How Indians and Pakistanis vote
Pakistan continues to vote on basis of identity. In India vote is not for issues or ideology, but for one's own.
India's democracy functions because of caste. The basis of voting is not issues or ideology, as in European democracies, but the preference for one's own. Is Pakistan different? We'll see that later, but first, to demonstrate the assertion.
The BJP is seen as an ideological party, but it isn't. It is the party of Lingayats in Karnataka, Patels in Gujarat and Rajputs in Rajasthan. The votes of these castes keep it in power. Its voters in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar are the upper castes, who are few in number. This puts the BJP behind the more numerous caste formations and parties; peasant Yadavs and Muslims in Mulayam Singh's and Laloo Yadav's parties and the Dalits in Mayawati's Bahujan Samaj party. No caste is more than a fifth of the population and so alliances are necessary. The Congress is India's only ecumenical party. It is genuinely above region, caste and religion. But even Congress is forced to pick candidates on the basis of caste because Indians stubbornly vote for their own rather than on issues.
Now, let's look across the border. Pakistan has not had many proper elections so there is limited data on its pattern of voting. I don't know of any psephologists on Pakistan's television channels who have the expertise that Indian psephologists have. Certainly, none has the experience. In its first general election, in 1971, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto won in West Pakistan and Mujibur Rehman swept the east. The Bengalis clearly voted for identity, but what about Punjabis and Sindhis? I would say that they voted for identity, too; 1971 is the only time that a party won a plurality of seats in both Sindh and Punjab. Why?
This was an election fought in West Pakistan on three issues: Against the Bengali's separatism, against Hindu India (Bhutto's popularity in Punjab came from his opposition to General Ayub Khan's sellout at Tashkent), and against military rule. Bhutto won because he owned all three issues. He represented Punjabis and Sindhis against these threats.
This is why the Baloch and the Pashtun, who are unconcerned about these things, did not vote for Bhutto. As Nadeem F Paracha has pointed out, he swept Lahore but not Karachi in that election. This is because the Muhajir goes his own way. I believe Pakistan continues to vote on the basis of identity and this will create a problem for Imran Khan, who is from the small community of Niazis.
Today in the National Assembly, the PML-N has one seat from Balochistan and none from Sindh. The number of seats it won even in the Sindh and Balochistan assemblies is negligible. It is a party of Punjabis. It would be interesting to see what the division of votes is in the Punjab Assembly elections where the voter does not see himself as Punjabi but as a Rajput, Arain or Jat. I will be very surprised if the voting pattern is in the least bit different from India's.
The MQM, the ANP and the JUI are also all regional identity parties. The Karachi vote of the ANP is the Pashtun vote. The PPP is the only national party in that sense. It resembles the Congress in that it is a dynastic party of martyrs — with an agenda that is pro-poor and non-militaristic. This makes the PPP reach out of Sindh and towards the north into the Seraiki area, culturally like Sindh, but not the Punjabi heartland.
The MQM, ANP, the Baloch leaders, the JUI and the party whose current version is PML-Q are oppportunists who align with those in power. They resemble the regional parties in India like those run by Jayalalitha Jayaram, Muthuvel Karunanidhi and Mamata Banerjee who will join any government for ministries. Imran can depend on their support if the PTI manages to eclipse the PML-N and the PPP. That's all he needs to do instead of winning the majority on his own. Can he do this?
A recent Pew opinion poll showed that Imran Khan was popular with over 70 per cent of Pakistanis, while Asif Zardari was preferred by only 14 per cent. Indians have long been familiar with the utter meaninglessness of opinion polls. There is zero chance that those polled will vote in this fashion. The Punjabi will vote for another Punjabi and if faced with two Punjabi candidates will then vote for his caste.
Imran's popularity on the basis of issues like corruption, Nato supply lines and drone attacks will not result in votes. Corruption is not an issue in India, except in the media, and I suspect the same conditions obtain in Pakistan. His best option is to lure established community leaders like he has done with Shah Mahmood Qureishi and Javed Hashmi. It is likely, given the ease with which the Sharifs let him go, that Hashmi is electorally unimportant. Only turncoats with votebanks will bring victory to Imran in a free election. Not loyal party workers, media favourites and certainly not issues.
