Dadyal politics

It is perhaps just as well that Dadyal does not register on any radar of international significance. The way its politicians have behaved does not show them, to understate the matter, in a blaze of glory. Any semblance of principle and integrity has gone out of the window. Ideology is a word not even understood by the actors; more modestly, even a vague vision of the direction the participants would like Dadyal to travel in is absent. It is all about making alliances of convenience and winning over vote banks. The protagonists have followed the principle that my enemy’s enemy is my friend; so a ridiculous game of musical chairs has played, as people move from one party to another.

To be fair, even in mature democracies ideology has been sidelined. However, it has been sidelined more in public utterances than in reality. Ten years of Labour in the UK saw massive injections of cash into the public services. That was presented as common sense, but equally it could have been presented in left-right language. In Dadyal and AJK, there are no such distinctions. There are no policy documents and manifestos. All we have to go on is the rhetoric delivered at public gatherings.

So what can we hope? I am an inveterate cynic in matters Dadyal and Mirpur. I do not believe that politicians can do much there, even given the best of intentions. That is not to say that ad hoc good things will not be done, but there will be no overall development strategy. Even if there were, it would remain on paper. However, although good deeds are difficult, good intentions notwithstanding, it is easier to do ill to people. So my advice is to vote for someone least likely to do ill; someone who can control his supporters and see beyond them. In brief, someone whose name is not used by supporters laying unmeritorious claims to Shamlat lands.