Pakistan, politics, perils and prospects

Quaid's disarming logic was that democracy is only system that empowers ‘all’ — minority as well as majority


Inam Ul Haque January 18, 2024
The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at tayyarinam@hotmail.com and tweets @20_Inam

print-news

At senior positions one is always confronted with the dilemma of decision-making (DM), to pick the right option from a range of options presented. Although decision-making as an art and science is well taught in the military staff colleges in the context of MDMP (Military Decision-Making Process) and is further refined through the study of Operational Analysis (OA) or the British Operational Art, DM remains a crucial dilemma. The acuteness of the dilemma is directly proportional to the sensitivity of the matter under deliberation. In one’s experience, there are two operative norms to help through such decision-making paradoxes. One, picking the option with ‘greater good for the greater numbers’; and two, the option being more in line with principles, norms and truism.

Elections present such a dilemma. If the Senate resolution on January 5, 2024 and its repeat, to postpone the February 8 General Elections is any guide, people at the helm are ‘on the horns of a dilemma’… to phrase another military dictum. There are strong reasons to hold elections or otherwise. My two cents are an opinion and open to criticism and disagreement. One keeps grappling with questions like, the aim and purpose of elections, the implications of electioneering, the state capture of the same entrenched ashhrafiyya regaining the reins of power through elections, transparency and representative nature of elections, the very essence of democracy and its temperamental compatibility with our political culture, etc.

But first, why elections. One remembers, as a young officer listening to an eminent Quaid-e-Azam University professor in 1990s eulogising democracy in his address to the GHQ officers. His disarming logic was that democracy is the only system that empowers ‘all’ — minority as well as majority. Everyone has representation, a voice and a vote. Years later during course work in an American University, one learnt that in ethnically polarised societies (like ours), democracy ultimately becomes the ‘oligarchy’ of major ethnic group.

Our journey towards this cherished goal has been tumultuous, uneven, uncertain and least productive — to put it mildly. In the present politico-geographic delineation of Pakistan, Punjab will always have outsized influence. Until we have more manageable administrative units (or provinces), smaller federating units would always feel deprivation — actual or perceived. And repeated democratic exercises would actually exacerbate such privation.

Second, democratic bandwagon runs smoothly when its essentials are in place, and that means an educated electorate; relatively homogenous societal make-up; a population not beholden to biradari, caste, religious, sectarian and/or ethnic interests; leaders wanting to serve and not loot and plunder; politicians with some schooling and grooming other than rhetorical bluster (promising moon during electioneering and failing abysmally in deliverance); political leaders not excelling in unneeded traits and credentials like crime, smuggling, clash of interests…or actually themselves representing interests (IPPs, land and sugar mafias, crime patronage, etc); and political parties more representative and not mere dynastic fiefs.

Most candidates were non-filers of tax returns during the recent paper submissions, making one wonder — comically and ironically — at the source of atrocious wealth that is needed to contest elections. Sadly, our political culture is far removed from democratic norms and standards.

Third, elections in Pakistan in general and under the present environs in particular are divisive, polarizing and oblivious to the national interests. The exercise also sets poor examples in civility, marred by horse-trading, vote-purchasing and all sorts of pressures on the electorate through brazen threats, enforced voting and pre/after-poll rigging of all kinds. The atmosphere is poisonous, threatening economic stability. The exercise costs prohibitively large expense from an impoverished national exchequer. And ironically the same faces in different or changed political parties surface again and again because they strategise re-election, which is perfected as an art.

Fourth, post-election government formation is weak, made through silly compromises and is reflective of institutional interests and biases. Performance of elected governments is even more abysmal with no interest by elected representative — except a miniscule — is serious legislation, informed debate and due diligence. The vacuum left is sadly filled by ‘other’ forces and the rest, as they say, is history.

Let’s look at the main contenders for the February contest. All are tainted with no consensus on anyone. PML-N is led by convicts, was tried thrice, is culturally a party of leaders with the House of Sharif calling the shots. Steeped in sleaze and corruption, their performance under wonder leader, Shehbaz Sharif, in the 15 months recently was appalling, to say the least. In an ill-intentioned power grab in 2022 (ostensibly to clear out NAB cases), the party expended its scarce political capital. Otherwise, why an astute political party would agree to run an almost bankrupt country in the hands of a populous demagogue, who was destined to meet his own electoral death.

