Morale della Storia
How can Pakistan survive with a corrupt dynastic political leadership on both sides? The moral of the story: it cannot
The writer is an academic and political analyst on Pakistan affairs, American foreign policy, international relations and economic matters. He can be reached at hl_mehdi@hotmail.com
Let us start from the bottom up: conclusion first and details later. It is rather an unusual practice in English journalism, but this imperfection is desired here to alert the readers of the argumentative improvisation that is going to be an impetus to reverse reasoning. For as witnesses to history, we, as citizens of a country and as human beings, go backwards into the past to examine events and historical realities. How else can we get to know anyone, any nation, or for that matter, a political leadership without going into their past?
Clarity about important national issues are also linked and intertwined with the past. In other words, neither appreciation nor understanding of vital national events is possible without reference to past history. To go forward, we need to step backwards first.
Let us get back to the moral of the story: it is shameful to personally submit to an idea, concept , notion, ideology or specifically to a particular political leadership when such a submission leads to the loss of personal integrity — when one loses one’s balance of rationality and intellectual equilibrium, against all common sense, to an extent that it compromises the fundamentals of decent and appropriate political behaviour.
I have always wondered in amazement how the stalwarts of a national political party in Pakistan that had immense popularity among the masses at one time and was founded by no other than Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, could have handed over the reins of this political machine to a person on the bizarre production of a piece of handwritten paper. But a more important question than that is: what democracy on earth gives the right to a person to establish a hereditary hierarchy in a democratic political structure? In fact, in a democratic sense, this kind of thing is unheard of. And yet, it is true. It has happened in Pakistan amazingly and unbelievably. Not only that, it is happening again — repeatedly and without any serious challenge or formidable opposition to it by anyone, especially the very stalwarts of the two major political parties, the PPP and the PML-N.
Bhutto aggressively promoted his daughter, Benazir, as his successor and leader of the party as if the Peoples Party and Pakistan were the prerogative of the late PPP leader. Benazir allegedly handed over the leadership to Asif Ali Zardari on a piece of handwritten paper napkin. And now, obviously, Zardari has unilaterally handed over the leadership to his son, Bilawal.
Sadly and unfortunately, this undemocratic practice is also being wholeheartedly espoused by Nawaz Sharif, the disqualified ex-prime minister, who has imagined in earnest that no one other than his daughter, Maryam Nawaz, should rule this unfortunate nation following his unceremonious exit. The promotion of dynastic rule seems to be a vital element of Nawaz’s future political plans and landscape. He has already unilaterally elevated his daughter Maryam as the de facto leader of the party. The absurdity of this situation is that Nawaz sees no contradiction to democratic principles in his dynastically planned political disposition.
The two major parties have devised this future for our “democratic” Pakistan. And it seems some people loyal to Nawaz and Zardari, respectively, are buying into this idea of family rule.
After all, perception management is a reality of our times. Who knows what propagandists are capable of. As we all know, an American public relations company in Washington, on the payment of a massive fee, has convinced Nawaz that his political comeback in Pakistan is within reach. Mind it, this PR establishment was recommended to Nawaz by no other than Zardari, who, at present, is attempting to negotiate yet another NRO for himself and his family with immodest insolence and shameful unscrupulousness. It appears that all of these Pakistani political actors consider the Pakistani masses as a herd of sheep and a crowd of fools. They think they can get away with anything.
The real problem in this respect resides with the prominent stalwarts of both the PPP and the PMLN. Let us start by examining the political behaviour of some of the major political actors of the PPP. Naturally, to begin with, I’m tempted to question the political wisdom and claim to the adherence to democratic principles of the famous and talented constitutional lawyer, a long-time prominent leader of the PPP, a former law minister, a leader in the movement for the restoration of honourable judges during the Musharraf era, a well-known revolutionary writer and poet, a darling of TV talk shows, and above all, a life-long self-proclaimed democrat to the core of his bones. A reasonable and legitimate question to ask him is: why does the honourable senator and constitutional law expert, a democrat, stand behind Bilawal? Does not the respected senator see a blatant violation of democratic principles in solidarity with the advancement of hereditary leadership? How does the senator justify this peculiar political behaviour — which is subversion of democracy and an instrument to promote an anti-democratic structure and culture in Pakistani politics.
An even more important question is: Why doesn’t the said senator challenge this brand of Zardari politics and leadership in party elections? Indeed, the senator is well-qualified, capable and perhaps popular enough to attempt it. The vital question is, democratically speaking, what holds him back?
Similarly, Qamar Zaman Kaira and Sherry Rehman, among many other long-time party stalwarts, are not challenging the party leadership and are continuing in an alliance of perpetual subversion of fundamental democratic covenants by supporting inherited leadership in a major national political party.
It is about time that someone in the PPP took the first step against the heightened excesses of personalised politics and let democratic values flourish. There has already been enough of Bhutto-Zardari damage to Pakistani politics and society. Enough is enough — and it needs to end now. Someone within the party needs to tell the ex-president and co-chairman of the party that his time is spent, and neither he nor his protégé and designated chairman of the party are needed. The PPP and its workers are awakening from their slumber now, and so are the Pakistani masses.
The PML-N is even more irrelevant to contemporary politics. Instead of presenting the required legal evidence to the court and the nation, the Punjab Lion has unleashed the Punjabi lioness to get consolation through a meaningless soliloquy against national institutions, including the Supreme Court and the military establishment. The issue is simple: tell the courts and the nation how you have amassed such massive wealth, seemingly beyond your known sources of income. As such, it is expected that you have amply misused your political power for unmitigated economic gains. In political parlance, it is defined as corruption.
