Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » Pakistani Middleclass, Army and Democracy
Pakistani Middleclass, Army and Democracy
By Raza Habib Raja
A few weeks ago I wrote a detailed piece on the reasons as to why democracy in Pakistan and its neighboring India has taken such divergent paths. In my opinion the reasons have to do with history of independence movement, early years after independence, image of the army in both the countries and also the attitude of middleclass in both the countries.
In any society, particularly a modern democratic society, middleclass provides a critical as well as decisive mass. Moreover it’s an extremely important contributor to intelligentsia, media and services sector, particularly critical services such as bureaucracy and armed forces. In our side of the world, the middleclass particularly urban middleclass, eventually is the major determinant of the dominant opinion and even the official policy. This influence is not merely through electorate (where they are always numerically less strong), but through other institutions such as army, judiciary, media and civil bureaucracy as well.
In my opinion, the so called “public” support of army (or at least encouragement of fixing “corrupt” politicians by interfering in the political affairs of the country) is coming from this class.
Of course the liberal (assuming that they exist) oppose this and try to present a case for democracy but at the same time “defense” from the liberal quarters does not go beyond name calling and allegations. For example a typical response would be to brand middleclass as bigoted and authoritarian with naïve understanding of geopolitical culture. Moreover, standard references to disrespect of “unwashed’ masses would be made. And of course this is supplemented by terms like drawing room gossip, reactionary , chattering classes etc.
Defense of democracy has to be realistic and not based on lauding passionate speeches about unwashed masses particularly when politicians apparently care little
themselves about the masses. The central thrust should be to present first a convincing case as to why democracy is a better option compared to armed dictatorship and frankly a very strong case based on historical evidence exists. despite chequered history of democratic regimes. And yes admit the shortcomings of the politicians also as weaknesses of politicians are not necessarily weaknesses of the entire political system.
Spinning facts to absolve politicians of their follies is not the way. Simply assuming that everyone is just bigoted or plagued by bias is also a form of denial. And interpreting everything as a grand conspiracy of the establishment mirrors the general mindset of the Pakistanis who have developed this habit to see everything through the conspiracy paradigm.
That brings us to a related question: does the middleclass hate democracy? The answer cannot be a definite yes because it’s the some apparent outcomes of the democracy in our part of the world which it detests. It does have concerns which periodically surface when democratic rule is again given a chance. One cannot conveniently dismiss every concern by branding it as reactionary or a manifestation of deep rooted insecurity about losing privileges the status quo offers. One can blame armed forces for harboring such insecurities but not the entire middleclass.
For the doubters let me remind that when elections of 2008 took place there was a severe hatred against army and it was expressed by the SAME middleclass. In fact so much so that General Kayani immediately upon assuming command as CNC had to withdraw army officials from various civilian posts. At that time even Zardari had a favorable impression and in fact several polls were revealing that by and large public was in the process of reevaluating their opinion about him. So the notion that middleclass simply hates him for the sake of hating is slightly exaggerated. There is more towards the current surge of hatred against the President.
So then what are the reasons?
In Pakistan, democratic regimes have been short on providing stability. One thing this class really loves is stability which too some extent is an outcome of its pro status quo orientation. Democracy in the developing countries, particularly if it’s not “regulated” tends to bring chaos as coalition building and consensus formation process does not develop quickly. Consequently the romantic love for a strong ruler intensifies each time the politicians indulge in destabilizing and chaotic practices when given a chance. It’s a small wonder that whenever army has intervened directly, there has been a sigh of relief from the middleclass.And historically armed forces have intervened when political chaos was reigning supreme.
However the most persuasive and unfortunately convincing argument is about the quality of governance. The executive has often overstepped its authority and has used mandate as a justification for anything from nepotism to controversial allocations of contracts. Moreover, the justification is also supplemented by the argument that if people do not approve of these “steps”, they will remove the government in the next elections. These repeated acts which use explicit justification of a public mandate, has at times alienated middleclass from the notion of democracy itself. Moreover, one has to understand the some of the interventions (though not all) by the armed forces were actually an outcome of the chaotic situation the politicians had brought.
Obviously the arguments against democracy by this class also constitutes anti feudal sentiments. It is often pointed out that the representatives of the people are actually feudal lords who come to the power through votes and in this way the feudalism is further strengthened. In fact according to some elements of the middleclass, democracy is even more problematic as it creates an umbrella of legitimacy due to mandate.
