Violence, institutions and the state
How has violence been controlled in human history? Through the establishment of resilient institutions. Here, it may be helpful to define an institution. An institution is a set of formal rules and informal norms that together with their enforcement mechanisms structure human interaction. Now, for rules to be effective, enforcement mechanisms must function. At the same time, rules embody incentives and disincentives and so, if they are enforced, they shape the behaviour of individuals and organisations. Violence occurs either when the rules do not take account of organisations that specialise in violence and undermine order or when rules are not enforced. In such a case, it is a failure of the executive, along with its law-enforcement agencies, such as the police and military. In any case, if as in Pakistan at present, there are non-state organisations that have emerged as rival powers to that of the state within its geographic domain, then it is the state as a whole that gets undermined, not just its component organisations.
Max Weber defines the state in terms of its monopoly over the legitimate use of violence. Now the minimum function through which a state acquires legitimacy is the provision of security of life and property of citizens. In this sense, if there is widespread violence by non-state groups, who remain unchallenged, then the monopoly of the state over violence is lost and hence, the very legitimacy of the state gets eroded. This sets into motion a self-destruct process, where normally peaceful and law abiding citizens, having lost confidence in the state to establish order, begin to join one or the other militant group or, otherwise, take to lawlessness to protect their individual interests. When law is not enforced and cannot provide order, the law ceases to exist. Civil war can result at some stage in the continuing breakdown of order. Foreign powers seeking to protect their own interests then step in as the state unravels. This is what we observe in Sub-Saharan Africa, Libya, and more recently, Syria.
It is in this perspective that it is possible to understand the vociferous demand for establishing order in Karachi by the National Assembly members as well as the Senate last week. Armed militant groups driven by various ethnic, sectarian and gang identities are competing for power and resources by seeking to control parts of the city. The judiciary, too, had earlier called upon the government to fulfil its primary responsibility of providing protection of life and property to citizens in Karachi. But the problem is not limited to Karachi. Taliban groups are on the rampage in Fata and even settled areas such as Swat in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P), Dera Ismail Khan in southern Punjab and areas bordering Afghanistan in Balochistan. Worse still, in some of the major cities in Punjab, Sindh, K-P and Balochistan, Taliban groups have pre-positioned themselves with arsenals of weapons and trained cadres. They have the capacity to launch simultaneous terrorist attacks aimed at paralysing the main urban centres of the country.
This is a defining moment for Pakistan. The vision of the founding fathers was of a pluralist, democratic polity nurtured by love, enlightenment and freedom; of a society enriched by the soaring creativity of its human potential. Can this experience of being, be brought to bear in confronting the forces of hate, bigotry and oppression; the forces of fear, which alienate us from the aesthetic and the spiritual? Can a consensus be achieved on who we are as a nation and can the state defend the nation?
Published in The Express Tribune, November 19th, 2012.
COMMENTS (8)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1725877703-0/Tribune-Pic-(5)1725877703-0-165x106.webp "article")
@gp65:
Your point is well taken . We have a strong tendency to deify our heroes , may it be
Jinnah or Iqbal . We assign their utterances almost scriptural status . We thus turn
them into barriers to creativity , rather than an inspiration to find our own answers to
the ever-changing challenges of life . Those who were supposed to be liberators of our
mind are transformed into its enchainers .
@shakrullah, @F:
Agree with both of your opinion but I have a question. Is the August 11 speech or what the founders wanted even relevant? What is relevant is to determine what people i Pakistan want today. I India, we have great respect for Nehru, Gandhi and Patel and other Congress leaders who fought British occupation. But the shape and direction that India takes today should be and IS based on what Indians want today. Not based on what our leaders wanted 65 years back.
The constitution is a living document - not a revelation where no discussion/debate/change is possible.
Keeping up democracy is the way to go. Democracy is dynamic that can steer Pakistan on way of progress and prosperity. Since last 65 years we have been playing havoc and made Pakistan a laboratory, where every day a new experiment is conducted, but no more now, we need only a strong democracyand nothing else. Corruption is always there and it is not unique to Pakistan alone. At least the electoral process gives people a chance to oust people from power. It is a process similar to sifting. It takes many years to mature. Pakistan’s military was propped up and strengthened by the cold war powers. Now the same powers are finding themselves in the opposite camp. In this scenario, Pakistan’s military does not have much muscle power to thrust its way through, like it did before. It managed to control the nation by pushing itself to the fore front of super power battles. Now that need is lost. Therefore Pakistan’s democracy has the best chance to grow and thrive. Mullahs and their political attempts have never succeeded in Pakistan. The voters have always rejected their overtures. Just keep at it. It will help the military go back to the barracks and submit to the civilian authority. And it will help come out of the unnecessary paranoia about neighbors.
Let us wait for TTP to establish peace and order. Afterall for the last three decades we have been investing heavily both financially and spritually to create, train, nurture and the let them loose to do our bidding both east and west. We did every conceivable thing to protect and proliferate them. Even being called "our boys," having got the strength they developed the craving to bite the hand that fed them. The hangover of ideological overdose is reflected in the data which suggest that seventy percent of us believe rather religiously that Taliban are the only credible political force that can deliver on every count from economy to international relations. What the learned author is talking about relate to the era when Pakistan was assumed to be made a civilized country. But that Pakistan have very skillfully been buried in the strategic depth of mini empire that we wanted to acquire despite the fact we knew it was a grave yard of empires.
A thought provoking and masterly piece, but the ideas thrown up are most probably not implementable.
One is reminded of the message of the Buddha (Dhammapada 1.5):
Translation in English would read:
In this world hatred can never by quelled by hatred; but only by non-hatred (or friendship).
THIS IS THE ETERNAL LAW..
This is somewhere behind the thinking of Manmohan Singh, the Indian PM.
"The vision of the founding fathers was of a pluralist, democratic polity nurtured by love, enlightenment and freedom; of a society enriched by the soaring creativity of its human .."
Even IF this were true, you forget to mention that such sentiments of the founders were firmly rooted in the framework of Islam. Read the entire August 11th speech of Mr. Jinnah and the Objectice resolutions passed by Mr. Liaqat Ali Khan - another founder and first PM.
English educated choose to ignore the reasons and means adopted to achieve and later build Pakistan. They are afraid to study and acknowledge uncomfortable truths that lie in front of them. But all this must be guarded by a body of lies and glossed over by convenient ignorance. What stops these English speaking "moderates" to organize and protest consistently and meaningfully against ingrained bigotry that is codified in law and practiced mercilessly against non-Muslims and Ahamadis? What stops them from having their works published in the Urdu media - that is where the masses, who clearly understand the founders, get their information from? The reason is very simple: they themselves cannot divorce religion from politics. They somehow magically want to find within Islam the equivalent of western plurality, tolerance and equality for all - muslim and non alike.
" The vision of founding fathers was of a pluralist , democratic polity , nurtured by
love , enlightenment and freedom ..."
A politically correct observation , but what if judged by its truth value ? Exclusivity , hatred
and rejection of cultural pluralism were built , as it were , into the DNA of Muslim League
politics . What has plagued our country over the last six decades can rightly be
seen as the unfolding of that dna . Such glib untruths as quoted above don't help us in dealing with our
present mess . We must face our past , howsoever unflatterig , to get rid of its hold on
our present . Please don't read too much in Quaid's 11th August speech ; see how
the Muslim League shaped the minds of Muslim masses for over four decades .
I do not think this theory is right for Pak because we live in different context - and we have nukes too and also Israel is not doing the good thing - looking at the timing any attempt to create disruption in Pak, we will annihilate poor Israelis :)