April 2012

Monday, April 30, 2012

The vital characteristics that allowed Western civilization to outpace Muslim civilization in the development of science in the modern period

It takes generations for civilizations to rise and recede. History reveals that every civilization has confronted rise as well as decline. Over the past few decades there has been a vigorous debate over the issue of factors responsible for the development or fall of a civilization. On one side some philosophers and scientists like J. Brownowski, Carl Sagan, and Bernard Lewis have completely attributed advancement of a civilization to intellectual learning based on empirical evidence and rationality, while on the other hand scholars like SH Nasr and Ali Allawi have urged the importance of religious science and spiritual beliefs. There has been insurgence of orthodoxy at some time while there have also been revolts against orthodoxy and fundamentalism, like the rise of Mutazillites in the 8th century.

In my view, religious orthodoxy and adherence to Islamic principles, tradition and norms and scientific underdevelopment were the causes of the decline of Muslims. On one hand where West was making scientific progress and technological development and made rationality prior to everything in inquisition and learning, and was rushing forward in the field of science and technology, the Muslims suspected philosophy and equated secular knowledge with heresy as they were against the notion of rationality and for them God possessed the utmost authority and was regulating the entire universe. There was no room for questioning the popular beliefs of religion. So this fatalistic attitude against rational inquiry and lack of curiosity for learning secular knowledge made it harder for any intellectual advance to occur in the Muslim society.
           
              In my paper I will critically analyze the downfall of the Muslims and present my arguments based on historical evidences to show how the Muslim civilization, which was once on the peak of success, stumbled and started declining because of its reluctance to acquire modern knowledge which in my view is contingent upon every civilization to acquire for economic prosperity as well as political power. I will first discuss the Western history, their dark ages and then their up rise and advancement in the field of technology after the Renaissance and will present my arguments to show how both of these civilizations encountered and responded to the clash between empirical enquiry and popular beliefs of the religion.

           
               If we analyze the Western history, we will come to know that before renaissance the Christian civilization has also encountered the same dilemma. Traditionally the Church possessed the ultimate authority and there was no room for questioning the doctrine and preaching of the Holy Church. It suppressed all teaching which was not in conformity with its preaching. For instance the incident of a dead scientist, Wycliffe whose bones were dug out and broken to pieces, as quoted by Pervez Hoodbhoy. (hoodbhoy, 1991, 25). Another instance which revealed the absolute authority of church was of Galileo, as presented by J. Brownowski. The question here arises that why was Church opposed to rationality and emergence of new ideas and what were the reasons of Church’s unyielding attitude? In my opinion the Church enjoyed its authority and was opposed to new ideas and rational thinking because of certain facts including observance of rules for every matter of life led down by church and unquestionable acceptance of church dogmas and was afraid of the threat posed by free thinking and empirical based enquiry as these factors could challenge its authority. Carl Sagan also presents the incident of destruction of Alexandria in pursuing the same stance. Apart from that the Church also rejected the notion of cause and effect and believed that every good happening is a reward from God and attributed natural disasters and diseases to punishments sent by God on sinful acts and work of demons. For that reason they discouraged the study of medicine and other sciences, as Hoodbhoy quotes Saint Augustine saying, “all diseases of Christians to be ascribed to demons.” (hoodbhoy, 1991, 27). Hoodbhoy also argues that “the church was not only the guardian of Christian soul, but also of his physical well being.” Hoodbhoy also presents a number of beliefs and doctrines of the church including,
Attack on doctrine of sphericity of earth and antipodes by theologians,
Reddening of water was taken as indication of God’s wrath,
Comets were viewed as fireballs flung by an angry God,
Thunderbolt was in consequence for five sins. (Hoodbhoy, 1991, 27-29)
 In short the Church was congested with cluster of mythologies and misbelieves during its early ages. The church continued to exercise its authority for almost ten centuries.
           
             In early 16th century a drastic transformation took place in Christian civilization as an attempt to reform the Catholic Church, in the form of Protestant reformation. Martin Luther, a German monk, in 1517 rose against some beliefs of Roman Catholic about the authority of Pop and Bible and salvation. They opposed Catholic Church’s doctrines of office and authority of pop, authority of Bible, and salvation. The Protestants came up with two doctrines known as Sola scriptura: the Bible is the final source for authority, and Sola fide: salvation comes by faith alone. (What is the difference…)

           In the late 15th and early 16th century, Europe started a gradual pushing back against the stranglehold of the unitary Catholic Church. It was at that time when came the Renaissance. The freedom of thought gradually started gaining ground and age of reason was begun. The unleashing of sciences started with it bringing in better technology and advancement. It was then followed by the Industrial Revolution in 19th century, as Bronowski also mentions that it was not only an economic revolution but also a social revolution. I think this was where the West was super ceding and gained an upper hand. According to Mirza A Baig, “The 15th century saw intellectual awakening in Europe now known as ‘the renaissance’. The writings of Arab scientists and philosophers were translated in European languages…” (Decline of Islamic…)
           
                   So historical evidences tell us that in pursuing advancement in science, West prioritized reason and rationality and by doing so they questioned each and every theory which came under their way and sought empirical evidence to answer that, and in my view that was the time when the upsurge of their civilization occurred and they started progressing. But now if we consider the history of Muslims, it is revealed to us that in the early ages Muslims, Islam spread very fast, and for many centuries Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement. The era between 8th and 11th century is known as “The Golden Age” of Muslims. J Brownowski also admires the Muslim civilization and their development in medicine, architecture, philosophy and mathematics in his documentary. In that period Muslim civilization progressed with leaps and bounds. It produces a tremendous amount of great Muslim scholars like Al-Khawarzmi, Bu Ali Sina, Ibn Esa, Al Farabi who are still regarded as the pioneers of science. Pervez Hoodbhoy also quotes George Sarton and a scientific journal Nature in which similar remarks about the glorious golden age of Muslims have been presented. (hoodbhoy, 1991, 102). Here question arises that if science was progressing in that era, what factors resulted in decline of Muslims? And what led to the difference in the attitude of Muslims towards science after the Golden Age?
           
