in Balochistan or slums of urban centres or in undeclared prisons. Reminding the House that his party, PPP, has already apologised to the people of Balochistan for the wrongs done to them over the past many years, the Prime Minister offered to set up a truth and reconciliation commission to provide relief to the victims of state terrorism. He also ordered repeal of the FCR in the Fata region. Restoration of law and order is the first priority of his government and he offered dialogue but only to those who would surrender arms. As for the judicial crisis he was quite circumspect, volunteering only that the “first step” had already been taken and no extra-judicial system would be tolerated. He reiterated his party position on strengthening judicial independence, and, therefore, he ordered that NAB be shifted to the judiciary from the executive. However, he committed himself to greater provincial autonomy with reduction in the concurrent list within one year.
He did not offer any significant shift in the direction of the country’s foreign policy but loosened somewhat the tight official noose around the neck of independent media by ordering that Pemra would go under the control of Information Ministry and promised to promulgate the Freedom of Information Act. He said he would appear regularly in the Parliament and field questions from the members in what would be called Prime Minister’s Question Hour. His lifting of the ban from labour and student unionism earned him strong desk thumping. Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani spent a big chunk of his time on the floor of the National Assembly in restoring the confidence of the members in the viability of the country’s economic potential. He announced a number of steps his government would undertake to increase electricity and water supplies, alleviate the burden of poverty and improve the lot of under-privileged segments of society but did solicit understanding, given that these challenges were too formidable and would need time and sincerity of purpose to overcome.



Summit of frustration

SUBSTANTIAL progress at Arab summits is rare. Habitual divisions have marked previous gatherings and have been usually papered over by a convenient consensus on generalities. But when half the leaders of the Damascus summit do not show up, the chances of reaching any sort of breakthrough considerably lessens, and the odds are further shortened when one of the principal parties of the very dispute which has kept so many leaders away, in this case Lebanon, boycotts altogether. The nonparticipation of so many Arab leaders in Damascus is the culmination of a growing sense of frustration with Syria’s leadership, mostly over its role in Lebanon, its declared support for Hamas in its battle for Palestinian minds and hearts with Fatah, and not to mention its all but declared alliance with Iran. The Arab countries who have chosen to send only token representation at the summit, notably the Kingdom and Egypt, have made clear their dissatisfaction with Syria and the fact that a solution on the issue including the election of army chief Michel Suleiman as the new president, a choice approved by both sides and decided unanimously by the Arab League, including by Syria is not being carried out. Thus the call by Prince Saud Al-Faisal for measures to be taken against member states that breach a common resolution.
However, the Syrian promise at the summit to cooperate in ending the political crisis in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia saying it saw Damascus as part of the solution is conciliatory language, which eased the tension. When it comes to Lebanon, all Arab capitals, including Damascus, are supportive of the choice of Suleiman for president, but are at odds at the rest of the deal. Syria must acknowledge the concerns of other Arab countries over the continuation of divisions in Lebanon, and their impact on regional stability. It is equally important for other Arab countries to accept that the influence of Syria, ultimately, has a ceiling and that Damascus is not the only player in Lebanon. Nor is Syria and Lebanon the only problem in the region. There is no shortage of crises in this part of the world: Palestinians against Israel, Palestinians against Palestinians, Iraq, Darfur, Somalia, and Arab economic cooperation in a globalized world. But with the summit becoming little more than an opportunity to express dissatisfaction with Syria, little of use has come out of the summit concerning these hot spots. Summits are not just photo-ops. They are meant to settle disputes. No Arab leader can deny the problems the region is facing; it is what route they take to the solutions that make all the difference. Lebanon, as so often in past, finds itself the battleground for wider regional and global disputes but it must remain the exclusive concern of the Lebanese people and until they develop a strong enough consensus on that, to the exclusion of all external powers, the people of Lebanon will continue to suffer. And the Arab world will remain that much more divided.

—Arab News