ISLAMABAD: Millions of Pakistanis will head to the polls on Feb. 8 to cast their vote in the thirteenth general elections in a South Asian nation where democracy remains fragile under the shadow of military rule and civilian politicians willing to do the army’s bidding, damaging long-term prospects for democracy.
The nuclear-armed nation of over 240 million people has been ruled directly by its all-powerful army for over 30 years of its history, and even when not in power, the military remains the invisible guiding hand of politics, with an outsized role in decision making related to foreign affairs, national security and the economy. The army says it no longer interferes in political affairs.
“Of the many disadvantages that Pakistan has suffered because of military coups, discontinuity and constant interruption in the political setup, in the running of the government, and indeed in the running of the parliament, has been the biggest disadvantage,” Nasim Zehra, Pakistani author and journalist, told Arab News.
She said military coups had instilled a “lack of security and unpredictability of policy” in the country, and created an “almost dangerous” competition among Pakistan’s political classes, constantly clamoring to curry favor with the army to stay in, or entrench themselves, in power.
It was unfortunate that the army had always found “civilian partners” to exert political influence, Zehra said, and it was civilian politicians who bent laws to accommodate generals, undermining the trust of the people and further entrenching the military’s power.
And even though the last coup in Pakistan was in 1999, Pakistanis would only be able to convincingly say the era of military rule was over for good if political parties and their leaders said with one voice and believed that they would not support any future “military adventure,” Zehra said:
“But that seems not on the cards as of now.”
Here is a look back at Pakistan’s troubled political history of military intervention:
“TROUBLED HISTORY”
In Pakistan’s first military coup in 1958, Governor-General Iskander Mirza enforced martial law and appointed Commander-in-Chief General Ayub Khan as chief martial law administrator. Just thirteen days later, Khan assumed the presidency and sacked Mirza, who was exiled to England.
Protests mounted against Khan after ruling for over a decade, with discontent heightening in the country’s East Pakistan wing, present day Bangladesh. But rather than resigning and allowing a constitutional transfer of power, Khan requested that Yahya Khan, then Commander-in-Chief of the Army, use the military’s supra-constitutional authority to declare martial law and take power, which he did on March 25, 1969.
Elections took place in 1970, to date considered one of the most transparent polls in the country’s history, but led to widespread unrest when East Pakistani leader Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman’s Awami Muslim League (AML) party emerged the winner but was not allowed to form government by Yahya Khan and the AML’s main political rival, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the founder of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), which was popular in West Pakistan.
The delay in the inauguration of the National Assembly unleashed significant unrest in East Pakistan, with the situation deteriorating into a civil war that led to the secession of the east wing of the country and the creation of the independent state of Bangladesh in March 1971.
Martial law was finally lifted in Pakistan in 1972 and Bhutto became prime minister in 1973 after a new constitution proclaimed Pakistan a democratic country. Bhutto took over the reins of a demoralized country that had suffered humiliation in war and governed Pakistan until elections in 1977.
The PPP won a majority in the elections as the right-wing religious opposition Pakistan National Alliance accused Bhutto of rigging. Protests and unrest followed, prompting Pakistani army chief General Zia-ul-Haq to remove Bhutto in a bloodless coup, suspend the constitution and declare martial law. The new military ruler promised “free and fair elections” within 90 days, but these were repeatedly postponed and it was not until 1985 that party-less general elections were held and a new assembly elected Muhammad Khan Junejo as prime minister while Haq was president.
Haq dismissed Junejo’s government three years later in 1988. The military ruler himself stayed in power for a total of 11 years until his death in a plane crash.
From 1988 to 1998, Pakistan was governed by former prime ministers Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, two bitter rivals heading the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and the PPP, respectively. This democratic period in Pakistan was marred by allegations of corruption against the two leaders and both their tenures were cut short controversially on charges of corruption.
Pakistan’s last military coup took place in 1999, after tensions mounted between Sharif and then-army chief General Pervez Musharraf over Pakistan’s military action against India in Kargil. When Sharif attempted to sack Musharraf and appoint another army general in his place, the Pakistani army chief overthrew his government and declared martial law on Oct. 14, 1999.
Musharraf’s coup was ratified by Pakistan’s top court and in 2001, he assumed the office of the president. In 2002, polls were held in Pakistan and a king’s party led by Sharif’s former political aides, the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q), formed government at the center.
After widespread protests amid his plummeting popularity, the military ruler, a key Washington ally during the War on Terror, resigned as president under the threat of impeachment in 2008 and was replaced by Benazir Bhutto’s widower Asif Ali Zardari.
Musharraf’s was Pakistan’s last military coup but analysts remain wary of the military’s continuing influence over politics.
“HYBRID REGIME”
Pakistani journalist and political analyst Zarrar Khuhro said the future of the country’s democracy was “bleak,” considering the military’s overarching and enduring influence over politics.
“There won’t be any real stability in the political system even after these elections, provided these elections do happen,” Khuhro told Arab News.
“And that is not a bug of the system, that is a feature of the system. It is designed to be unstable so that the [military] establishment’s huge influence on Pakistani politics can be maintained.”
What was worse, he argued, Pakistan was now run as a “hybrid” regime in which the military retained control over multiple domains including politics without actually having to carry out a military coup.
“Because it [hybrid regime] provides the illusion of democracy,” Khuhro added, “thus discrediting the entire democratic process itself.”
Veteran Pakistani journalist and political commentator, Hamid Mir, said it was unfortunate that the military as the most important institution in the country had repeatedly abrogated the law and damaged the constitution, the only binding document.
“Now you see, the forces that refer to themselves as the guardians of Pakistan or say that they have to save Pakistan or that we are fighting for Pakistan, are the biggest enemies of this constitution,” Mir told Arab News.
“They think nothing of it [constitution], so this is a huge contradiction.”