                 I think there are a number of reasons responsible for the downfall of the Muslims including reluctance in pursuance of technological development, the attitude of ruling dynasty, rejection of science and lack of curiosity for learning and advances in thought. But in my opinion all these factors emerge from one single cause which is religious orthodoxy and strict adherence to religious doctrines. Ali Allawi quotes Shakib Arsalan who in his series of articles in a journal titled Why Muslims are Backward and why Others have Progressed also argues that “the main causes of Islamic decline were the Muslim unwillingness to take initiative, be proactive and the absence of intellectual creativity (ijtihad) within the Islamic world” (rise and decline…). In response to the issue of the difference of the attitude of Muslims towards science, I personally agree to the view of modernist-reconstructionist Muslims who credited the past scientific achievement to the harmony between Islam and science, in contrast to orthodox-restorationists who claimed that the glory needs restoration of Shariah only (hoodbhoy, 1991, 104). Here it can be argued that scientific development took place in the early Muslim ages because they were not against science, or in other words they took science and developed harmony between science and theology. In their view religion was never against study of science and they assert that seven hundred and fifty verses of Quran exhort believers to study nature and pursue modern science. A hadith of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) can also be quoted here according to which it is the duty of every Muslim to seek knowledge.
             
                   I would like to quote Bernard Lewis here who, in his famous book “what went wrong” claims that Christianity separates the church from the state, but Islam does not. Instead, it teaches Muslims to apply scripture to the real world (Lewis, 2002). I think this is where the orthodoxy started building up its support and growing its roots. They took religious belief and doctrines as the ultimate authority and instead of looking for some rational arguments and empirical evidences; they rejected all the notions of science which challenged the popular beliefs. The decline of sciences in Islamic culture was synchronic with the upsurge of religiosity which made the existence of secular pursuits ossified. For instance in early ages of Muslim history, there raised three sects collectively known as Jabria, who believed in the doctrine of predestination and claimed that every event and action was the act of God. Not only had they considered the economic and political incidents as acts of fate, for them the brutal incidents like that of slaying of Imam Hussain in the battle of Karbala was also an act of inexorable fate, as mentioned by Hoodbhoy (hoodbhoy, 1991, 117). Although there emerged a movement against orthodoxy by Mutazillites led by Wasil Ibn Ata, who strongly believed in the doctrine of free will and reconciliation of faith and reason, but was banished because of use of repression by their rulers, as Hoodbhoy quotes the example of Al Mamun who persecuted all such qazis and ulema who refused to testify to the doctrine of Quran’s creation (hoodbhoy, 1991, 120). Also they gave primacy to reason over revelation. So it was soon banished resulting in the strike back of orthodoxy as people strongly supported the religious opposition against them by Imam Hanbal.
           
                     Another important factor which led to the decline was rejection of science on the basis that it goes against Islamic faith and belief. All the sciences including geometry, astronomy and philosophy were rejected on the same grounds and the people who practiced them were condemned as heretic. Hoodbhoy also presents quite a few examples representing these incidents, for instance:
Considering ullum ul awail as ulum ul mahjura (repudiated sciences),
Banning of copying of books of philosophy in Baghdad,
Burial of books of Abdus Salam,
Khwarizm Shah reporting astronomy as pure heresy,

                Apart from all these anti rational views, they also refused to accept the connection between cause and effect and had firm belief that God is solely responsible for everything. For instance the Asharite dogma and also Al Ghazali’s theology, according to which God is directly responsible for the cause of all physical events, and constantly intervenes in the worldly affairs. Hoodbhoy also quotes Al Ghazali who reckons philosophers such as Ibn Sina and Al Farabi as unbelievers (Hoodbhoy, 1991, 127). The burning of cotton in Ghazali’s view was also an act of God and couldn’t happen without His intervention. A similar example has also been presented by Iysa Bello who quotes Ghazali’s belief on God’s knowledge of the particulars according to which “God knows the eclipse and all its attributes and accidents through an unchangeable knowledge which is His eternal attribute” (bello, 1989,113).
      
               An important factor which in my opinion played a havoc role in reforming the attitude of Muslims towards intellectual learning and securing western science was the attitude of West towards undeveloped nations after the Renaissance. Throughout the history, the relationship between Islam and West had been of a qualitatively different form. There had been times of fruitful collaboration as well as eras of fierce wars and violence like battle of Crusades and Ottoman domination of Balkans. So Muslims had always seen West with eyes of suspicion. After the renaissance, the birth of modern science took place. The former feudal system was replaced by the capitalist system and mystical universe turned to mechanical. But then West used this power endowed by science as a weapon and started subjugating and colonizing the less developed nations. Here the Muslims viewed West as a great threat to their civilization and strongly denounced each and every aspect of their life including culture, economic system, educational system. For instance the British, who came to India for trade but then ended up colonizing the whole sub continent bringing it under their power in the 19th century. Faced with the brutal onslaught of mercantile imperialism, the Muslims who ruled India for many ceturies couldn’t digest their defeat and rose against them. They rejected their language, culture and even education which for Muslims was the need of that time as Hindus were progressing in advancement. At that moment the rationalists like Sir Syed Ahmad Khan started his campaign known as Ali Garh Tehreek and urged the importance of modern education. But the reluctance of Muslims to learn modern education served as a major portion of their decline and they preferred adhering to their moral values and tradition.
       
             Summing up all my arguments, I would like to conclude here by saying that there were quite a number of factors responsible for their decline including their anti rationalistic approach towards intellectual learning and modern science, the hesitancy and lack of curiosity towards practical knowledge, and adherence to tradition and faith with unquestionable authority. I presented my arguments to show how the Christian civilization confronted the same situation when Church was the absolute authority, and then how they progressed by prioritizing rationality and empirical enquiry in learning. But in contrast the Muslims, who were on the peak of success in early ages and made remarkable progress in the fields of philosophy, arts and other sciences, unfortunately turned their back towards modern knowledge and rationality and gave priority to religious belief and faith, and as a consequence started declining. In the end I would conclude by urging that keeping in view the devastation caused to Muslims by this anti rational attitude, it is the very need of the day to transform our mindset, because it is only modern knowledge which can bring development and advancement in the technology.

Sunday, April 29, 2012

Ethnic Nationalism as a Façade for Class Exploitation: the case of the Pashtun Nationalist Struggle


Pakistan has been prey to strong ethnic and sectarian divides since its inception. The politics of ethnic nationalism has been used to disguise the exploitative class structure and this paper explores the case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in this regard. The politics of ethnicity has scarred national integration and solidarity. As politics has mainly remained the domain of the elite, the slogan of ethnicity has been raised time and again to perpetuate the existing political structure and class inequality. The case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is no different. The Pashtuns are a historic race who takes pride in its bravery, hospitality and heroism. This strong cultural tradition and affiliation only to one’s own ethnicity and tribe should have faded over the years somewhat with the influence of modernity. However, this was not the case. This strong allegiance continued and the role of the tribal Sardars and the ruling class is crucial in this. It is always essential for the ruling class to maintain the status quo, since that is what perpetuates and strengthens their control. In order to achieve this goal they use the slogan of ethnicity to distract people from the real economic and social disparities that confront them. This is precisely what the nationalist leaders of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have done in the name of the Pashtun nationalist struggle.
           
