Can Pakistan ever be a democracy?
Author: M. S. N. Menon
Publication: Tribune India
Date: October 18, 2002

No, not in a thousand years!

India took a thousand years to get into the spirit of democracy. That spirit has stayed with us. Today, it is part of our reflex, part of our character, part of our civilisation.

We are told that the recent election in Pakistan was “free and fair.” But what triumphed was not democracy, but fundamentalism — to be precise, Talibanism. This was, of course, feared when the Al-Qaida and Taliban forces took shelter in Pakistan.

Washington is, perhaps, alarmed. But it could have anticipated. It failed to heed the warning. For the first time, religious parties have made an impressive showing in Pakistan. Thanks to Uncle Sam’s ineptitude.

But we will be making a serious mistake if we surmise that the infection is confined to NWFP and Baluchistan. It has infected half the armed forces, the intelligence services and a good part of the bureaucracy.

And yet we were told that, under American pressure, Musharraf was engaged in combatting fundamentalism. That was, of course, a lie. How can it be true when he is the patron of the jehadis in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Only the US State Department can fool itself to believe that he is engaged in promoting democracy. But, then, the USA has always been partial to dictators.

Much has been made of the war against terrorism. What are the facts? Operation Enduring Freedom has not gone beyond Kabul. The rest of Afghanistan is still Taliban and Al-Qaida territory. Will NWFP, Baluchistan and the Pashtoon territories of Afghanistan strike for independence? If they do, Punjab will be isolated. And Sindh may like to break loose from Pakistan.

Today the Taliban (mostly Pashtoons) and Al-Qaida forces are re-grouping in Afghanistan and Pakistan to take over the region. And Bin Laden and Mullah Omar are still there to guide these forces. The future of Pakistan is indeed bleak. Hence the continuing danger to India.

How is it that democracy failed to take root in Pakistan? For good many reasons: because, for one, for more than half its life, it has been under military rule. And the military rulers not only suppressed democracy, but also encouraged the anti- democratic forces.

But there are more profound reasons for the failure of democracy. And it has to do with Pakistan’s genesis. The region of Pakistan was notorious for its feudal and tribal background. More so the Punjab. It provided soldiers to the British empire. Naturally, the British extended special patronage to these feudal elements. The region was rich and fertile, had the best irrigation system and was dominated by Muslims. They did not support the demand for Pakistan. Why should they, when they were already masters of the region?

The demand for Pakistan came from areas where the Muslims were in a minority. That is from the Gangetic plain and peninsular India. If they had migrated to the Pak region, they would have perhaps changed the dynamics of Pakistan. But they did not. When partition did take place, only a few million left. But even they were not welcome in Pakistan. They had to live in ghettoes and were called mohajirs. Thus, they had no impact on the character of Pakistan. Jinnah’s dream turned into a nightmare.

So, the areas which fell to Pakistan remained feudal and anti-democratic. It has remained so even to this day.

Parties and politicians were equally responsible for the failure of democracy. Even after Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was executed by the military regime, his daughter, Benazir, did nothing to curb the power of the army and the intelligence services.

As for Nawaz Sharif, he encouraged the growth of the very forces — the fundamentalists — who were anti-democratic. For their want of gumption, they are cooling their heels in foreign lands today.

True, twice there were “fair” elections in Pakistan: once in 1953 when the Bengalis threw out the Muslim League from East Pakistan. Naturally, the Punjabi establishment was so enraged that it dismissed the East Pakistan government. The second time was in 1970, when Mujibur Rahman won the national election. Again, the western wing of Pakistan could not permit the ascendence of the East.

The military rulers have made a mockery of democracy. Thus both Zia-ul-Haq and Musharraf held fraudulent “referendums” to establish their legitimacy. But only 5 per cent of the electorate voted for Zia and 10 per cent voted for Musharraf!

But in the final analysis, the failure of democracy in Pakistan has to do with the nature of Islam and the role played by religion ins society.

Musharraf told mediamen on May 4, 2002, “Allah has placed me in this position.” Naturally, what God had proposed, no man could set aside. It is as simple as that in Pakistan. And he claimed, he was carrying out the “vision” of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan!

One would think that the Pakistanis are deeply religious. This is by no means the case. Justice Munir of Pakistan posed the question: “What is Islam and who is a Muslim?” during an enquiry. This is what he writes after his extensive talks with the Ulemas and Maulanas: “No two learned divines agreed on this fundamental.” No wonder, Pakistan is a highly arbitrary society. There can never be any consensus (Ijma) although Muslim societies are based on Ijma. Ijma is thus a fraud in these circumstances.

By insisting on the finality of the Prophet’s revelation and the immutability of both the Koran and the Sunnah, Islam has denied itself self-renewal. Early Islam, however, did produce an intellectual class — the Mutazilites. There was growth of philosophy and science. But all these were suppressed when free enquiry led to loss of faith. By emphasising the primacy of the Umma, the individual was devalued, and Ijma was misused to suppress dissent.

Indeed, the concept of democracy can threaten both Umma and Ijma, for it encourages individualism. But individualism is taboo in Islam. But where there is no individualism, there can be no democracy.

__________________
Devil-may-care