In our national language Urdu, the government is called “HAKOOMAT.” As such the people who run the government are known as “HUKMARAN” or rulers. Who is Hukmran? Hukmaran is one whose “HUKM” or “ORDER” is carried out. When we try to go deep into the meaning of the words “hakoomat” and “hukmaran,” we find another word in between and that is “HIKMAT” or “WISDOM.” A “hukm” or “order” that lacks “hikmat” or “wisdom” leads to chaos, confrontation and even tyranny. So what does a politician need to become a successful “hukmaran” and run the “hakoomat” successfully is “hikmat” or “wisdom?” But mere hikmat or wisdom alone is not enough. What one requires in addition to that is “HALQA,” or a “CIRCLE” of “like minded people” that may also be called a “TEAM.” The “halqa” or the “team” is actually “THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE” of a political party and “THE CABINET” of a party in power.

1. 2012
Why do the Prime Ministers Fail?
Isn’t it the right time to ask this question?
In our national language Urdu, the government is called “HAKOOMAT.” As such
the people who run the government are known as “HUKMARAN” or rulers. Who
is Hukmran? Hukmaran is one whose “HUKM” or “ORDER” is carried out. When
we try to go deep into the meaning of the words “hakoomat” and “hukmaran,”
we find another word in between and that is “HIKMAT” or “WISDOM.” A
“hukm” or “order” that lacks “hikmat” or “wisdom” leads to chaos,
confrontation and even tyranny. So what does a politician need to become a
successful “hukmaran” and run the “hakoomat” successfully is “hikmat” or
“wisdom?” But mere hikmat or wisdom alone is not enough. What one requires
in addition to that is “HALQA,” or a “CIRCLE” of “like minded people” that may
also be called a “TEAM.” The “halqa” or the “team” is actually “THE EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE” of a political party and “THE CABINET” of a party in power.
Zahid Hussain Khalid
This article was first written in 2004
3/14/2012

2. Why do the Prime Ministers Fail?
By: Zahid Hussain Khalid
It is very strange that, in Pakistan, both the elected and non-elected prime ministers fail to
retain their status. They are either forced to resign or shown the door disgracefully. A
number of reasons for the disgraceful exit of the prime ministers are available on record
covering almost every aspect and logical reason that comes to mind. However, one aspect
of the problem has been often neglected and that is the failure of the prime ministers to
comprehend the complex state management structure and use it appropriately in the
interest of the country as well as the people. What are they expected to do? Instead of
going into the details of their recorded mistakes and or failures, let us have a look at it
from a very different and unique angle.
In our national language Urdu, the government is called “HAKOOMAT.” As such the
people who run the government are known as “HUKMARAN” or rulers. Who is
Hukmran? Hukmaran is one whose “HUKM” or “ORDER” is carried out. When we try
to go deep into the meaning of the words “hakoomat” and “hukmaran,” we find another
word in between and that is “HIKMAT” or “WISDOM.” A “hukm” or “order” that lacks
“hikmat” or “wisdom” leads to chaos, confrontation and even tyranny. So what does a
politician need to become a successful “hukmaran” and run the “hakoomat” successfully
is “hikmat” or “wisdom?” But mere hikmat or wisdom alone is not enough. What one
requires in addition to that is “HALQA,” or a “CIRCLE” of “like minded people” that
may also be called a “TEAM.” The “halqa” or the “team” is actually “THE EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE” of a political party, “THE CABINET” of a party in power.
A team or a cabinet is formed for what? Any team owes its formation to a shared
VISION, a common CAUSE or a joint MISSION. Now if a team has a vision defining a
cause and the cause itself has the strength to turn into a mission then the TEAM performs
and the hukmaran or ruler succeeds. Here the success is also not unconditional. The
condition is appreciation of the performance by those for whom the team works! And