                   According to Lenin on Marxist ideas about nationalism:
“Throughout the world, the period of the final victory of capitalism over feudalism has been linked up with national movements. For the complete victory of commodity production, the bourgeoisie must capture the home market, and there must be politically united territories whose population speak a single language … Therein is the economic foundation of national movements.” (Lenin).
            
                  Marxist point of view believes nationalism to be a capitalist construct created by the bourgeoisie in order to detract the masses from the real issue of class exploitation that they are facing. For Marx the proletariat are a community in their own who are not subject to national boundaries but it is imperative for them to recognize their class exploitation as a whole. In much of the third world “nationalism” was used to mobilize the masses against colonial rule. In the case of Pakistan as well, the ruling dominant party was the Muslim League which consisted mainly of the landed class. However the concept of a separate state for the Muslims without Hindu subjugation and with equal economic and social opportunity seemed very attractive for the masses that ended up supporting the Muslim League. However once the new state was formed the ruling elites entered the spheres of state and nation building and the idea of equal economic opportunity proved to be an elusive dream for the vast majority of Pakistanis. In essence the elite bourgeoisie not only directly affect the lives of the masses through means of the market forces and means of production which they control but also indirectly affect the way the masses perceive their own reality. This is identified by Marx as “false consciousness”. Through the disguise of ideology the ruling class in reality serves its own vested interest and manipulates the lower classes into believing that their progress lies in uniting under the flag of ethnic nationalism.


When we apply the above mentioned dynamics to the case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, it transpires that the same is true for this enigmatic Western Frontier. Wali Khan at one occasion made a historical statement that has been quoted by ANP supporters till today. According to him :

“I have been a Pakistani for the last 40 years, a Muslim for 1300 years and a Pashtun for 400 years.”(Khan).

The above statement is a prime example of rhetoric used for manipulating masses to believe that their escape lies only in uniting on ethnic grounds.

Although the overall social structure of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is much like the rest of Pakistan, certain differences exist. Tribal “jirgas” form an important part of state machinery in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Even at the eve of partition the Governor of NWFP consulted the tribal elders on the issue of “Pakhtunistan”. The elders of the village not only made decisions on behalf of the tribes but also had the agency to call the “Lashkar” (Stewart). The importance of “Jirgas” cannot be ignored as even today they stand unchallenged hence the lives of ordinary people depend to a great deal on the tribal elders and leaders. The British Raj played almost the same card in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as they did in Punjab and other areas of the subcontinent. The big “Khans” were given huge tracts of land on which they exercised considerable social and economic control. Below them were the small “Khans” who owned smaller landholdings and also were not the direct favorites of the British (Banerjee). Therefore a class conflict in the society of Khyber Pakhtunkwa was bound to evolve entailing control in the hands of the aristocracy and marginalizing the peasantry.

After the creation of Pakistan, over time the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (known as NWFP before 2010) began its own nationalist struggle on the grounds, that for the Pashtun race Pakistan was a secondary identity and that their ethnicity was the foremost source of identity and affiliation. Much like the Muslim masses of the subcontinent, the Pashtun masses of Pakistan have been made to believe that their salvation lies in attaining self determination and in the ideology of ethnicity that is promoted by these nationalist leaders. The Awami National Party (ANP) has been the single most important voice of the Pashtun nationalist struggle since independence. The party has come a long way from before partition under the auspices of Bacha Khan and the “Red Shirts”. The “Red Shirts” or the “Khudai Khidmatgar” party in essence was a non violent anti colonial movement that wanted to rid the subcontinent of the British Raj (Sufi). It is noteworthy that over the years the movement has evolved a great deal and is now one of the mainstream political parties in Pakistan; however the class element among the party leadership remains quite the same.

The Red Shirts were lead by Abdul Ghaffar Khan who wanted “Pakhtunistan” - a separate homeland for the Pashtun race. He came from a family of aristocratic landowners. At the time of independence in 1947, majority of the Red Shirts voted against Pakistan as according to their demands the referendum should have had an option of voting for “Pakhtunistan” (Ahmed). After independence, the Red Shirts elected Abdul Ghaffar Khan as their party President. Initially in 1958 with the imposition of martial law the party suffered a setback however later came together in 1964. Throughout much of the next decade the party adopted a socialist ideology and consisted of leaders from both wings of Pakistan demanding provincial autonomy (Rashiduzzaman). Later in 1986 the Awami National Party emerged along with other ethnic nationalist groups, and elected Asfandyar Wali Khan as the chairperson.

Abdul Ghaffar Khan belonged to the Muhammadzai clan which is a sub division of the Abdali or Durrani tribe. Ahmed Shah Abdali was the founder of the state of Afghanistan so in essence the Muhammadzai clan is one of the royal dynasties of Afghanistan. The close association of this family’s nationalist politics to the politics of Afghanistan can therefore be attributed to this link. According to the Marxist conception of the Asiatic mode of production, land was allotted to “jagirdars” for raising revenue for the state. After the introduction of the Permanent Settlement Act, the “jagirs” became private property. Furthermore, the Indians who had helped the British in the mutiny of 1857 were rewarded a great deal. The case of Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s father Bahram Khan falls under this category. He extended his support to the British in the mutiny and as a result got awarded acres of land which later became his personal “jagir”. Nevertheless Abdul Ghaffar Khan involved himself in an anti colonialist struggle and went ahead to mobilize the masses against the foreign rulers. Nevertheless, when viewed closely it is evident that throughout his movement the interests of the Muhammadzai clan elites were always accounted for (Ahmed). More so he never raised the slogan of land reforms or anti feudalism as land is the principle means of exercising political, social and economic control in the rural areas of Pakistan especially.
            
               The introduction of the ‘One Unit’ plan, in 1955, developed anguish among the smaller provinces of West Pakistan. This lead to the formation of the National Awami Party (NAP) which was a conglomeration of individuals from various political and ideological leanings all demanding provincial autonomy and representation. The overall tilt of the party was anti imperialist especially opposing the inclusion of Pakistan’s entry into defense agreements with the United States. Although the political ground realities had changed to an extent however Wali Khan, the son of Abdul Ghaffar Khan, decided to continue his father’s political heritage. Hence the idea of “Pashtoonistan” was not completely washed out of the picture. Cold war politics was at its peak at that time and he used the appeal of socialism to prove his anti imperialist stance and to gain support from the USSR. They portrayed themselves as a progressive bourgeoisie who was fighting for the rights of the oppressed proletariat against the imperialist and centralist state (Ahmed).
          
