In a new constitutional democracy such as Pakistan’s, the press is quite free, the courts are generally fair and, for better or for worse, people have got the leaders they deserve.
But this democracy has also been interpreted by some groups as a license for anarchy. Each province is badly infected. There are tribal lashkars in Balochistan, urban terrorists in Karachi, militant separatists in rural Sindh, violent sectarianists in Punjab and drug warlords in the Frontier. These mafias are better armed than the police. They control pockets of land where the writ of the Pakistani state runs thin. Having become a law unto themselves, they are a constant and fearful reminder of the precariousness of our nation-state. Why can’t governments crush them?
Lacking legitimacy, military regimes (such as Zia ul Haq’s) were preoccupied with problems of political support and survival. Hence, far from focussing on how to get rid of the problem, these regimes were often directly responsible for nourishing and sustaining the mafias to do their bidding. A case in point is the MQM which was given succour by Zia ul Haq when he was challenged by the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy in the 1980s. Similarly, the Sipah i Sahaba and various other extremist sectarian groups began to extend their tentacles in civil society during Zia’s forced Islamisation campaigns.
Civilian regimes, however, have had a different mindset in trying to cope with these mafias. Benazir Bhutto’s first government lived constantly in fear of the “establishment”. Her writ was challenged even within some of the organs of the state, like the army and the presidency whose leaders actively conspired to undermine her government. So she could not afford to take on the mafias. Nawaz Sharif’s Islamic coalition, on the other hand, lacked legitimacy because the 1990 elections were rigged. Therefore he felt obliged to join hands with the mafias in order to consolidate his rule.
Ms Bhutto is now a prisoner of sorts again. Her coalition is inherently fragile. She faces a ruthless and strong opposition determined to create or exploit any situation which can undermine her government. That is why the MQM terrorists are getting away with murder and that is why the Sipah i Sahaba continues to fan the flames of violent sectarianism and that is why Nawab Bugti and Nawab Magsi don’t give a damn about what Islamabad says or thinks. The drug warlords are happily harvesting a bumper poppy crop without a care in the world. And Maulana Sufi Mohammad of the Tehreek i Nifaz i Shariat i Mohammadi (TNSM) is rampaging in Swat, Dir and Mohmand agencies. He can do this with impunity because Mr Aftab Sherpao’s dubiously installed PPP government hangs by a thread in the Frontier and doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going.
Such are the inherent weaknesses of electoral coalitions in nascent democracies. Nothing worthwhile ever gets done. In any other country, the likes of Sufi Mohammad would have been bunged into prison for subverting the Constitution (for that is exactly what he and his misguided followers have done by violently insisting upon a separate set of laws for themselves). Not so in Pakistan. Can you imagine the opposition’s outrage in the “free press” if the government of the day decided to crush the revolt in a cold-blooded manner?
Looking at the political landscape of this country today, it increasingly looks as if the idea of Pakistan as a modern nation-state is beginning to come apart. There is bitter discord on every conceivable issue. A powerful section of the MQM wants Karachi to be a city-state, a strategy designed to create untold convulsion and spill much blood. Karachi-ites are bitterly critical of the Pakistan army, the country’s last line of defence. Muslims elsewhere are feverishly disputing the nature of the Pakistani state propagated by Mohammad Iqbal and M A Jinnah. Some people want Pakistan to bask in isolated splendour and are advocating a strategic defiance of the West. Others are seeking to exploit the trickle-down effects of strife-torn Afghanistan which have already plunged another neighbouring country — Tajikistan — into civil war. There is no agreement even on the matter of whether or not to put our bomb on the shelf. And the sinister Indian “hand” is to be found in every nook and cranny of this country.
At the root of it all is the inability of the government and opposition of the day to play by an agreed set of political rules and ideas. This has led to a dangerous free-for-all where minor groups, with strong, parochial interests, are able to blackmail the government or hold it to ransom. Thus, with the two main parties at each other’s throats, marginal groups backing one or the other have got a stranglehold over the country.
Under the circumstances, it would be logical to pray for a modern prince to put the country straight. Unfortunately, there are no such saviours in sight. In the meanwhile, it is clear that our present leaders cannot or will not rise above themselves to stop the country from going to the dogs.