|
|
Why democracy didn't take roots in
Pakistan?
Vinod Kumar
"AN intensive
debate is raging in the country about revival of democracy" says Ghulam
Kibria in his article "Why democracy didn't take roots" (Dawn April 22,
2000) and then goes on to observe "What is missing in this debate is an
in-depth analysis to identify real reasons because of which democracy
did not work in Pakistan but in India it did."
Otherwise a very thought provoking article, it fails to identify the
real reasons for the failure of democracy in Pakistan. I will come to
this later -- let me first review his article.
He goes on to list the various reasons, like lack of education of people
and politicians in democratic fundamentals, illiteracy of the masses,
division along provincial, linguistic and ethnic barriers, leadership
having become a family affair, etc. among others for the failure of
democracy in Pakistan. He even goes on to list castes as one of the
reasons -- I thought castes was the curse of the Hindus alone and
Pakistan being Islamic society should be free of the castes.
He then returns to kafir bashing. He says " The Muslims of India
suffered from all this social sickness but to the leaders then, Hindus
and the British were the only problems." Had Kibria read the history
right he would have known that it were the Hindus (also the ancestors of
the majority of those who are Pakistanis today), who were enslaved and
were the victims of Muslim atrocities through centuries of Muslim rule
-- but if it pleases Ghulam Kibria that the Muslims suffered because of
the Hindus -- let it be. Let him have his moment of satisfaction. If
putting the blame on others could solve problems, no-one in the world
would ever had any.
On all those counts that Kibria believes have prevented democratization
of Pakistan, India was no better than Pakistan in 1947 when the Muslims
decided to form an Islamic nation. As a matter of fact, in most fields,
Muslims held better position as compared to the Hindus. Even today India
(read Hindus) has (have) far more divisions along provincial,
linguistic, ethnic and caste lines than Pakistan does. In addition India
has the religious minorities problem also which Pakistan, thanks to its
far-sightedness, in its own way, solved at its very inception.
Coming to the basic question -- why democracy did not take roots in
Pakistan?
As a matter of fact, Kibria has answered the question in his article
when he noted that "(T)he first and foremost condition for growth of
democracy is acceptance by all the sovereignty of the people" but failed
to pursue it further. Democracy demands men make laws to govern
themselves. It is the acceptance of this premise that democracy has
succeeded in India and it is the rejection of this very premise that
democracy failed to take roots in Pakistan.
No society can live outside the parameters of its basic ideology; and
not only the ideology but the very raison d'être of the existence of
Pakistan is Islam. Though India is not a religious Hindu state but
Hinduism is still the soul of India and still guides the way India
thinks and acts. It is the basic difference in these ideologies that has
made democracy a failure in one and success in another even though in
all other respects both countries are twins. It is when religion comes
into play, the two part company.
As Kibria noted and I repeat, "the foremost condition for the growth of
democracy is acceptance by all the sovereignty of the people" and this
very basic requirement of democracy is quite contrary to the basic
ideology of Islam. Islam says "all sovereignty rests in Allah" and any
ruler that rules the Ummah rules as "vice-regent of Allah". The Ummah
can elect the vice-regent but neither the vice-regent or the Ummah has
right to make laws to govern themselves -- the laws have already been
'revealed' in the holy Koran. Only the Ulema can interpret them and the
Ummah follow what the Ulema interpret. In Islam, Ummah is created by
Allah and have no independent existence or will. Islam is a monotheistic
faith and thus allows no diversity either in the concept of their God to
suit the individual or the mode of worship or life. Every individual has
to fit the preconceived mold -- no diversion is allowed.
It is not without reason that most Islamic scholars have declared
democracy, which gives sovereignty to the individual, an un-Islamic
concept.
To the contrary, in Hinduism, the individual is the most important
factor. Each individual is urged to search the truth for himself -- even
the authority of the Vedas -- the highest regarded scriptures of the
Hindus -- is not to be accepted if it does not pass individuals' search
or interpretation of the truth. With the concept of multiple
manifestation of Hindu gods, diversity is the norm rather than the rule.
I will not be far off if I were to say, in Hinduism each individual
creates his own god or at least worships the god of one's own choosing.
Hindu scriptures are man made and evolve with time. No such freedom is
allowed in Islam. Islamic laws, as revealed in the Koran, are immutable
and unalterbale.
Even in democratic India, the Muslims don't want to live by man-made
laws but by Sharia -- the laws revealed by Allah.
Democracy did not fail in Pakistan because of illiteracy or castes or
ethnic differences or linguistics or any of the other reasons put
forward. The Indians, as already said above, were no more literate, only
marginally if at all, than the Pakistanis. And as far as castes, ethnic
differences or linguistics are concerned, Pakistan does not even come
close to the problems India faces.
Other than religion, the people of both India and Pakistan come from the
same stock, were part of the same nation, share the same history, had
the same opportunities in pre-partition days. If any, the Muslims had an
upper edge over the Hindus on two counts: firstly the Muslims had ruled
India for centuries and then under the British, the Muslims were given
preferential treatment in government jobs (and in army) in excess of
their population proportion.
The real reason why democracy failed in Pakistan is the ideology
Pakistan is wedded to. Sadly, this is true of any Islamic country.
Pakistan is not unique in this respect. A quick glance at all the
Islamic nations around the world will prove the point.
The day Hinduism becomes a minority religion in India, it will be no
different from Pakistan. |
Email this page
to a friend
Printer-Friendly Page
