Kashmir's Governance-Conflict Debate

A lot of mess in our governance is self made. It comes
from our collective disdain to discipline, penchant for thriving
chaos and a terribly high tolerance to incompetence. But let us
also recognize that some of the attitudes that govern these are a by-product
of the political uncertainty itself – where basic survival reigns supreme.
Where tomorrow remains uncertain, and rules seldom apply.

Arjimand Hussain Talib

Kashmir’s ongoing governance-conflict debate is akin to the classical
chicken and egg story.

So what lies at the root of our messy situation? A governance deficit? The
basic unresolved political question? None, or both?

We have the ruling National Conference (NC) on the one hand which hates
the term ‘bad governance’ every time it is mentioned. NC’s point is that it
is not the bad governance but the basic political question of Kashmir that
is at the heart of our problems. Many others, on the other hand, feel the
contrary.

An objective analysis of this matter makes one thing amply clear: truth lies
somewhere in the middle. Our messy situation is as a result of both – the
lingering political turmoil which goes beyond governance, and abysmal
governance in itself.

And let us accept this reality with grace, without feeling annoyed. Facts are
facts.

Let there be no qualms about this: governance is a basic function of the
political environment in a political system. And if there is a problem
in the very political system, it will correspondingly impact the quality
of governance. A political system where democratic principles are not
supreme, to expect governance to be just, accountable and transparent
would be foolhardy.

If there are factors and forces that undermine democratic functioning
through extra democratic means then the system will automatically
malfunction. Power will flow from myriad directions, and, eventually, flow
in myriad directions too. That has been one of the basic problems with
Kashmir.

But this is not the whole story.

A lot of mess in our governance is self made as well. It comes
from our collective disdain to discipline, penchant for thriving
chaos and a terribly high tolerance to incompetence. But let us
also recognize that some of the attitudes that govern these are a by-product
of the political uncertainty itself – where basic survival reigns supreme.
Where tomorrow remains uncertain, and rules seldom apply.

Let us accept the fact that the reason we are not able to complete a single
development project in time these days is that our governance has touched
an abysmal low.

A few days back I had an interesting discussion with an official of the
Economic Reconstruction Agency (ERA) and a contractor, responsible for
executing the Rs 41.64 crore Rawalpora-Tengpora drainage project.

While talking about the delay in the execution of the project with the two
gentlemen, the contractor put all the blame on our ‘work culture.’ He is
partly true. We cannot single out a single person or institution for all our
troubles.

I think the Asian Development Bank (ADB)-funded projects in our state –
implemented by ERA - offer a classic case study for us to understand our
governance issues.

One of the premises of the loan was that it was meant for ‘post conflict
reconstruction.’ And when we say ‘post conflict’ it automatically goes to
assume that there is a semblance of stability in the environment where it is
supposed to be implemented. But that is where we have erred.

In my personal experience in developing active conflict and post-conflict
category reconstruction and development project proposals in several
countries, not factoring in risk factors in the project design itself proves a
serious mistake.

Now let us see where we stand. The actual implementation on ADB
projects began in May 2005. Although 31 Dec 2009 was supposed to be its
completion time, the deadline is already extended to 30 June 2011.

It is almost certain that it will not be able to finish the projects by that
deadline. As per latest figures made available by ADB, by 30 November
2010, only 65 per cent of the financial disbursements have actually been
made. That means we are supposed to spend the rest 45 per cent in the next
six months.

The point is that while conceptualizing a project of such a mammoth
magnitude, it is critical to identify the sources of risks and contingency
plans to overcome those. We cannot pretend all is well with us and then err
frequently. A logical framework matrix must list all foreseeable disruptions
and identify the systems and the means to overcome these.

Political disturbances are normally cited as main impediments in our
project implementation. It is true that a deterioration of security climate
results in the flight of non local workers from our projects. But why can’t we
factor in this risk factor in our log frame and have contingency plans built
in our projects?

If work culture is the problem, there are varied instruments to overcome
that. One could, for example, have across-the-board performance appraisal
systems and contract conditions – covering consultants, contractors,
laborers, engineers, etc. - which minimize the risks and provide for
replacements. And conflict and political uncertainty have nothing to do
with those. Such instruments are made use of even in the worse conflict
situations than ours.

The recent evaluation report by the ADB, prepared by its urban economist
Hiroyuki Ikemoto and Project Implementation Officer (PIO) Saugata
Dasgupta, clearly point to such deficiencies.

But then some plain accountability and commitment issues also crop up.

The reason we have a single ECG machine serving an entire emergency
department at the state’s ‘premier’ medical institute – SKIMS – cannot
have anything to do with political uncertainty. Can a political uncertainty
prevent such an institute to have a couple of reserve ECG machines? Can
political uncertainty inhibit us from deploying 2-3 mobile ECG machines
in the emergency observation ward of SKIMS, from where even the

most critical patients have to be ‘transported’ to the ECG room to do a
cardiograph?

Let us take another example. On Fridays most of the emergency unit
personnel take long breaks to attend Muslim prayers in our hospitals.
Does our political uncertainty hinder us from having a system wherein non
Muslim personnel could be put on duty at that time?

The reason I mentioned these two examples is that I have seen precious
lives being lost just for these two small issues.

Then let us take our collective disdain for traffic rules and disrespect for
traffic cops.

Most of us tend not to obey traffic rules because we don’t see those who
make and are supposed to uphold laws following these. We don’t respect
the traffic cop because he asks us for a lift back home every evening.
Political uncertainty doesn’t inhibit our traffic department in deploying
a few pick-and-drop cabs for these poor cops, even as the officers have
cavalcades at their own disposal.

In a nutshell, let us all accept some blame and confess that we can do better
in spite of our limitations. We owe our children a better future.