But then questions arise as to what has given rise to the above issues.
One of the major problems in Pakistan is that it still is an agriculture based society with a strong social patriarchal structure which thrives on contact building. Now this contact building and largely obliging culture comes into full play when political class is in power. People who have voted EXPECT to be given a share in the governance and this in turn has given rise to out of merit job allocations and contracts.
Expecting favours is culturally deep rooted and democracy merely facilitates it as the ruling class is accountable to the voting public. This practice of obliging of course seriously undermines quality of governance. The apparent advantage that Middleclass sees in the military establishments is that these are apparently insulated from such kind of pressures. Moreover majority of the people while growing up have seen military a shade away from normal civilian life even during the martial laws. The disciplined look, insulated from public pressure creates this strong impression that military won’t be obliging the way Politicians are.
Secondly it has to be realized that Parliamentary democracy has evolved in the industrial societies and is functionally geared to address the needs of that kind of society. Western model of universal suffrage also presupposes educated and informed electorate,established social voluntary structures like unions, associations, mature and responsible media and above all a strong tradition of constitutional liberalism which is underpinned by independent courts, separation of powers and strong emphasis on individual liberty.
In the Western world these features evolved before the advent of universal suffrage. Farid Zakria’s excellent book titled as “future of freedom” chronicles the development of constitutional liberalism in various countries of Europe and argues that such development needs to precede democracy for it to be stable, sustainable, and for ensuring that governments remain accountable in every respect. Zakria argues giving historical examples that voters alone cannot make the government accountable without a strongly entrenched tradition of constitutional liberalism.
In fact historically countries where democracy arrived before these traditions have fallen victim to chaos and eventually despotic rule by some strong man. Chaos, if developed would naturally be countered by establishing authority and unquestionable subservience which normally comes with military rule. That of course does not justify Military rule but provides a reason as to why it often takes place and why some people are obsessed with it.
Another issue which has to be kept in mind is that democracy would need independent institutions like Judiciary and Media no matter how “reactionary” these are to ensure that it remains on track. And these institutions do not automatically develop through voting process. The notion which has often proven irrelevant in a country like Pakistan is that voters alone can provide the necessary accountability. This unfortunately is not even true for developed countries. First of all mandate does not necessarily reflect complete will of the people due to principal agent problem and moreover vote received in an election does not necessarily validate every step taken by the Government during its reign. Voters eventually appraise the OVERALL PERFORMANCE of a party, not every step. So therefore claims that if voters do not approve of a particular controversial step, they will vote the party out in the next elections is not a valid argument. For democracy to be effective strong and INDEPENDENT institutions, even if they are “reactionary’ are needed!! Due to this factor, there is a legitimate rationale for judiciary and media to keep a check on the government during the interim period.Independence of these institutions is a prerequisite on these grounds.
And So what is the way out?
First the convincing has to explicitly RECOGINIZE these problems and liberal intelligentsia has to support independent institutions and check and balances. Yes it includes this vulgar media also!! Sorry but even if it is vulgar, it is needed!!And yes STOP defending political class when it merits condemnation and please stop interpreting criticism as merely “reactionary”. Trying to defend incompetence through spinning factual position and branding everything as a grand conspiracy of the establishment will not do. If anything it further insulates the political class from political discipline and questions the credibility of the liberals themselves.
For democracy a culture of accountability has to be there and that culture may even at times evolve through excessive lynching (provided that does not result in army’s intervention!) phase into more mature criticism. Yes at times media is unfair but it is OK if it points to nepotism and poor governance. The argument which should be given is that we should stick with democracy but also strive to cultivate a culture of accountability and strong institutions.
What the stability obsessed crowd should be made to understand is that the solution is not replacing democracy with autocratic rule or judicial rule but by ensuring the mechanism which ensures that chaos does not develop and governments do not become excessive in their conduct. Democracy may not be a perfect system but a modern and
ethnically diverse state needs it. The central thrust has to be on recognizing where democracy is faltering and how to ensure that those areas are strengthened.
