Pakistan's political crises: a way forward

 Pakistan's political crises: a way forward

Political crises in Pakistan started with the death of its founding father, Quid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, followed by the assassination of Liaqat Ali Khan, the then-prime minister of Pakistan. The history didn’t change but was followed by Ayob Khan's first martial law and then the transfer of martial law to another military chief, General Yahya Khan. Resultantly, a full-fledged civil war started in the country, which led to the partition of Pakistan into two parts: Bangladesh and Pakistan. The leadership still learned nothing from its history, and a military chief, Zia ul Haq, imposed another marshal law. The then-prime minister, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was arrested and then sentenced to death. History had been still following itself, and one time more emergency was imposed in the country by another army chief, General Musharaf, and the then prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, was arrested. It was still not enough, and another incident happened in the country when Benazir Bhutto, the then prime minister, and daughter of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was assassinated in Rawalpindi. After the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the Army parted ways by imposing martial law, but another practice started in the country when the then PM, Yousaf Raza Galani, was dismissed through judicial procedure. The practice repeated itself, and the then PM, Nawaz Sharif, was also dismissed through court. When Prime Minister Imran Khan came into power, he started different lawsuits against the opposition; as a result, he was removed from office through a vote of no confidence, and today the present government has started multiple lawsuits against him. What does it show? A prudent mind can understand that nothing has changed in Pakistani politics since its inception. The politics of revenge started in 1950, and to date, the same practice has been followed. So there is a need for change, a change that is pragmatic, constitutional, political, and mature.

The history shows that Pakistani politicians are not interested in solving national problems; they are only interested in taking revenge on each other through governmental machinery. They are not the representatives of the people; they only represent their enmity. Since the inception of Pakistan, every succeeding government has been involved in taking revenge on the previous government, and while doing so, they forget about what they had promised the public. They forget the constitution, they forget their duties, they forget public grievances, but they never forget how to take revenge on their opponents. The opponent also prepares a plan for revenge, and when the opponent comes into power, they start the implementation of their revenge plan. Let's go back into history. Iskandar Mirza, the first president of Pakistan, abrogated the constitution and brought Ayoub Khan into power for its own sake, not for the sake of the country. Ayoub Khan removed Iskandar Mirza from power. Then Yahya Khan removed Ayob from power. Then, when Bhuto opposed Sheikh Mujeeb ur Rahman from taking the oath as president, Sheikh Mujeeb resultantly declared East Pakistan an independent country. On the other hand, Bhuto has been removed by Zia ul Haq. Zia ul Haq was assassinated on the way back to Rawalpindi. Similarly, the practice continued, and then Perviz Musharraf removed Nawaz from government, and then Musharraf was sentenced to death, but he didn’t come back to Pakistan and died in London. After that, Nawaz was dismissed from office by Khan through the court, and then again, Khan was removed from office through a vote of no confidence. This is the sad history of revenge in Pakistan.

 

What is the way forward? How does one change history? The solution to the political crisis, which is the result of revenge, is three-fold. First and foremost, an important step should and must be taken by the public. What is that step? The public must ask their political leaders whether they are contesting elections for revenge or public grievances. The public must ask their leaders not to list the failures and weaknesses of the previous government but to show what they can do for the country. The political debate among people must not be based on listing the drawbacks of their opponent but must be based on what their leader did for the country. The public must ask their leaders to come together and present their respective plans to the nation in the media by saying, "If you elect me as prime minister, I will do this and that for the country" instead of listing the failures of their opponents. So unless the people are not loyal to themselves, leaders can never be loyal to them, and the leader will always justify their failure by listing the failures of others.

Another step should and must be taken at the level of leadership, and that is to leave the politics of revenge. Leaders must learn from history that no one can feel safe in this country with the politics of revenge, as they have seen that none of the prime ministers completed their full tenure in the entire history of the country. If they continue the politics of revenge, then they will be used by other actors, including the military, foreign lobbies, and the judiciary, for their own interests. If they leave the politics of revenge and do not create hurdles for one another, then every party will be able to complete its full term in government without any fear. Until they realize it, they will never be able to run the machinery of government without fear.

Last but not least, the judiciary and media must play their independent roles, and the military establishment must not interfere in the domain of politics. Until every institution remains in its constitutional domain, there will be crises in the country, and there will not be only political crises; there will also be security crises, economic crises, educational crises, judicial crises, and constitutional crises. Pakistan has been passing through all these crises, and the reason revolves around the interference of state institutions in one another's domain.

So the political leadership, the public, the military establishment, the judiciary, and the media must think over the history of Pakistan and then decide whether to change it or repeat it. Everyone must realize they must change history now or let history change them. We, the people, have to decide.

Kamran Khan Advocate

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Love is moral even without legal marriage, but marriage is immoral without love." - Ellen Key

"Love is moral even without legal marriage, but marriage is immoral without love." - Ellen Key   Ellen Key, a renowned Swedish feminist writer, expressed this quotation, emphasizing the significance of love in the context of relationships between individuals, particularly within and outside the institution of marriage. The quote underscores the moral and ethical dimensions of these relationships. Society often considers the legal aspect of relationships as the basis for their morality, even if they may actually be immoral. Conversely, relationships that may not conform to legal standards can still possess moral values. Ellen Key's message conveys that love is the fundamental element in relationships between men and women. When love is present, the relationship is moral, regardless of its legal status. Conversely, any relationship, even a legally recognized marriage, devoid of love, is immoral. One of the supporting arguments for this viewpoint stems from nature. All...
Read more

Permanent hatred & love lead to slavery

  Permanent hatred & love lead to slavery While addressing the farewell ceremony, he advised his nation and said, "The nation that indulges towards another a habitual hatred or habitual fondness is in some degree a slave." (Washington's Farewell Address, 1796.) Washington cautioned his nation against forming permanent alliances or enemies, emphasizing the need to rely on emergent situations instead. He was well aware of the repercussions that arise from habitual animosity and affection. At the time, his nation had just emerged from centuries of slavery and colonial rule, having recently gained independence as the United States of America, with Washington serving as its 1st president. He provided a roadmap for the nation to follow, and adherence to this roadmap ultimately propelled America to become a global superpower. In contrast, nations that pursued an emotion-driven policy witnessed a significant decline in their respective countries. This article will thoroug...
Read more

Faultlines in Pakistan's political culture

  Faultlines in Pakistan's political culture Pakistan's political system has never, not even momentarily, seen a smooth evolution. Pakistan has had ongoing political crises since its inception on the world map, which was then followed by economic, judicial, and constitutional problems. The political culture of Pakistan has certain fault lines that lead to political crises, and unless these fault lines are acknowledged, discussed, and rectified, the political system cannot be altered. Major fault lines in Pakistani political culture include the lack of ideological politics in the country, the lack of internal democracy in the so-called political parties, the legacy of dynasties, the lack of national political parties and a divided house, the practice of revenge politics, polarized politics with populist political leaders and the practice of US vs. THEM, the blame game with propaganda politics, the civil-military divide, the strong establishment and weak judiciary, controlled m...
Read more