The problematics of democracy by Dr Rasheed Hasan Khan

O CTOBER has been a cataclysmic month for Pakistan. The GHQ was attacked by extremists as was the police training establishment in Manawan near Lahore and the aeronautical complex at Kamra. More than a score of explosions took place in major cities killing hundreds and setting in motion a wave of alarm and panic across the country. With this backdrop the military operation in South Waziristan was launched. The political scene was no less hectic.

The Kerry-Lugar bill, which had been a subject of deliberations during President Zardari's visit to the US and was claimed a great achievement for Pakistan, became the object of great controversy among the political circles in the country. Though American aid has never been without conditions as had been the case with earlier Symington amendment in the sixties and Pressler amendment in the eighties, the furore over the Kerry-Lugar bill was extraordinary. The GHQ publicly expressed its reservations on the bill which tipped the already negative balance of opinion.

Then came the NRO which created two well defined camps in the country. Both these issues were brought up for discussion in parliament belatedly after a great deal of public debate. However, President Zardari and Nawaz Sharif met on October 26 after an interval of four months. There was no agenda for the meeting which ended without any tangible result, as was already expected by the political observers.

The conundrum of a functioning democracy has been a problem in our national life since the birth of Pakistan. Unless the nation correctly analyses the problem and, more importantly, takes practical measures to resolve it, we will move from coup to coup with interregnums of so-called democratic rule. The term ‘so-called’ is appropriate because apart from elections and a parliament, there is no actual change in society, nor an effort to bring about a change.

A callous attitude towards the pressing problems faced by the people and alienation of the rulers from the masses remains the general pattern when the military is not in power. People participate in elections with great hope and enthusiasm but get disappointed soon after. It is high time we learned something and grew out of it.

Every political system evolves from the economic structure of a given society. Parliamentary democracy, as we know it, evolved with the development of capitalism in Europe from the year 1500.

It has been a long journey for capitalism and a long journey for democracy. The landed aristocracy which ruled Europe during the early 17th and 18th centuries, arbitrarily distributed privileges and monopolies, exercised control on trade and manufacturing, and levied taxes at will.

The new emerging capitalist class found this unacceptable and required a new political and legal order for its growth and the consolidation of its power. The resulting clash with the feudal interests gave rise to a civil war in England. One king lost his head and another his crown, before the supremacy of parliament and capitalism was established. This is the classic model of parliamentary democracy which Britain's former colonies tried to adopt.

When the British withdrew from the subcontinent in 1947 the region that constituted Pakistan was dominated by semi-tribal, semi- feudal relations of production. Industry was at a nascent stage and mainly existed in the state sector. The bourgeoisie as a class was weak and consisted of some mercantile capital and professional classes.

White collar workers constituted the lower end of the spectrum. The capitalist forged an alliance with the feudal class and the civil and military bureaucracy to rule the new nation. This alliance also had the blessings of British imperialism.

Thus, the idea of a democratic society, though paramount in the scheme of the founders of Pakistan, was stillborn. It was this unholy alliance that was to blight the future of Pakistan.

Feudalism is not only a retrograde system but a concentrated expression of its political and economic construct in the form of culture is pernicious, pervasive and virtually perpetual. In many societies the cultural impact of feudalism can still be seen long after the feudal economic structure has been dismantled. Authoritarianism, bigotry, intolerance, and resistance to progress which are the dominating features of today’s society in Pakistan are a legacy of feudalism.

Therefore, even political parties and public institutions are run like feudal estates to the exclusion of the broad masses of the people. The bourgeoisie have given up their historically progressive role and instead opted to compromise with imperialism on one hand and the feudal/tribal elements on the other. The status of elections and parliament in such a situation is a little more than a farce.

This is not to suggest that elections need not be held. They must be held but must not be reduced to a mere ritual — a dangerous ritual of anointing a new group of people with a right to plunder the resources and oppress the people.

Pakistan today stands on the brink of an abyss. Growing American presence and total interference in government policies by the IMF and World Bank , economic meltdown, breakdown of law and order and pervasive corruption are making life impossible for most Pakistanis. The people naturally look towards the government which is a coalition of major political parties in the country. But it appears incapable of resolving the core problems.

We have been there in the past too. We have faced similar situations during the rule of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif in the nineties. Gen Musharraf's military rule is too recent to forget. The reason is not difficult to see.

The leadership of all major political parties comprises the same feudal, tribal and comprador elements and their allies, the civil and military bureaucracy — that has led the country into the mess it is in, in the first place.

This is irrespective of the distinction of a civilian or military regime. Their class interests are similar. Therefore, their policies are also similar. The recent sugar and flour crisis in the country and the helplessness of the government to tackle it is a vivid example of this.

Since 1970 when the first free and fair elections were held in Pakistan, the ideal of a sovereign, free and truly democratic Pakistan remains as distant today as it turned out to be then. But the solution does not lie in the forcible regime change.

For a genuine change the people of Pakistan will have to close their ranks, fight a long-drawn battle and determine their destiny themselves. They will have to create a genuine, viable alternative to the present political culture. How this would happen is difficult to say. ¦