Adil Najam
Back in August of 2006 one of the first ATP Polls we did was to ask our readers which recent leader they thought did the most good for Pakistan? We had structured the question carefully to focus on the good that these leaders did (all leaders do bad things as well as good, some more and some less). It is time to ask the same question again.
In 2006 we had not included Gen. Musharraf since he was still in power. This time including Gen. Musharraf but not Asif Zardari, who is in power now. So, what do you think?
Please do take the question serious and answer it in the spirit asked:
The Question: Focussing primarily on whatever ‘positives’ might have been achieved during their stint(s) in power, who, amongst the following, did the most ‘good’ for Pakistan?
Let me repeat the explanatory paragraph I had included in introducing the question the first time:
The key word is ‘achieved.’ We always have plenty of discussions about what leaders have and are doing wrong, but nearly never talk about what they did right. Interestingly, even when we are trying to make a case for someone, we tend to make it by explaining what is wrong with everyone else. After all, if everyone else is bad (and worse) then our guy must be good, at least in ccomparison and by default. The logic makes a perverse sort of sense but tends to take our political conversations towards confrontations (since they are based on ‘attacking’ the other rather than on ’supporting’ our own). So, here is an experiment to see if we are capable of talking differently about such things.
As before, for Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif consider the combined impact of two stints they each had in power. Do also please tell us what you think they did that was most important and lasting to Pakistan’s well-being as a nation. Again, we focus on achievement here not because the ‘bad’ that they did was not important (in each case it was) but to discipline our conversation towards thinking of things that, maybe, we should be doing more of.
All Confused since the lists of good doings are all blurred by horrible acts.
Dumb I feel!
All of them did some very bad things too, but since you are only asking about the good part, here is a rough list.
Ayub Khan:
– Economy (yes there were flaws in the distribution too but it was a good attempt)
– Infrastructure development
– The basic democracies. Yes, using this system as an electoral college was wrong, but still establishing such a system of elected local bodies was a great step. This probably also contributed to the politicization of the people which eventually led to the anti-Ayub movement.
– Good foreign policy, especially opening up relations with China and Pakistan’s ties with the US.
– Strengthening the military.
ZAB:
Major things:
– Bringing national self-esteem back after the 1971 defeat (though of course his own role in 1971 dampens this)
– Starting the nuclear program.
– Foreign policy.
ZAB also accomplished a few smaller things, which I believe are overly exagerated by his apologists. These are:
– Land reforms (to the very limited extent they were carried out)
– The 1973 constitution. I count this as a smaller thing because the new govt had to make a constitution, and it wasn’t such a big deal that they came up with one. After the separation of East Pakistan, this was also relatively easier, compared to the tough balancing act that had to be performed between East and West Pakistan in the 1950s. The contents of the 1973 constitution aren’t that special and it has several gaping holes, such as the absence of a proper mechanism for ensuring the independence of the judiciary and the election commission. The part for which Zab deserves some credit is that he did bring most politicians on board in the constitution, though not in as inflated a sense as jialas believe.
I am not including the claim that he gave the common man a voice because that was basically an outcome of the 1960s movement, and ZAB actually hijacked it.
ZAB also did a lot of bad things. An honest discussion on that can result in comparisons between him and Zia, but that will be going off topic here.
Zia:
– developed the military further and took the nuclear program forward substantially from where it was when he came into power. used the cold war to Pakistan’s advantage in doing so.
– Created elected local bodies.
– ended the Baloch insurgency by using non-military means.
Of course Zia also did enormous damage but here we’re talking about the positives only.
BB and NS:
To be fair to them, some of their projects got interupted in the middle due to short terms. For example, NS was interested in building the Gwadar port in his first term, and in his second term, Ahsan Iqbal was planning a higher education initiative.
– Lady health workers program
– Continuing with the nuclear and missile program in the face of sanctions (I don’t consider carrying out nuclear tests as a good decision though).
– The polio irradication program.
Some other things that were good in principle but badly marred by corruption or other controversies:
– The motorway (the controversy also includes how it was stopped in the middle, which made it more expensive when it was resumed)
– The cab scheme (should have stuck to locally assembled cars and the deals should have been transparent)
– The IPP projects (grossely expensive and kickbacks were certainly involved)
Musharraf:
– Devolution
– Opening up the media
– Higher education initiative (accomplished less than what it set out to do, but still achieved something.). If nothing else, the foreign phd scholarships.
– Women rights related. Provided an environment where issues like honour killings could be debated openly for the first time. Special seats for women in the assemblies, and especially local councils were a huge step forward (though whiny burger class women rights activists are too disconnected to appreciate how important this is). And of course, the women protection bill, which removed the probblematic parts of the hudood laws (now a rape victim doesn’t have to produce 4 whitnesses and rape cases can be prosecuted on the basis of DNA related evidence)
– Joint electorates in addition to separate seats for religious minorities.
The economy was badly mismanaged though, so deserves a mention in the list of failures and gimicks rather than accomplishments. Likewise for the war on terror (especially the criminal manner in which the Taliban gradually took over Swat during his rule).
Obviously Musharraf, he had the economy booming at 7%-9% real GDP growth (moving to $160bn from mere $75bn), with most of the times inflation at a moderate level, cosidering growth – foreign reserves at $16bn and infrastructure development rampant, along with key economic reforms. GDP Per Capita unsurprisingly was increasing rapidly – poverty reducing quickly and education improving too.
He also gave the media freedom which the “democratic” goverments were unable to. He gave more seats to women and minorities, he increased nuclear, cruise, ballistic and other military programmes. He improved relations with China and other important countries. He also tried to quench this meance of terrorism and he introduced local bodies system. And he introduced HEC and more higher education universities amongst 1000 other things he did well.
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was good too because of his foreign relations and little bit economic development. Ayub Khan was instrumental in winning 1965 war
only Quaid-e-Azam
rest were
sheitan-e-azam
Salaam to all,
I have voted for President Pervez Musharraf. Because of the following points:
> The first most important thing, he gave us all freedom of speech yet we forgot that freedom comes with great responsibility. The media which was released by President Musharraf didn’t realize that there is nothing above National Interests, not even the freedom of Media.
> He changed the complete outlook of our nation, he took prompt steps and gave the new generation vision to have an updated living.
> He was a good decision maker and during his tenure infrastructure, health and education facilities were improved critically.
> He never claimed to end load shedding, and didn’t meet his word.
> He has great respect and honor nationally and internationally.
> He took Pakistan to a level of self reliance and sustainability. Having our reserves to $16Bn
This is only a glimpse of his achievements. And I m proud to be his supporter. Without any personal interest.