This piece is a response to Mr. Hussain Haqqani’s article titled “Pakistan’s Pyrrhic Victory in Afghanistan:Islamabad Will Come to Regret Aiding the Taliban’s Resurgence” published in Foreign Affairs on 22 July 2021.Mr. Haqqani has been biased to hold Pakistani military establishment responsible for U.S. failure and Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan. In the entire article he, does not blame America for her misadventure in Afghan territory which
Akhilesh Pillalamarri calls as the ‘graveyard of empires’.Mr. Haqqani also does not highlight Indian strategic ambitions to insecure Pakistan’s western border and make it unmanageable for Pakistan. Mr.Haqqani perhaps did not review the already published literature on Taliban’s gains in the wake of U.S. retreat and now pointing finger at Pakistan like a street urchin.
Peter Beinart’s “In Afghanistan, Trump is Poised to Re-Escalate a Hopeless War” Published in The Atlantic on 12 May,2017
Before I respond to his frail argument I would like to mention an article of Michael McKinley, “We All Los Afghanistan: Two decades of Mistakes, Misjudgments, and Collective Failure published in Foreign Affairs on 16 August,2021.I would like to remind my readers that Michael McKinley had illustrious career as an Ambassador of the United States to Afghanistan(2014-2016) as he also served as U.S. Ambassador to Brazil, Colombia, Peru and as a senior advisor to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The gist of his argument is that “The blame for this terrible tragedy cannot be laid at any one door.” Then how could Mr. Haqqani blame Pakistan for U.S. failure in Afghanistan. It sounds quite absurd. This response to Haqqani’s article has picked some of his points from whole manuscript and response to clarify facts that have either been absent or misrepresented.
Mr. Haqqani writes “Pakistan’s security establishment is cheering the Taliban’s recent military gains in Afghanistan. The country’s hard-liners have funneled support to the Taliban for decades, and they can now envision their allies firmly ensconced in Kabul. Pakistan got what it wished for—but will come to regret it.” Well! Pakistan’s security establishment is deliberating like China and other regional actors that how to respond to such a situation in Afghanistan. Pakistan never wished anything contrary to the interest of the people of Afghanistan and overwhelmingly extended an extraordinary support which even is unthinkable.
If I ask Mr. Haqqani a question, “Does America let any Mexican enter in the U.S. even if there is a serious humanitarian crisis in Mexico?”. The answer must be a big, fat No! Pakistan has done so decades ago and even now people of Afghanistan pin high hopes on Pakistan as a savior, international media can show massive gatherings of Afghan refugees seeking exit from Afghanistan. Pakistan has already hosted millions of Afghan refugees who were fed, clothed, educated and later granted citizenship of Pakistan. That era wreaked a great havoc in Pakistan as drugs and sectarian killings ruined the social fabric in Pakistan. But how many times Pakistan held America responsible. Instead, the U.S. lashed sanction under Pressler Amendment(1985 Originally banned most economic and military assistance to Pakistan unless the U.S. president certified, on an annual basis, that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear explosive device) and later Brown Amendment that Pakistan could not get access to U.S. military aid. Strategic allies are not treated like this as U.S. did by using carrot and stick approach.
Haqqani’s point that a “Taliban takeover will leave Pakistan more vulnerable to extremism at home and potentially more isolated on the world stage.” Is somewhat valid only in terms of waves of extremism otherwise as international isolation Pakistan is concerned that is not a logical argument. But organized attempts of international propaganda machinery to isolate Pakistan cannot be denied whose hub is New Delhi. Indian organized media propaganda campaigns against Pakistan have been counterproductive. U.S. did not trust Pakistan while waging war in Afghanistan and the outcome is trillion dollars, loss of servicemen and major blow to U.S. national prestige.
