Css knowledge

Competent governance

WITH a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic now surging across the world, two factors have generally been identified as particularly significant for how competently countries have managed the challenge. The first and obvious one is effective governance and the second is national resilience.
The global debate about governance has intensified at a time when leaders are still struggling to balance conflicting concerns in addressing a health crisis that rages on despite hopeful reports about a vaccine.
Fareed Zakaria’s new book "Ten Lessons for a Post-Pandemic World" doesn’t just deal with the governance aspect but also the world’s changing landscape. The book, he explains, is not about the pandemic but about the world that has emerged from it and influenced by responses to the crisis. For him, the pandemic did not usher in new global trends but accelerated those already in play. The 10 lessons he draws are based on intricate arguments and include: the need to balance speed of human development with safety, quality not quantity of government matters, markets remain insufficient, experts should be heeded but they too should listen to people, inequality should be addressed, globalisation will endure, and a bipolar world has emerged.
The tour d’ horizon of global realities is breezily written but it is the chapter on governance which warrants consideration here. Zakaria raises the question widely debated during the pandemic, whether democracies or authoritarian systems have managed the crisis better. He concurs with the view that democracies have done better. But what about the US and Britain? He argues that mishandling by the former is an American not a democratic disease. And he identifies a “competent, well-functioning, trusted state” or the quality of governance to have been instrument
In a recent podcast Francis Fukuyama made a similar assertion but maintained that it was not the type of political system that determined efficient management but an effective state. In an essay written in March he argued that the crucial determinant in efficient crisis response is state capacity and trust in government. “What matters in the end is not regime type but whether citizens trust their leaders, and whether those leaders preside over a competent and effective state.”
For Zakaria the key question is why some states have governments that work well when others don’t. He notes that a competent bureaucracy and the ability to tax have been key factors in the history of modernisation and he cites the example of Singapore that has also been advantaged by “highly disciplined and focused leadership”.
He evaluates America’s weaknesses and attributes them to its anti-statist tradition, distrust of government and uneven efforts to establish a strong and efficient national state. Today, he writes, “the US has fewer government officials per capita than most other advanced democracies”. American federalism has created its own problems of paralysis and gridlock. He shows how disordered American government has been, failing to address pressing challenges for a generation while coasting along on a combination of “dynamic economics and dysfunctional politics”. He concludes that America should learn good governance from the world and undertake reforms which include making the government a more important economic actor and delivering better public services.
Government performance and effectiveness has been intensely reviewed during the pandemic but the debate has obviously gone on for a much longer time. The past decade witnessed a trend strengthening in the West of growing public discontent with governments and declining confidence in their ability to deliver. This prompted much discussion of the weaknesses of Western democratic systems.
Successive annual Global Risk Reports of the World Economic Forum warned of rising popular disaffection with Western democracy. The 2019 report stated that “many Western democracies are struggling with political fragmentation and polarisation that have complicated the process of providing stable and effective governance”. It added that “weak governance raises serious questions about numerous countries’ political health”.
The rise of anti-establishment right-wing populism or new authoritarianism further intensified the debate about factors behind the growing public disaffection with traditional parties and elites and deepening mistrust of government institutions. The strains these developments imposed on democracy were widely commented on as were governance failures fueling nationalist populism.
This debate has already produced much literature. One book of this genre published some years back offered instructive insights and made an important contribution to this conversation. Intelligent Governance for the 21st Century by Nicolas Berggruen and Nathan Gardels examined why political systems were not delivering effective governance and whether there was a need to reimagine government. The authors rejected the idea that only Western ideas and systems should be the paradigm in discussion while pointing out that both Western and Eastern political systems need correction. Both confronted common challenges they were increasingly unable to cope with.
The answer lay in drawing on the best practices of both East and West to find a ‘middle way’ that would recalibrate political systems and evolve hybrid institutional arrangements. They saw strengths and vulnerabilities in both and suggested they learn from each other, fusing “knowledgeable democracy” with the Confucian tradition of a learned “accountable meritocracy”.
The book saw most Western governance systems stymied by dysfunction. Terminal decay was certain without reform, claimed the authors, as electoral democracy, anchored in a consumer culture of instant gratification, was self-interested and short term, and de-emphasised any notion of the long term and common good.
In contrast, China took a long-term governance perspective, could take difficult decisions and implement them robustly. Imbued with the Confucian values of education and ethics, its system is based on the meritocratic tradition of learned and experienced elites, as reflected in the Communist Party’s modern mandarinate. This, the authors argued, has empowered the country to chart its long-term future and is responsible for its extraordinary rise. Nevertheless they stressed that its system needs correction by instituting accountability as popular demands grew for democratic checks on arbitrary authority.
The idea of evolving a template of intelligent government by drawing on the best attributes of East and West and balancing meritocracy and democracy is a compelling one. Practicable or not, Pakistan has much to learn from the rich debate on governance that continues.

