One year of misrule
Dr. Niaz Murtaza
As the PML-N set-up marks its one year in power today, I review its outcomes to ensure accountability via a detailed framework that I have used for several past setups. It says the quality of a setup’s outcomes depends on the quality of its strategies which depends on the quality of its team.
Outcomes occur in five domains (economic, political, social, security and external) and functions (legislation, policy, projects, services and institutional reform). So, just by looking at the team, one can predict early how a setup will do in five years. Looking at its weak team last year, I had said that PML-N will do poorly. A year has validated my view, as shown below. I focus on the federal setup given space issues.
Politically, the year has been our annus horribilis since ’47 for a civilian setup. Coming to power via rigged polls with establishment help, it has unleashed a big assault on key institutions on its behalf, causing more damage in just one year than others did in a full term. This includes dubious legislative tweaks like the 26th and PECA amendments, disruption of social media and abuses against opposition groups like PTI, PTM and BYC. The aim seemingly is to deliver the establishment its long-held dream of a docile setup and society based on its misplaced view that this will deliver progress. But the poor outcomes in all domains belie the view.
Economically, progress means economic stability, durable growth, equity and sustainability. So far, we have only regained economic stability after the 2022 crisis, with low inflation and higher dollar reserves. But past regimes too gave us such stability. Regaining economic stability after a crisis is easy. Under IMF-led reforms, two persons can achieve it via administrative fiat in a few months. The State Bank chief ups interest rates and devalues the rupee. The Finance guru cuts development outlays, ups import tariffs and begs and borrows from Gulf and China. All this shrinks the twin deficits to contain the crisis but cuts growth and causes misery for the poor.
But durable growth comes from deep reforms in sick state units, energy sector, subsidies, tax and tariff realms and bureaucracy and developing a creative vision for a pro-poor economy to increase investment, productivity, sectoral growth and exports. Thus, the higher level progress aims require very different tasks and skills than economic stability and if a setup achieves the latter, it doesn’t mean it can also achieve the former. So, like past setups, PML-N too is failing to achieve durable growth etc. Reforms are largely stalled and its vision is limited to blandly distributing patronage-driven services such as different cards and laptops which will only increase the fiscal deficit but will not ignite dynamic, equitable or durable growth. As Khurrum Hussain has noted astutely in these pages, it may have already achieved peak stability and things may go downhill now given the lack of reforms.
Externally too, the same is true. Ties have improved a bit with China, USA and Gulf states but not given major fruits. So, while loans have been rolled over, there has not been the inflows of billions that it was hoping for which would have allowed it to defer serious reforms by loosening the current account binding constraint. Tensions persist with India and Afghanistan as both refuse to play ball. While the plateau with China, USA and Gulf states affects the economy, those with the latter two affects security.
The security status remains fragile and both BLA and TTP have launched several huge attacks. Parachinar is the latest flashpoint. Despite threats, attacks and visits, the Afghan Taliban have so far not reigned in TTP militants operating from its soil. As with the economic and external situation, PML-N and its patrons remain clueless on how to improve things. Finally, there have been no major initiatives in social sectors.
So, the status is the same in all domains- plateaus with no chances of major gains soon given a lack of team capacities. The cabinet size has doubled but not capacities as new appointees are inept political ones. This shows the real problem is not the lack of capacity but intent. Neither PML-N nor the establishment want deep economic change as it may unfurl major political and social changes in society that they can’t control, leading to their political demise. So, their aim is to crush societal dissent and feverishly look for funds from big states that will allow them to postpone reforms as long as possible and maintain their political fiat. But this strategy may not work for much longer. So, if our rulers don’t smell coffee soon, we may be headed towards economic and security chaos.
The writer is a Political Economist with a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley and 25 years of senior-level work experience across fifty countries. murtazaniaz@yahoo.com; @NiazMurtaza2.