Pakistan stood by the U.S. in war against terrorism beyond former’s capacity, hosted bases to U.S. for military operations despite intense internal pressure and also earned title of non-NATO ally. United States did not treat Pakistan like other non-NATO allies. According to the U.S. Department of State “Major Non-NATO Ally(MNNA)status is a designation under U.S. law ,that provides foreign partners with certain benefits in the areas of defense trade and security cooperation. The Major Non-NATO Ally designation is a powerful symbol of the close relationship the United States shares with those countries and demonstrates our deep respect for the friendship for the countries to which it is extended.”On the other hand, the U.S. treated Pakistan like an opponent and adopted discriminatory policies towards it. The glaring example of U.S. discrimination is Indo-US civil nuclear deal and U.S. outright support for Indian candidacy by the former U.S. President Barack Obama for United Nations Security Council(UNSC) as a permanent member(with or without veto power).The U.S. launched drone strikes deep into Pakistan’s territory that caused much collateral damage and public outrage. Collateral damage in drone strikes increased anti-Americanism in Pakistan.
Pakistan suffered with a direct and indirect cost of $126 billion. It is the economic cost of war that Pakistan fought to support U.S. in Afghanistan otherwise Taliban were not as major threat to Pakistan as to the U.S.
Pakistan’s major military operation starting from operation Alimizan(2002) to Zarbe-Azb(2014) and Raddulfasad(2017) achieved greater success against terrorist groups and dismantled their networks, strongholds and also restored normalcy in turbulent areas. Also successfully managed gigantic challenge of internally displaced persons (IDPs).National Action Plan(NAP) helped Pakistan to address menace of terrorism through institutions as well. Statistics of terrorist incidents from 2003 to 2017 can compared with 2017 to 2021 which shows a complete eradication of terrorist networks on this side of the border unlike Afghan territory where U.S. troops did every effort to establish a so-called democratic government and train army but it proved a soap-bubble that seemed beautiful but quickly burst.
The U.S instead of appreciating such sacrifices blamed Pakistan of playing double-game rather U.S. proved an untrustworthy partner in war against terrorism. The incident of Salala incident (2011) shook Pakistan when NATO troops killed 24 soldiers of Pakistan in an unprovoked incident. No Non-NATO ally has been ever threated like this especially the one who remained a lynchpin of U.S. war against terrorism.
Haqqani’s claim that “The Taliban’s victory will have an equally disastrous effect on Pakistan’s domestic peace and security.”
Pakistan, over the two decades has learn to respond to traditional and non-traditional security threats very efficiently. Taliban may pose a threat to Pakistan if they try to export their ideology beyond border and once again engage in drug trade and transnational terrorist groups set up ties with Taliban. But contrary to the expectations of millions, Taliban after taking over Kabul announced general amnesty for the people. They also appealed for economic aid and cooperation. They provided a safe passage to Indians who wanted to leave the country. American embassy was neither attacked nor ravaged .That is a drastic change in Taliban’s thinking and approach to conduct affairs of the state. The IMF has suspended economic assistance over $370 million to Afghanistan scheduled to arrive on 23 August 2021.An IMF spokesperson said it was due to “lack of clarity within the international community”.
Haqqani’s claim about “ Pakistan’s generals see the Taliban as an important partner in their competition with India. Weak civilian leaders in Islamabad, meanwhile, have acquiesced to a policy that prioritizes the elimination of real or perceived Indian influence in Afghanistan”
Such a claim must properly be analyzed that what are the ground realities. India was never desired by Afghans to be on their soil as investor or partner in reconstruction, as Afghanistan due to landlocked geography has highly been dependent upon Pakistan. If that was the case why did Indians flee from Afghanistan after the takeover as Taliban could themselves see material contribution of India on Afghanistan soil.
Mr. Haqqani forgot to highlight doomy U.S. involvement in Afghanistan to overpower Soviet troops. Taliban were partners with the U.S. when Jallauldin Haqqani met with President Regan and the latter termed him as a freedom fighter against Soviets. Reuters published a story on September 14, 2011 in which the former U.S. Congressman
Charlie Wilson, who fund-raised for the Afghan resistance, once called Jalaluddin ‘goodness personified’. The warrior was held in such high esteem he visited the White House when Ronald Reagan was president.” U.S. betrayal to Taliban and leaving Afghanistan without reconstruction after the war with Soviet Union enraged Taliban and they decided not to trust the U.S.
Therefore, leveling such allegations against Pakistan makes Hussain Haqqani himself a double agent who was ambassador of Pakistan in the U.S.(2008-2011) but worked for the latter’s interest.
Mr. Haqqani has not mentioned any U.S. failure in Afghanistan as puppet governments that U.S. established were not true representative of Afghan People. That is why Ghani had to flee and his forces had to surrender.