3. what does the team get in return? In return it may turn the country into a living heaven,
command the gratitude and respect of the country’s people and earn for the ruler a place
in “heaven.” Holy Quran has put it like this:
“Rabbay Hub Ley Hukman, Walhiqney Bis-salehein, Waj-al-ley
Lissan-a-Sidqin Fil Akherein, Waj-al-ney Min Warsatey Janat-in-
Naeem!”
“O God, give me wisdom (hikmat), and company (team) of those who are
pious, and let my praise (appreciation) be on the tongues of those
(governed) who come after me and let me inherit the heaven.”
Can there be a simpler and more comprehensive definition of “Good Governance.”
What, according to the modern political philosophy, is required for Good Governance?
Simply a party manifesto or a constitution “endorsed” by the people of a country through
their elected representatives; an efficient state management structure and a vigilant team
of public representatives to make sure that the party manifesto or constitution of the
country is adhered to in letter and spirit for providing a level playing field to every citizen
of the country enabling him to have a trouble free comfortable life according to his ability
and ambition.
It is not that the political parties in Pakistan do not have a manifesto. Every party, no
matter how big or small it is, has a manifesto. Country also has a constitution. The
existence of a large number of political parties in the country clearly indicates that the
“circles” or “teams” of “like minded people” also exist. Then what is wrong? They do not
have a “Common National Cause.” They have failed to understand the difference
between a “Common National Cause” and an “Individual Party Approach.” First, they
have to agree on a “NATIONAL CAUSE” and then decide, through dialogue, which
“APPROACH” will be right to turn that cause into a “Common National Mission.”
Endeavor to do so will enable them to arrive at “NATIONAL CONSENSUS” which they
presently lack. Why consensus is necessary? It is necessary because now we, as a nation,
are not left with much time due to the apparently visible strength of our “elements of
national power” which have made our enemies very uncomfortable and increasingly

4. restless. God has blessed our country with those human and natural resources that are
essential to make a nation great. How ironic it is that we have pledged this greatness to
our enemies for peanuts in terms of temporary financial, strategic and personal political
gains? Majority of our politicians, senior most officials of the armed forces and
bureaucracy, media owners and business tycoons have evidently and miserably failed to
treat Pakistan as their “motherland” either intentionally or unintentionally. They have
been either forced by circumstances or personally tempted to do that. They have never
ever tried to rise above their selves. What are the consequences?
The sovereign mandate of the people of Pakistan to delegate political authority through a
genuine political process has been usurped by a group of civil and military individuals. It
has been assumed not without genuine geo-strategic reasons that the very survival of
Pakistan depends on them. If they are removed from the scene then the country is
expected to face very unpleasant consequences. Consequently, the people of Pakistan
have repeatedly mandated them through presidential referendum and elections of the
national and provincial assemblies to go ahead with their agenda. However, within less or
slightly more than two or three years, the prime minister nominated by the majority party
in the national assembly is either forced to resign or kept under constant pressure because
he fails to deliver. The failure of the out-going or struggling to survive prime minister
clearly indicates that there is a major fault in the State Management Structure. First of all
this fault needs to be identified to proceed further. For that purpose, it is necessary to
have a look at the State Management Structure. How does the structure work? How is it
working now? What can be done about it? Certainly, a lot is needed to be done and can
be done to put the system back to work properly! One thing, however, has to be kept in
mind that anything that is not genuine can not be expected to work more efficiently and
can not last longer than something which is genuine. No matter how sincere, dedicated,
pious and patriotic the architects of the structure are it falls down and nobody can do
anything about it.
State Management Structure is well defined in the constitution. The visible changes in
this structure have the approval and endorsement of the parliament. Therefore, the

