It was revealed in a testimony before the Supreme Court last week that in 1990 the then president of Pakistan, Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan and the army chief General Aslam Baig forced the head of Mehran Bank to provide to the Inter Services Intelligence a sum of Rs345 million in the ‘supreme national interest’, out of which Rs140 million was used to bribe a raft of politicians to form an alliance to oppose Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto in the elections of 1990.
This exposure comes close on the heels of a rather more public transfer of hundreds of millions of rupees by the incumbent government, to individual members of the National Assembly, as development funds for their constituencies, days before they were to vote in the Senate elections. These are manifestations of the prevailing model of governance and the associated social order.
Power in Pakistan is constituted by appropriating state resources legally or illegally, for sharing with other factions within the elite coalition to retain their support, or with personalised dependents to build individual domains of power.
This patron-client model of governance is integral to a social order that, through its institutional structure, systematically generates rents or unearned income. This is done by restricting competition and excluding the majority of people from the process of investment, high wage employment and equitable access over markets, basic services and participation in governance.
The prevailing rent-based model of governance originated in the British colonial period. It had emerged following the peasant revolts in 18th century-Punjab, whereby the old Mughal elite was overthrown and replaced by the upper strata of the peasantry.
The colonial government consolidated the position of the new peasant lineages through revenue settlements which formalised the proprietorship of the new ‘zamindars’ over land. Furthermore, a resource gratification for the new agrarian-elite which was unprecedented in Indian history emerged: the development of the canal irrigation system by the British and the associated process of appropriating irrigated land as ‘crown waste’ to be utilised and granted to selected loyal ‘zamindars’ at the political discretion of the government.
Two organisations of the state that were particularly strengthened by the new institutional arrangements, were the army and bureaucracy as they were given control over a significant proportion of state resources, training and positions within the power structure.
These economic and social processes led to the emergence of a coalition of the military, landed-elite, bureaucracy and state-nurtured capitalists, who began to exercise state power in the post-independence period. Within the power structure, the military had a dominant position and the lion’s share of resources.
Each of the political regimes in Pakistan’s history used available opportunities to devise their own characteristic forms of rents. In the early 1950s, ‘evacuee property’ was granted to favoured immigrants from India. In the 1960s, the Ayub government’s policy of commercial licenses, cheap credit, import protection and subsidies constituted rents for selected families. In the 1970s, the nationalisation and expansion of the state apparatus enabled lucrative appointments in the state sector to party loyalists of the prime minister ZA Bhutto regime. In the 1980s, Ziaul Haq’s government provided opportunities to his supporters to skim off foreign aid and weapons meant for the Afghan Jihad. In the 1990s, rents were mainly generated through milking the banking sector. In the Musharraf period, it was allegedly done by using public sector entities to manipulate the stock market for windfall gains for the rulers. In the present period we have seen development funds being used to gain political support. Thus, while the model of governance remains, the forms of rent vary.
Those who talk of ‘change’ may wish to consider that it involves changing the very model of governance and the underlying social order: this means the coalition of elites, the educational system, the religious and ideological apparatus and the entire set of formal rules and informal norms which serve to generate rents for the rulers.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 13th, 2012.
COMMENTS (7)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1713525343-0/WhatsApp-Image-2024-04-19-at-4-09-16-PM-(1)1713525343-0-270x192.webp)
1713525453-0/Henry-Cavill-in-James-Bond-(AI)1713525453-0-270x192.webp)
Mehrangate case is clear. It was a intertwined conspiracy against PPP government by the spy agency and so called democratic politicians. Mian Nawaz Sharif was a part of this conspiracy against a democratic Government. Supreme Court must be unbiased and it should give a fair verdict on Mehrangate Scandal. Law is not only for PPP but others should be equally dealt with iron hands. Mian Nawaz Sharif and other politicians that were baking this conspiracy must be declared ineligible to take part in politics. Interestingly there is no counter statement on the part of PML-N leaders which is tantamount to confess these charges. Lets see what punishment Mian Sahib suggest for himself it is litmus test not only for Judiciary but so called democratic leaders.
