Political peace is precondition of growth
Tuesday, 16 September 2008
Syed Fattahul Alim
The finance and planning adviser has spoken with an air of uncertainty about the prospect of continued trend of growth of the economy after the expected political change following the national election scheduled in December next. He, however, emphasised that the ongoing private sector-led growth should be the chosen path of development by whichever government may take office after the election.
This is a very important observation from the finance adviser about the future development of the country after the next general election.
To be frank, it is not only the finance adviser, the whole nation is concerned about the changes to come in the political landscape of the country. All the issues that have sent the people speculating, however, may not fully converge with those expressed by the finance adviser. That is because, the common people are always in favour of change. Moreover, the elections are the only occasions when they get the opportunity to say their say about the kind of government they want in office.
It is not to say that in the prevailing socio-political ambience in the country, the people are able to exercise their will fully to elect a government of their choice. That is because, the very political vehicles through which they try to voice their opinion about the system of government is not perfect. Moreover, the electorate here, unlike their counterparts in the advanced democracies, are not critically conscious about the political choices they so often make. They are still swayed by the demagogues, the charlatans and the time-servers. They continue to support the major political parties in existence despite the fact that those had failed them more than once in the past. They are still seen to cast their lot with the same leadership and parties. This aspect of their behaviour appears enigmatic to the many who try to judge the people according to their own pet and romantic beliefs and ideals. To them the mass people are either highly idealised actors of political change or a mindless mob. True, the people are often misguided in their choice of political leadership. But what is truer is that they are never mistaken about when to look for a change. They never fail to recognise the moment of truth.
The protagonists of different ideologies and political belief systems are often disillusioned about the changes taking place in the mood of the general public towards the major issues of concern. But the people are never disillusioned. That is why, unlike the thinkers and the theorists, who, more often than not are too burdened with their preconceived notions about the issues at hand, the mass people are a pragmatic lot and forever ready to embrace the changes without any prejudice.
Understandably, the people in general have no prejudice about embracing the changes that may come after the next general election.
But this is all about the people's penchant for change, though they may be quite unaware of what exactly would be the nature of the change they would be going to embrace in the future. Take for the instance the change that took place after January 11, 2007 popularly known as 1/11. One cannot, however, say that the mass people had effected that change. No doubt, the people, in general, were not at all happy with the developments that preceded that watershed in the political developments of the country. The reign of chaos and anarchy that preceded 1/11 was certainly not an acceptable condition of life for the general public. They were certainly looking for a change. So, when the military-supported caretaker government took office with a promise to change the situation for the better, they accepted the changeover. They pinned their hope on the new government, though an unelected one, not because they had promised them the moon. In fact, they only wanted that the existing political stalemate should go and that the new caretaker government would steer the country till the time when a new political government of their choice is voted into office. It was as simple as that. So, the anti-corruption drive, the talks of political reform and all other endeavours taken by the caretaker government, the lay people watched with the anticipation of a cleaner political ambience in the future. Now that the incumbent caretaker government has promised that they have about cleared the country's political deck for a new elected government to take over, the people have no misgivings about accepting that change either.
However, political change is one thing, and a positive change in the lot of the common people is another. Will the upcoming political change through the general election in December give some comfort in the lives of the masses of the people? Have the parties now girding their loins for the next general election changed their ways meanwhile? How far the reform measures taken by the caretaker government have been able to transform their outlooks about their political opponents? Have they changed their 'the winner takes it all' mentality during these two years' period of supposed atonement? Will they again be at each other's throat once the caretaker government calls it a day?
These are the basic issues the people in general are concerned about. The midwife of change, the caretaker government now in office, will have to ensure that that they have succeeded in fulfilling the mission they had taken upon themselves after 1/11. For they cannot simply afford to do less than what they had promised to the people after their assumption of office some 21 months before. And they know it best how far they have achieved their goals and if the political parties to run the affairs of the government after the elections will be able to start their work with a clean slate. The incumbent government owes it to the people the answer to these pertinent questions.
