Surrender of power

Power intoxicates those who hold it. As soon as an individual assumes power, it transforms him from an ordinary person into a super human being. The attitude of people changes towards him and he is respected, eulogised and praised. Flatterers gather around him and express their admiration for all his actions. Wherever he goes, people pay homage to him. Everybody is ready to obey his orders. He is referred to with some high sounding titles as Fuhrer, or Il Duce. We can find one such example in our very own political history: it was sycophants who made Ayub Khan Field Marshal, without even fighting and winning any war. Surrounded by brownnosing advisers, he believed that he had extraordinary qualities and wisdom. He asserted his authority and felt a great sense of pleasure when people submitted before him. Such absolute power that he enjoyed is usually held either by monarchs or dictators. Once they assume it, they like to keep it for the rest of their life. That’s why they are either removed by the dagger of the assassin or by a hatched conspiracy. They do not surrender their power voluntarily.
Those who are not killed when being deposed from their seats of power and survive as powerless, their condition is deplorable in the aftermath. As soon as they lose power, they are reduced again to ordinary persons. Those around them turn their loyalties to the next powerful man. We have many examples in history of the kings and rulers who suffered humiliation and insult after their loss of power. When Shahjahan was imprisoned in the Agra fort, all great nobles let him be and he spent the rest of his life in isolation. Farrukhsiyar, the Mughal emperor, when removed from power by the king makers’ party at the court, was imprisoned where he starved and nobody cared for his plight; later, he was mercilessly murdered.
However, we do have fa ew examples in history when the autocrats and monarchs voluntarily retired from kingship. Chandragupta Maurya (320-298 BC), the founder of the Mauryan Empire, after consolidating his dynasty and building the first great Empire, retired to spend his last years as an ascetic. He enjoyed the taste of power but realised that he should devote his time in prayer to get spiritual serenity before death. His son Bindusara succeeded him without any bloodshed. A rare example in the history of kingship.
In another example, Diocletian (284-305 AD), the Roman emperor, was famous in history because he restored the decaying Roman Empire again as a power. As the Roman Empire extended and it became difficult for an emperor to crush rebellions of different nations and tribes, he introduced a novel system to divide the empire among four emperors. This worked. Every emperor was responsible for his domain and this division aided the maintenance of peace and order. Once he achieved this, he retired and started to live as an ordinary Roman citizen. However, after his retirement, his system collapsed and the Roman Empire again plunged into disorder and chaos. A delegation of the Roman nobility went to Diocletian and requested him to take up the responsibility again. Instead of talking politics, he talked about the cultivation of cabbages and their qualities. After retirement, that had become his hobby. He was no longer interested in becoming the emperor. He preferred to cultivate cabbages and wanted to enjoy the peaceful life of an ordinary person. Another rare example of surrendering power.
But every ruler was not like Chandragupta Maurya or Diocletian. Muhammad Tughlaq, the ruler of India, faced many challenges for his rule and there were many aspirants to the throne who took up arms against him. He faced rebellions and was under attack from all sides but he failed to crush the rebellions and adequately respond to the onslaught. At this critical moment, Ziauddin Barani, the author of Tarikh-i-Firuzshahi, advised him to abdicate and retire. He refused and died as a failed and disappointed monarch. He did not want to lose power and face defeat and humiliation. Sometimes, that is the price that a person has to pay for holding power.
In recent history, we have the example of Nelson Mandela, who after his release from prison, was elected the president of South Africa. After serving one term, he retired and left the position for others. Though he did not have political power any longer, but still he was and remains one of the most respected citizens of the world.
On the other hand, there are countless examples of dictators who are reluctant to leave power and cling to their rules for dear life. In the recent demonstrations of people in the Middle East, the recalcitrant Hosni Mubarak left the presidency only after immense public pressure. He is now in prison and facing charges of corruption and massacre of peaceful citizens. In Syria, Bashar Assad is still not ready to submit to the will of the people and is subjecting them to atrocities in vain attempts to hold onto power. In Libya, Qaddafi is still taking last minute gasps to stick to power and refusing to surrender. As things stand in the Middle East at the moment, there is competition between the power of the people and the absolute power of rulers and dictators.
In Pakistan, too, only three dictators have left reluctantly under the pressure of people. One only ‘vacated’ the presidency after he died in accident. It shows that in the modern period, the power of people is emerging with a force and denying dictators absolute power.
In democracy, transfer of power is easy. Those who are elected know that they have to surrender their power once their designated tenure is up and have to submit themselves to the will of the people again through the electoral process. Therefore, in a democratic society, there are no executions or murders of powerful individual to decide succession battles. There is also a check on the use of power .In this case, no one individual becomes the holder of absolute power but rather the real power lies with the mass of the people.

The writer is one of the pioneers of alternate history in the country.