That is, assuming Pakistanis are like Indians and will vote like Indians.
It will be fascinating if Imran Khan can prove this to be untrue.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 8th, 2012.
The BJP is seen as an ideological party, but it isn't. It is the party of Lingayats in Karnataka, Patels in Gujarat and Rajputs in Rajasthan. The votes of these castes keep it in power. Its voters in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar are the upper castes, who are few in number. This puts the BJP behind the more numerous caste formations and parties; peasant Yadavs and Muslims in Mulayam Singh's and Laloo Yadav's parties and the Dalits in Mayawati's Bahujan Samaj party. No caste is more than a fifth of the population and so alliances are necessary. The Congress is India's only ecumenical party. It is genuinely above region, caste and religion. But even Congress is forced to pick candidates on the basis of caste because Indians stubbornly vote for their own rather than on issues.
Now, let's look across the border. Pakistan has not had many proper elections so there is limited data on its pattern of voting. I don't know of any psephologists on Pakistan's television channels who have the expertise that Indian psephologists have. Certainly, none has the experience. In its first general election, in 1971, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto won in West Pakistan and Mujibur Rehman swept the east. The Bengalis clearly voted for identity, but what about Punjabis and Sindhis? I would say that they voted for identity, too; 1971 is the only time that a party won a plurality of seats in both Sindh and Punjab. Why?
This was an election fought in West Pakistan on three issues: Against the Bengali's separatism, against Hindu India (Bhutto's popularity in Punjab came from his opposition to General Ayub Khan's sellout at Tashkent), and against military rule. Bhutto won because he owned all three issues. He represented Punjabis and Sindhis against these threats.
This is why the Baloch and the Pashtun, who are unconcerned about these things, did not vote for Bhutto. As Nadeem F Paracha has pointed out, he swept Lahore but not Karachi in that election. This is because the Muhajir goes his own way. I believe Pakistan continues to vote on the basis of identity and this will create a problem for Imran Khan, who is from the small community of Niazis.
Today in the National Assembly, the PML-N has one seat from Balochistan and none from Sindh. The number of seats it won even in the Sindh and Balochistan assemblies is negligible. It is a party of Punjabis. It would be interesting to see what the division of votes is in the Punjab Assembly elections where the voter does not see himself as Punjabi but as a Rajput, Arain or Jat. I will be very surprised if the voting pattern is in the least bit different from India's.
The MQM, the ANP and the JUI are also all regional identity parties. The Karachi vote of the ANP is the Pashtun vote. The PPP is the only national party in that sense. It resembles the Congress in that it is a dynastic party of martyrs — with an agenda that is pro-poor and non-militaristic. This makes the PPP reach out of Sindh and towards the north into the Seraiki area, culturally like Sindh, but not the Punjabi heartland.
The MQM, ANP, the Baloch leaders, the JUI and the party whose current version is PML-Q are oppportunists who align with those in power. They resemble the regional parties in India like those run by Jayalalitha Jayaram, Muthuvel Karunanidhi and Mamata Banerjee who will join any government for ministries. Imran can depend on their support if the PTI manages to eclipse the PML-N and the PPP. That's all he needs to do instead of winning the majority on his own. Can he do this?
A recent Pew opinion poll showed that Imran Khan was popular with over 70 per cent of Pakistanis, while Asif Zardari was preferred by only 14 per cent. Indians have long been familiar with the utter meaninglessness of opinion polls. There is zero chance that those polled will vote in this fashion. The Punjabi will vote for another Punjabi and if faced with two Punjabi candidates will then vote for his caste.
Imran's popularity on the basis of issues like corruption, Nato supply lines and drone attacks will not result in votes. Corruption is not an issue in India, except in the media, and I suspect the same conditions obtain in Pakistan. His best option is to lure established community leaders like he has done with Shah Mahmood Qureishi and Javed Hashmi. It is likely, given the ease with which the Sharifs let him go, that Hashmi is electorally unimportant. Only turncoats with votebanks will bring victory to Imran in a free election. Not loyal party workers, media favourites and certainly not issues.
That is, assuming Pakistanis are like Indians and will vote like Indians.
It will be fascinating if Imran Khan can prove this to be untrue.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 8th, 2012.