Haqqani mentioned General Hamid Gul(late) and referred to 2014 television talk .Haqqani quotes : “When history will be written, it will be stated that the ISI(Inter-service intelligence) defeated the Soviet Union in Afghanistan with the help of America. Then there will be another sentence added . The ISI, with the help of America, defeated America.”He, in other words acknowledges that the ISI has the potential to defeat America with American help.
This statement was cherrypicked out of context leaving whole of his talk aside just to malign Pakistan’s security agencies. Pakistan has been a partner in global war against terrorism and how could it defeat world’s strongest power which failed in Afghanistan due to its flawed strategy and prolonged unnecessary presence in Afghanistan without empowering Afghans. If Haqqani believes what General Gul (late) stated in 2014, then Haqqani does not have any confidence in operational capability of U.S. forces who are apparently are easy to defeat in Afghanistan.
Mr.Haqqani’s point of internal dysfunction and economic challenges, and terrorist attacks on minorities in Pakistan are false and baseless. Pakistan’s slow economic growth is the outcome of lending support to U.S. in war against terrorism and inviting wrath of terrorists who attacked on soft targets as well deterred investment and inflicted on Pakistan’s economy. Regarding attacks on minorities in Pakistan, Indian involvement was brought to surface when Kulbhushan Yadav was caught with organized network for aiding terrorist groups to carry out terrorist activities in Pakistan.
Pakistan’s constitution is the supreme law of the nation and it is Islamic in nature that no law can be formulated in direct contravention to Quran and Sunnah. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan respects religious and cultural values of other nations and similarly, it is obligatory for other nations to respect Islamic culture and values. No nation has any right to disrespect other religions and its sacred personalities. Such an act is tantamount to stoking fire in a jungle that can engulf whole area. Mr.Haqqani knows the sensitivity of the topic therefore, does not get much into it.
There is a huge difference between Islamizing curriculum or reforming curriculum according to the needs of the society. Mr. Haqqani forgot to mention his friend Mr. Modi who has launched nation-wide campaign of hatred for religious minorities and even introduced Citizenship Amendment Act(2019) that is a major blow to secular spirit and democratic values of so-called rising India. How many articles Mr. Haqqani published on plight of Kashmiris especially after the revocation of Articles 370 and 35-A of the Indian constitution? Did he raise the voice of poor Kashmiris that they were under siege in this modern age. No country spoke of their freedom of expression and freedom to move. There has been a complete media blackout and no one allowed to come out of their homes. Use of brutal force to implement unjust, unilateral policy of Modi.
Instead of appreciating Pakistan’s good-offices in Taliban and-U.S. negotiations Mr. Haqqani finds fault with Pakistan’s facilitation of both the parties to Agree to Doha Agreement (2020) which set the stage for U.S.-long-awaited withdrawal from Afghanistan. He quotes UN Security Council Report published in June which found that “Taliban have not broken-off ties with Al-Qaeda and that senior Al-Qaeda officials have recently been killed alongside Taliban Associates while co-located with them.”
United Nations Security Council report must be very credible but it also questions U.S. presence in Afghanistan for last wo decades, making high claims of destroying high value targets, dismantling Al-Qaeda networks. Whereas the reality is the opposite, the U.S. presence strengthened Taliban and their hold on Afghanistan which caused Kabul’s fall within three weeks of U.S. withdrawal.
U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, meanwhile, has said that “al-Qaeda could reconstitute itself in Afghanistan within two years of an American withdrawal.”International community collectively must ask U.S. presidents a question, what did you achieve in there? Except killing people indiscriminately. Human right organizations must dig into massive violations of human rights to unearth the truth. If Al-Qaeda still have the potential to reconstitute itself then whom were you killing in numerous operations. Regarding Mr. Haqqani’s prediction about Pakistan and U.S. relationship, he contends “The two countries’ relationship seems poised to become even more unreliable in the years ahead.” It is not due to Taliban take over, but U.S. assertiveness about backing out of CPEC, providing air bases in Pakistan and other multiple reason.
