What should a leader do?
Predicting the future is never easy. All major corporations and nations devote
substantial efforts towards devising processes and technologies that assist in
managing information and knowledge, and to help understand the future. The more
accurately one can grasp the emerging world; the better one can plan and choose
the course.
A related debate has to with if deductive or inductive reasoning better for this
task. Furthermore, whether the right or left-brain people more suited at seeing
patterns and trends and provide the clues about what is coming. One of the key
shortcoming in this regard is that human operates from what is known. While new
discoveries give further credence to the fact that there is a lot we do not
know. Even the best-developed models can be thrown off by a single anomaly, as
the proponents of chaos theory would claim.
A lot also depends on the assumptions and frame of reference being used to grasp
a given reality. Now a day’s, media plays an important role in framing peoples’
perceptions about what that may be. Despite the limitations, the worse mistake
is not to have predicted wrongly, but to have not even made indigenous attempts
to understand the future. In absence of this effort, one is prone in believing
what others may conceive.
For more than a decade now, the politics of Pakistan has been disproportionately
impacted by the war on terror. In addition to widespread corruption and poor
governance, this has caused economic stagnation and the energy crisis. In other
words, the internal and external problems of the country have become linked. The
nation cannot walk away from the war on terror, and the more it stays involved;
its economic and security situation worsens further.
For example, two prominent thoughts have emerged about where Pakistan is heading
in the US. One of them presents a pessimistic and damning view that the nation
is gradually spinning out of control, extremism is spreading, and the point of
no return is approaching quickly. The scholars with this view are often older
and have been dealing with affairs of Pakistan for an extended period of time.
One senses exasperation in their demeanor. It appears to be an after effect of
having dealt with the complex Afghanistan situation and the difficult
Pakistan-India relations, and to make sense of it in the context of war on
terror.
A little bit optimistic version usually comes from the relatively younger
intellectual community of the think tanks. The hopefulness is premised on the
economic prospects the region, manifesting in the form regional trade and energy
dealings. Generally, there is an emphasis on promoting the civilian government
as opposed to depending on the military.
On the other hand, it is equally critical to understand the trends impacting the
surrounding region where nationalism, conservatism and security concerns are
resurgent. The developing global competition between China and the US, the
impact of BRICS, and the traditional tussles between the Arabs, Persian and the
Turks, are all equally important considerations.
The consequences of climatic changes, especially the frequent flooding and
predicted acute shortage of water will have no less impact on the region as
population continues to explode.
The key question is how much are Pakistan’s leaders, of all shapes and forms,
preparing the nation for these trends and challenges. With in this inquiry, lies
another major dilemma that the leaders of both developed and developing world
are facing. Is the job of a leader to educate their voters about the most
serious issues and provide them with a new vision, direction, and solution to
what is not working? Or, do they just simply represent popular voices in the
short term to win votes, while leading the citizens towards oblivion in the long
run.
The political dynamics of Pakistan, and many other places for that matter, are
stuck in a vicious cycle. The past and present political mistakes result in a
reactionary cycle. And, the reactionary politics may not be what is required to
deal with the emerging world. For example, nationalistic, conservative and
religious forces are on the rise in Pakistan as well as in the Middle East. This
may have to do with war on terror, change in the global balance of power and
associated economic influence. Although it is important to understand the deeper
reasons producing this change, more critical is to understand where this
dynamics may lead to if left unchecked.
Consider the example of Egypt. After years of Mubarak rule, a Muslim
Brotherhood-led government came into power. While the uprising there was
spearheaded by younger liberal elements, they were not organized enough to
benefit from what transpired as a result of their efforts. Now, faced with
economic constraints, the Morsi government is being forced to take some of the
same steps Mubarak was blamed for, and in the end may also cause its decay.
American economic assistance to Egypt is linked with continuing the peace treaty
with Israel. The big question in these circumstances is what will follow if
Morsi fails, and will the pendulum shift to liberal forces, or even more radical
elements.
As is happening in the region, the conservative, nationalist and moderate
religious elements are likely to win in Pakistan’s elections. However, they may
require the help of liberals to form the government. Such a divisive polity is
unlikely to be highly decisive and the governance will obviously suffer once
more. In the long run, continued failure to deliver will result in more support
for hard-line elements and against dealing with the west. This is not very
difficult to forecast.
Predicting the results of Pakistan’s elections is not that hard. How to avert
the expected paralysis is where most of the focus is needed.
To do this will require a visionary, pragmatic, and persuasive leadership that
does not have to spend majority of its time on its own survival.