                   If viewed in contrast to the other nationalist struggles for provincial autonomy and representation of language, the Pashtun struggle cannot compare on equal footing. Unlike the Bengalis they were never able to forward the cause of their language as they did not form a majority in the overall population. Although the centralist tendencies of the state did impose Punjabi-Mohajir dominance, it is evident that the leadership of the Pashtoonistan struggle simply wanted to regain their past hegemony. The people of the province had voted in favor of Pakistan with a majority. The creation of the state of Pakistan was to harm the Pashtun elitist leadership the most. Many of the powers previously exercised by the tribal leaders and landlords now became the domain of the state.
            
                When considering the case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa it is essential to realize that the Pashtun bourgeoisie consist of landed as well as industrial families. The three major capitalist families are the Hotis, the Khataks and the Khanzadas. These families were also part of the 22 famous families of Ayub Khan’s era which controlled the majority of Pakistan’s financial assets. Much of their financial capital is invested in sugar mills. These capitalists can easily associate with other capitalists in Pakistan on the basis of shared interest and material welfare. They are aware of the fact that economic links with the rest of the country are crucial to their survival as it provides the chunk of the market demand for their sugar. The Pashtun capitalists have also invested in other industries such as pharmaceutical and textiles (Ahmed).

The interests of the petty bourgeoisie and the urban middle class of Pashtuns have always been in line with integration with the rest of the country’s economy. The Pashtuns have dominated the transport business in the country especially in Punjab and Sindh. The migration of Pashtun workers to these urban centers has provided them with employment opportunities and has enabled them to send back remittances home to their province (Ahmed). So much so that this migration has caused ethnic violence in Karachi especially between the Pashtuns, Mohajirs and Sindhis who are all competing for employment and land. The Sindhis feel that their rights are being usurped by these foreign immigrants. On the other hand we do not find many examples of the Frontier hosting as many migrant workers from other parts of the country or in that case the vast majority of land and property in the Frontier is owned by the Pashtuns.

In order to establish the claim that much of the ethnic nationalism is lead by the elites and does not essentially hold mass support it is essential to consider the viewpoint of the peasantry as well. Statistics reveal that many evicted peasants from Khyber Pakhtunkwa ended up in urban centers of Punjab and Sindh specifically Karachi for alternative sources of employment (Ahmed). The peasants now have realized that the concept of “Pakhtunistan” would have entailed total control of the landlords over all means of production hence depriving the peasantry of any chances of education, employment etc. They have realized that tendencies towards national integration are in their best interest. This by no means implies that they are willing to give up their cultural and traditional values and practices; rather it implies that they accept that assimilation with the rest of the country and acceptance towards the social setup of other provinces will help them achieve economic progress and development.

The Green Revolution of the 1960s was a watershed event in increasing economic and class disparities in Pakistan targeting the peasants directly. Upon independence most of the peasants in Punjab and NWFP were involved in a sharecropping relationship. The Green Revolution in President Ayub Khan’s era introduced mechanized farming techniques and the use of HYV (High Yield Variety) seeds. The idea was to improve efficiency and to eradicate the parasitic relationship that existed between the landlord and the peasant in which the landlord was not responsible for the entire process of cultivation but was only interested in the final produce (Herring). However, this reform plan backfired, as  on most middle and few large land holdings  the use of tractors and tube wells rendered many of the peasants evicted from the land and unemployed (Alavi). The new techniques improved the yield and hence a large majority of peasants in the rural areas found themselves landless and searching for alternative employment. This lead to unrest followed by armed clashes as income disparities reached new heights.
           
             The Pashtun proletariat in Karachi has on several events proven himself to be part of a class struggle against the capitalists as opposed to being involved in an ethnic struggle. The economic and social deprivation that he suffers at the hands of the capitalist makes him realize that it is more imperative to confront this class exploitation. The notorious slaughter of S.I.T.E workers in Karachi was a landmark event for the labor struggle in Pakistan. The ruling political bourgeoisie though at once subdued the unrest; however the event had far reaching effects throughout the country. The Pashtun peasants in Peshawar lead a protest and rally in order to express their solidarity with the innocent workers who had been killed. During the same year a group of peasants were involved in a fierce struggle with the landlords in Malakand when 14 other peasants from Mardan were arrested on the grounds of extending their support to the peasants of Malakand (Ahmed). This made them a part of a greater class struggle beyond the narrow bounds of ethnicity or province. 
            
                 The urban and rural middle class of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa also do not share grievances on ethnic grounds as have been witnessed in the cases of Bengali or Sindhi nationalist movements. In Pakistan, the civil service and military are the major employers for the middle class. According to the government’s statistics, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa accounts for 13.40% of Pakistan’s population whereas they account for 22-25% of the military according to unofficial estimates (Rizvi, 199). This represents a more than proportionate representation of the Pashtuns in the army. A similar observation can be made about the civil service. Moreover employment in the military provides a valuable indication on the socio-economic reality of the Pashtun middle class. This is because defense expenditure forms the greatest chunk of Pakistan’s annual budget. Moreover the military as an institution is well grounded in Pakistan and hence provides people with fair chances of upward social mobility unlike most other institutions which have been riddled with corruption and have no marks of meritocracy left. Therefore the Pashtun middle class has no grievance against the military in terms of not getting an equal chance rather many other communities accuse the Punjabis and Pakhtuns of dominating the military and hence other organs of state machinery as well.
            
            The last elections of 2008 once again saw the Awami National Party coming to power in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. They were welcomed once again as a breath of fresh air after the suppressive regime of MMA. Overall the country’s political situation took a turn as a democratically elected government came to the fore after a nine year long military dictatorship. One of the landmark measures that ANP was successful in taking was the change in name of the province to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Attaining a separate identity for the Pakhtuns and their province had long been on their agenda and this was finally achieved through the eighteenth amendment. However when examining their role within the past four years it appears that politically and economically their performance has been quite dismal. The politics of elitism was once again witnessed when Asfandyar Wali, named his nephew Ameer Haider Khan Hoti as the Chief Minister. Such an act in the presence of other senior and competent candidates such as Bashir Bilour was a golden example of the dynastic politics which is characteristic of the politics of not only ANP but also of most other mainstream parties of Pakistan. 
            
                 The Chief Minister in 2009 explained that a massive reform in health, education and industry was one of the foremost goals of the ANP on attaining power. According to the United Nations assessment report the flash floods that hit Swabi District in 2009 created massive problems of food supplies and sanitation (UNDP). However the government was unable to bring the situation under control without the help of international agencies such as the United Nations. The catastrophic floods of 2010 were a classic example of failure on the part of the provincial government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa especially. The military had to step in with its resources in order to rescue people from the disaster (UNDP). The government’s steps have been insufficient and the plight of thousands of poor and helpless people continues. Furthermore to aggravate the situation, the international donor community has expressed serious skepticism on the efficient use of funds. The state apparatus is prey to corruption and the funds are not being used properly which is a big question mark for the government of ANP.
            
