Arifa Noor
OUR politics is divided into 10-year-long cycles. Or perhaps they can be called pendulum swings that take around a decade (give or take a couple) to move from one end to the other. At one end, the credibility of the civilian side is at its peak and they are seen as saviours, while at the other, hope shifts to the establishment after having been shattered by the politicians.
At least this is what appeared to have happened by 1999 when the military coup took place — the ‘corruption’ stories of both the PPP and PML-N, coupled with the latter’s success in alienating most sections of society — the judiciary, the political opposition, the press (there was no ‘media’ back then), as well as most of the urban middle class — by first freezing dollar accounts and then trying to pass the amirul momineen constitutional amendment. The relationship with the military was on a downward trajectory.
This meant that there were few voices condemning the coup. Even human rights organisations kept their condemnation muted, so worried had they been by the implications of the constitutional amendment. It’s an ugly national secret that Gen Musharraf was quietly welcomed by many of us in his initial years. But by 2007, the cycle had ended.
The very politicians we had collectively turned our backs on earlier were our great hope. Benazir Bhutto, who, reportedly, the American officials had no time for after the coup, was ushered into a deal with the dictator, and the joy with which the 2008 elections were greeted, despite the tragic event leading up to them, is still fresh in our minds.
It is hard to say for sure, but 2019 is very different from 1999.
But that was 2008 and now it is 2019. In the intervening years, the (traditional) political class, those we had pinned our hopes on, has lost much of its sheen. Once again there are stories of corruption and misgovernance, centralised decision-making within parties, dynastic politics, and politics based on individual interests.
Enter the PTI with its slogan of change, led by a man who doesn’t behave like a (traditional) politician. He is backed by the powerful establishment and, more often than not, we are reminded of shrinking civilian space.
No wonder many allege an unofficial coup is in place. Indeed, parallels can be drawn with the Musharraf years.
There is little doubt that the establishment has recovered much of its credibility and space that it seemed to have lost in 2008, while the political class (barring the PTI) for the moment seems to be facing pressures similar to what it did from 1999 to 2007.
Similarly, the chaos in parliament is in some ways similar to what we saw post 2002; a strong opposition led by the PPP and PML-N had paralysed parliament at that time too. Back then too, we thought the opposition benches were filled with sincere democrats.
So, is this a pendulum swing against democracy? And will it take another decade for a reversal of fortunes?
It is hard to say for sure, but 2019 is very different from 1999. And the ‘swings’ seem to have changed.
One way to put it is that the ‘rightward’ swing this time round doesn’t seem to have gone as far right as we imagined or feared. Or we could say that the characteristics of the swing have changed altogether.
Of course, the first and biggest evidence of this is the continuation of the democratic setup and timely elections. Along with this, there is a qualitative change for the better in both the establishment (which wants the election process to continue and is averse to a direct intervention) and the politicians. Hence the latter, which had no place to speak till 2002, now have a platform, and a democratic one at that. The proliferation of news channels, with their unending appetite for sound bytes and debates, has provided them with another platform. And an opposition, however much under pressure, will always get more time than a government, which tends to avoid too many interviews.
All of this also allows for a greater pushback, be it the accountability drive, the shrinking space for freedom of speech or other political issues. And in the absence of a direct intervention, the judiciary is also less pliable. It may have encroached needlessly at times on civilian space, but it has also ruffled uniforms on more than one occasion.
In this regard, the outcome of the latest references against Supreme Court judge Faez Isa will provide more evidence of whether or not the judiciary will be restrained. However, so far, it doesn’t seem to be an easy task, for the collective outrage to the news of the reference is reminiscent of the coming together of the political parties and the legal community when Iftikhar Chaudhry was fired.
In other words, this time around, the pushback started from day one. And the pressure being exerted is not targeting the PTI alone. It is being felt elsewhere, too.
On Sunday night on anchor Mohammad Malick’s show, a senior analyst explained that the military does not make public culprits who have been caught and convicted of espionage, as it allows the ‘enemy’ to find out that its ‘information’ may now be out of date and irrelevant. Then why did it do so this time, he was asked.
There was so much criticism of the current accountability process and how it only targeted the political class and spared the military and the judiciary that Rawalpindi was compelled to make it public, explained the analyst.
Did media pressure lead to making information public, which is not the norm, asked an incredulous host. The answer to his question did not add more details to what had already been said, but the short exchange was revealing. Indeed, this is no 1999.
The polity has come a long way since. And if the swings no longer look like the past, perhaps the time period will also be different.
No comments:
Post a Comment