Second and the most important argument is ethnic fabric of our country. What is often overlooked by critics of democracy is that for an ethnically diverse country such as Pakistan, lack of democracy will be catastrophic and in fact historically every dictatorship has resulted in increased feeling of marginalization. Democracy is the only workable framework in a modern industrial society which can tap diverse voices and ensure integrity of the state through preservation of diversity through negotiation and renegotiation. Just simple analysis in chronological order can prove the point that after each dictatorship the feeling of depravity and anger has increased. Bangladesh and bloody 1971 episode owed a lot due to lack of consensus building which only democracy could have ensured. Ayub era despite apparent high growth rates delivered a broken Pakistan.
Zia regime instilled hatred in Sindh and Mushrraf a lot of hatred in Baluchistan. An ethnically diverse and now charged up country cannot exist without democracy. Democracy may have proven short on quality governance (for that matter so has dictatorship) but it is the only workable way to ensure that diverse voices are heard and their concerns are properly incorporated in the policy framework.
Third people have to be reminded that every military dictator’s regime ended with some kind of public protest which actually went too long because the dictator was not politically feeling the heat the way a political government would. They even went on suspending courts! Protests went on and eventually far more frustration was felt and of course when the dictatorship ended Pakistan was in a more miserable state.
Fourth, while Military regimes may have provided a façade of stability, there is nothing to support that military dictatorships fared any better in financial corruption. And moreover
systematically the resources were transferred to bolster the army schemes and industries. Of course due to censorship most of the corruption scandals never came to light. It is a fallacy that only politicians are corrupt.
We need to win the battle of minds and address skepticism through concrete, rational and factual defense of democracy. We need to reinforce an obvious truth that a modern industrial society which is so complex needs democracy and the solution is to push for better governance within democracy not substituting it with dictatorship or even through army’s proxies (known as indirect rule).
Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: Army, Democracy, political, politicians
22 Responses to "Pakistani Middleclass, Army and Democracy"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- MA
said Dear Saad, Well done my friend on writing such a n... - saad
said Ahem: Bit like Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Nehru, the older... - AKB
said Islamophobia: Washington’s New Form Of Coloniali... - AKB said What's in a name?? Calling yerself 'ibn e Ahmed' w...
- AKB said Calling the Mullahs will only make them say you ar...
- tajender
said Perfidious Tajender Hooliganism”.
i pity u pe... - ahem
said to saad
Imagine a bus with two steering wheels... - ben 10 games online said Paktehouse.net is the best and biggest website of...
- ahem said to saad
Everything that involves Pakistan has t...
- ahem said Every islamic state starts with false-sweet (or sw...
Good introspective piece!
‘
But often this has to do with a people’s worldview regardless of how that worldview comes about!
‘
Are the people looking for a savior, or are they prepared to work to save themselves.
‘
‘Democratic Govts’ in Pakistan do not work, because when electing them, people were again looking for saviors, and when they didn’t work out, they opted for Army, and then again looked somewhere else!
‘
Maturity of people is seen when they try to set up institutions, and using them, so to speak, try to save themselves! That is when people feel responsible for themselves!
‘
In Muslim societies, the over-dependence on Allah, could be one of the reasons why it doesn’t work!
On the one hand kuran says: God does not help those who do not help themselves.
On the other hand kuran says that the most important life is after death
and
hold on to the rope of islam and attain paradise.
—
then again:
Everything good comes form islam and islam only.
and kuran knows all the problems and has all the solutions.
—
No two muslim “scholars” agree on the definition of “muslim”. But every muslim functions as a watchdog on every other muslim.
—
With that kind of a confusion (and I have mentioned only a tiny part of it) it is no surprise that nothing works in Pakistan.
So the blame is put on non-muslims and foreign hands – which only makes the situation worse.
Apart from the Zakari bit, an excellently thought through and well explained and well written article.
Pakistan liberals must define clearly what do they want to liberate and what is the mission and technique they want to employ to achieve it. A simple denial of the reality and the issues which concerns the masses, slapping the muslim clergy and the madrassas for the ills of the society such as extremism is not going to change the situation. Nor becoming simple fellow travelers on the band wagon of the democracy which is practiced in one or other form in western countries is not a wise course for a developing a cohesive Nation from the 180 million people.
Democracy requires a common culture, strong and independent institutions and above all education for the masses. It is not the political or military leaders or the beaucracy which is in the way of a democracy, it is also not the midde class but the entire masses which must be taken on board to rid them of the colonial uniforms, and the most natural Islamic way of life is going to lead to a democratic, a secular, and most modern Govt. on earth.
