Why does Pakistan’s democracy remain under the shadow of army?

Thank the politicians

While in London Nawaz Sharif told reporters that Pakistan was facing certain issues which could not be tackled single-handedly and required consultations with all stakeholders. The government, army and ‘other institutions,’ by which he meant non-civilian intelligence agencies, hold close consultations over important issues which has helped them a lot. He said whether it was a decision regarding war on terrorism, bringing about a constitutional amendment, setting up military courts or formulating NAP, these were done through consultations. To justify his surrender to other state actors he referred to the teachings of Islam. “Our religion Islam also advises us to sort out issues and differences through consultations. It is frequently done through which I also get inputs, enabling the government to reach a decision.”

This is the first official recognition of what a section of the media had witnessed happening over the last two years. The system operating in Pakistan is diarchy where the army is the major player.

Despite the peaceful and orderly handover of power in 2013 after the PPP administration had completed its 5-year tenure, the system has still failed to come out of the army’s shadow. The responsibility lies mainly with the politicians.

The PPP leadership did pretty little to build institutions. Raza Rabbani, who was by no means a favourite of the party co-chairman, played the major role in the formulation of the 18^th amendment which was a major achievement of the period. Zardari claimed he had done the nation a great favour by agreeing to handover powers to the prime minister. Instead of giving credit to Raza Rabbani, who richly deserved it, Zardari said the amendment was the result of the efforts of his minion Babar Awan.

The PPP leadership did pretty little to build institutions. Raza Rabbani, who was by no means a favourite of the party co-chairman, played the major role in the formulation of the 18^th amendment which was a major achievement of the period

Bad governance combined with rampant corruption characterised the PPP tenure. Some of the PPP’s top-most leaders and their relatives were the principle beneficiaries. Zardari’s policy of conciliation was meant to gain the support of some the most corrupt politicians for the ruling alliance. They too were permitted to make hay under the PPP’s shining sun. The establishment as usual maintained the record of the misdeeds and used it to keep the PPP under its thumb.

The PPP’s election manifesto announced by BB on November 30, 2013 promised ‘five Es’ i.e., employment, education, energy, environment and equality “to make our state a truly democratic, welfare state.” What Zardari and Gillani did was to totally and completely ignore the party’s manifesto. There was n o place for people in Zardari’s political outlook. Under the PPP rule the ranks of those below the poverty line continued to swell. Unemployment skyrocketed and the period was marked by shortages and long queues.

The PPP consequently lost support among the masses. Its rule was characterised by bad governance. It could not therefore resist the army’s encroachments on its turf. Major foreign policy decisions were taken away from the civilian government. So were matters related to national security. Balochistan was put directly under the supervision of the army. The PPP-led government in the province was allowed perks and privileges. The establishment also looked the other way as the PPP’s chief minister and his cohorts indulged in the loot of the provinces’ kitty. The much touted provincial autonomy was not granted to Balochistan.

Zardari had meanwhile stopped counting on the masses. He downgraded the importance of public protest. All political changes, he declared, would henceforth take place through talks. He relied totally on wheeling and dealing and handed over the provincial chapters of the party to unscrupulous manipulators.

Come 2013, with Nawaz Sharif in power bad governance continued with minor differences in style. Methods to mint money for instance became more sophisticated. The PPP leaders were less discreet while those of the PML-N were artful dodgers. Development plans and business transactions under the PML-N were characterised by total lack of transparency. Shehbaz Sharif alone accompanied the PM to China and Turkey, the two countries which were to undertake most of the joint projects. As an exception that proves the rule Balochistan CM was allowed to join them on one of their several tours. The scions of the Sharif brother were also taken along and introduced to those who matter in these countries.

Here and there stories of cronyism and corruption leaked out. A federal PML-N minister was reported to have appointed his two brothers on lucrative PIA posts besides accommodating 20 other relatives in the already overburdened national carrier. A PML-N Punjab minister was caught receiving bribe in CCTV footage. While Rangers and NAB have been given a free hand to arrest and interrogate politicians and bureaucrats in Sindh, it is not without reason that they have not been allowed to probe their counterparts in Punjab.

When politicians fail to do their job, they allow the army to occupy their turf. They do not care to seek inputs from relevant quarters, are unwilling to strengthen the parliamentary committees that can help thrash out important national issues

Sharif has aptly been called a part time prime minister as his love of foreign tours indicates. Some believe it involves deals. It is claimed that he has made seven personal visits in the last six months to UK alone.

With people seeing no change for the better in their lives, the PML-N leadership knows few would come out protesting into the streets if their government was to be removed in a putsch. The PML-N stands isolated from the masses. It is an irony that a military leader rather than a politician enjoys the highest ratings in Pakistan today.

When politicians fail to do their job, they allow the army to occupy their turf. They do not care to seek inputs from relevant quarters, are unwilling to strengthen the parliamentary committees that can help thrash out important national issues. They give little importance to the Parliament. In the case of the PML-N the PM and cabinet members usually remain absent from the National Assembly and Senate sessions providing encouragement to party lawmakers to play truant.

Whenever subjected to accountability the politicians often do not deny the charges. They instead question why the army and judiciary are being treated as sacred cows. In other words if they did not take notice of those in uniform who indulged in corruption, the army too has no right to question them. Underlying the logic is a firm belief that those in power have a right to plunder, misuse authority and indulge in cronyism. The establishment however keeps a record of the misdeeds to blackmail the politicians. Thanks the politicians, democracy continues to remain under the shadow of the army.