In conclusion, Taliban came to power again because they were more powerful than their 1996 rule and had backing of their own people. It was the American government that kept lying to rest of the world about gains in Afghanistan. Regional actors are deliberating to deal with the latest and unexpected development in Afghanistan. Pakistan has been the major victim of terrorism for last two decades. Like other regional actors China, Iran, Saudi, Arabia, UAE, Pakistan is also looking into that how to engage with this political reality (Taliban) and work for preventing any crisis-like situation in Afghanistan. U.S. seems not to engage Taliban politically but that will antagonize Taliban towards the U.S. and its allies. Majority of the international media are reporting from Kabul which reflects there is a sense of security for them. A stable and economically viable Afghanistan is better for regional peace and security than an economically shattered and security-wise unstable. Therefore, it is the responsibility of great power and regional actors to extend humanitarian assistance and economic aid to avoid any resurgence of drugs and Kalashnikov culture. Transition from a puppet government to a Taliban regime is crucial for people of Afghanistan. History teaches great lessons, perhaps states don’t wish to learn them.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of author’s own and do not necessarily represent or purport the organization he works for.
A long way of solidarity: a voice for the voiceless Kashmiris
Every year on February 5 Pakistan observes Kashmir Solidarity Day. It aims to demonstrate Pakistan’s support and solidarity with the people of Indian-occupied Kashmir, and their continuing liberation struggle, and to honor Kashmiri martyrs who sacrificed their lives fighting for Kashmir’s independence.
Every year, on Kashmir Solidarity Day, Pakistan expresses its political, moral, and diplomatic support for the righteous fight of our Kashmiri brothers and becomes its voice in the international forums.
Kashmir’s discord carries historical as well as contemporary events that hinder its political future.
Historical account of the humiliation of Kashmir’s people
The history of conflict dates back to 1947. In the June 3 plan, the princely state offered a choice between India and Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh deceived Pakistan and ceded Kashmir to India through a standstill agreement, which sparked an uprising of Pashtun tribesmen and the Hindu nationalists and RSS to organize a program against Muslims, killing between 20,000 and 100,000 Muslims. On October 27, 1947, Indian troops landed in Kashmir to fight against the Pashtuns and the local armies; this led to the first India-Pakistan war. During the war, India’s prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, promised a referendum: “The fate of Jammu and Kashmir is ultimately decided by the people; the pledge we have given is not only to the people of Kashmir but also to the world.” “We will not and cannot back out of it.”
India referred the dispute to the United Nations a little more than two months later. A resolution passed on August 13, 1948, asking both nations to withdraw their forces; once that happened, a referendum was to be held, allowing the people of Kashmir to decide their political future. But the Indian troops were never withdrawn, and the referendum never happened. On January 1, 1949, the ceasefire was agreed upon, and Kashmir became a disputed territory. Over the next 70 years, India and Pakistan fought three wars over Kashmir.
In Indian-administrated Kashmir, India maintains around 600,000 troops in Kashmir, who have committed human rights violations like rape, torture, and enforced disappearances that continue today. The number of people killed in Kashmir is estimated to be between 50,000 and 100,000, which shows the ruthlessness of the so-called largest democracy in the world.
Situation after the abolishment of articles 370 and 35A
On August 5, 2019, the Indian government abrogated Article 370 and Article 35A of the Indian Constitution, which granted Jammu and Kashmir a special status and autonomy. The Indian government enforced a curfew, disrupted communication connections, arrested political leaders, and deployed extra soldiers in the area, generating widespread resentment and demonstrations.
Since the abolition of Articles 370 and 35A, human rights abuses and violations in Kashmir have increased significantly, with claims of widespread mass arrests, torture, and extrajudicial executions by Indian security personnel. The Indian government has also restricted freedom of speech, assembly, and the press, making it impossible for citizens to openly express their thoughts and report on the state of the area.
In addition, the Indian government has been accused of fostering demographic changes in the area through the settlement of Hindu migrants, which has resulted in a fall in the percentage of the Muslim population and degradation of the Kashmiri people’s distinctive cultural and religious identity.
International human rights groups have shown concern about the situation in Kashmir and demanded an independent investigation into the reported human rights breaches and abuses. About 87 civilians have been killed by the Indian forces since the abrogation of Article 370. The international community has also advocated for a peaceful settlement to the issue that takes the Kashmiri people’s rights and interests into consideration.
