Why do the Prime Ministers Fail? Isn’t it the right time to ask this question? In our national language Urdu, the government is called “HAKOOMAT.” As such the people who run the government are known as “HUKMARAN” or rulers. Who is Hukmran? Hukmaran is one whose “HUKM” or “ORDER” is carried out. When we try to go deep into the meaning of the words “hakoomat” and “hukmaran,” we find another word in between and that is “HIKMAT” or “WISDOM.” A “hukm” or “order” that lacks “hikmat” or “wisdom” leads to chaos, confrontation and even tyranny. So what does a politician need to become a successful “hukmaran” and run the “hakoomat” successfully is “hikmat” or “wisdom?” But mere hikmat or wisdom alone is not enough. What one requires in addition to that is “HALQA,” or a “CIRCLE” of “like minded people” that may also be called a “TEAM.” The “halqa” or the “team” is actually “THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE” of a political party and “THE CABINET” of a party in power.

2012

Zahid Hussain Khalid This article was first written in 2004

3/14/2012

Why do the Prime Ministers Fail?

By: Zahid Hussain Khalid

It is very strange that, in Pakistan, both the elected and non-elected prime ministers fail to

retain their status. They are either forced to resign or shown the door disgracefully. A

number of reasons for the disgraceful exit of the prime ministers are available on record

covering almost every aspect and logical reason that comes to mind. However, one aspect

of the problem has been often neglected and that is the failure of the prime ministers to

comprehend the complex state management structure and use it appropriately in the

interest of the country as well as the people. What are they expected to do? Instead of

going into the details of their recorded mistakes and or failures, let us have a look at it

from a very different and unique angle.

In our national language Urdu, the government is called “HAKOOMAT.” As such the

people who run the government are known as “HUKMARAN” or rulers. Who is

Hukmran? Hukmaran is one whose “HUKM” or “ORDER” is carried out. When we try

to go deep into the meaning of the words “hakoomat” and “hukmaran,” we find another

word in between and that is “HIKMAT” or “WISDOM.” A “hukm” or “order” that lacks

“hikmat” or “wisdom” leads to chaos, confrontation and even tyranny. So what does a

politician need to become a successful “hukmaran” and run the “hakoomat” successfully

is “hikmat” or “wisdom?” But mere hikmat or wisdom alone is not enough. What one

requires in addition to that is “HALQA,” or a “CIRCLE” of “like minded people” that

may also be called a “TEAM.” The “halqa” or the “team” is actually “THE EXECUTIVE

COMMITTEE” of a political party, “THE CABINET” of a party in power.

A team or a cabinet is formed for what? Any team owes its formation to a shared

VISION, a common CAUSE or a joint MISSION. Now if a team has a vision defining a

cause and the cause itself has the strength to turn into a mission then the TEAM performs

and the hukmaran or ruler succeeds. Here the success is also not unconditional. The

condition is appreciation of the performance by those for whom the team works! And

what does the team get in return? In return it may turn the country into a living heaven,

command the gratitude and respect of the country’s people and earn for the ruler a place

in “heaven.” Holy Quran has put it like this:

“Rabbay Hub Ley Hukman, Walhiqney Bis-salehein, Waj-al-ley

Lissan-a-Sidqin Fil Akherein, Waj-al-ney Min Warsatey Janat-in-

Naeem!”

“O God, give me wisdom (hikmat), and company (team) of those who are

pious, and let my praise (appreciation) be on the tongues of those

(governed) who come after me and let me inherit the heaven.”

Can there be a simpler and more comprehensive definition of “Good Governance.”

What, according to the modern political philosophy, is required for Good Governance?

Simply a party manifesto or a constitution “endorsed” by the people of a country through

their elected representatives; an efficient state management structure and a vigilant team

of public representatives to make sure that the party manifesto or constitution of the

country is adhered to in letter and spirit for providing a level playing field to every citizen

of the country enabling him to have a trouble free comfortable life according to his ability

and ambition.

It is not that the political parties in Pakistan do not have a manifesto. Every party, no

matter how big or small it is, has a manifesto. Country also has a constitution. The

existence of a large number of political parties in the country clearly indicates that the

“circles” or “teams” of “like minded people” also exist. Then what is wrong? They do not

have a “Common National Cause.” They have failed to understand the difference

between a “Common National Cause” and an “Individual Party Approach.” First, they

have to agree on a “NATIONAL CAUSE” and then decide, through dialogue, which

“APPROACH” will be right to turn that cause into a “Common National Mission.”

Endeavor to do so will enable them to arrive at “NATIONAL CONSENSUS” which they

presently lack. Why consensus is necessary? It is necessary because now we, as a nation,

are not left with much time due to the apparently visible strength of our “elements of

national power” which have made our enemies very uncomfortable and increasingly

restless. God has blessed our country with those human and natural resources that are

essential to make a nation great. How ironic it is that we have pledged this greatness to

our enemies for peanuts in terms of temporary financial, strategic and personal political

gains? Majority of our politicians, senior most officials of the armed forces and

bureaucracy, media owners and business tycoons have evidently and miserably failed to

treat Pakistan as their “motherland” either intentionally or unintentionally. They have

been either forced by circumstances or personally tempted to do that. They have never

ever tried to rise above their selves. What are the consequences?