The Europeans needed centuries to reach the not very perfect democracy,the republic of Pakistan can have a most liberal democracy in less than a decade.
Rex Minor
@ Rex
Thanks for liking the article> But what was wrong with Zakria? I have read his book and he makes a lot of convincing arguments.
Regards
Raza
@RHR
Well done! A good thesis as I won’t call it an article. Some of the points were really well argued.
Pakistan will be a democratic state when, and only when, the people develop a democratic outlook, and that is a very rare commodity at present. It will be a long while before Pakistanis can get rid of the Wadhera culture, and it will not be easy.
Pakistan has gone on far too long on a wrong path, and it is not even ready to accept this fact. Articles like this one are very good mental exercise, but devoid of any current usefulness.
@RHR
your article is genuine one, your thoughts and a thesis( as Imtiaz mentioned it) could form the basis of a direction and the strategy for progress in Pakistan. Capitalise on its stregnths and not its drawbacks.
I have not read Zakiri’s book, but I have watched his show in cable networks and certain articles in Newsweek and Times. He is a zionist and does not give me the impression of a genuine person.I have watched him playing with words, a typical approach of a show master but not an intellectual jounalist? We all now the story of chicken or egg first!
We should not ignore the European history, the heads of monarchs and nobility were guillotined before the power was transfered from Bourgeoisie to the proletarians. European Govts face more or less the same problems that Pakistan is facing, but they are containable and get managed with the help of its old but stable institutions and above all the people.
We do not have strongly entrenched traditions of constitutional liberalism, nor do we have a full transparecncy and corruption free Govts. We have just lost the President of the republic who was subjected to a very strong media campaign, allegedly having made use of kickbacks such as receiving credit at a special interest rate and having spent costfree overnight stays, against granting political favours to some business individuals.
The aim of the spring revolution in arab countries has been to achieve freedom and dignity, and the pariamentry parties which are likely to come to power must be committed to the religion of Islam. An genuine Islamic Govt. will have to be automaticaly linked to democracy. For Islam does not recognise Kings or Emperors nor approve individual dictators.
Rex Minor
to rex
Every person who is intelligent and honest and hence criticizes islam is a zionist for you. This shows what a low-level of education (if at all we can call it education) is imposed on muslims.
When Mohammad tries to get back Makkah then he is a hero – but if jews try to get back their land (or what they belive is land given to them by god, who supposedly is also the god of the arabs and muslims) then they are vilified as zionists.
@Observ
Mr Zakari is a regular member of the zionist clique! I am sure you are also an intelligent person, but often think very loudly and instead of keeping your thoughts to yourself, you post them. I wonder for whose benefit? Certainly not yours and most certainly not mine; but they provoke responses from one or other person. You are a quisling like Mr Zakari, but I have not yet found out who your master is?
Rex Minor
to Rex
You are definitely a quisling of islamic totalitarianism and arabic and turkish imperialisms.
I am not a quisling since I do not accept any imperial power over me. I deicde everytime on the basis of honesty and knowledge. But I don’t claim to be perfect or final or to posess anything like that.
Narendar Modi abusing Pakistanis, watch it with your own eyes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P-s22uUuWQ
Although the U.S. is supposed to represent the highest form of Democracy it IS a Republic. All that aside, when comparing the U.S. and Democracy and other countries quest for it, people tend to forget that it took 200 years before the founding fathers were able to establish a Constitution. It was something that had to “evolve”, and I believe that is the point Raza is trying to make here. Pakistan has a long way to go before that stabilization comes. However, as long as Pakistan adheres to being a nation run under a religious rule, real democracy will never survive because Islam is from the Old Testament and that represents anything BUT real democracy!
Lady Guinevere
P.S. Raza, great article and well explained!
@Raj too! You and I once argued about Pakistan being India’s “Dog to Kick” and not America’s, well you are Indian and you are kicking and abusing my dog and I want the “others” to know it and I want it to stop. You know what they say about people who abuse animals! Let them be the judge of your behavior! Leave her alone!
Lady Guinevere
Lady Guinevere wrote:
To lady G.
Pakistan being India’s dog to kick?
On which planet are you living?
Islam has been kicking us hindus since 1200 years and Pakistan is one many-spiked shoe on its umpteen legs.
Do you know the difference how many hindus have been killed or robbed by muslims in India and how many muslims have been killed or robbed by hindus in Arabia?
