Re: Pakistan & The Establishment
Hi Zakk,
Read this book sometime back, so little rusty but here goes. Allow me to digress from your statement for just a while cause it defines the inherent problem.
His explanation of how the idea of Pakistan evolved was informative yet brief and touched upon issues which have been completely ostracized from our general discussions. For example, initial concept of Muslim nationhood included areas of UP, Bihar, Hyderabad Deccan and was called Osmanibad. Since most of the working/active All India Muslim League leadership belonged to areas which did not become part of Pakistan, they were forced to find new political constituencies, new alliances were formed and new ‘Ideas’ were discussed. Similalrly, political leaders of Punjab, Sindh and Frontier were suddenly faced with a concept which they were not prepared nor were they very willing to accomodate. It was in this environment where politicians evaded constitutional reforms, compromises were made with the religious right (Objective Resolution of Pakistan), Muslim Leaguer’s lost ground to nationalists and the newly established poltical leadership started its long road of upheavels, political gimmickry, compromises, deceptions and experiments.
One extremely important aspect of our political history which was not touched upon by SC was the role of US and the fight against communists/leftists. Since Pakistan depended upon US aid and military assistance, there was definite pressure to accomodate American interests. Indonesia is another example where Sukharno’s government was toppled by the military and purge or mass murder of leftist/nationalists/communists left 500,000+ dead. Result of such policies targets political parties with leftist/communists/nationalist leanings and then impacts trade, farmer and student unions. End result is in front of us, a state totally dependent upon its establishment i.e., military+beuracracy+feudals+clergy. People ask why India has such a success story, politically speaking. Answer is very simple, they maintained their political diversity. Communists have for ever ruled in the South and Bengal, Congress which started as a secular party has been able to provide India with the politcal leadership and cadre to carry on a political process in its true spirit. When you have freedom of expression, political diversity, tolerance and room for new ideas to emerge and evolve that is the road how civil socieities are formed, through the interaction of citizens with a stake in the system trying to form shock absorbers and creators ofnew ideas. Pakistan’s failure lies in its inability to promote freedom of expression, diversity of ideas and most importantly establishments misconception that national ethos can be manufactured and imposed. Cohen deals in detail as to how the establishment in different eras collaborated with political leaders, religious parties (JI, JUI), judiciary in their pursuite of imposing a cultural ethos as defined by this select group of leaders or interest groups.
Until policies and visions are defined by the state’s security concerns, we will continue to have ideas manufactured and imposed.