Politicians each others’ worst enemies
The key to success of democracy is the effective working of state and societal institutions and processes over a long period of time. These institutions must respect each other because every institution enjoys autonomy but does not operate in a vacuum. If an institution endeavours to expand its domain at the expense of others or develops a self-ascribed mission of rectifying all other institutions, there will be sharp institutional imbalance which is not helpful to democracy.
In a country like Pakistan where democracy is trying to rehabilitate itself after long years of military rule, some institutions and power players are trying to retain their hitherto privileged position while others are attempting to expand their domain. The civilian political institutions, especially the elected civilian federal government, often find themselves under pressure from the military that has a long tradition of dominating the political process, and the superior judiciary that has acquired a hyperactive profile to extend its domain in the post-2009 period.
In a democratic system, no person or institution can make an exclusive claim to ‘all wisdom’ or the ‘national interest’. All this is evolved through dialogue and mutual exchange among the political and societal players and state institutions. Politics is viewed as the art of the possible within political power framework rather than an activity simply for promoting textbook honesty or righteousness. These values are part of the collective ideals and norms of democracy but all democratic ideals are pursued through mutual consultation and shared effort. The political process creates institutional arrangements for implementing these norms because it is a shared responsibility. No single institution or leader can enforce them.
Pakistan has traditionally experienced institutional imbalance. The return to democracy in 2008 has initiated the process of rehabilitating civilian institutions and balancing them with the state institutions. This balancing of different state and societal institutions has to be distinguished from exact equilibrium which is neither possible nor desirable. Each institution has a defined role but the primacy is assigned to elected institutions.
The pressures on civilian institutions do not come from the military and the judiciary alone. It is also exerted by political leaders and parties. This is done in two ways. First, the poor performance of civilian elected governments alienates the people from civilian leaders and institutions. Second, political leaders delegitimise each other by trading charges and counter-charges. The opposition and the government engage in accusing each other of corruption, nepotism and malpractices. They often pursue these agendas in total disregard of democratic norms and political decency. This is a recipe for self-destruction on the part of political leaders. When they try to delegitimise each other, they in fact undermine civilian politics and democracy.
It is interesting to note that all major political parties are in power either at the federal level or in provinces. The federal coalition includes four political parties. If the PML(N) is in opposition at the federal level it is ruling the province of the Punjab. The PPP heads the ruling coalition at the federal level and shares power in Sindh, KP and Balochistan but it is in opposition in the Punjab.
Being in power at federal or provincial levels, it is ironic that these political parties are busy delegitimising each other by accusing each other of corruption, mismanagement and mishandling of state institutions and resources. The PML(N) engages in mudslinging because it finds itself outsmarted by the PPP leadership that has built such a strong coalition at the federal level that the PML(N) desire to pull down the federal government has failed to materialise.
The main target of the PML(N) criticism is President Asif Ali Zardari. The Punjab chief minister, Shahbaz Sharif, seem to have surpassed his party colleagues in condemning and criticising Zardari, turning this into a personal campaign and an emotional issue.
The latest demonstration of the PML(N) antipathy towards Zardari reflected in the sloganeering by the PML(N) when Zardari addressed the joint session of the parliament on March 17. It revived the unfortunate memories of the 1988-1999 period when the president used to be shouted down by opposition whenever he addressed the joint session of the parliament. Interestingly enough, a few of the members of the PML(N), known for disturbing the address of the president in 1988-1999 were active in sloganeering in the joint session on March 17.
Some of the activists of the PPP are equally hard hitting in criticising the PML(N), especially the poor performance of the Punjab government and highly personalised management of governmental affairs by Shahbaz Sharif. This keeps politics on the boil.
The MQM, a partner of the PPP in the federal and Sindh governments, periodically engages in propaganda against the senior partner in these governments, i.e. the PPP, to extract political and economic dividends regarding its political interests in urban Sindh, especially Karachi. Its campaign for putting an end to extortion is the latest example how it shifts the blame of administrative failure on the PPP rather than share it as a coalition partner.
Lacking a long term perspective, it is not surprising that the political leaders have spent time and energy on the Memo issue and the Mehran Bank scandal. The judicial review of these political issues is not expected to contribute to resolving Pakistan’s economic and social problems or improve governance. These two episodes discredit civilian leaders as well as the military.
The international financial institutions, other states and political analysts do not have to undertake any research on corruption, mismanagement and institutional decay in Pakistan. They get enough material from what the political leaders have been doing to each other over the last four years. They can also get some material from the remarks of the judges of the Supreme Court.
The pathetic show of gross violation of parliamentary decorum by the opposition on March 17 in the presence of the Pakistani service chiefs and foreign diplomats has not simply embarrassed Zardari. It has actually embarrassed the parliament and discredited democracy. This has strengthened the perception that the political leaders lack a long term vision because they cannot get over their personalised and partisan agendas.
The writer is an independent political and defence analyst.