Dangerous games
Pakistan is tightly gripped by a discourse on electoral rigging and illegitimacy of the government
The writer is a PhD candidate and coordinator of South Asia Study Group at the University of Sydney
The 2013 general elections and the recent by-election in NA-122 both present a worrisome reality that is being slipped under the rug: the country has become dangerously polarised and radically intolerant. Not being happy with the election results is one thing, but dismissing every election one doesn’t win as ‘rigged’ may on the surface be a face-saving exercise, but, in actual fact, is dangerous for the very weak social stability Pakistan hinges on. This gets worse when irresponsible political leadership and the ever-sensational media amplifies and perpetuates such a narrative to make the election results controversial. Such a prolonged national discourse on electoral rigging has an undesirable end result, which can be seen in numerous African countries, including in Togo, Burundi, Nigeria and so on.
Elections in weak democracies are potentially very risky. There is a bulk of literature and history on the subject of the electoral process leading to violence, and it reveals the same story over and over again: that elections in fragile states with weak civil-political institutions are often mired in dispute and allegations of rigging, leading to, in most cases, a breakdown of social stability and violence. Hence, in the process of democratisation, it is important for the nation-building project that all parties reach a consensus for the greater good of national stability and institution-building. Once consensus is reached, the narrative on the elections can be diverted from deepening political fault lines further.
More than two years after the general elections, Pakistan is tightly gripped by a discourse on electoral rigging and illegitimacy of the government, which is silently destroying social stability through political radicalisation and polarisation. What Imran Khan doesn’t realise is that through his rhetoric of ‘strengthening democracy’ (what many see as his personal ambition to become prime minister by hook or by crook), his campaign has damaged Pakistan both at the domestic and global levels — the consequences of which are going to be felt in the next few years.
Pakistan has become dangerously polarised with every election. The humiliation of defeat faced by young PTI supporters and the humiliation of ‘rigging’ faced by the PML-N are paving the way for hyper political radicalisation, evident in the way with which voting for the PML-N is interpreted as a reflection of Punjab’s ‘illiteracy’. Such provincial and ethnic narratives can be volatile. On the global front, Khan’s campaign has the potential of reducing Pakistan to the category of a failed state, with the government struggling for legitimacy, people divided, and there being high chances of electoral violence.
The fact that Khan has made his point, which has been addressed through the JC report, the election reforms committee, and numerous times through by-elections with the majority of people rejecting his stand on ‘dhandli’ and wanting the country to move on, it makes little sense for him to continue treading on this destructive path. If a political party that is not from Punjab had peddled the same narrative on electoral rigging, the response of the ‘Umpire’ and political forces would have been much stiffer. But here is a leader who can’t be touched, for no one wants to be a victim of his wrath of allegations and the abuses that follow through his followers. Being aggressive on a cricket field where your energy is focused on the other team is one thing, but using the same tactics in national politics against your own people is much more serious. Lest we forget, it was the refusal of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to accept the victory of Mujibur Rahman’s Awami League in the 1970 elections that led to the eventual break-up of Pakistan.
It really then is a dangerous game that Khan is playing. Given how Pakistan is currently under attack from all sides, including by militants, religious bigotry and Indian bullying, Khan’s rash politics of accusations and de-legitimising the elections may be the most damaging. It is, after all, a fact of history that nations always fall from within. Unless the national discourse doesn’t change, Pakistan will continue to teeter on the brink.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 19th, 2015.
Elections in weak democracies are potentially very risky. There is a bulk of literature and history on the subject of the electoral process leading to violence, and it reveals the same story over and over again: that elections in fragile states with weak civil-political institutions are often mired in dispute and allegations of rigging, leading to, in most cases, a breakdown of social stability and violence. Hence, in the process of democratisation, it is important for the nation-building project that all parties reach a consensus for the greater good of national stability and institution-building. Once consensus is reached, the narrative on the elections can be diverted from deepening political fault lines further.
More than two years after the general elections, Pakistan is tightly gripped by a discourse on electoral rigging and illegitimacy of the government, which is silently destroying social stability through political radicalisation and polarisation. What Imran Khan doesn’t realise is that through his rhetoric of ‘strengthening democracy’ (what many see as his personal ambition to become prime minister by hook or by crook), his campaign has damaged Pakistan both at the domestic and global levels — the consequences of which are going to be felt in the next few years.
Pakistan has become dangerously polarised with every election. The humiliation of defeat faced by young PTI supporters and the humiliation of ‘rigging’ faced by the PML-N are paving the way for hyper political radicalisation, evident in the way with which voting for the PML-N is interpreted as a reflection of Punjab’s ‘illiteracy’. Such provincial and ethnic narratives can be volatile. On the global front, Khan’s campaign has the potential of reducing Pakistan to the category of a failed state, with the government struggling for legitimacy, people divided, and there being high chances of electoral violence.
The fact that Khan has made his point, which has been addressed through the JC report, the election reforms committee, and numerous times through by-elections with the majority of people rejecting his stand on ‘dhandli’ and wanting the country to move on, it makes little sense for him to continue treading on this destructive path. If a political party that is not from Punjab had peddled the same narrative on electoral rigging, the response of the ‘Umpire’ and political forces would have been much stiffer. But here is a leader who can’t be touched, for no one wants to be a victim of his wrath of allegations and the abuses that follow through his followers. Being aggressive on a cricket field where your energy is focused on the other team is one thing, but using the same tactics in national politics against your own people is much more serious. Lest we forget, it was the refusal of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to accept the victory of Mujibur Rahman’s Awami League in the 1970 elections that led to the eventual break-up of Pakistan.
It really then is a dangerous game that Khan is playing. Given how Pakistan is currently under attack from all sides, including by militants, religious bigotry and Indian bullying, Khan’s rash politics of accusations and de-legitimising the elections may be the most damaging. It is, after all, a fact of history that nations always fall from within. Unless the national discourse doesn’t change, Pakistan will continue to teeter on the brink.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 19th, 2015.