This is, in essence, the point of democratic dispensation and rules. There are no two opinions on this subject anywhere, any place, with any ideology or in any form of government.
The issue is: how can Pakistan survive with a corrupt dynastic political leadership on either side of the coin?
The moral of the story is: it cannot.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2017.
Clarity about important national issues are also linked and intertwined with the past. In other words, neither appreciation nor understanding of vital national events is possible without reference to past history. To go forward, we need to step backwards first.
Let us get back to the moral of the story: it is shameful to personally submit to an idea, concept , notion, ideology or specifically to a particular political leadership when such a submission leads to the loss of personal integrity — when one loses one’s balance of rationality and intellectual equilibrium, against all common sense, to an extent that it compromises the fundamentals of decent and appropriate political behaviour.
I have always wondered in amazement how the stalwarts of a national political party in Pakistan that had immense popularity among the masses at one time and was founded by no other than Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, could have handed over the reins of this political machine to a person on the bizarre production of a piece of handwritten paper. But a more important question than that is: what democracy on earth gives the right to a person to establish a hereditary hierarchy in a democratic political structure? In fact, in a democratic sense, this kind of thing is unheard of. And yet, it is true. It has happened in Pakistan amazingly and unbelievably. Not only that, it is happening again — repeatedly and without any serious challenge or formidable opposition to it by anyone, especially the very stalwarts of the two major political parties, the PPP and the PML-N.
Bhutto aggressively promoted his daughter, Benazir, as his successor and leader of the party as if the Peoples Party and Pakistan were the prerogative of the late PPP leader. Benazir allegedly handed over the leadership to Asif Ali Zardari on a piece of handwritten paper napkin. And now, obviously, Zardari has unilaterally handed over the leadership to his son, Bilawal.
Sadly and unfortunately, this undemocratic practice is also being wholeheartedly espoused by Nawaz Sharif, the disqualified ex-prime minister, who has imagined in earnest that no one other than his daughter, Maryam Nawaz, should rule this unfortunate nation following his unceremonious exit. The promotion of dynastic rule seems to be a vital element of Nawaz’s future political plans and landscape. He has already unilaterally elevated his daughter Maryam as the de facto leader of the party. The absurdity of this situation is that Nawaz sees no contradiction to democratic principles in his dynastically planned political disposition.
The two major parties have devised this future for our “democratic” Pakistan. And it seems some people loyal to Nawaz and Zardari, respectively, are buying into this idea of family rule.
After all, perception management is a reality of our times. Who knows what propagandists are capable of. As we all know, an American public relations company in Washington, on the payment of a massive fee, has convinced Nawaz that his political comeback in Pakistan is within reach. Mind it, this PR establishment was recommended to Nawaz by no other than Zardari, who, at present, is attempting to negotiate yet another NRO for himself and his family with immodest insolence and shameful unscrupulousness. It appears that all of these Pakistani political actors consider the Pakistani masses as a herd of sheep and a crowd of fools. They think they can get away with anything.
The real problem in this respect resides with the prominent stalwarts of both the PPP and the PMLN. Let us start by examining the political behaviour of some of the major political actors of the PPP. Naturally, to begin with, I’m tempted to question the political wisdom and claim to the adherence to democratic principles of the famous and talented constitutional lawyer, a long-time prominent leader of the PPP, a former law minister, a leader in the movement for the restoration of honourable judges during the Musharraf era, a well-known revolutionary writer and poet, a darling of TV talk shows, and above all, a life-long self-proclaimed democrat to the core of his bones. A reasonable and legitimate question to ask him is: why does the honourable senator and constitutional law expert, a democrat, stand behind Bilawal? Does not the respected senator see a blatant violation of democratic principles in solidarity with the advancement of hereditary leadership? How does the senator justify this peculiar political behaviour — which is subversion of democracy and an instrument to promote an anti-democratic structure and culture in Pakistani politics.
An even more important question is: Why doesn’t the said senator challenge this brand of Zardari politics and leadership in party elections? Indeed, the senator is well-qualified, capable and perhaps popular enough to attempt it. The vital question is, democratically speaking, what holds him back?
Similarly, Qamar Zaman Kaira and Sherry Rehman, among many other long-time party stalwarts, are not challenging the party leadership and are continuing in an alliance of perpetual subversion of fundamental democratic covenants by supporting inherited leadership in a major national political party.
It is about time that someone in the PPP took the first step against the heightened excesses of personalised politics and let democratic values flourish. There has already been enough of Bhutto-Zardari damage to Pakistani politics and society. Enough is enough — and it needs to end now. Someone within the party needs to tell the ex-president and co-chairman of the party that his time is spent, and neither he nor his protégé and designated chairman of the party are needed. The PPP and its workers are awakening from their slumber now, and so are the Pakistani masses.
The PML-N is even more irrelevant to contemporary politics. Instead of presenting the required legal evidence to the court and the nation, the Punjab Lion has unleashed the Punjabi lioness to get consolation through a meaningless soliloquy against national institutions, including the Supreme Court and the military establishment. The issue is simple: tell the courts and the nation how you have amassed such massive wealth, seemingly beyond your known sources of income. As such, it is expected that you have amply misused your political power for unmitigated economic gains. In political parlance, it is defined as corruption.
This is, in essence, the point of democratic dispensation and rules. There are no two opinions on this subject anywhere, any place, with any ideology or in any form of government.
The issue is: how can Pakistan survive with a corrupt dynastic political leadership on either side of the coin?
The moral of the story is: it cannot.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2017.