The recent political developments in the country following the release of the two main leaders of the major political parties of the country on bail bode well for a peaceful transition in politics. And it is not only the transition that should be peaceful'. In fact, the pursuit of peace should be the hallmark of the government that would take office after the election.
The concern of the incumbent government as reflected through the utterance of the finance adviser focuses on this basic precondition of uninterrupted economic growth, which is healthy law and order situation born of political peace. Whatever the driving force of the economy, preferably the private sector as noted by the finance adviser, it will not be able to function unless one bids farewell to the politics of confrontation, one-upmanship and vendetta.
Now the big question is has the caretaker government been able to effect a change of heart in the existing political discourse of the country? Have the parties given up their old pastime of calling each other's bluff or of issuing the threats of destroying the other along with the country?
It is none other than the incumbent government that must provide a satisfactory answer to these questions. Otherwise the whole exercise carried out thus far since the 1/11 will lose their meaning.
The people in general feel elated at the news that there is an effort to bring the topmost leaders of the two major political parties at the dialogue table. If successful, that would be a major breakthrough in the decades-long history of political stalemate in the country. It is exactly this Gordian knot that all concerned were waiting to be cut by any change agent worth its salt. But the job cannot be done in a hurry. Neither should it be a slapdash one.
The politics of confrontation has so far dashed all hopes for growth and prosperity in the country. One approach to get rid of this situation was to put an end to this politics altogether. But in the given circumstances, that would be a tall order to achieve. Moreover, neither the parties, nor their leadership have come out of the blue. They are very much part of the country's political history. So, it is simply impractical to wish them away. Under the circumstances, the best approach is to tame these two mutually antagonistic forces of politics through making them realise the futility of their unending war to annihilate each other. If they see reason, that would in itself be a great leap forward in ensuring peace even after the political transition through election.
It is reassuring that the caretaker government has taken upon itself this Herculean task of bringing the two leaders face to face with each other. This is certainly a commendable move on the part of this government.
The finance and planning adviser has spoken with an air of uncertainty about the prospect of continued trend of growth of the economy after the expected political change following the national election scheduled in December next. He, however, emphasised that the ongoing private sector-led growth should be the chosen path of development by whichever government may take office after the election.
This is a very important observation from the finance adviser about the future development of the country after the next general election.
To be frank, it is not only the finance adviser, the whole nation is concerned about the changes to come in the political landscape of the country. All the issues that have sent the people speculating, however, may not fully converge with those expressed by the finance adviser. That is because, the common people are always in favour of change. Moreover, the elections are the only occasions when they get the opportunity to say their say about the kind of government they want in office.
It is not to say that in the prevailing socio-political ambience in the country, the people are able to exercise their will fully to elect a government of their choice. That is because, the very political vehicles through which they try to voice their opinion about the system of government is not perfect. Moreover, the electorate here, unlike their counterparts in the advanced democracies, are not critically conscious about the political choices they so often make. They are still swayed by the demagogues, the charlatans and the time-servers. They continue to support the major political parties in existence despite the fact that those had failed them more than once in the past. They are still seen to cast their lot with the same leadership and parties. This aspect of their behaviour appears enigmatic to the many who try to judge the people according to their own pet and romantic beliefs and ideals. To them the mass people are either highly idealised actors of political change or a mindless mob. True, the people are often misguided in their choice of political leadership. But what is truer is that they are never mistaken about when to look for a change. They never fail to recognise the moment of truth.
The protagonists of different ideologies and political belief systems are often disillusioned about the changes taking place in the mood of the general public towards the major issues of concern. But the people are never disillusioned. That is why, unlike the thinkers and the theorists, who, more often than not are too burdened with their preconceived notions about the issues at hand, the mass people are a pragmatic lot and forever ready to embrace the changes without any prejudice.
Understandably, the people in general have no prejudice about embracing the changes that may come after the next general election.
