Burden or opportunity?
IN terms of women’s leadership, Maryam Nawaz’s rise to the position of chief minister of Punjab marks a milestone in our political landscape. As Pakistan’s first woman chief minister, and that too, in the country’s political heartland, Ms Nawaz is embarking on a journey of challenges and opportunities.
But it is also one likely to be marred by the controversy generated by an election that has left the nation polarised. She faces the dual challenge of not only delivering effective governance but also rebuilding the public’s fractured trust in the political system. With strong allegations of rigging and seething voters, she has her work cut out for her.
Ms Nawaz will also have to contend with the sexism that dominates our political discourse, though as the daughter of a senior leader, she enjoys privileges and protection that grassroots politicians have never had.
Her inexperience in parliamentary politics is likely to subject Ms Nawaz’s every move and decision as chief minister to a level of scrutiny that is perhaps greater than what her counterparts in the other provinces will encounter. To perform in such a treacherous political terrain, Ms Nawaz has no choice but to expertly navigate the delicate line between assertive leadership and inclusive governance.
In a climate of political hostility and deep mistrust, it will not be easy to be a unifying force and bridge the divide between the ruling party and opposition. Her success will hinge not only on her ability to deliver tangible results but also on her capacity to foster dialogue and collaboration.
The challenge ahead requires a leader who can transcend partisan divides, and prove that she is the leader of a provincial assembly, and not just a political party. As the saying goes: uneasy lies the head that wears the crown — and this will be true for Ms Nawaz. Will she rise to the occasion, or sink? Time will tell.
Published in Dawn, February 25th, 2024
Engaging the Taliban
DEALING with the Taliban — Afghanistan’s de facto rulers — continues to present a diplomatic dilemma for the global community. Isolating the radical group would mean pushing them into a more extreme direction, quite possibly into the hands of bloodthirsty militant outfits. On the other hand, rewarding them with recognition as they continue to trample on women’s rights is clearly problematic. In fact, the Taliban are making things difficult for themselves due to their rigidity. An example of this was the group’s boycott of a recent two-day UN-sponsored moot in Doha convened to discuss Afghanistan. A number of states, including Pakistan as well as multilateral bodies, participated, but the Taliban were missing in action. Apparently, the rulers in Kabul stayed away because they were not happy with the presence of some of the other Afghan delegates, while they also oppose the appointment of a UN special envoy on Afghanistan.
It was a mistake for the Taliban to boycott the Doha moot when they are trying to get the global community to accept them as Afghanistan’s legitimate government. Their room to manoeuvre is limited, and instead of setting preconditions, the group should use every forum to engage with their neighbours, and other regional states, as well as multilateral bodies. Yet it is also true that if the global community insists that the Taliban deliver on a list of demands before recognition is granted, the conversation will go nowhere. Both sides — the international community and the Taliban — need to meet halfway. Demands that the Taliban end their brutal curbs on women’s education, movement and employment are entirely justified. Yet expecting the ultra-conservative movement to immediately bow to these demands is naïve. Instead, a quid pro quo can be proposed: a timeline for global recognition can be envisaged, provided the Taliban take incremental steps to lift the curbs on women. Moreover, scholars from Muslim states should convince the Taliban’s Kandahar-based leadership that women’s education does not flout religious norms. Similarly, the Taliban must be told that there will be zero tolerance for hosting terrorist groups on Afghan soil, and the recognition process will be frozen if they allow militants to use Afghanistan as a base for destabilising neighbours. Engagement with the Taliban should continue, as isolating Afghanistan internationally will not harm the country’s rulers as much as it will millions of ordinary Afghans.
Published in Dawn, February 25th, 2024
Pipeline progress
THE outgoing caretaker government has decided to move forward with the much-delayed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project, and the incoming administration will be required to take further diplomatic and legal steps so that the scheme is no longer hindered. The Cabinet Committee on Energy on Friday decided to construct an 80km stretch of the pipeline running from the Iranian border to Gwadar. The Iranians have built the pipeline at their end, but Pakistan has been unable to start work on its side of the border, apparently due to concerns of attracting US sanctions. The interim administration seems to have made the decision considering Iran’s option of moving the International Court of Arbitration, which could bring a $18bn penalty for Pakistan, as the state had issued a sovereign guarantee for the project.
The caretaker set-up’s move should bring some clarity regarding the project’s future. First agreed to in 2009, the scheme has been in limbo mainly because successive governments here have failed to take a concrete decision on its fate. The caretaker administration had consulted neutral foreign experts on the issue, who had said that while the scheme could attract US sanctions, Pakistan’s citing of force majeure to justify its inability to proceed with the scheme was a weak defence. Therefore, executing the project was preferable. With regard to the incoming rulers, the PML-N in its latest election manifesto has also cited its desire to “enhance economic and energy ties” with Iran, specifically mentioning the oil and gas sectors. Hence, there should be no contradictions between the caretaker administration’s decision and the new rulers’ policies.
The fact is that Pakistan needs regular and affordable access to natural gas. Dwindling local supplies cannot meet demand, as the gas load-shedding in both the domestic and industrial sectors, especially during the winter months, shows. Therefore, importing Iranian gas is a sensible economic decision; it is the geopolitics of the matter that have caused lengthy delays in the scheme’s implementation. The fear of US sanctions should be dispensed with. For example, both China and India have been importing Russian oil, despite the West’s displeasure with this trade in the context of the Ukraine war. The US has sanctioned hundreds of entities and individuals linked to Russia. This includes firms in China, Turkiye and the UAE. And while it can be argued that China and India have the economic heft to ignore American and European sanctions, Pakistan, if it plays its cards right, can also trade with Iran without attracting Washington’s ire. The state should go ahead with the pipeline, while the legal and diplomatic fronts need to be monitored to ensure that the project is protected from American sanctions. The new government must do what is in the country’s best interests.
Published in Dawn, February 25th, 2024