The real motive behind the series of actions, deeds, misdeeds, and decisions that brought our Republic to the current state-of-affairs is becoming clear and obvious. That is the formalization of a plan of destruction by (i) deliberate omission of truth by those who knew but then held the information in their personal archives;(ii) determined pro-activism in the dissemination of lies by those mercenaries deployed with ideological messages, and;(iii) deceptive delivery of promises by those who actually governed.

The entire plan, commonly referred as ‘grand design’ by politicians, intellectuals, and laypersons alike seems to have been devised to sow the seed of hatred amongst all, break the unity of the country, paralyze all functioning institutions, and ultimately capture the governance so as to ensure a remote-controlled management from afar. Certainly, in an environment where coining any action or decision that is unsuitable to your palate as ‘grand design’ is common practice, one may be skeptical about the above viewpoint, but it is certainly not out of place in this specific context.

The outcome yet may not be completely obvious, but it is on track. The real surprises are yet to be revealed, finally quenching the thirst of those drowning in speculation. The blow is likely going to be immeasurably intense, and regrets and shocks will be omnipresent.

Admittedly, the pace of advancing has been a little slow. That may have been partly due to the unforeseen natural disasters, and partly due to the modifications in the strategic exercise of political offers and acceptances, combined with expressions of vested interests and competing offers of extra services. However, the target is still intact; the goal post remains the same.

The “grand design” tragedy, so far, seems inexplicable. Those who are in search of the causality are still exploring the maze and have not arrived at the endpoint. Those few who understand this already have decided to take the vow of silence to avoid being aggressed by others. Those who do not necessarily think they need to understand this, position themselves between the situational ambivalence and their existential-necessity, and continue to look at the opposite direction. Their shenanigans are perennial, systematically hurting the larger citizenry.

So many scandals have gone by without resolution; so much of expectation has vanished without achievement; and yes, a few success stories have also been recorded, but, although deserving, without much accolade. The lack of accolade is likely due to the ambiguity in peoples’ minds, filled with angst, frustration, and despair, yet also lightly enveloped with sliver of hope, curiosity, and tolerance.

The Republic is bleeding, both literally and figuratively, and politically as well as economically. The much-needed development work is slow, if not at a standstill, although slogans of development continue to be included in every leaders’ speeches at all federal, provincial or district levels. Despite all this, not enough time was devoted to thinking and strategizing about the methods of guaranteeing adequate, transparent, pragmatic, and equity-based opportunities for each of the provinces and districts for them to carry out the development programs. This matter continues to be more serious and relevant in a country which can implement development programs only from borrowed money that needs to be repaid, thus, making it a citizen-wide obligation, if not also an intergenerational one.

In similar vein, while not enough institutions have been adequately reformed to ensure sustainability of performance in a republican setting, appointments, even the constitutional ones, have been provided a color or price tag and are sold to the first-come highest bidder, without any consideration of the person’s background and contribution.

People’s ambivalence vis-à-vis leaders’ hollow and loud patriotism and artificial nationalism are quite interesting to see. The most vocal ones are often also rewarded with a portfolio of glamour as a token of appreciation for their help, howsoever self-serving that may have been.

The larger citizenry, on its part, broadly appears to have lost faith and developed distrust vis-à-vis the establishment’s style, perspective, and behavior. The once-vibrant and omnipotent civil society which had blessed the change flawed in process without deep consideration of the ramifications, now, realizing that it had bet on the wrong horse, more and more believes in spontaneous street-made decisions, essentially generated with emotion, rather than with due processes and logic, and wants to rely heavily on popular internet-based justice. The executive, legislative and judicial powers, it seems, have been, de facto, relegated to the streets. Such a practice has been ongoing for some time, but the leaders prefer staying either non-committal or not fully honest about their intentions to correct. Ironically, notwithstanding the above, at the time of approaching the ballot boxes, the strong and burning stance of the civil society stays only lukewarm, at best.“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat,” said Sun Tzu, a Chinese military strategist of the 5th century BC. This saying holds true in the current context, regardless of the ideology dominating the political parties, the establishment, or the civil society.

On a daily basis, what is noticeable is that squeezed between the contrasting demands from different geopolitical corners, from the North, the South or even farther, and clueless about the approach in responding to such demands in a coherent manner, the decision-makers appear compelled to take unrealistic stances, essentially for media purpose. Such stances, they well know it, are only but hollow dents for camouflaging purpose, which most people, thanks to their limitless patience, tend to preclude from their spectrum of judgment.

Reconnecting with reality, thus, is the prime reminder for today. Without feeling any humiliation, and hesitation, showing heroism happens to be the logical call, even if that means going back two decades and re-embracing the system of that time. A compromising attitude is needed from all sides. That would help to at least bring back peace and security, resume a normal routine, and restore some smile on the face of the people. Indeed, a good compromise is better than a bad victory!

The author can be reached at Kshitiz@juno.com