The fickle feature of Pakistan polity has been a key de-stabilizing factor. Hero one day; zero another day
Gallows and the Throne
By Mowahid Hussain Shah
Politics in Pakistan has oscillated between the gallows and the throne.
In 1971, Bengali leader Mujib, while held in custody, faced the possibility of execution from the West Pakistan establishment. In February 1974, the same establishment saluted Mujib when he arrived to attend the Islamic Summit at Lahore as head of Bangladesh. After the secession of East Pakistan, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto ruled the roost in the West wing and hailed the truncated Pakistan as ‘new’ Pakistan until he ran afoul of the military and was hung after a dubious trial and conviction. Zardari faced massive pelf charges and was scorned by the establishment until he landed in the presidency and became supreme commander of the armed forces. Nawaz Sharif faced treason charges and the usual sickening calls for capital punishment; after returning from exile, he was given a guard of honor on again regaining the office of Prime Minister of Pakistan.
This fickle feature of Pakistan polity has been a key de-stabilizing factor. Hero one day; zero another day. Yesterday’s traitors are the heroes of today. The ping-pong match between humiliation and adulation has soiled the national landscape.
Massive larceny and missteps of civilian despots have ensured that the praetorian dragon remains to be slain. It is a byproduct of a culture where artificial display and crafty manipulation are viewed approvingly.
In a letter to President Iskander Mirza, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto extolled him as a greater figure than the Quaid. Many similar accolades were showered on Ayub, Yahya, Bhutto, Zia, and Musharraf. In the chairs, they present themselves and are depicted as the paragon of patriotism. Out of chair, they are prone to be tarred and tarnished by trash talk. The constant immersion in these muddy waters has contaminated notions of honor and blurred the differentiation between right and wrong.
The idolatry of chair worship has much to do with it being perceived in permanent terms. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto literally described the throne being all-powerful shortly before he was dethroned. Power has its own fluctuating dynamics, yet is perceived in static terms.
The culture of “sifarish”, sycophancy, and back-stabbing intrigue behind closed doors ensures that the cycle of getting enthroned and being dethroned shall continue, with bouquets for the incoming rulers and brickbats for the dismounted ones.
Not enough attention has been concentrated on identifying what works and what doesn’t work.
There are self-defeating propensities. One is overreaching and grabbing more than one’s legitimate share of power. Another is thoughtless action lured by the immediacy of petty advantage without vetting and weighing of implications. Reflection can and does apply brakes against the accelerating reaction of over-speeding.
One way to break established patterns of self-imposed errors is to dig from the past and invite critique from wiser heads. It is easier to persist, however, with old habits even when they don’t work. The chance of trying a different approach is thereby missed.
Once on the stage, the rulers end up doing what they once deplored off-stage. The once-humble behave like mini-Pharaohs, falsely assuming immunity from karma. And, thus, the pendulum keeps swinging between the throne and the gallows.