The situation in Kashmir remains severe, and the continuous violence and human rights violations continue to provide the international community with a formidable task. The region’s political future is still unknown, and a sustainable resolution to the war has not yet been found.
Pakistan’s Advocacy for Kashmir
Pakistan has made several attempts to resolve the ongoing conflict in Kashmir and has sought international backing for its stance on the matter. Pakistan has repeatedly discussed the Kashmir issue at the United Nations and other international forums, stressing the need for a peaceful settlement of the conflict based on the self-determination principle and the right of the Kashmiri people to choose their destiny. Pakistan has also made diplomatic attempts to garner international support for its viewpoint, notably via the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the Non-Aligned Movement.
Pakistan has also endeavored to provide political, diplomatic, and moral assistance for the Kashmiri resistance movement. India has accused Pakistan of financing terrorism in the area based on information that Pakistan supports separatist organizations in the region. Pakistan has denied these allegations and advocated for a peaceful settlement according to UN Resolution 47 (1948), which calls for a ceasefire, and UN Resolution 51 (1948), which calls for a plebiscite to be held in the region to determine the will of the Kashmiri people.
Despite these attempts, the situation in Kashmir remains unresolved, and a permanent resolution to the conflict has not yet been reached. The issue remains a significant source of conflict between India and Pakistan and a problem for the international community.
Kashmir’s political future remains uncertain and is the subject of ongoing discussion and negotiation between India and Pakistan, as well as international engagement.
Currently, the territory is split between India and Pakistan, with India administering the greater part and Pakistan the smaller. The Line of Control (LoC), which divides the two managed territories, has often been the scene of tension and bloodshed.
There have been appeals for a peaceful conclusion that takes the rights and interests of the Kashmiri people into consideration. Some have suggested the concept of “self-determination,” in which the people of Kashmir would have the right to choose their destiny through a referendum or a negotiated solution between India and Pakistan.
Kashmir’s political future is unpredictable and vulnerable to the continuous dynamics of the war as well as the shifting political and strategic objectives of the major regional countries. The international community still has a big part to play in finding a solution, and India, Pakistan, and the other countries in the area are likely to have to be involved and support any lasting solution.
Sri Lankans deserve a clean break from the past
The decision of former president Maithripala Sirisena to run for president pits two unpopular, establishment candidates against one another. With both Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe involved in past political turmoil and the current economic crisis, Sri Lankans deserve a clean break.
While a presidential election cannot be held until 2024, the Sri Lankan Electoral Commission recently announced local elections for February. With no popular mandate and as the only member of his party, President Wickremesinghe is expected to face an embarrassing defeat in the poll, but it is unlikely to bring down the government.
The announcement that Sirisena would run as president comes at a pivotal time for Sri Lankans.
Wickremesinghe warned this week that the Sri Lankan economy could contract by up to 4% this year, after shrinking 11% last year.
Last year, the island nation descended into turmoil, with an economic collapse leading to its worst crisis in years. Foreign currency shortages, runaway inflation and a recession left the government unable to make debt repayments and left Sri Lankans desperately short of food and fuel.
This led to unprecedented unrest, particularly in the capital Colombo, resulting in the deaths of protesters and police, with hundreds more injured or detained. The protests culminated in the storming and occupation of the presidential palace, forcing Gotabaya Rajapaksa to flee the country, with Wickremesinghe replacing him as president.
Sirisena has a chequered history in Sri Lankan politics.
Sirisena was part of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s cabinet before defecting to the opposition and winning a surprise election victory against Rajapaksa in 2015.
As President, Sirisena formed a close partnership with Wickremsinghe, appointing him Prime Minister, before the two spectacularly fell out. This culminated in the sacking of Wickremesinghe in 2018, replacing him with Mahinda Rajapaksa. At the time, Wickremesinghe claimed that the move was “unconstitutional”.
This led to a constitutional crisis and power struggle between Wickremesinghe, Rajapaksa and Sirisena, with the former President dissolving parliament and calling snap elections. Sirisena then decided to not seek re-election, leaving office in early 2019. He was replaced as president by Mahinda’s brother, Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
Recently, the Sri Lankan supreme court ordered Sirisena and several other top government, police and intelligence officials to pay millions of rupees in compensation to the victims of the 2019 Easter bombings in Colombo. The court found that Sirisena, as former president, ignored multiple warnings about an imminent terrorist attack weeks before the deadly event took place.