Lady Guinevere wrote:
If in Old Testament Jahweh was a grumpy gran’pa, in Qu’ran one would see him in his Wolverine Berserker mode!
Islam is a way of life and is synanimous with democracy. This is a news for me that Pakistan is adhering to being a nation run under a religious rule and that the US is supposed to representthe highest form of democracy. Lady G should know that non Islamic parties have the majority in the parliament, in the military, para military and in the administration structures of the country. The Islamic parties and the clergy are given the portfolios of exremism, terrorism, suicide bombings and all other unrests in the country including being responsible for inviting the CIA operatives setting up a large logistic infra structures in the country to support and direct their military operations in and around Afghanistan.
No sir, Pakistan main task remains and that is to decolonis their military and civil structures and set up democracies at the village, town and city level and let the peers decide and control how they want to develop their country. Pakistan constitution should reflect the values derived from Islam, similar to the constitutions of the European countries which reflect the values from the old testaments.
The dignity of a human is inviolable, states article 1 in the German constitution, and there is no reason why it must be different in Pakistan. Solidarity among the different sections of the society and different provincial structures must be incorporated in the constitution. This is how post war west Germany has become today the stronger economy of Europe and is even prepared to offer solidarity to other European countries to make a strong Europe.
People of Pakistan need a a leader with a vision, not scapegoats to transfer blames, self reliance, not aids from others; not forgetting that the sub-continent is approximately two hundred years or more behind Europe. One way would be to implant foreign country’s constitution, which the Indians did, but people of Pakistan have a legacy from Islam, thousands of years history, culture and the rule of law developed and practiced in several stages of history. The mission for the media and the intellegentia is to communicate and create a bondage between the citizens and the political leadership on one hand and to provide visionary information so that the country’s institutions undertake structural reforms. There is a plenty in the article to follow.
Pakistan need not bother about the bloody history of the Imperial Americans and their pioneer forefathers who had to overcome the hostile native Indians, import a large contingent of slaves into the land for hard and menial work, and fight the war of independence. They have developed over time an economy which could not be sustained without a regular contingent of elite as well as low paid immigrant workers. There story is the repeat of Roman empire and other empires which eventualy come to an end, a sad end I must say. The Chinese are already preparing themselves to relieve them of the great burden. Let the Americans follow their interests and let Pakistan tackle their domestic concerns. War on poverty should be the priority for Pakistan. Let the yanks fight the war in foreign lands on their own. This is part of their economy and let them alone with their parnoia and games which is a legacy of their founding fathers.
Rex Minor
@Raj
Lady G has given non muslims a pieace of info. Islam is from the old testament. Quraan is the old testament. Muslims do not agree with the new testaments which European emperors modified it to suit their requirements of the time. Quraan in arabic language remains unaltered.
I am sorry but I did not understand your spanish?
Rex Minor
Allah says
“it’s not my business to protect books”
@Observ
You ignored the word’dog’.
Rex Minor
Lady Guinevere
Thanks a lot madam for liking it!!!
Regards
Raza
@raza
again brilliant article!
i think that in addition to everything that you said, i would like to see the addition of land reforms as another piece of legislature that will go a long way in bringing a stable democracy to pakistan.
it is i think, the attitude of the punjab that plays the major role. and their attitude has always been one of landlords. because of this approach, the attitude that a stable democracy requires has not been built up. if land reforms are introduced, then the proletariat can truly find their voice and the traditional shackles that bind them will then be broken. this is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. only if this happens will most of the people feel that they actually have a stake in the country that is worth their effort. the environment of a landlord of course only helps the dictators which of course has always been the plan.
the second attitude is the attitude of the punjab towards the military. in the punjab, the military have always been looked upon as nothing short of the best in existence. it is a matter of pride. any family with a member in the armed forces sees it as a matter of great pride. this is the same in the indian part of punjab too(i should know). while this attitude is not a problem in itself, what it does is that it makes the people of punjab trust and rely far more on the military than on any government.
in that way pakistan’s job is easier. those willing for a stable democracy should concentrate on the punjab. being the most populous and prosperous it is in punjab that all the answers lie. bring in land reform for the first problem. for the second, a FORMER CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF FROM THE PUNJAB WITH AN IMPECCABLE CHARACTER SHOULD TAKE TO POLITICS! that would be a great way for the traditional punjabi reliance on the the military to be channeled through the ballot!