Dr Abdul Wahid Soomro (MNA Pakistan Peoples Party)

In an interview with the monthly Herald, President Asif Ali Zardari talked about disaster management in the country, on the role of military in Pakistan and rumours surrounding the current government. Following is part II of the interview.


Q. Why is there a perception that the military is not part of the government?
A. I don’t think the military can even step out without the government’s permission. Who pays the military — for the fuel they use, for the men flying helicopters? Who bought them these helicopters? Sixteen of them were given free to me last year by the Sheikh of Abu Dhabi. Some are at the army’s disposal. The army is one of our sectors. Anywhere in the world, when there is a catastrophe the marines are called in.
Q. But do the orders follow in such a way that the civilian government tells the military to go to certain areas for disaster management and not the other way round?
A. Of course, there is no other way round. This impression is again created by the 64-channel strong cottage industry surviving on one young democracy.
Q. Do you think efforts to manage and mitigate such a huge disaster would have been more effective if we had local representatives on the ground?


 
A. My chief minister and irrigation minister were literally sleeping on the dykes in Dadu. If the ruling party had not been working in Sukkur or in Jacobabad, do you think these people would have been alive today? It is the party which came into action. Because the democratic aspect of it is less attractive – there are no helicopters, it doesn’t make good visual angle – doesn’t mean that it is not there. During these floods, there was an election happening in Bahawalpur and the next district, Rajanpur, was inundated. If people are so unhappy, why are they voting for us?
There is a disconnect between the media, the people and the pseudo-intellectuals. Jamshed Dasti [Muzaffargarh MNA] is a case in point. You should take it up as a case study. The judges forced him to resign; he stands for re-election, everyone in the 64-channel media goes against him and he still wins. All of a sudden the parliamentarians’ degrees have become important when the law requiring them does not exist. When the law existed, nobody’s degrees were challenged. When the law does not exist, not having a degree has become an offense retrospectively.
Q. Do you see this as a conspiracy?
A. No, I think people are small-minded and have a narrow vision. They do not know how far-reaching the effects of the decisions they take are. God forgive them, for they know not. As far as we are concerned we are used to fighting against odds and so is Pakistan. We shall motivate the people and get out of it.
Q. There is a lot of discussion of the government completing its five-year term…
A. There is no discussion. There are a few headlines and questions asked and answers given. We haven’t sat down and discussed how the government is going to pass the five years.
Q. But after the mandate expires and you go to the elections, what will you take to the voters?
A. If you ask for a journey’s end while the journey is going on it is rather unfair. Let the journey finish and let the people decide. If you ask about the two and a half years, we managed to get a dictator out first time ever without confronting the institution or making the nation aggressive. We could have made the nation aggressive creating a law and order situation but we talked him out of it. First time in Pakistan we made a woman the speaker of the parliament and made a consensus prime minister. We gave Balochistan an economic and political package; we gave the National Finance Commission, the eighteenth amendment. We restored the judges with right timing, after Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar retired, so that nobody loses. This is democracy at its best. At the same time going to the International Monetary Fund is not a populist decision. If I was thinking of populism, I could have said why should I increase the tariff of electricity and take away the subsidy? So we have taken difficult decisions. That again is democracy’s strength that it can take and sustain difficult decisions.