But Wickremesinghe is also no saint.
Wickremesinghe, a six-time prime minister, won a parliamentary vote with the backing of the Rajapaksa’s Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna party to replace Gotabaya Rajapaksa in July 2022. For this reason, he is accused of owing his position to the family.
Upon gaining the presidency, Wickremesinghe immediately cracked down on protesters, condemning the protests as “against the law” and calling protesters “fascists”. Under his watch, more than 140 protesters have been arrested and its leaders driven into hiding.
In August 2022, the United Nations condemned his government’s crackdown on protesters. The UN also criticised the repeated use of emergency measures, such as curfews, calling them a “misuse of emergency measures”.
The president has also been accused of delaying this poll, claiming the economically crippled country cannot afford to spend 10 billion rupees on a local election. However, the election commission decided to proceed despite the president’s request. Nonetheless, this raises doubts about Wickremesinghe’s respect for the democratic process.
What Sri Lankans desperately need is political stability and good economic management so the country can dig its way out of its worst crisis since independence.
Sirisena and Wickremesinghe offer neither. The former is struggling to finalise a bailout deal with the International Monetary Fund and both are notorious for poor political decision making and unpopular with a public desperate for change.
Therefore, Sri Lankans are faced with two establishment candidates who only offer more of the same.
The solution, at least for the time being, is for Wickremesinghe to call a presidential election so the next president has a clear mandate by the people. This will assist in forming a stable government and in bailout negotiations with the IMF.
Power also needs to be decentralised through ambitious political reforms that allow for wider participation and decision making in parliament. While, admittedly, this would be difficult under both Sirisena and Wickremesinghe, it is the first step in dealing with corruption and nepotism in Sri Lankan politics.
Presidential candidates serious about solving the countries problems also need to focus on key issues, such as rebuilding the economy, accountability for human rights and rebuilding political integrity and public trust.
Only once this is achieved, and Sri Lanka has shed itself of its dysfunctional political past, will it be able to recover.
A Hybrid Political System for Pakistan: A Proposal
The political system of Pakistan is an amalgamation of Islamic, British, and Indian influences, shaped by a multifaceted array of religious, ethnic, and regional factors, making it a culturally rich and ever-changing landscape. Pakistan is renowned for its powerful military establishment, which has traditionally wielded significant influence in determining its political direction. The nation’s political history is characterized by cycles of military rule, punctuated by several coups, followed by phases of democratic rule, though the military has continued to exert a significant degree of influence in the country’s politics. Furthermore, Pakistan has had to contend with the pernicious threat of extremism, with various militant groups operating within its borders and perpetrating terrorist attacks, which have destabilized the nation’s political, social, and economic stability.
This article aims to shed light on the challenges faced by the political system in Pakistan, specifically concerning the current political turmoil the country is experiencing. It also suggests a potential solution to stabilize the system and bring about a revolution in the way politics is conducted in Pakistan
The challenges faced by Pakistan’s democracy are compounded by the elite classes’ actions. The country is currently facing significant upheaval, which can be attributed to several factors. The lack of solid democratic institutions, frequent military takeovers, and the involvement of powerful military and civilian elites are among the underlying causes of the country’s political instability. Additionally, ethnic and regional conflicts, poverty, and economic growth issues further exacerbated political instability. The ongoing conflict in Afghanistan, as well as political unrest in neighboring countries, have also had an impact on the country. Furthermore, Pakistan’s history of military control, political corruption, and a lack of a deeply ingrained democratic culture have all contributed to the volatility in its political system.
The current political quagmire that plagues Pakistan is multifaceted, primarily stemming from a dearth of political acumen and a paucity of commitment on the part of leaders to prioritize the exigencies of the populace over their own personal and factional interests. This has led to a diminution of public confidence in the political system and government officials. Furthermore, the military’s prolonged political intervention and sway history has exacerbated a lack of democratic stability and accountability. Another critical conundrum that has impeded the country’s political evolution is the preponderance of corruption and nepotism in every government agency, rendering it difficult for citizens to repose trust in government officials. As a result, there is a burgeoning loss of faith in institutions of all varieties, with people losing trust in the government, corporations, and political leaders.