              On coming to power another major claim made by the ANP was to curb radicalism and hold dialogues with the militants in order to achieve peace in the region. However the police was often found inefficient and helpless and the vacuum left by them was filled by the Taliban. Incidents of Taliban taking over the sphere of law enforcement in the province indicate the failure of the government in its promise of providing law and order and security to the public. The Chief Minister of the province also claimed to build underpasses, major hospitals, Burn and Trauma center of Peshawar and provision of clean drinking water however ground realities are quite murky ( ANP).  
            
              On its agenda of eradicating illiteracy and lack of awareness, the government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa faced another setback recently. In August 2011, the anti polio drive carried out in the province failed to produce the desired results as a vast majority of parents refused to get their children vaccinated. This percentage was mainly to be found in areas with lower literacy rates where parents were misconstrued into believing that vaccinations might render their children infertile or impotent. The United Nations has expressed concern over this alarming trend as it is arising out of many of the relatively peaceful areas in the province (Dawn News). This establishes the fact that the government despite carrying out the drive has failed to take necessary measures in order for the drive to be successful. The masses with low rates of literacy need to be made aware of issues concerning their own health and betterment but the government’s role is nowhere to be found in this regard.

A close examination of the Awami National Pary’s rule shows that they ended up preferring the politics of expediency over their claimed politics of nationalist struggle. An example of elitist politics in the ANP was when Wali Khan awarded a ticket to Ghulam Farooque for a seat in the National Assembly. Ghulam Farooque was one of the architects of the industrialization of the era of the 1960s which resulted in increasing disparities and depriving the Frontier of its rightful share in Pakistan’s development (Ahmed).The leadership though itself belonged to the landed class and the bourgeoisie, adopted leftist and socialist leanings in order to forward its cause of Pashtun nationalism.

The overall economic conditions of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have never been appreciable. The central government has always been accused of neglecting Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and lack of development plays an important role in shaping the minds of the people. According to the Bureau of Statistics, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa the literacy ratio for the province is 37.26 %. The situation in the tribal belt is even more appalling with a literacy ratio as low as 17.42%. Despite this the provincial government has allocated only 6.04% of the revenue expenditure for education (Federal Bureau of Statistics). Overall a low rate of education means that the masses are more prone to the rhetoric of ideology and ethnic nationalism. The lack of exposure means the people readily accept the claims of the Awami National Party.

Supporters of “Pashtun” nationalism argue that this ideology cannot simply be brushed aside by arguments regarding class cleavages. It is essential to look into history to view the various ethnic nationalist struggles that have taken place in this land. The British Raj experienced numerous tribal insurgencies from the Pashtuns. The Faqir of Ipi’s revolt is an example of one such struggle. He was a man of good repute and saintly demeanor however was only able to mobilize a small force to fight against the British. Despite inadequate supplies and overall asymmetrical capability against the British army, Faqir Ipi’s force fought with valor and bravery. The Pashtuns gathered under his umbrella to fight foreign intervention and with the hope of maintaining the purity of their land and race. However it is noteworthy that the tribes of the area always found it impossible to unite. Apart from their differences and feuds, another reason for the lack of support to Faqir Ipi’s movement was the fact that the British secured the loyalties of many of the tribal leaders by giving them financial subsides. This provides analysis into the class structure of the area. It suited the tribal lords to admit allegiance to the British Raj when they were provided with financial incentives that kept the control in their hands (Talbot).  
            
             Another historical example of Pashtun resistance are the Anglo Afghan wars. These wars must be analyzed from the viewpoint of the Pashtun race as resistant not only to foreign military invasions but also to the cultural change brought about by outside powers. The first Anglo Afghan war especially has been considered one of the worst defeats for the British army leaving them with only one survivor (Eliot). The wars took place as part of the larger phenomenon of the “Great Game” which was a tussle between the Russian and British empires for influence in Afghanistan.
            
             Ethnic identity throughout the world is one of the strong notions of affiliation. Several movements and struggles have taken place in the name of ethnic nationalism. In some cases such as East Pakistan, they have produced the desired outcomes. In other cases however they continue to be futile. Although the socio economic and cultural realities of every community differ nevertheless all such movements share certain characteristics and all aim to achieve autonomy and identity. Pakistan in its initial years had to deal with Bengali separatism until finally in 1971 the two wings of Pakistan parted ways. The Bengalis too were promised an elusive dream of self identity and equal economic opportunity and an escape from the colonial hegemony exercised by West Pakistan. However with the exception of the acceptance of Bengali as their national language, Bangladesh too has failed to achieve much. The post independence politics of Bangladesh too has been a victim to military dictatorships and dynastic elitist politics.
            
                 The case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the Awami National Party presents a similar dilemma. The politics of pragmatism has caused the party to shift sometimes in favor of socialism and sometimes in favor of industrialization. What began as a non violent anti colonial struggle against oppression has over the  years corrupted and become one of the many opportunistic political parties found in much of the third world. The flag of ethnic nationalism continues to win the ANP votes in most areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Low rates of literacy and lack of awareness has rendered the masses incapable of realizing that their elected representatives are in fact their exploiters. The masses need to realize that their freedom lies in confronting the class conflict which is existent not only in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa but in all parts of Pakistan. Uniting under the banner of ethnic nationalism will simply continue this process of exploitation and prevent them from achieving upward political, social and economic mobility. 

