Towards a new political drift in Pakistan

Pakistan’s politics is entering a difficult and uncertain phase. Two important developments in the last week can have far-reaching implications for the nature and direction of Pakistani politics.
First, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif made angry comments about how the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) is managing corruption and misusing state resources. He was visibly unhappy about NAB’s role as an autonomous accountability institution. Second, the filing of the First Information Report (FIR) in Gujranwala against unidentified persons for the terrorist attack on the Pathankot airbase in India is another unusual development that will have implications not only for Pakistan-India relations but also for Pakistan’s internal politics.
The prime minister’s criticism of the working of NAB may reflect his genuine concerns. However, its timing is politically motivated. When NAB pursued accountability in Sindh, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leadership did not complain about any deficiency in its procedures. There was no complaint about its rough treatment of those accused of corruption or misuse of state resources. Several PML-N leaders supported NAB’s accountability in Sindh. It was the PPP that complained about the disposition of NAB and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA).
Now, it was the prime minister’s turn to take on NAB because the available media reports suggested that the body was looking into the affairs of the PML-N big guns at the federal level and in Punjab. It was reported that some of the major power-generation and transport projects as well as the LNG project were under scrutiny.
Some blue-eyed bureaucrats of the federal and Punjab governments were also said to be under investigation. All this perturbed the prime minister because if these actions are allowed to go unchallenged, the PML-N’s monopoly of power and resources in Punjab would be undermined.
The Punjab law minister defended the prime minister’s criticism of NAB and blamed it for making big businessmen and investors like Mian Mansha apprehensive about launching new business and industrial projects. He also claimed that this would also undermine the efforts for privatisation of state enterprises running in losses.
The track record of NAB and its predecessor institutions for accountability shows that the rulers are not held accountable for their misdeeds. They may face accountability when they are knocked out of power. Even in such cases if the ousted rulers agree to work smoothly with the new rulers, they can save themselves from accountability.
Keeping in view this tradition, there is not much hope of NAB holding the Sharif brothers, their senior advisers and beneficiaries responsible for any corruption or partisan use of state resources.
The prime minister or the Punjab law minister need not worry about NAB pushing the complaints of corruption against the PML-N leaders to their logical end. This is quite evident from NAB’s response to the prime minister’s criticism that reflected its timid traditions. What worries the prime minister and the PML-N’s top leaders is that if the establishment extends its blessings to NAB, its chairman can adopt a tougher posture towards the PML-N ministers and other big guns on corruption and misuse of state resources.
It is in the context of the recent prime ministerial statement on NAB that the second development becomes significant. It is surprising that the FIR against the Pathankot perpetrators has been filed in Gujranwala for something that has taken place in another country. Though no person or group has been named in the FIR, the phone numbers given by India are expected to be pursued. The filing of this FIR amounts to partly acknowledging that the incident originated from Pakistan.
India is not going to be satisfied with the registration of the FIR. While giving credit to the Nawaz Sharif government for this, the Indian government will use the FIR to engage in propaganda against the Pakistani establishment. India’s game would be to cause a breach between the civilian government and the establishment because it already argues that Nawaz Sharif wants to improve relations with India and promote trade and that the establishment is not entirely on-board with this.
The timing of the filing of the FIR is significant. As has been noted, the prime minister first made a statement about the ‘misdeeds’ of NAB. Within a day of this statement, the federal government filed an FIR in Gujranwala.
It is important that all stakeholders handle the situation with restraint and caution. If the prime minister has embarked on these two measures to assert his electoral strength and he hopes that the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) will stand by it as it did during the 2014 PTI dharna, he is likely to be disappointed unless he agrees to protect the PPP’s interests in Sindh. The prime minister should not overestimate his political clout as this could prove to be misleading.
Given the ongoing challenge posed by terrorism and extremism, the civilian authorities and the establishment need to work in harmony. However, the civilian government needs to pay more attention to improving governance, controlling corruption and the highly partisan use of state resources. Furthermore, the civilian government should be willing to allow independent scrutiny of the major power generation projects, the metro bus projects in Lahore and Islamabad and other construction projects. Any rift in civil-military relations can make the future of Pakistani democracy problematic and uncertain. - Express Tribune