Fwd: Why democracy did not take roots in Pakistan

Why democracy didn't take roots in Pakistan?

Vinod Kumar

http://vinod11220.tripod.com/DemocracyinPakistan.htm

"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."

He is right on both counts and I believe he also. 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.

.

Relevant Pages