Fpsc Jobs 03.12.2021

Why Students Fail in CSS?

Last week, FPSC announced the result of the written part of CSS 2021. As per the data, about 2.11% of the total candidates have qualified the written, yet the most difficult, examination. Majority of them failed in verious subjects, most of them in English Essay, and Precie and Composition paper.

So, most of the aspirants are asking about the reasons the lead to failure in CSS. In this regard, i think i am not the competent and relevant individual to talk about it. The examiners who actually mark the papers can provide the best insight. However, as for as my own rough and incomplete understanding of the high rate of failure is concerned, following are some of the reasons which directly or indirectly contribute to failure in CSS.

1. I have come across hundreds and thousands of aspirants who claim that they attempted CSS without having comeplete or enough preparation. They do it either due to family pressure or for the sake of experience. I think CSS exam in not that easy to be cracked with normal/ routine or incomplete preparation. One has to prepare every subject in its full capacity, and selective study will not be enough to become a CSP. Therefore, one of the reasons is that aspirants don't take CSS exam serious, and attempt it without proper guidance, right direction and complete study.

2. The second reason is that maximum of the candidates don't know how to deal with English essay and Composition papers. Majority of the aspirants don't know the basics of essay writing. Either their grammer mistakes are huge in number, or their sentence structure is so weak that it could not convey the true meaning. Moreover, the content of the essay is almost either irrelevant, incomplete, incorrect or outdated. In addition, students don't take the Precis and Composition paper serious. They only focus on the Precis question, which is just of 20 marks, and avoid other questions which include correction, idioms, pair of word and words/meaning. Isn't it stupidity to compromise 80 marks for the sake of 20?

3. The third reason is that some of the aspirants couldn't handle the pressure of examination. When the candidates receive the first paper of essay, they don't know which topic they can attempt well. Due to huge pressure, and fear, they either select a wrong topic, or they could not grasp the meaning of the title, which lead to maximum number of failure in essay and other papers. So fear factor makes the difference. These are those who have comeplete preparation, and have good chances of success. However, they couldn't handle the pressure, and make blunders.

4. Luck also matters

After 74 years of independence where does Pakistan stand?

PAKISTAN’S independence day was celebrated with much enthusiasm as it should. These milestones are opportunities to renew the national spirit and inspire hope about the future. They are also occasions to push back against negativity and build national confidence. It is, above all, a moment to recall the vision of Mohammad Ali Jinnah of a liberal, democratic, tolerant and peaceful Pakistan where there is no place for what he called the “poison” of corruption or nepotism, mismanagement and inefficiency. And where women have an equal place in society.

Introspection is necessary to not only take stock of where the country is but also review the challenges that remain to be addressed. Multiple challenges emerged over the decades as the cumulative consequence of a complex interplay of internal and external factors. Political disruptions due to military interventions, elite monopolisation of resources and pursuit of dysfunctional economic strategies contributed to governance challenges. So did the blowback from Pakistan’s protracted geopolitical engagements and impact of big power rivalries. External overstretch and internal underreach became a familiar pattern. The ‘tyranny of geography’ imposed heavy burdens. A volatile neighbourhood with contested or unstable borders made security paramount in national priorities but this inevitably involved a trade-off with the country’s development needs.

A review of the state of play today shows that the glass is both half full and half empty. Five key aspects of the country make it half full although this by no means is an exhaustive list. First, on the political front a firm national consensus and agreement among political actors now exists on the continuance of democracy. The military is part of this consensus even if the army’s influence on national policy looms large. The ‘hybrid’ political system in place today gives the army a role unusual in a democracy but that does not mean military interventions have been legitimised.

The second aspect is emergence of forces that are changing power dynamics. They include an energetic media and a more diverse civil society. While under stress today, they are nonetheless powerful vehicles to hold rulers to account. Public opinion is now increasingly important with the media shaping people’s view of government performance. It is also placing limits on governments’ power which is why there are ongoing efforts to stifle media freedom. Such assaults however are being fiercely resisted. Greater citizen activism too is contributing to a transformed political environment and reflects a new sense of public awareness and empowerment.

The challenge is to reimagine a Pakistan that meets the needs of its people not just its privileged elites.