But this is all about the people's penchant for change, though they may be quite unaware of what exactly would be the nature of the change they would be going to embrace in the future. Take for the instance the change that took place after January 11, 2007 popularly known as 1/11. One cannot, however, say that the mass people had effected that change. No doubt, the people, in general, were not at all happy with the developments that preceded that watershed in the political developments of the country. The reign of chaos and anarchy that preceded 1/11 was certainly not an acceptable condition of life for the general public. They were certainly looking for a change. So, when the military-supported caretaker government took office with a promise to change the situation for the better, they accepted the changeover. They pinned their hope on the new government, though an unelected one, not because they had promised them the moon. In fact, they only wanted that the existing political stalemate should go and that the new caretaker government would steer the country till the time when a new political government of their choice is voted into office. It was as simple as that. So, the anti-corruption drive, the talks of political reform and all other endeavours taken by the caretaker government, the lay people watched with the anticipation of a cleaner political ambience in the future. Now that the incumbent caretaker government has promised that they have about cleared the country's political deck for a new elected government to take over, the people have no misgivings about accepting that change either.
However, political change is one thing, and a positive change in the lot of the common people is another. Will the upcoming political change through the general election in December give some comfort in the lives of the masses of the people? Have the parties now girding their loins for the next general election changed their ways meanwhile? How far the reform measures taken by the caretaker government have been able to transform their outlooks about their political opponents? Have they changed their 'the winner takes it all' mentality during these two years' period of supposed atonement? Will they again be at each other's throat once the caretaker government calls it a day?
These are the basic issues the people in general are concerned about. The midwife of change, the caretaker government now in office, will have to ensure that that they have succeeded in fulfilling the mission they had taken upon themselves after 1/11. For they cannot simply afford to do less than what they had promised to the people after their assumption of office some 21 months before. And they know it best how far they have achieved their goals and if the political parties to run the affairs of the government after the elections will be able to start their work with a clean slate. The incumbent government owes it to the people the answer to these pertinent questions.
The recent political developments in the country following the release of the two main leaders of the major political parties of the country on bail bode well for a peaceful transition in politics. And it is not only the transition that should be peaceful'. In fact, the pursuit of peace should be the hallmark of the government that would take office after the election.
The concern of the incumbent government as reflected through the utterance of the finance adviser focuses on this basic precondition of uninterrupted economic growth, which is healthy law and order situation born of political peace. Whatever the driving force of the economy, preferably the private sector as noted by the finance adviser, it will not be able to function unless one bids farewell to the politics of confrontation, one-upmanship and vendetta.
Now the big question is has the caretaker government been able to effect a change of heart in the existing political discourse of the country? Have the parties given up their old pastime of calling each other's bluff or of issuing the threats of destroying the other along with the country?
It is none other than the incumbent government that must provide a satisfactory answer to these questions. Otherwise the whole exercise carried out thus far since the 1/11 will lose their meaning.
The people in general feel elated at the news that there is an effort to bring the topmost leaders of the two major political parties at the dialogue table. If successful, that would be a major breakthrough in the decades-long history of political stalemate in the country. It is exactly this Gordian knot that all concerned were waiting to be cut by any change agent worth its salt. But the job cannot be done in a hurry. Neither should it be a slapdash one.
The politics of confrontation has so far dashed all hopes for growth and prosperity in the country. One approach to get rid of this situation was to put an end to this politics altogether. But in the given circumstances, that would be a tall order to achieve. Moreover, neither the parties, nor their leadership have come out of the blue. They are very much part of the country's political history. So, it is simply impractical to wish them away. Under the circumstances, the best approach is to tame these two mutually antagonistic forces of politics through making them realise the futility of their unending war to annihilate each other. If they see reason, that would in itself be a great leap forward in ensuring peace even after the political transition through election.
It is reassuring that the caretaker government has taken upon itself this Herculean task of bringing the two leaders face to face with each other. This is certainly a commendable move on the part of this government.