Election of Prime Minister should be through the direct vote of voters and not through parliament. During elections a voter, besides voting for an MNA and MPA should also cast vote for who should be the nex Prime Minister of Pakistan. This will determine who is the most popular Person in Pakistan and only the most popular person has the right to lead the country. The new Prime Minister elected in such a way should be given the authority to form his own government of people outside of the parliament. This will deter any people from becoming MPA or MNA who are just getting elected for some position in the government or to do corruption. Those who get elected will do the real work of a parliament - to legislate and serve as monitor's of Prime Minister and his cabinet's activities.
Dear Dr sahib, As Quaid-e-Azam said,"we are nation by every defination of word nation"but if mr jinnah was alive to see our conditions these days he would have said,"we are puppets by every defination of word puppets".The taking of bribes or corruptions by the politicans is not a new thing ,why we go towards 1990,why not talk about the corruption in the last one month related to senate elections.It is just a havoc created by the media these days because no other issue is avalaible on which they can attract viewer ship or advertisement revenues.Instead of digging oldgraves the media should focus on the corrupt practices in the election of senators and other use of government machinery in the recent bye elections.
What an informative article. Keep this up Dr. sahib. The fact of the matter is that everyone in the political arena is fixated on finding access to this bonanza called rent. The situation in Balochistan in this regard is pathetic and alarming. Every MPA has the prerogative of identifying and executing the projects through his frontman worth Rs 250m. The Province stood as a major beneficiary of 7th NFC award as the income increased by almost 100%. But the people of balochistan have never ever seen the infastructure ie roads, schools bridges etc, in such a dilapidated condition. As always the govt. would get away with this merciless loot and the spectre of poverty would be afflicting the 90% of population. The elite have gobbled the cake and only crumbs have been left to the people to contend with. Winning hearts and minds when it needs to be won is increasingly becoming an uphill task when everyone who matters is devotedly prostrating before the idol of RENT. The supposedly pious lot are also eagerly involved in this self-centered pursuit of washing hands in flowing Ganga. These vicious games of corruption, rent seeking and loot have been played for too long and the only loosers have been the people of Pakistan.
The problems of present day PAK is exactly the same faced by India once. India found the indigenous solution and constantly tweaking it and of course, it was possible due to strong leadership during troubled times. Unfortunately, in PAK the landed gentry of the political class and the landed institution of army have no incentive to change the system. Unless there is a grass root desire for change, the present rent models will continue. Most often, however, such changes are always accompanied by civil strife. The question is will the landed gentry support the civil strife when it happens or squash them with their collective armed might?
One thing is for sure, the change in rent model will not happen in ninety days.
Excellent Dr Sahib.
Although you probably covered it under the rubric of "subsidies", let us not forget the appreciated exchange rate! Imagine Rs 4.76/US $ in Ayub's time although that was 'modified' through the clumsy export bonus voucher system (which also applied to imports). I think that made the average weighted exchange rate about Rs7/US$.
It must go to ZAB's credit that he did devalue in one shot by 130% (% may not be exact since my memory fails me) and there was a sort of 'managed float' thereafter and only recently has the IMF classified us as having a "floating exchange rate". I personally think that is rather generous since we seem to be intervening all the time.
Yes, Sir, those promising "change" have NO idea that the cards are stacked heavily against them. The system of governance cannot be changed over-night and certainly not in our life-time! It will be a slow and painful progress and will be resisted to the hilt. Indeed, it may never change.
Do you think our "elite" and the rent-seekers will yield without mounting a struggle?
Typical bureaucratic-authoritarian model of Guillermo O'Donnell. "State has very low level of tolerance at early stages of development (Import Substitution Industry). The civil and military bureaucrats join hands to get rid of political disturbances. This started in Pakistan in 1954 when the civil-military bureaucrats joined hands and the game is not over yet.