Three, the confluence between rapid urbanisation, shift in the centre of economic power from the countryside to cities and a more ‘connected’ society empowered by modern communications has opened space for transformation of traditional, patronage-based politics. The rise of a larger, more assertive middle class is also a consequence of these factors. Its size may be disputed (estimates range between 50 and 70 million people) but the reality is not. An urban middle class seeking a greater voice in the country’s politics offers opportunities to align Pakistan’s governance system both with changing demographic dynamics and aspirations of a social group whose outlook is different from that found in the stagnant, patrimonial world of traditional politics.

Four, the greater visibility and growing role of women in many fields of life. Women professionals are making a mark and a difference in many areas and inspiring a younger generation to break more glass ceilings. Rising urban female literacy is driving this change even though rural literacy lags way behind. Of course, women have a long way to go to secure what the Constitution promises and close gender gaps. Violence against women also remains an imposing challenge. But the number of organisations now making women’s voices heard is an encouraging development.

Five, Pakistan’s youth bulge is an asset — just over 60 per cent are under 30 — with the potential to power a significant leap in development. To reap a demographic dividend this youthful population needs access to education, skills and jobs otherwise a demographic disaster awaits. No account of positive developments is complete without mentioning the flowering of art, music, literature, visual arts and movies witnessed in recent years. This profusion of creative voices has enriched Pakistani culture and is emblematic of a living nation.

Read: Independence and inter-dependence

As to why the glass is half empty the principal reason remains a weak and vulnerable economy burdened by chronic budget and balance-of-payments deficits and growing indebtedness. The structural sources of constant crises in public finance have yet to be addressed. They lie principally in a narrow tax base as reflected in a low and almost stagnant tax-to-GDP ratio. Income tax payers have for years hovered around 3m or less — little over 1pc of the population. A regressive tax regime is in place with indirect taxes accounting for most government revenue. Reliance on domestic and foreign borrowing has landed Pakistan in a classic debt trap where more is borrowed to pay off old debt. The only way to resolve this is by higher investment and growth, both of which have long remained sluggish. A narrow export base compounds Pakistan’s macroeconomic difficulties. Low productivity, lack of innovation and a relatively insular business community remain perennial problems.

The country’s education deficit is another reason for the half empty glass. With over 22m school-going children not in school — second highest number in the world — Pakistan needs to urgently address this ‘silent emergency’. Lack of education lies at the heart of almost all challenges confronting the country. It should therefore be seen as an imperative, not just a desirable social goal.

A third factor is the country’s increasingly dysfunctional politics. This requires little elaboration, characterised as it is by relentless political confrontation, shallow political discourse, lack of consensus on core national goals and failure to accord parliament a key role in democratic governance. Last but not least is growing intolerance in society which also needs little explanation.

Like other countries Pakistan has both strengths and weaknesses. The challenge is to reimagine a transformed Pakistan that addresses its vulnerabilities, ensures it meets the needs of its people not just its privileged elites, and looks within, not outside, to seize its destiny.

Excellent 👌👌

Moral decay and Pakistani politics | Political Economy | thenews.com.pk Personal interest is symptomatic of the moral depravity that plagues Pakistan with no remedy in sight