Furthermore, the failure of successive governments to address the issue of corruption has further undermined public trust in the political system. The permeation of corrupt practices in every government institution has made it difficult for citizens to have faith in government officials, leading to a general disillusionment with the political system. Additionally, the lack of transparency and accountability in government operations has enabled corrupt officials to operate with impunity, further eroding the public’s trust in the political system. The aforementioned issues have resulted in a political climate marked by a lack of stability and continuity, hindering the country’s economic and social development. It is imperative that the political class and other stakeholders work towards addressing these issues to ensure that the political system can effectively serve the people’s needs and promote the country’s long-term stability and prosperity.
Proposing A New Way to get stability in Political System?
A hybrid political system combines characteristics of many political systems, such as democracy and autocracy. Two examples are a semi-presidential system, which combines a prime minister and a president, and a federal system, which combines a central government with regional administrations. Hybrid systems can also include components of other kinds of democracy, such as a parliamentary system combined with a robust presidential system. These systems are frequently viewed as a compromise between competing political ideologies or as a means of balancing the strengths and shortcomings of various systems
If the official replaces the current political system with a hybrid one, it could be very beneficial. One of the main advantages of a hybrid system is that it allows for a balance of power between the legislative and executive branches of government. In a presidential system, the executive branch is separate from the legislative branch, with the president having a lot of power. In a parliamentary system, however, the executive branch is accountable to the legislative branch. In a hybrid system, the executive branch has some independence from the legislative branch but is still responsible for it. This helps to prevent too much power from being concentrated in one person or group and also helps to protect citizens’ rights and to avoid abuse of power.
An additional benefit of implementing a hybrid system is that it may facilitate more efficient decision-making by leveraging the strengths of both presidential and parliamentary systems. In a presidential system, the separation of powers can result in stalemates and prolonged indecision, while in a parliamentary system, the government can swiftly collapse if it loses the legislature’s support. A hybrid system, on the other hand, can offer a balance of stability and agility, allowing for more prompt decision-making while maintaining the accountability of the executive branch. Furthermore, considering Pakistan’s history of military involvement in politics, a hybrid system can provide a mechanism to hold the military accountable to the civilian administration and reduce the likelihood of military intervention.
It is imperative to acknowledge that a hybrid system may not be the ultimate remedy for all of Pakistan’s issues, and its successful operation would require meticulous planning and execution. Nevertheless, this system could potentially provide a glimpse of sustained stability in Pakistan’s political landscape, and it is incumbent upon the authorities to consider this system as a viable option to circumvent further obstacles.
India rejected the collective West’s destructive attempts to polarise the world order
Taken together, the speeches made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar at the Voice of...
February 19: An anti-interventionist coalition to March to White House from Lincoln Memorial
On February 19, Washington, DC, will witness a protest against the war in Ukraine that marks a sharp departure from...
Education For All – Our Investment in Humanity
Authors: Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown and Yasmine Sherif Millions of children are experiencing a world being ripped apart. Armed conflicts,...
The suffocating economy of Iran
Iran’s economy is on a roller coaster. The past year saw a dramatic rise in inflation rates and a historic...
The Irony of Indonesian Media Disaster Communication
Indonesia occupies the fourth position as the most populous country in the world, with a projected population that will continue...
Xi Jinping’s visit to Russia and America’s hostile policy towards China-Russia rapprochement
The visit of Chinese President “Xi Jinping” to Russia will be organized, which will most likely take place after the...
Prospects of Vietnam’s Economic Growth in 2023
The ongoing war in Ukraine and increasing commodity prices across the world have impacted the developing countries. Countries in Asia...
Science & Technology4 days ago
New discoveries and scientific advances from around the world
Economy4 days ago
Pakistan’s elite and the current economic crisis
Middle East3 days ago
The role of Guangdong Province in the Egypt – China relationship
World News3 days ago
NATO tanks for Ukraine provoke contradictions in the alliance
Economy4 days ago
Guangdong special economic zones at China
Urban Development4 days ago
A City-Led Climate Resilience
International Law4 days ago
Shaping a 21st-century world order amounts to a patchwork
Intelligence2 days ago
India’s Strategic Use of TTP to Undermine Pakistan’s Stability