PPP undoubtedly has more cerebral power than any other party, but it is also tainted for their alliance with PDM recently, ostensibly for Asif Zardari to see relaxation in cases against him, and Bilawal to be launched at the federal level. One, however, grudgingly admires PPP leadership, who demonstrated pro-Pakistan credentials at critical junctures (Pakistan khapay); never clash with institutions; and are savvier of Pakistan’s political culture, rather than simply being sleepy-eyed idealists. Plus, PPP has Sindh, especially its rural areas, undisputedly to itself.

PTI shot itself in both feet on 9th May and is still busy churning out anti-establishment (particularly anti-Army and anti-General officer cadre) propaganda through its IT brigade, youthful cadre on social media. Some apparently saner heads even among military veterans consider 9th May as insider job. Ridiculous, as Army had many heads rolling at the senior levels. Facilitated to power by the powers-that-be, nurtured and guided, but ultimately falling out in a dirty personality clash with its once benefactors. PTI’s cult-like following still makes it a popular party. However, there are serious questions about its governance capability, inexperience, nationalist outlook and lack of focus on performance and chest-thumping to eradicate corruption.

Other contenders like religious and nationalist parties have no numbers to be counted at the national level. So, the national scene has no palatable options. If…and I say if elections are to be held, we should expect an expanded PDM with a truncated opposition. On a personal note, a national-unity government (since we passed the stage of technocrats) should be the preferred outcome to usher in stability that is key to economic development.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 18th, 2024.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

 

COMMENTS (1)

Saleem Akhtar Malik | 9 months ago | Reply General Inam considers the state capture lack of transparency and representative nature of elections among the impediments to holding free and fair elections. From this he concludes that holding elections under the prevailing environment presents a dilemma to Pakistan s various power brokers. Questioning the rationale behind holding elections the writer further observes In ethnically polarized societies like ours democracy ultimately becomes the oligarchy of a major ethnic group. Oligarchy is a conceptual form of power structure in which power rests with a minority group. In the case of Pakistan majoritarian rule is the appropriate term. There is only one homogenous society the Japanese society There are microscopic minorities even in Japan . Elsewhere every society has significant minority groups. In the US 75.5 of the population comprises the Europeans. Among the White Only population Anglo-Americans are the largest racial group in the US. The 13 American natives according to General Inam s logic have a stronger case to demand authoritarian rule. In India 43.63 of the population is Hindi-speaking. Should India become a dictatorship Democracy runs smoothly when its essentials are in place and that means an educated electorate relatively homogenous societal make-up and a population not beholden to biradari caste religious and sectarian interests. There is some truth after all when political scientists observe that the time stands still in Pakistan. On 7 October 1958 Iskander Mirza Pakistan s first president abrogated the constitution of 1956 describing it as unworkable and full of dangerous compromises. and declared martial law in Pakistan. Iskander Mirza also said that democracy cannot flourish in Pakistan s predominantly illiterate society. While replacing an elected government with martial law Iskander Mirza not only abused politicians he also denounced as unworkable the 1956 Constitution that he had sworn to uphold. General Ayub Khan who sacked Iskander Mirza 15 days later too rejected Western democracy while condemning politicians because firstly democracy could not be cultivated in Pakistan s climate and secondly it did not suit the genius of the people . Elections in Pakistan in general and under the present environs in particular are divisive polarizing and oblivious to the national interests. Agreed. 1970 elections resulted in the breakup of Pakistan. What was the reason We all know that the 71 War was the culmination of a struggle for power between the Awami League the Army and the Peoples Party. This power struggle degenerated into a civil war which was exploited by India to dismember Pakistan. Starting in 1947 the elite in both wings had gradually lost their romance with a united Pakistan and were looking for an excuse to get rid of each other. The separatist tendency in East Pakistan found open expression and was translated by the Bengali intelligentsia into a popular movement abetted strongly by India. That the West Pakistani centers of power particularly the Punjabi and Sindhi feudal class had also gravitated towards separating the two wings is generally ignored. During the twilight of his rule Ayub Khan told the Bengali speaker of his rubber-stamp parliament that East Pakistan should become free if Bengalis were not happy. The speaker rebuked Ayub by asking how could a majority secede from the minority. Post-election government formation is weak made through silly compromises and is reflective of institutional interests and biases. The performance of elected governments is even more abysmal with no interest by elected representatives except a minuscule in serious legislation informed debate and due diligence. The vacuum left is sadly filled by other forces and the rest as they say is history. Furthermore all politicians are tainted with no consensus on anyone. This again is true. All the politicians starting from ZAB down to Nawaz and IK came to power by concluding some sort of understanding or deal with the Army. All of them backed by the Deep State performed according to their abilities and were shown the door when they had either outlived their utility or earned enough money to last for a lifetime. This is what happened with the Sharifs and Zardari. IK got the boot for different reasons.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