Afghan peace prospects
WILL the peace process between Afghanistan’s warring parties be put at risk by the Pentagon’s recent announcement that more US troops will be withdrawn ahead of schedule? Not really. Factors other than troop levels are more significant for the future of peace talks. In any case, troop levels have progressively been going down since the Doha agreement of February between the US and the Taliban. The drawdown of another 2,000 troops, planned by mid-January, will likely have limited impact on the situation especially as the US will still retain air power and maintain a CT capability.
Also, several thousand Nato-led international forces are present to train, advise and assist Afghan forces and aim to leave when ‘conditions allow’. Above all, international leverage will now shift from military to economic means — the military option being all but exhausted.
Nevertheless, the key to Afghanistan’s future is whether the intra-Afghan dialogue can make enough progress towards a settlement, including a ceasefire, before all international forces leave Afghanistan and global interest wanes. The intra-Afghan process that began in September as a consequence of the Doha accord faces imposing challenges. Delays in its initiation were due to wrangles between Kabul and the Taliban over prisoner exchanges. Once these disagreements were resolved the dialogue got underway in Qatar. Talks are now reported to be nearing agreement over procedures and terms of reference (TORs) for negotiations. This will open the way to talks on substantive issues including a ceasefire. The US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s visit to Doha and meeting with the Taliban’s chief negotiator Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar was aimed at accelerating the peace talks following the Pentagon announcement.
Not everyone agrees that a speedier pullout of troops will have marginal effect. After 2,000 are pulled out in January — under the Doha accord this was to happen in May 2021 — about 2,500 American troops will be left in Afghanistan. Some media reports indicate how several US allies have been “rattled” by this decision, which obviously seeks to make good President Donald Trump’s pledge to bring American soldiers home before he leaves office. The chairman of Afghanistan’s High Council for National Reconciliation, Abdullah Abdullah, said while he respected this decision “it has come too soon”. Nato Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg cautioned that the “price for leaving too soon or in an uncoordinated way could be very high”.
ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD
It is up to the Afghan parties to make the tough compromises needed to secure a settlement.
Some Congressional Republicans and American ana­­lysts fear that this accelerated exit would tou­g­hen the Taliban’s negotiating position. For their part, the Taliban have welcomed the US announcement as a “good step” that would help bring an end to the war.
While Pakistan has repeatedly called for a “responsible US troop pullout”, officials were neither surprised nor worried about the latest development and believe this might even encourage Washington to step up and impart more urgency to diplomatic efforts to goad the Afghan parties into accelerating progress in substantive negotiations.
The incoming administration of Joe Biden is not likely to change course on the military drawdown especially as this has now gone so far ahead. Moreover, the president-elect has in the past not favoured continued military engagement in Afghanistan and instead urged an end to “forever wars”. There is speculation that his administration might slow down the pullout of remaining US forces in deference to the view of many defence officials and Nato allies. This too is unlikely to make an appreciable difference to the on-ground situation in Afghanistan. A key question is how early and substantively the Biden administration focuses on the Afghan issue given its heavy domestic agenda and other more pressing foreign policy priorities.
The current uptick in violence in Afghanistan is worrisome for all stakeholders including the country’s neighbours. This figured prominently in talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan when Prime Minister Imran Khan recently visited Kabul. Some intensification of violence was expected as the Afghan parties seek to expand areas under their control to strengthen their negotiating hand. But this does not explain the pattern of increased violence. There is a puzzling aspect to some of the urban violence and terrorist attacks which raises the question of whether this is being orchestrated by internal and external spoilers who are loath to see the talks make headway. True or not, the spike in violence is creating an extremely fraught environment and adding to the uncertainty that clouds the peace talks. However, once TORs are formally agreed the next phase of talks is expected to focus on the reduction of violence — crucial to create an atmosphere of trust and calm for the arduous negotiations that lie ahead.
Meanwhile, a pledging conference for Afghanistan that took place recently in Geneva, co-hosted by the UN and Finland, and attended mostly virtually by 100 countries and international organisations, saw the US, EU and other donors commit around $3 billion for Afghanistan next year and $12bn over the next four years. What was significant was that pledges were conditioned on tangible progress in peace talks and a ceasefire although the EU also made assistance contingent on the ‘preservation of human rights gains’. A top US official announced that while it was pledging $600 million for 2021, only half would come now “with the remaining available as progress in the peace process is reviewed”. Pompeo was more direct:“The choices made in peace negotiations will affect the size and scope of future international support and assistance.”
This underlines that the international community’s economic leverage will be more important in the months ahead than other means to influence the negotiating parties into making progress. Both Kabul and the Taliban see continuance of international assistance as necessary as they know that without funds state collapse is threatened. Even though international influence will diminish over time economic incentives rather than coercive pressure will be the likely vehicle to influence the peace process.
Pakistan, Afghanistan’s other neighbours and the international community have obvious if varying stakes in the country’s peaceful future and will try to assist in whatever way they can. But it is up to the Afghan parties to make the difficult compromises needed to secure a peace settlement. Afghanistan’s destiny can only be determined by Afghans themselves.

Talks between Afghan government and Taliban open in Qatar

Doha, Qatar - After nearly two decades of war that has killed tens of thousands, peace talks between the Afghanistan government and the Taliban have opened in Qatar's capital.

Key speakers at Saturday's opening ceremony at a hotel in Doha included Abdullah Abdullah, chairperson of Afghanistan's High Council for National Reconciliation, Taliban deputy leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The negotiations, where the two warring sides will sit face-to-face for the first time, will start on Monday.

For his part, Abdullah spoke about seeking a dignified and lasting peace.
"I believe that if we give hands to each other and honestly work for peace, the current ongoing misery in the country will end," Abdullah said, calling for a "humanitarian ceasefire". Baradar, meanwhile, repeated his group's demand for the country to adopt an "Islamic system".

"We want Afghanistan to be an independent, developed country, and it should have a form of Islamic system, where all its citizens see themselves reflected."
Pompeo, for his part, told the Afghan sides that "the choice of your future political system is, of course, yours to make" as he urged them to "seize the opportunity" to secure peace.