The sovereign mandate of the people of Pakistan to delegate political authority through a

genuine political process has been usurped by a group of civil and military individuals. It

has been assumed not without genuine geo-strategic reasons that the very survival of

Pakistan depends on them. If they are removed from the scene then the country is

expected to face very unpleasant consequences. Consequently, the people of Pakistan

have repeatedly mandated them through presidential referendum and elections of the

national and provincial assemblies to go ahead with their agenda. However, within less or

slightly more than two or three years, the prime minister nominated by the majority party

in the national assembly is either forced to resign or kept under constant pressure because

he fails to deliver. The failure of the out-going or struggling to survive prime minister

clearly indicates that there is a major fault in the State Management Structure. First of all

this fault needs to be identified to proceed further. For that purpose, it is necessary to

have a look at the State Management Structure. How does the structure work? How is it

working now? What can be done about it? Certainly, a lot is needed to be done and can

be done to put the system back to work properly! One thing, however, has to be kept in

mind that anything that is not genuine can not be expected to work more efficiently and

can not last longer than something which is genuine. No matter how sincere, dedicated,

pious and patriotic the architects of the structure are it falls down and nobody can do

anything about it.

State Management Structure is well defined in the constitution. The visible changes in

this structure have the approval and endorsement of the parliament. Therefore, the

constitutional legitimacy of this structure can not be questioned. The question that can

now be asked is how this structure can work efficiently to serve both the country as well

as its people. Before commenting on the functionality of the existing State Management

Structure it is advisable to first understand who are at the giving and at the receiving

ends.

People of Pakistan are at the “giving” and “receiving” ends in terms of “political power

and legislative authority” and “civic rights and socio-economic privileges” respectively.

The national and provincial legislators enjoy their political power and exercise their

legislative and executive authority through federal and provincial bureaucracies on behalf

of their voters. When the legislators and cabinet members become irresponsive and

irresponsible the people are left at the mercy of federal and provincial bureaucracies to

beg for their civil rights and social privileges. It also indicates that the Head of the State

Management Team is the President. It appears that the prime minister and the cabinet

ministers are nominated “through artificially engineered and dramatized consensus” by

the majority party in the national assembly. This is true because the nominations are

actually approved by either the party chief or the President. The President gives oath of

office to them. There is nothing wrong with that provided the prime minister and all the

cabinet ministers belong to the same party and the prime minister is considered a strong

party head or a member of popular standing. Even if the ministers do not belong to the

same political party, they must have a “common national political agenda,” like members

of the political alliances in India and other countries, and rise above their party

preferences as and when such a need arises. This is not the case. On top of that, the

governors, provincial chief ministers and ministers, Prime Minister and federal ministers

coming from different party backgrounds have their respective individual party agendas.

How one can expect them to perform as a team when there is no practically operational

labour policy, no health policy, no education policy, no cultural policy, no trade policy,

no industrial policy, no youth policy and no “inter-ministerial and inter-provincial

coordination policy?” Yes the policies are very much there but they are not visible and if

the policies are visible they are not people-friendly. To sum up the observation the

following conclusions can be drawn:

The federal ministers do not appear and behave like a team because they

do not have a “common national political cause”

How can a “head” (prime minister) of this “team” (ministers) believing in

“everyone on his own” can make them submit to his “authority” and work

for a “Common National Cause” in the interest of the country and its

people?

This is where the fault lies!!! Whose fault is this? It is not difficult to

guess.

Prime minister appears to be a “House and Cabinet Relationship Manager” whose job is

to keep everybody happy without enjoying any authority himself. He has an army of

national assembly members on his back who are totally oblivious of their legislative

responsibilities. They are interested in “funds for the development schemes focusing only

on roads, bridges, communication and canals” for what reason is an easy guess. They

spend millions and billions of rupees on their election without bothering to conduct a

survey to assess the social and economic needs of the voters in their constituencies. None

of them has ever come up with a plan saying hay look here this is what my voters need

for a better living: for housing, for health, for the education of their children, for their

safety and security, for employment and post-retirement benefits. For this, they take

refuge in the concept of “Public Private Partnership” to fleece the people with their

corporate partners in health, education, individual and collective security, recruitment

outsourcing and worker welfare departments. “Public Private Partnership” in a country

which does not have a number of genuine “Consumer Protection Platforms” and “People-

friendly Responsive and Responsible Regulatory Authorities” makes the life of the

people miserable. This is exactly what is happening in Pakistan. So what is required to be

done?

First requirement of an efficient people-friendly State Management Structure, therefore,

is the preparation of a well defined “National Plan of Internal and External Priorities.”

First pre-condition for CONSENSUS on such a “National Plan of Internal and External

Priorities” is the participation of all the heads of the political parties in Pakistan in

“Preliminary Brain Storming Session” with their respective formal “Proposed Plans”

covering “Five Major Areas,” namely, politics, economics, social welfare, diplomacy and

defence. There must be a live televised debate on the proposals to enable the people of

Pakistan to participate in this debate as observers on call so that their opinion or vote may

be solicited at an appropriate time.

Another ideal solution will be to form a number of panels of genuine opinion influence

groups covering media, corporate sector, women, youth, religious scholars, minority

groups and sports legends. If this is not done and not done with God speed then this entire

State Management Structure will fall in such a way that the words will fail to describe the

severity of the outcome.

The genuine political stability and real economic growth will be witnessed only when

wisdom will prevail and teams of like minded individuals having focus on their vision,

cause and mission will be formed to run the affairs of the state.