Works Cited
Ahmed, Feroz. Ethnicity and Politics in Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford UP, 1998. Print.
Ahmed, Feroz. "Ethnicity Class and State in Pakistan." Economic and Political Weekly 31.47 (1996). Www.jstor.org. Economic and Political Weekly. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4404794>.
Ahmed, Feroz. "Pashtoonistan and the Pashtoon National Question." Pakistan Forum 3.12 (1973). Www.jstor.org. Middle East Research and the Information Project. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/2569059>.
Alavi, Hamza. "Elite Farmer Strategy and Regional Disparities in the Agricultural Development of Pakistan." Economic and Political Weekly 8.13 (1973). Www.jstor.org. Economic and Political Weekly. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4362483>.
Banerjee, Mukulika. The Pathan Unarmed. Karachi: Oxford UP, 2000. Print.
Bessler, Manuel, and Stephanie Bunker. FLOODS IN NWFP PAKISTAN – 17 August 2009. Rep. UNDP. Web. <http://oneresponse.info/Countries/Pakistan/publicdocuments/FLOOD_17August-2009.pdf>.
Elliot, J. G. The Frontier 1839-1947. London: Trinity, 1968. Print.
Herring, Ronald J. "Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and the "Eradication of Feudalism" in Pakistan." Comparitive Studies in Society and History 21.4 (1979). Www.jstor.org. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/178694>.
Rashiduzzaman, M. "The National Awami Party of Pakistan : Leftist Politics in Crisis." Pacific Affairs 43.37 (1970). Www.jstor.org. Pacific Affairs, University of British Colombia. Web.  <http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublication?journalCode=pacificaffairs>.
Stewart, Jules. The Savage Border The Story of the North West Frontier. Gloucestershire: J.H Haynes and, 2007. Print.
Sufi, Juma Khan. Bacha Khan, Congress and Nationalist Politics in NWFp. Lahore: Vanguard, 2005. Print.
Talbot, Ian. "Waziristan, the Faqir of Ipi, and the Indian Army: The North West Frontier Revolt of 1936-37 by Alan Warren." The American Historical Review 106.4 (2001). Www.jstor.org. The University of Chicago Press. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/2692976>.
UNDP. "Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government and UNDP Release First Ever Millenium Development Goals Report." Www.undp.org.pk. UNDP. Web. <http://undp.org.pk/khyber-pakhtunkhwa-government-and-undp-release-first-ever-millennium-development-goals-report.html>.
Yusufzai, Ashfaq. "Anti-polio Drive in KP: Over 16,000 Refusal Cases Recorded in July." Dawn News [Peshawar] 4 Aug. 2011. Print.
Rizvi, H.A (2001). “The military” in Gilani and Weiss (eds) Power and Civil Society in Pakistan. New York : OUP. Pp. 186-213 


Written By: Chanel Khaliq

Change in ideology – from socialism to capitalism: the case of the Pakistan Peoples Party

The guarantee of equal economic opportunity and an end to exploitation has long attracted the masses of underdeveloped countries - victims of poverty, inequality and despair. Pakistan’s case is no different. The wave of communism began when USSR adopted the Marxist-Leninist model and this lead to the creation of a new sphere of influence. Socialism began to be viewed by many countries as a respite from the unjust and exploitative capitalist system created by the West and the sway of modernity. It was Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan who raised the slogan of socialism and founded the Pakistan Peoples Party in 1968 (PPP). In his words:
          
            “Socialism is of direct interest to Pakistan, an underdeveloped country, marked by internal and external exploitation” (Grover, 237).

The party’s manifesto, that won them 81 seats in Parliament in the 1970 general elections, stated “Islam is our faith, democracy is our policy, socialism is our economy. All power to the People!” Clearly the beginnings of Pakistan Peoples Party had socialist and communist leanings (Chaudhry, 128). For them equality and justice could only be upheld if there was economic egalitarianism which was not possible if the capitalist system, in its existing form, continued. However, the 2008 manifesto which has brought PPP to power today, claims that “ social democracy is our economy” (PPP). It also mentions that the party will try to blend economic liberalism with state responsibility. Even if we consider the actual political situation today, we find no traces of the policies that PPP initiated under Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. It is pertinent that even later governments of the PPP in the 1990s became allied to the United States and its capitalist policies to win support and to come to power. This paper will attempt to examine why socialism failed to achieve its intended goals in Pakistan causing an ideological shift of the PPP from being overtly in favor of socialism, to an acceptance of the capitalist system and ultimately joining the US block.


In its 1970 manifesto, the PPP identifies two major causes that have plagued Pakistan. Firstly the exploitative capitalist system and secondly, the fact that Pakistan is an underdeveloped country in the global world. In order to fulfill the claims to bring an end to the unjust economic system, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s government took a number of steps. As per their manifesto the PPP government began the nationalization of basic industries. The government would now control the affairs of 20 private firms worth $200 million (Kaushik, 226). The aim was to prevent the big entrepreneurs from accumulating surplus earnings in their own pockets and not compensating the laborer adequately. However, Bhutto left out the cotton textile manufacturing industry from his nationalization program which was incomprehensible, considering the fact that cotton crop is the backbone of Pakistan’s economy. Surendra Nath Kaushik contends that in reality major industrial tycoons and powers were excluded from this policy and so it appears that Bhutto did not want to challenge or upset their established financial control and took this measure as mere window dressing. 

In order to live up to its status of being the voice of the working classes of Pakistan, the PPP introduced new labor laws. These included the effective participation of the workers in the management and the system of collective bargaining (Kaushik, 227).  Bhutto’s education policies lead to the nationalization of private schools as he aimed to provide quality education for all. However, his most revolutionary step to hit the country was the Land Reform Measure. This reduced the ceilings on land from 500 to 150 acres of land on irrigated land and from 1000 to 300 acres on unirrigated land. (Kaushik, 228).

On the whole, the economic measures taken by Bhutto’s regime bear a lot of semblance to the ten point agenda of The Communist Manifesto, especially in case of his education policy and the nationalization of key industries. These measures, however, failed to achieve much. The major reason was that Bhutto failed to curtail the power of the big businesses. Rather than a completely socialist economy, he opted for a mixed economy which favored more state control. Pakistan’s economy was dependent upon these big entrepreneurs for much of the development and creation of employment. This was also due to the fact that the government increased the defense budget, leaving less allocation for development projects (Kaushik, 243).  Furthermore, the administrative system was a victim of red tapism and corruption. The Land Reform measures could not be implemented properly due to the dishonesty and issues related to bribery at the lower level, especially in the law enforcement agencies. Records were forged and transfer of land was made on paper to relatives etc, which failed to break the grip of the existing landed class (Malik, 92). In other words, the infrastructure that was required for the effective functioning of much of these socialist measures was not present. Moreover, the economic dependence of many of the ‘harees’ on the ‘jageerdaars’ in much of rural Pakistan prevented the landed aristocracy from abiding by the law. Much of the resulting economic disaster lead many circles to be critical of the actual implementation of socialist policies and whether they can produce results on ground or not.

Keeping in line with Leninist ideology on imperialism, Bhutto stood for state sovereignty. In his essay “Political Development in Pakistan” he talks about this concept and explains how Pakistan has always allied itself closely to the US and has been among the foremost to join SEATO and CENTO, but has, however, not benefitted. He disregards foreign aid when it comes with a compromise to state sovereignty (Grover, 250). This idea of self autonomy and resistance to foreign Western subjugation touched large sections of society. Bhutto exposed Pakistan’s vulnerable position in world politics, especially with relation to India and the United States. He was a strong supporter of improving relations with the Peoples Republic of China (Grover, 255). Nevertheless, it is debatable as to what extent Bhutto could live up to his anti-imperialist stance. After the 1971 fiasco Bhutto became obsessed with achieving armament parity with India. For this purpose, support from US would be crucial. However, when the US refused armament supply, Bhutto expressed his disapproval by withdrawing from SEATO. Under Nixon’s government, relations between the two states improved considerably over the issue (Kaushik, 204).  Nonetheless, on the issue of nuclear proliferation, Bhutto’s strong standpoint is quite appreciable. Despite US warnings to stop Pakistan from purchasing nuclear technology, Bhutto went ahead with the project and in this regard he portrayed, although in limited capacity, Pakistan’s ability to make sovereign decisions in its own interest.