"Each of you, I hope you will look inside your hearts; each of you carry a great responsibility, but know that you're not alone. The entire world wants you to succeed and is counting on you to succeed," he said.

Kicking off proceedings earlier on Saturday, Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani said both parties must "rise above all form of division ... by reaching an agreement on the basis of no victor and no vanquished".

The intra-Afghan talks were set to take place in March but have repeatedly been delayed over a prisoner exchange agreement made as part of the United States-Taliban deal signed in February.

In the agreement, the Taliban had agreed to release 1,000 Afghan troops, while the government said it would release 5,000 Taliban prisoners. France and Australia objected to freeing six of the Taliban prisoners who were involved in the killing of their nationals.

Taliban and Afghan government sources told Al Jazeera a compromise was reached by sending the six prisoners to Qatar. The prisoners arrived in Doha on Friday and will remain in custody there.

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad said although the talks raise hopes of the war ending in the country, many challenges remain.

"This is a new phase in diplomacy for peace in Afghanistan," Khalilzad told reporters in a telephone briefing on Friday.

"These negotiations are an important achievement, but there are ... significant challenges on the way to reaching an agreement."

Live
NEWS/HUMANITARIAN CRISES
Talks between Afghan government and Taliban open in Qatar
Historic talks to end Afghanistan's long-running conflict kick off in Doha with opening remarks from both sides.

by Shereena Qazi
10 hours ago
whatsapp

Doha, Qatar - After nearly two decades of war that has killed tens of thousands, peace talks between the Afghanistan government and the Taliban have opened in Qatar's capital.

Key speakers at Saturday's opening ceremony at a hotel in Doha included Abdullah Abdullah, chairperson of Afghanistan's High Council for National Reconciliation, Taliban deputy leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

MORE ON AFGHANISTAN
Historic talks held in Qatar on ending war in Afghanistan
today
Talks between Afghan government and Taliban open in Qatar
today
In Pictures: Historic intra-Afghan talks formally launch in Qatar
today
US mourns 9/11 dead, Trump tries to end 'forever wars'
yesterday
The negotiations, where the two warring sides will sit face-to-face for the first time, will start on Monday.

For his part, Abdullah spoke about seeking a dignified and lasting peace.

Advertisement

"I believe that if we give hands to each other and honestly work for peace, the current ongoing misery in the country will end," Abdullah said, calling for a "humanitarian ceasefire".

INTERACTIVE: Intra-Afghan talks Sept 12 2020
Alia Chughtai/Al Jazeera
Baradar, meanwhile, repeated his group's demand for the country to adopt an "Islamic system".

"We want Afghanistan to be an independent, developed country, and it should have a form of Islamic system, where all its citizens see themselves reflected."

Afghan peace talks
Abdullah Abdullah called for a 'humanitarian ceasefire' [Sorin Furcoi/Al Jazeera]
Pompeo, for his part, told the Afghan sides that "the choice of your future political system is, of course, yours to make" as he urged them to "seize the opportunity" to secure peace.

"Each of you, I hope you will look inside your hearts; each of you carry a great responsibility, but know that you're not alone. The entire world wants you to succeed and is counting on you to succeed," he said.

Kicking off proceedings earlier on Saturday, Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani said both parties must "rise above all form of division ... by reaching an agreement on the basis of no victor and no vanquished".

Delayed talks
The intra-Afghan talks were set to take place in March but have repeatedly been delayed over a prisoner exchange agreement made as part of the United States-Taliban deal signed in February.

In the agreement, the Taliban had agreed to release 1,000 Afghan troops, while the government said it would release 5,000 Taliban prisoners.

Afghan peace talks
Formal negotiations are due to begin on Monday [Sorin Furcoi/Al Jazeera]
France and Australia objected to freeing six of the Taliban prisoners who were involved in the killing of their nationals.

Taliban and Afghan government sources told Al Jazeera a compromise was reached by sending the six prisoners to Qatar. The prisoners arrived in Doha on Friday and will remain in custody there.

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad said although the talks raise hopes of the war ending in the country, many challenges remain.

"This is a new phase in diplomacy for peace in Afghanistan," Khalilzad told reporters in a telephone briefing on Friday.

"These negotiations are an important achievement, but there are ... significant challenges on the way to reaching an agreement."

Afghan peace talks
The talks were set to take place in March but were delayed over a prisoner exchange agreement [Sorin Furcoi/Al Jazeera]
It took almost six months to get the Taliban and the government to the negotiating table, and analysts said the challenging part is to get both sides to reach an agreement.

"The various delays since the first designated start of the talks in early March show how much mistrust the two parties need to overcome,"