5. constitutional legitimacy of this structure can not be questioned. The question that can
now be asked is how this structure can work efficiently to serve both the country as well
as its people. Before commenting on the functionality of the existing State Management
Structure it is advisable to first understand who are at the giving and at the receiving
ends.
People of Pakistan are at the “giving” and “receiving” ends in terms of “political power
and legislative authority” and “civic rights and socio-economic privileges” respectively.
The national and provincial legislators enjoy their political power and exercise their
legislative and executive authority through federal and provincial bureaucracies on behalf
of their voters. When the legislators and cabinet members become irresponsive and
irresponsible the people are left at the mercy of federal and provincial bureaucracies to
beg for their civil rights and social privileges. It also indicates that the Head of the State
Management Team is the President. It appears that the prime minister and the cabinet
ministers are nominated “through artificially engineered and dramatized consensus” by
the majority party in the national assembly. This is true because the nominations are
actually approved by either the party chief or the President. The President gives oath of
office to them. There is nothing wrong with that provided the prime minister and all the
cabinet ministers belong to the same party and the prime minister is considered a strong
party head or a member of popular standing. Even if the ministers do not belong to the
same political party, they must have a “common national political agenda,” like members
of the political alliances in India and other countries, and rise above their party
preferences as and when such a need arises. This is not the case. On top of that, the
governors, provincial chief ministers and ministers, Prime Minister and federal ministers
coming from different party backgrounds have their respective individual party agendas.
How one can expect them to perform as a team when there is no practically operational
labour policy, no health policy, no education policy, no cultural policy, no trade policy,
no industrial policy, no youth policy and no “inter-ministerial and inter-provincial
coordination policy?” Yes the policies are very much there but they are not visible and if
the policies are visible they are not people-friendly. To sum up the observation the
following conclusions can be drawn:

6. The federal ministers do not appear and behave like a team because they
do not have a “common national political cause”
How can a “head” (prime minister) of this “team” (ministers) believing in
“everyone on his own” can make them submit to his “authority” and work
for a “Common National Cause” in the interest of the country and its
people?
This is where the fault lies!!! Whose fault is this? It is not difficult to
guess.
Prime minister appears to be a “House and Cabinet Relationship Manager” whose job is
to keep everybody happy without enjoying any authority himself. He has an army of
national assembly members on his back who are totally oblivious of their legislative
responsibilities. They are interested in “funds for the development schemes focusing only
on roads, bridges, communication and canals” for what reason is an easy guess. They
spend millions and billions of rupees on their election without bothering to conduct a
survey to assess the social and economic needs of the voters in their constituencies. None
of them has ever come up with a plan saying hay look here this is what my voters need
for a better living: for housing, for health, for the education of their children, for their
safety and security, for employment and post-retirement benefits. For this, they take
refuge in the concept of “Public Private Partnership” to fleece the people with their
corporate partners in health, education, individual and collective security, recruitment
outsourcing and worker welfare departments. “Public Private Partnership” in a country
which does not have a number of genuine “Consumer Protection Platforms” and “People-
friendly Responsive and Responsible Regulatory Authorities” makes the life of the
people miserable. This is exactly what is happening in Pakistan. So what is required to be
done?
First requirement of an efficient people-friendly State Management Structure, therefore,
is the preparation of a well defined “National Plan of Internal and External Priorities.”
First pre-condition for CONSENSUS on such a “National Plan of Internal and External
Priorities” is the participation of all the heads of the political parties in Pakistan in
“Preliminary Brain Storming Session” with their respective formal “Proposed Plans”

7. covering “Five Major Areas,” namely, politics, economics, social welfare, diplomacy and
defence. There must be a live televised debate on the proposals to enable the people of
Pakistan to participate in this debate as observers on call so that their opinion or vote may
be solicited at an appropriate time.
Another ideal solution will be to form a number of panels of genuine opinion influence
groups covering media, corporate sector, women, youth, religious scholars, minority
groups and sports legends. If this is not done and not done with God speed then this entire
State Management Structure will fall in such a way that the words will fail to describe the
severity of the outcome.
The genuine political stability and real economic growth will be witnessed only when
wisdom will prevail and teams of like minded individuals having focus on their vision,
cause and mission will be formed to run the affairs of the state.