Right from its inception, Pakistan has been facing an identity crisis. Initially, Islam was taken to be a uniting force for the Muslims of the subcontinent that lead to the creation of Pakistan. Later, rifts began to develop not just on the basis of ethnicity but also the religious circles raised their voice demanding the implementation of Shariah. Iftikhar H. Malik, in his book “State and Civil Society in Pakistan”, refers to the contention between the ruling elite of Pakistan and the religious elite. Pakistan faced problems in defining a system for itself. Some of the clergy’s demands were fulfilled with the incorporation of the Objectives Resolution, although, issues on the basis of religion kept emerging (Malik, 51). However, this continuing variance made one thing absolutely clear; Pakistani politics could not be separated entirely from religion. Furthermore, if any doctrine or ideology was to make its place in Pakistan, it had to be compatible with Islam or else strong opposition would result from the Ulema. Although religious parties have not had a majority in the Parliament historically and the common people may not be practicing Muslims per se, the rhetoric of the Ulema has been instrumental in wooing public opinion of the masses against anyone who threatens the rule or principles of Islam. This is why all governments in Pakistan till today have not parted from Islam rather, have used it as a tool to manipulate the masses and to legitimize their rule. This is why even concepts such as, democracy and electoral politics, were initially under much criticism and leaders such as, Bhutto had to assure the public that they were in no way contradictory to Islamic principles.

When considering Socialism in the context of the Pakistani society, it is essential to view the compatibility between socialist principles and Islam to reach any conclusion. Bhutto himself, in his essay “Political Development in Pakistan”, states that there is no incompatibility between Islam and socialism. He uses Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Allama Iqbal’s vision of Pakistan to justify socialism. He claims that they both dreamt of a country established on Islamic principles with a socialist economy (Grover, 245). The concept of egalitarianism is one of the foremost essentials in an Islamic society. Islam preaches that in the eyes of God all men are equal and a higher status is accorded only to those who are more God-fearing. In this sense, Socialism and Islam are essentially attempting to achieve similar ends. Social equality and justice cannot exist in the presence of economic disparity.  Bhutto, therefore, introduced the concept of “Islamic Socialism”. This implied the development of an egalitarian society on Islamic principles.

However, as astute as Bhutto was, he failed to realize that the comparison of Islam with socialism simply on the rhetoric of egalitarianism is not enough. He could not justify this on philosophical grounds as to how he was comparing an ideology based on materialism with religion which has its foundations on transcendental reality. Perhaps the most fatal blow that socialism suffered was at the hands of the religious circles. Nadeem Farooq Paracha, an eminent writer of the left in Pakistan, views the failure of Islamic Socialism in Pakistan and much of the Arab world because of the clergy. Traditional Islamic scholarship has always viewed socialism to be an anti-religious creed. However, the divergence is simply not on philosophical grounds and the ground realities must not be ignored. Nadeem Paracha points out that much of the clergy, especially those in politics themselves, come from the landed aristocracy which makes them skeptical of socialist policies in the first place. This brand of socialism tried to emphasize those aspects of Islam which are in harmony with modern socialist ideals however; at this they were criticized of wrongly interpreting the holy text. Furthermore, in the case of the Pakistani society issues such as drinking, music, cinema etc, have mostly been disapproved of and the modernist regime of Bhutto was strongly condemned by the ulema (Paracha). Besides this, some religious Ulema were against the policy of land reforms based on their school of thought. Scholars such as Muhammad Taqi Usmani asserted that the ceilings or limitations on land holding, such as the ones proposed through land reforms, had no place in Islam. Also, the state does not possess the right to forcefully acquire land from some party for the purpose of redistribution (Web).

In this discussion, it is also imperative to consider the role of ideology in general. In world politics, hard core ideology cannot sustain if it does not mould itself to the social, political and cultural setup of a society. In his essay “Interaction of Ideology and Strategy in Pakistan’s Domestic Politics”, Khalid Javed Makhdoom explains the problem ideology has to face in opposition of realism and pragmatism (Grover, 528). The PPP claims that Bhutto envisioned a Pakistan in which power was invested in the hands of the masses. He brought to the forefront an ideology that was the voice of the working class, however, political expediency demanded something else. His socialism was the idea of a “mixed economy”. This implied that he could not essentially hurt the big entrepreneurs and could not break their grip of the economy. The measures he could in reality take were not enough to reform the established capitalist system. Therefore, the inefficacy of policies such as nationalization and Land Reform owe to the imbalance between ideology and realism. Bhutto, unfortunately, was unable to attain the right balance and tilted too much towards expediency leaving ideology in the background.

Purely socialist oratory and ideals, to break away from the “Jagirdari” system in Pakistan, had to be put in accordance to the social and political setup of the country. It was not plausible to raise slogans of socialism and implement those policies in a country where funding for the election campaign comes from big landlords and industrialists. Moreover, the majority of the vote bank resides in rural areas where voting decisions are decided by the tribal chiefs or the bigger landlords (Sayeed, 46). Sayeed points out that in viewing the structure of the PPP at the time of Bhutto, it was visible that the upper positions were occupied by those belonging to the upper middle strata, however, a large number of active workers were industrial laborers, small shop owners and workers. Relations between the upper and lower levels of leadership weakened and more and more workers belonging to the peasantry and the working classes began to leave the PPP.

When Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s daughter, Benazir, came to power in 1988, she had to face entirely different political realities. She came to the forefront after Pakistan had been ruled by an army dictator for several years. It was imperative for her to deal with the new issues at hand such as relations with the US and the military (Grover, 447). She could not afford to sustain the concept of socialism at that point in time when communism was declining throughout the world. For many analysts, the decline of the socialist ideology was apparent when the USSR fell in 1991. As US had emerged as the victor from the cold war, it was essential for Benazir to look towards maintaining cordial relations with it. Hailing from a modern upper class family and being exposed to secular Western education, she became the target of much criticism by the Ulema and religious circles (Malik, 162). Pakistan had been exposed to Islamization policies for a while now and Benazir thought it in her best interest to adopt practices such as the “chaddar” and “Tasbih” to appease the religious faction. Upon assuming power, she made the deep-seated decision of pursuing a capitalist system for Pakistan, keeping in view the global context. She disregarded much of the socialist ideas without providing solid reasons (Shafqat, 658). During both her tenures, Benazir stayed far from nationalization policies, in fact in 1990 she ordered privatization of around 14 units. In her second tenure, the private sector even went as far as entering railway, telecommunication, energy and transport (Bhowmik, 931). This was a move much in contrast to socialist agenda of arguing for important industries such as these, which are essentially the backbone of an economy to be under state control.

