Gilani-Nawaz meeting

Mohammad Jamil

President Asif Ali Zardari and Mian Nawaz Sharif have held about a dozen meetings in the past and discussed mainly annulment of 17th amendment and withdrawal of 58-2(b), as the former blocks Mian Nawaz Sharif’s chance to become third-time prime minister, and withdrawal of the latter would strip president of unprecedented powers. In other words, they gave overriding consideration to secure their positions and there was nothing for the hapless teeming millions who wanted jobs, basic facilities of education and health and availability of essential items at affordable prices. Now, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) Quaid Mian Nawaz Sharif have met in Prime Minister House and reportedly the focus of discussion was proposed Balochistan Package, though 17th amendment and 58-2(b) also figured in the talks. After the meeting Mian Nawaz Sharif said that that he presented his viewpoint on the governmental package for Balochistan.

Mian Nawaz Sharif has to bear in mind that no government of any hue and shade in the world allows violence and separatist tendencies. He should not forget that the US and India have special interest in the province and are supporting those elements who raise the slogan of independent Balochistan. And the government claims to have incontrovertible evidence of funding and arming the insurgents by the Indian RAW in Balochistan. Addressing a news conference in the Punjab House following his meeting with the prime minister, PML-N chief said that army operation should stop; all arrested persons should be released; all missing persons should be traced and recovered and those involved Bugti’s murder should be arrested and put on trial. He said: “There were no political problems in Balochistan during the tenure of democratic governments. There had not been any loss of lives of Pakistan army troops and police in the restive tribal areas and Balochistan as well; if there would have not been dictatorship in the country.” But this is travesty of the truth. One should remind Mian Sahib that there was not only political problem but also rebellion and insurgency during the tenure of democratically elected government of late ZA Bhutto, which was constrained to conduct army operation. It has to be mentioned that it was a military dictator General Zia-ul-Haq who withdrew the sedition cases against the Baloch Sardars and National Awami Party members. It is possible that late Bhutto had the desire to see the PPP-led governments in all the provinces but the fact remains that sardars and centrifugal forces had put up resistance when the PPP government tried to build roads and schools in the province. There is no denying that during British Raj and after independence Balochistan and NWFP were neglected so far as development is concerned. But this is also true that despite being part of the provincial governments, sardars did nothing to persuade or push the central government for development of their province. From the statements and interviews of scions of Bugti, one can understand that the bone of contention between late Akbar Bugti and the federation arguably was that he wanted crores instead of millions as gas royalty. He wanted that gas companies should employ people only on his recommendations though the skilled personnel were not available in Balochistan. As regards Mian Sahib’s suggestion of holding talks with those who are not in Balochistan, he indeed meant negotiations with Brahamdagh Bugti who is ensconced in Afghanistan and Mir Byar Marri who is in London. If one believes statements of scions of Baloch sardars, they will accept nothing short of independence. Alluding centrifugal forces in Balochistan, Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman is already complaining that government is turning a blind to those challenging the writ of the state in one part of Pakistan, whereas in the other province military action is being taken dubbing them anti-Pakistan and terrorists.. It has to be understood that Balochistan is a multi-ethnic province where pushtuns, hazaras and Punjabi settlers live. And they are being targeted by the centrifugal forces. The PML-N chief has suggested that the package must be made in such a way that it is acceptable to the people of the province, and for this purpose the government should hold dialogue with all elected and unelected leaders of Balochistan, and also with those who are in self-exile.

There is no denying that during British Raj and after independence Balochistan and NWFP were neglected so far as development was concerned. And efforts should be made to develop these provinces by allocating additional resources to bring the people of Balochistan at par with developed provinces. Sardars want levies under their control, of course to be paid by the government, to enhance their power so that they could keep the weak and smaller tribes under subjugation and pressure. They do not want any cantonments as if Balochistan is not part of Pakistan. It has to be understood that it is the responsibility of the state to ensure that frontiers are safe, and the enemy is indeed deterred by the presence of the armed forces. How Mian Sahib could reconcile with sardars who arrogate to themselves the right to take the decisions as to the quantum of the army to be deployed in Balochistan? And it is too well known that they do not want cantonments in Balochistan.The citizens have started realizing that their leaderships are preoccupied with their own agendas and have their own priorities. And they are totally indifferent to their problems. Even in the recent meeting with Mian Nawaz Sharif, Asif Ali Zardari agreed to expedite the annulment of 17th amendment thus paving the way for Mian Sahib to become third-time prime minister. In return Mian Nawaz Sharif promised not to destabilize the government. Both parties would do well to give priority to solving the problems people are facing otherwise they would lose faith in the democratic process. In the CoD, the PML-N and the PPP had, among other things, stood for supremacy of the constitution, non-intervention of military in politics and independence of judiciary, which are, indeed, important issues. But of no lesser importance are the miseries afflicting the masses in their daily lives, and by articulating their hardships and problems and commitment to redress them could earn the people’s goodwill.

Having said all, the government should ensure that provincial autonomy is given to all the provinces. According to 1973 Constitution, the matter of provincial autonomy was resolved, and in view of the crisis a compromise formula was evolved whereby ‘concurrent list’ was to be reverted to the provinces after 10 years i.e. 1983 but nothing has been done in this respect so far. Distribution of federal divisible pool has been another bone of contention between federation and the federating units. The fact is that the provinces require financial resources to be able to maintain the social and physical infrastructure needed to provide basic services to their people. And since the bulk of the provincial resources come from the taxes of the federal government, they are dependent on the latter. It is, therefore, imperative to ensure an equitable distribution of financial resources between the federation and federating units, otherwise social and economic disparity between the provinces could only grow, strengthening the centrifugal forces fanning greater provincial disharmony.

http://pakobserver.net/200911/14/Articles02.asp