Revolution or anarchy?
Is Pakistan ripe for it?
No, it isn’t. The collapsing autocratic kleptocracies in the Middle East are being rocked by populist forces for democracy and freedom, much like absolutist Europe in the late 18th and early 19th century and Communist Eastern Europe in the late 1980s at the fag end of the Cold War. Each revolutionary wave was secular and each changed the global balance of power in the world. But no such secular revolutionary movement for “liberty, equality and fraternity” is churning in the bowels of Pakistan. Indeed, Pakistan’s history is littered with relatively successful, but non-secular, popular movements for democracy and liberation from dictatorships. The first student-led revolt in 1968 ousted the secular military government of General Ayub Khan. The second multi-party led agitation in 1977 chucked out the secular autocratic regime of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. The third popular revolt was only three years ago when young lawyers and a free media swept the moderate government of General Pervez Musharraf from power.
That’s why, despite three decades of military rule and one decade of fascism under a civilian government, and unlike the states of the ME where non-Islamist (but not necessarily secular) democratic change is in the air, Pakistan has an established multi-party political system, regular and broadly acceptable general elections, a fairly consensual constitution, noisy federal and provincial parliaments and a fiercely free media and independent judiciary. So we have none of the political s suffocation and repression that has characterized much of the ME.
Does this mean that Pakistan is immune from the winds of change blowing in the rest of the Muslim world? No, it doesn’t mean that at all.
Some similarities with the ME are striking. Over 60 per cent of the population of Pakistan, like in most ME countries, is under 30 years. Most of it is unemployed, alienated and angry because the democratic system is not delivering. Like the ME, anti-Americanism is rife. And like the ME, there is outrage against the double standards of the West in supporting the decadent, exploitative and oppressive ruling elites in the Third World while simultaneously exporting ideas of democracy, freedom, human rights and liberalism.
This suggests that the idea of “revolution, people’s power and radical change” is in the air even in Pakistan. But the growing tragedy is that this sentiment is anti-democracy, anti-secularism, anti-liberalism and anti-pluralism because the system of political democracy a la Westminster has only served to sustain a game of musical chairs for corrupt politicians and grasping soldiers who have been living off economic rents and military handouts from the United States in pursuit of its foreign policy objectives in South and West Asia. Pakistani democracy is characterized by 3 Ds: dynastic, dysfunctional and discredited.
So is Pakistan headed for an “Islamic revolution” like Iran under Ayatollah Khomeni in 1979? No, it isn’t. Iran lent itself to an Islamic revolution because it was uniquely different from other Muslim countries. It is ethnically united and religiously homogenous. Also, it had a class of religious scholars who were all united behind one leader. But Pakistan is not ripe for such an Islamist revolution. It is ethnically divided and intensely sectarian, with strong regional sub-nationalisms and ethnic loyalties that cut into religious unity, as demonstrated by the secession of East Pakistan in 1971 and the failure of the MMA to make a dent in politics.
Under the circumstances, what sort of change is possible in Pakistan?
A fresh election is not a sufficient condition for radical change. Nor is a technocratic regime a long term option because the media and judiciary will tire of the arrangement and challenge it.
The flash points in Pakistan are deeply worrying. Foreign policy is based on passion rather than interest. The economy is wilting under the strain of corruption, debt servicing and defense spending. Increasing religiosity and anti-Americanism are keeping foreign investors at bay. The mad scramble to stockpile nuclear weapons is ringing alarm bells everywhere. The proliferation of armed jihadi and Taliban groups is posing severe problems for installing liberal democracy, building peace with India and doing business with the West. If a war with India is provoked or there is conflict with the US, then all bets will be off.
The elements of a failing state are assassination, anarchy, civil strife, war, economic meltdown and secession. The only realistic option is for our political leaders to keep religious passion out of law and politics, anti-American outrage out of economic and foreign policy, and unaccountable corruption and inefficiency out of government. We must make liberal secular democracy work so that Pakistan can survive and prosper as a nation-state.
Is Pakistan ripe for it?
That’s why, despite three decades of military rule and one decade of fascism under a civilian government, and unlike the states of the ME where non-Islamist (but not necessarily secular) democratic change is in the air, Pakistan has an established multi-party political system, regular and broadly acceptable general elections, a fairly consensual constitution, noisy federal and provincial parliaments and a fiercely free media and independent judiciary. So we have none of the political s suffocation and repression that has characterized much of the ME.
Does this mean that Pakistan is immune from the winds of change blowing in the rest of the Muslim world? No, it doesn’t mean that at all.
Some similarities with the ME are striking. Over 60 per cent of the population of Pakistan, like in most ME countries, is under 30 years. Most of it is unemployed, alienated and angry because the democratic system is not delivering. Like the ME, anti-Americanism is rife. And like the ME, there is outrage against the double standards of the West in supporting the decadent, exploitative and oppressive ruling elites in the Third World while simultaneously exporting ideas of democracy, freedom, human rights and liberalism.
This suggests that the idea of “revolution, people’s power and radical change” is in the air even in Pakistan. But the growing tragedy is that this sentiment is anti-democracy, anti-secularism, anti-liberalism and anti-pluralism because the system of political democracy a la Westminster has only served to sustain a game of musical chairs for corrupt politicians and grasping soldiers who have been living off economic rents and military handouts from the United States in pursuit of its foreign policy objectives in South and West Asia. Pakistani democracy is characterized by 3 Ds: dynastic, dysfunctional and discredited.
So is Pakistan headed for an “Islamic revolution” like Iran under Ayatollah Khomeni in 1979? No, it isn’t. Iran lent itself to an Islamic revolution because it was uniquely different from other Muslim countries. It is ethnically united and religiously homogenous. Also, it had a class of religious scholars who were all united behind one leader. But Pakistan is not ripe for such an Islamist revolution. It is ethnically divided and intensely sectarian, with strong regional sub-nationalisms and ethnic loyalties that cut into religious unity, as demonstrated by the secession of East Pakistan in 1971 and the failure of the MMA to make a dent in politics.
Under the circumstances, what sort of change is possible in Pakistan?
A fresh election is not a sufficient condition for radical change. Nor is a technocratic regime a long term option because the media and judiciary will tire of the arrangement and challenge it.
The flash points in Pakistan are deeply worrying. Foreign policy is based on passion rather than interest. The economy is wilting under the strain of corruption, debt servicing and defense spending. Increasing religiosity and anti-Americanism are keeping foreign investors at bay. The mad scramble to stockpile nuclear weapons is ringing alarm bells everywhere. The proliferation of armed jihadi and Taliban groups is posing severe problems for installing liberal democracy, building peace with India and doing business with the West. If a war with India is provoked or there is conflict with the US, then all bets will be off.
The elements of a failing state are assassination, anarchy, civil strife, war, economic meltdown and secession. The only realistic option is for our political leaders to keep religious passion out of law and politics, anti-American outrage out of economic and foreign policy, and unaccountable corruption and inefficiency out of government. We must make liberal secular democracy work so that Pakistan can survive and prosper as a nation-state.
No comments:
Post a Comment