After the death of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, PPP split into many factions. Benazir had to deal with the issue of keeping the party together and to continue the struggle for democracy. Professor Khalid Mahmud sheds light on these splits and describes them as the confedralists, the leftists and the pro party establishment group (Mahmud, 144). It is evident that in the wake of Islamization policies, Benazir looked for support in the Western and particularly US block to rally and legitimize support. She now considered the US to be her constituency for gathering support and coming to power. However, this move of hers was strongly criticized by the leftist factions in PPP. To their disappointment, it was obvious that she had abandoned the path of “anti imperialist” policies unlike her father, but much like him she also preferred the politics of expediency, although with regards to different issues. Moreover, eminent names in the party such as Mumtaz Bhutto and Hafeez Pirzada who had also been close associates of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had split ways with the mainstream PPP leadership. This perplexed the leftist circles even more and created more controversy about Benazir’s ability to lead her party through the turmoil (Mahmud, 145). Maliha Lodhi, who has enjoyed an illustrious career in Pakistan’s Foreign Service, also analyzes this aspect of Benazir’s leadership in her article “25 years of the PPP”. It was Benazir who shifted the focus of the party from socialism to social democracy. Although the outburst of socialism had by the 1990s diminished to a great extent, however, the PPP is still known among the common man as the party that forwards the upward mobility of the oppressed classes (Lodhi, 311).

Pakistan’s strategic location has turned out to be quite unlucky for it. Due to this fact, Pakistan has remained in the eyes of superpowers such as the USA and the USSR. During the cold war years, it was in USSR’s interest to ally with Pakistan and underdeveloped countries would always prove easier grounds for the propagation of socialist ideologies. Although Pakistan never became an outright ally of the USSR, it has in fact, throughout most of history, remained loyal to the US. Rampant corruption and disrespect for merit, lack of envisioned leadership and institutional imbalance has been Pakistan’s plight. Unfortunately, Pakistani leadership has always looked towards the West to legitimize its rule rather than its own masses. This is to a great extent owed to the reality that colonialism might have ended but imperialism has not. Pakistan has remained dependant economically on the US especially. The strategic location as regards to India and the two major wars that Pakistan had experienced always left Pakistan dependent on the US, either for arms or other forms of foreign aid. Be it the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan or the September 11th attacks, US has always used Pakistan for its own interests. This realization has created a lot of anti-American sentiment, not only in the masses but also among the intellectual circles of Pakistan. Hamid H. Kazilbash, in “Anti Americanism in Pakistan”, sheds light on the aspect of American control over Pakistani politics. In fact, it is assumed by the masses to a great extent that the fate of leadership and rule is in the hands of the White House (Kazilbash, 62). It is pertinent for parties to take notice of this important fact. The US has been responsible for mentoring authoritarian dictatorships in Pakistan such as that of President Zia-ul-Haq. Therefore, when Benazir Bhutto had to assume power it was impossible for her to ignore this colossal influence that US exercised. Taking an anti imperialist stance like her father was not what the situation demanded of her.

Considering the case of the Pakistan People’s Party, it can be deduced that Z.A Bhutto’s socialist policies fell prey to the institutional imbalance between the bureaucracy and the politicians, most of whom hailed from the aristocracy and who never let national interest take precedence over vested interest. Moreover, Maliha Lodhi sheds light on an altogether different aspect of Z.A Bhutto’s case. She points towards the fact the political circumstances at the time that Bhutto ran for elections were ripe for a socialist change. Ayub Khan’s authoritarian rule had lead to the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few big families and economic disparity was unbridled. In such a situation, Bhutto strung the right chord by raising the slogan of “rotti kapra makan” and showing them the dream of a classless and just society (Lodhi, 311). Therefore, in this respect his commitment to ideology can be viewed with some skepticism. Benazir Bhutto inherited more complex circumstances, in which she not only had to legitimize her position, but also look to keeping the party together. She saw the United States as her savior and so joined the line of many of the opportunistic and power driven politicians of Pakistan.

Supporters of the Pakistan People’s Party today contend that although they now look towards being a social democracy, the party does retain much of its original character of being a voice for the downtrodden masses. This argument can be viewed by looking at the party’s 2008 manifesto. Claims such as provision of education, healthcare and sanitation are much similar to their initial claims and are much like the claims of most socialist parties. Due to the change in global politics and the world scenario today, it is quite unthinkable to adopt policies such as nationalization and land reform. This also partly owed to the fact that once these policies encountered failure in the 1970s, people are unlikely to restore their faith in them again unless or until they are assured  of their success in the form of determined and willful leadership. M.B Naqvi in his article “PPP: The party continues” puts forth the fact that now no matter  what ideology a party adopts in its manifesto, it is of no use to the common man whose economic position does not depend on promises but on what action a party takes on assuming power (Grover, 459).

Furthermore, when considering ground realities, many supporters of the party today argue that socialist ideologies have now become part of history especially after the fall of the USSR. Pakistan is now beset with new problems such as terrorism, although economic tribulations remain. In such circumstances, the party has to look towards stabilizing Pakistan’s image in the Western world and to fight stereotyped conceptions of Pakistan portrayed in the Western media. Moreover, it is also claimed that the essential nature of socialist policies or the ends that they try to achieve as regards bringing economic equality are still dear to the PPP. This is manifested in their initiatives such as The Benazir Income Support Program. This program aims at providing income to 40 % of the families living below the poverty line (BISP).

The implementation of socialist policies, especially in a country like Pakistan, requires headstrong leadership and revolutionary change. Rejecting imperialism is no easy task for the leadership of any third world country. Although socialism, unlike hardcore Marxism, does not rely as much on revolution, reform in the case of Pakistan could not work because of the socio-economic realities. Z.A. Bhutto, however, can perhaps hold claim to the revolutionary task of enlightening the masses about their status. It was the first time in the history of Pakistan that some leader belonging to the upper stratum of society stood up and made them realize the exploitation and oppression they were subject to. Although Bhutto was possibly the only leader in Pakistan to have experienced such ground swelling, his effort of reforming from within the existing framework failed terribly. Moreover, Pakistan’s legacy is unfortunate in this respect that politics of expediency end up taking precedence over any ideology or vision and PPP’s shift from being a party for change to a party supporting status quo is very much owed to this reality. 


Written By: Chanel Khaliq