One of the worries that any government in Pakistan must think about is how to get rid of organisational structures that are obsolete and do not respond to changing circumstances. In fact, how does one have the ability in government to respond to changing circumstances and thus save the country from a disastrous situation? The recent law and order situation has meant that Pakistan is now on a four-day working week. If every Friday is to be lost then the working hours are also less proportionally.
Is the construction of a resilient society difficult? Can we withstand the surprises that await us in the next few months? Are our surprises predictable and can we take effective steps in Karachi? Can we handle the Balochistan situation? What is the impact of the 18th Amendment on the constitution and how effective has that been? Who would be responsible for the implementation of this? In a country where implementation of any legislative measure the requirement is for having new organisational structures. Where is the sanctity to Cabinet decisions? Is the Cabinet Secretary capable of performing like the ones in other countries? Is the power of the designation dependent on the personality of the person or the system? Ghulam Ishaq Khan was once the Cabinet Secretary and what do we have now? Normally the Cabinet Secretary is one who rules the system through its procedures. The rules of business are meaningless. The result of a weak and poor governance system, the result of indiscipline or and the result of a lack of commitment? One can ascribe any number of reasons. The rule of law and implementation of its decisions are the most sanctified functions of the government irrespective of whether those are in favour or against the government, by one political government or its opponents. If this is not done then there is utter chaos. Some of these with dual jobs are now absconding. They have been guilty of doing things that they should not have indulged in.
Those in the bureaucracy are caught in a bind. If they do their job honestly and well they are on the wrong side of the politicians who keep on jumping like a gram on a hot plate against the bureaucrat. All politicians then join hand and carry out a well planned intrigue against the well meaning and truly performing bureaucrat. Honesty is at a low premium at the moment and if this be so the management of this country cannot be based on resilience.
The interesting feature is that the creation of a resilience society and organisation need not be complex. The aim is simple to withstand the surprises that await us. At the moment the powerful do only one thing and that is to use state machinery to handle those that try and do their job. Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and KPK are all guilty of this. The instant examples may be seen from the missing person's case. The Karachi killings and the Balochistan vendetta are part and parcel of the use of force. It was Macaulay who made two very amongst many arguments when he said 'Anyone who has right to hanging has a right to education,' and secondly he said 'out of a hovel only a pig will come out'. He was the DPI who gave us the universities and the education system that we have messed up. It was his daring to call the bluff of the Viceroy of India when he said 'that if you do not stop interfering in my work I will resign my commission'. That stopped the mighty colonialist in his track. Can we do this today?
Instead of resilience we are on the path of resistance. That leaves us weak and mentally retarded as a nation for then we are in a blind man's buff chasing every shadow and making all kinds of noises. It is an unnerving psychological weakness. It drains us, forces us into a reactive mode and we thus become sitting ducks. Karachi, Balochistan is based on this very aspect of our working. We become more insecure with time when we allow unfettered power to take over.
Can we then transit our ministry of interior as the ministry of resilience? Our police force and our rangers and in fact all uniformed personnel cannot defend us against an enemy that is working on two wheelers. The deforms (not reforms) that Musharraf carried out are now playing us and the chicken's have come home to roost. We have built unnecessary walls that we think can protect us. They cannot. Let me tell you this as a veteran of East Pakistan where we were in such a precarious position that dialogue was the only way out. We thought that tanks could do the job. We now think that armoured personnel carriers can do the job. Well keep on thinking. The ministry of defence should be an adjunct to this 'ministry of resilience'. Who will agree? The ministry of defence? No way. They will keep their rigid way till we lose another part of Pakistan.
Resilience expands the slow variable policies. Righting law and order now is a slow variable policy. Slowly and surely they work beyond their domain. Such efforts are valuable for what they achieve. The people of this nation have to be bound by working hand in hand. So instead of donor-related advice we should do the simple things first. Be this in any field. Slow variables by definition are within the grasp of each one of us; no, one does not have to be a Socrates or a Descartes to do this simple task.
Why should we be in a maladaptive system? Which standing committee has done a job on determining a maladaptive organisation? Are there none? These organisations that are maladaptive are easy to snap and the snap does not have to be physically that way. This happens when the organisation is based on old and obsolete ideas or and when they are confronted with the real world. This inflexibility and these mistakes take on the air of a prison as the organization is locked in to the work of the past.
If we were to ask what are the assumptions of taking this country forward then the policy making organisations will wring their hands and feel that they are being wronged unnecessarily. The provinces that are in turmoil will not automatically stabilise. There is hard work ahead and there is a need to build in flexibility. If not then... I cannot dare for I have had one such experience in the then East Pakistan. We need a degree of radical decency. Radical in as much as the order of the action should be different and unfettered with and by anyone in the power hierarchy and decent because it has to be for the many and not for the few.
One of the few aspects that ought to be understood is that there is no need for a grand strategy but small meaningful interventions. These add up to huge actions. There is a new math world that is emerging. There are constant surprises and there are constant ruptures in societies like the ones that we are having in our country. No amount of grand effort will help the manner of their operation(s) are different. It is apparent that one bomb placed exactly can do more damage than the entire air force. Al Qaeda has proved it.