In 2022, the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC) held the yearly written examination of Central Superior Services (CSS) from May 12 to May 20, 2022 for the recruitment of officers against basic pay scale 17. The paper of Pakistan Affairs (General Knowledge III) caught attention.
The paper intended to explore knowledge and personal assessment of CSS candidates regarding issues in Pakistan affairs. The paper did not encourage the regurgitation of crammed information that a CSS candidate was holding to express.
Questions asked were remarkable. For instance, “Discuss the role of regional and nationalist political parties in Pakistani politics. How far these parties are necessary for the political system?” The second half of the question was meant for revealing the core understanding of CSS candidates. In Pakistan, there is a school of thought which propagates that no political system can run the country, which should be placed under a military general. Similarly, there are people who think that heterogeneity on the political chessboard is otiose. These critics demand a simplistic political environment based on as little diversity as possible. Reasons for simplifying the political domain are two: first, the critics live mentally in the medieval age of the Caliphate and yearn for the revival of that era in the modern times; and second, the critics think that fewer political parties are easy to manipulate to achieve the objective of cohesion to translate the concept of unity of command. These ideas are now peddled on TV talk shows, which permit speakers averse to democracy. Hence, several CSS candidates could be found condemning heterogeneity, and falling prey to the ire of the examiner.
The next question was also brilliant. “Discuss the Federal Structure of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan after the 18th Amendment. Why criticism on the 18th Amendment started recently?” Again, the second half of the question was meant for inviting understanding of CSS candidates, who must be having their opinion about the significance of the amendment (which comprised around 102 changes) to the Constitution. It is true that the amendment which had taken place in 2010 became the subject of immense criticism mostly in and after 2017. A slew of critics got activated to denounce the amendment, in order to pave the way for its reversal. Through their comments, even some judges of the Supreme Court also expressed antagonism to the amendment.
Obstacles were two: first, a two-thirds majority was required to undo the amendment in Parliament; and second, the SC had no power to strike the amendment down. To ensure provincial autonomy, making and passing the amendment was a great feat made by political parties to improve the 1973 Constitution. By so doing, the need for launching military operations to subdue dissenting voices in (smaller) provinces has been minimized.
The next question was also luminous. “Discuss the issues and mistrust in US-Pakistan relations after the withdrawal of the US troops from Afghanistan.” The source of issues and mistrust is one: Pakistan tries to equate itself with the United States (US) as equal partners, though Pakistan is a beneficiary of the US’ financial and military aid.
The next question was also excellent. “Evaluate the factional politics of the early years (1947-58) and their impact on the democratic process of Pakistan.” This question was meant for exploring the understanding of CSS candidates about the politics influencing initial formative years. In these years, even those parties (and their leaders) emerged that had opposed Pakistan’s formation. Nevertheless, these opponents adapted to Pakistan’s reality and changed themselves to serve the country.One reason for the factional politics was that the All India Muslim League (AIML) kept other parties (of the Muslims) dwarfed.
Hence, the Muslims generally were not attuned to running their independent political parties. Second, the politics of the AIML remained restricted to opposing the Indian National Congress. The reactionary tinge trickled down to the Muslim politicians who tried to run their political parties after Partition along the same lines embodying the term, factional politics, which then opened the path to another power broker, the martial law administrator.
The next question was also exceptional, in fact an award winning question. “Every state designs its foreign policy on its national interests rejecting feelings and emotions. Why did Pakistan prefer emotions, feelings, and ideology in its foreign policy? Also, analyze its impact.” Pakistan’s foreign policy is shorn of objectivity. If national interests are still relevant, these are defined by emotions, feelings and ideology, and not by rationality. Compared to the past, Pakistan has learnt this lesson the hard way. Now, Pakistan is so terrified that neither does it contest India’s act of August 2019 to merge Kashmir nor does it recognize the government of the Afghan Taliban in Kabul.
The next question was also outstanding. “What is the volume of grants, aid and loans in Pakistan’s economy in the last ten years to stimulate growth? Discuss.” Who can give an overview of it, perhaps no CSS candidate? By the way, what has been left with Pakistan: more expenditures (which are non-developmental) and less earning? The tyranny is that a country running on grants, aid and loans claims to be independent and thinks that it can devise an independent foreign policy.
The next question was also wonderful. “Why did Pakistan join Western Defence Pacts? What cost does it have to pay for that? Explain.” Again, the second half of the question was meant for revealing the core understanding of CSS candidates about the country’s past and future. Pakistan was keen to join the defence pacts in 1954 and 1955 meant for halting the advance of communism in South Asia and South East Asia. The real crunch time came in 1979 when Pakistan got engulfed in a civil conflict between Islamists and Communists ravaging Afghanistan. Pakistan made it a war. Pakistan has still been paying the price of its past decisions. Interestingly, the Afghans are now annoyed at Pakistan’s fencing the Durand Line.
The next question was also luminous. “Discuss the issues and mistrust in US-Pakistan relations after the withdrawal of the US troops from Afghanistan.” The source of issues and mistrust is one: Pakistan tries to equate itself with the United States (US) as equal partners, though Pakistan is a beneficiary of the US’ financial and military aid.
