September 26, 2008

Zia to Zardari

Zardari, the present President, owes his Presidency as much to Zia, the past President, as to anything else.  It is a classic case of the law of unintended consequences running amuck. 

This has been a recurring theme in Pakistan’s polity and society.  Musharraf also owed his ascent to the Presidency through the courtesy of the then-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s ill-conceived and clumsy attempt to dismiss him in October 1999.  The phenomenon of the dismissed bouncing back to assume power has deep roots in Pakistan’s politics. 

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was overwhelmed in 1966 when, upon being fired by Field Marshal Ayub Khan, he was given a rousing reception at the Lahore Railway Station by Lahorites.  That instilled the seeds of a comeback   through the launching of the Pakistan Peoples Party over a year later, at the residence of Dr. Mubashir Hassan, in Gulberg, Lahore. 

Public memory being selective, Bhutto’s populism overshadowed his adulation of military rule.  In a letter to President Iskander Mirza, he had even elevated Mirza as a personality above that of the founding father of Pakistan, the Quaid. 

Also, Nawaz Sharif, long derided as a protégé of the Establishment, gained a new lease on life when he publicly defied the decision of then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan to fire him in April 1993. 

The aforementioned shows that, in the changing dynamics of political events, how the predictions of someone’s political demise are, to cite Mark Twain, “greatly exaggerated”. 

Pakistan media pundits and soothsayers are quick to write off someone and equally are prone to write obituary columns when someone is out of favor and out of sight, a view that assumes that life is supposed to follow a static script devoid of turns and unpredictable tomorrows. 

By eliminating Zulfiqar, in April 1979, Zia could not predict that he would indirectly help create a dynasty whose principal beneficiary today is Zardari.

Had the facts of the Dacca debacle been fairly presented before the public and those responsible were held accountable, the direction of Pakistan after 1971 may have been different. 

The bad are supposed to be superseded by the better, but sometimes they are replaced by the worse.  The flaws are much more deeply rooted in culture than with the personalities who emerge from that culture. 

The founder of the Mughal Empire, Babar, had alluded to the duality and hypocrisy embedded in the Subcontinent culture when he composed his memoirs 500 years ago. 

The human condition remains the same. 

It doesn’t make a difference whether the ruler wears a civilian achkan or a military uniform.  It is a mere exchange of labels without a change in substance.  Both display symptoms of an autocratic mindset.  Both show and share a similar aptitude for absolutism in the pursuit of power.  Both surround themselves with yes-men and women.  Both equate dissent with treason.  Both put personal ambition above that of common good.  Both are subjected to nonstop praise and publicity.  Both practice despotism under the garb of democracy.  And for both, the pitfalls of downfall are set in motion by overreach. Both are denounced and renounced when out of power.  Inevitably, the actions of both ensure a humiliating exit.

Pakistan today is besieged by the very forces its society and polity have nurtured.  There seems to be a crushing awe of big money which makes a mockery of democracy by conferring, in effect, a license to the super-rich to rule.

The moral compass may be getting increasingly difficult to re-set.  Just note how frequent is the usage of the term “revenge” and how infrequent is the usage of the term “integrity”. 

It is integrity which has been the hallmark of the Quaid’s legacy and personality. The martyrs would be turning in their graves. 

The moral rot within an over-compromised Establishment may well have unleashed forces that it cannot control.  Those bedazzled by the temporary glamour of power are doomed to be eventually acquainted with its darker side.  In a polarized environment, the political gains are fragile and reversible. The unsung Presidencies of the past bear eloquent testimony to the fickleness of fortune. 

Threatening to dominate the current scenario is the gathering storm hovering over the Afghan-Pakistan frontier.  It’s a heavy burden for any setup to carry, especially so, with its international blowback effects coupled with its domestic backlash.  Then, too, the Kashmir cauldron is beginning to bubble and spill over into the danger zone of Indo-Pak relations. 

The cleavage between the elite and the street is sharply apparent.  The mood in the street is one of indignation.  The propensity of the elite is once again of passive acceptance.  One of the definitions of foolishness is to repeat the same thing over and over again and yet expect different results. 

Amidst all these looming challenges, sweeping generalizations are made that democracy has won, parliament has become ‘sovereign’, and soon things will become better. 

How?

Can a raven become Iqbal’s falcon?