PTI has recently sent a letter to the IMF requesting the global lender to factor in the country’s political stability in any further bailout talks with the Government of Pakistan. The letter stated that the 8 February general election was subjected to widespread intervention and fraud in the counting of votes and compilation of results. Given the policies and principles the IMF stands for, there should be no doubt that the abuse of power by a small number of public office-holders to impose their agenda on Pakistan’s populace as aforesaid and thus to ensure their continuing personal gain, would not be promoted or upheld by the IMF.
Moreover, it said not just the PTI, but several other political parties in Pakistan, along with several western governments, Commonwealth observers, local civil society organizations and international print and electronic media, have called for an independent probe into claims of intervention and electoral fraud. The Party called upon the IMF to give effect to the guidelines adopted by it concerning good governance as well as conditionalities that must be satisfied before the grant of a finance facility that is to burden the people of Pakistan with further debt. An audit of at least thirty percent of the national and provincial assemblies’ seats should be ensured, which can be accomplished in merely two weeks.
Pakistan’s internal politics and political dogfight has now spread out of the country, reaching into the global arena from Washington, Brussels and London to Makkah and Medina. Interestingly, other nations and the global community as well, became aware of the newest trends and traditions of the country’s politics, wherein Pakistani leaders often invited them for the Umpire or mediator role. Historically, political wrestling at the global forums might have benefited any political party or leader in the past but surely such kind of civic work seriously undermined the country’s prestige and impaired the national image at the global level.
Although, the European Union, the United States, Canada and other western governments uphold democracy, human rights and the rule of the law during their dealing with foreign countries yet the IMF, the World Bank and other global financial institutions deal with the incumbent governments, follow their business rules and have their due diligence criteria that is more governance and fiscal management related than political.
Hence, the PTI’s persuasion of a foreign entity into domestic politics is unlikely to produce the desired results as the global community is well versed in Pakistan’s domestic political landscape and the years-long political tussle between two warring factions in the country. The PTI has asked the IMF to play a political or arbitrator role in the domestic politics of the country before the global institution engages with the sitting government which came through a months-long legitimate electoral process, duly notified by the country’s election regulator (ECP), testified by Parliament and lawmakers.
Presently, a cash-strapped Pakistan is struggling hard to stabilize its economy after securing a $3 billion standby arrangement from the IMF, amid record inflation, rupee devaluation and shrinking foreign reserves, whilst political groups aimed at satisfying their rivalry through bidding on a highly fragile economy. In the role of opposition, it might be a good idea to chase the government, however in treasury, it is no less than sedition to play with the economy. The PTI has stroked the ball in the IMF’s court and this can be called an unhealthy obsession in the country’s politics.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Lahore.
Email: [email protected]
views expressed are writer’s own.
