Managing a divided mandate

By Rasul Bakhsh Rais
The writer is Director, Area Study Centre, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad
raisrb@isb.paknet.com.pk

The elections 2002 is a landmark event in the political history of Pakistan for many reasons. It places the country back on the rails of democracy, returns it to constitutional politics, though within a drastically altered framework, and puts into rest many of the wild speculations about poll rigging. The results announced so far at the time of writing this piece show two clear trends. One is that none of the traditional mainstream political parties is likely to return with a majority to form government at the federal level. With the split within the Muslim League that the military take over caused, the electoral mandate appears to be fragmented. With this we may be entering into a new era of coalition politics, or else into chaotic conditions.

The days of heavy mandates are over. The Muslim League (Q), Mutahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA), Pakistan People's Party Parliamentarian (PPPP), and Pakistan Muslim League (N) have taken top four slots in ranking. How the coalition building goes once the last result has been announced will be the big question before the nation as well as the political parties. Both democracy and coalition building require a tradition and political culture of working together, something that has been missing in our country. But this doesn't mean that parties, politicians and public at large don't learn from their political experience. The pessimists and the cynic brigade many not waste time in suggesting that fragmented mandate is a sign of political instability. If that is the case, then how we explain instability when the PML returned with a heavy mandate in the 1997 elections. The reason was that almost all the parties in the opposition within the assemblies and out of them ganged up against the League that their leaders under the umbrella of Grand Democratic Alliance with one point agenda; removal of Nawaz Sharif government. They believed that Sharif had become arrogant, arbitrary and insensitive to the genuine interests of other sectors of the society. In other words, he lacked or ignored the political skills of working with other political parties.

In my opinion, the results present a challenge as well as an opportunity for the political parties to show maturity, rise above partisan politics and learn to cooperate in public interest as well as in the interest of strengthening democracy in the country. They have a heavy responsibility on their shoulders. The four way division of national assembly seats is that no strongman or strong government may emerge. The best response to fragmented mandate would a national government with wider representation to all the national and regional political parities on the basis of minimum common agenda. Well, some may argue that how it is possible in highly personalised political culture. But the politics itself is an art of making things possible by bargaining and compromise.

The constitutional framework within which elections have been held also requires coalition building and cooperation. A fundamental lessons of democratic theory and practice that it is not about majority ruling arbitrarily but accommodation and adjustment of all interests of the society never sunk in the political class of Pakistan. All societies are made of too many sections, so they represent too many interests, different visions of what is good for the society and how to pursue those visions. This is exactly what the electoral results show. There are of course time, when in national wave, a party under a charismatic and popular leaders generates greater enthusiasm and support for it or his vision of reform, change and political direction, but that is rare in transitional democracies.

Even if the idea of national government is rejected by some of the parties on the top, two rival coalitions will dominate the political scene in the country; one in the government and the other in the opposition. That means what? The answer is strong, vocal opposition that would restrain the tendency of government to act in an autocratic fashion. We may not rule out confrontation on some issues, but the logic of numbers is such and the framework within which political forces will have to operate may make it difficult to upset the critical balance between the opposition and the government.

The speculative assessment of the spin-doctors on the electronic media that some of the political parties are poles apart and would not join hands to form coalition government is speculative at best. It defies the political logic and cumulative experience of Pakistan and other societies that suggests parties and political persons driven by interests can reach a common ground. Today, the mainstream political parties excluding the MMA have hardly any ideological distinction. They speak the same political language. The difference among them is only pursuit of separate political interests, which all the parties in democracies do as a group of individuals concerned with the question of political power. But then, it is also the question of power that in situation in which Pakistan stands today, they close their ranks, depending how much each of them gets and to what level of satisfaction. My argument is that there is compulsion for the political forces to work together. The PML (N) and the PPP, the two rivals in politics for long time have quietly worked behind the scene to make seat adjustment. They may carry on cooperation in the assemblies.

The real surprise is emergence of the religions political parties in Frontier and Balochistan. But they have done equally well in Punjab and Sindh compared to what has been their popular vote percentage or numbers in the assemblies. They have never done so well in any elections in the history of Pakistan. They represent an ideology, a very distinct national programme and have a very different view of Pakistan's policy in Afghanistan, Kashmir and toward the United States of America. Their growth and electoral success is yet another aspect of how the Pakistani polity is divided. In the Frontier they have replaced the ethnic, regional and national parties and will be an important political factor in other provinces and at the Centre. They are an ascending political force that neither present government nor the political parties can ignore. Their views on governance, religion and foreign policy can no longer be considered those of the fringe elements. They have succeeded in sinking roots among the masses all over the country. A big chunk of the Pakistani population it seems shares their views and would like to see Pakistan change its on domestic and foreign policy issues.

Isolating or keeping the religious political parties through horse trading or any other manipulative exercise would be self-defeating and even dangerous for political stability in the country. Their mandate will have to be respected and their rising power accommodated. Religious political parties have been part of various coalitions, and this time, except in the Frontier where they have comfortable majority to form their government, they would form political partnership with mainstream parties or play the role of very assertive opposition. When all the election results have been compiled and notified, the complexion of Pakistani politics will change. Working together, building workable coalitions, logrolling, accommodation and compromise will be its dominant themes. That is the best way to manage political fragmentation.

[taken with permission from http://www.jang.com.pk]

Date/Time Last Modified: 6/3/2004 8:12:39 AM

© 2004, Human Development Foundation. All rights reserved.
1350 Remington Road, Suite W, Schaumburg, Il. 60173
Toll Free: (800) 705-1310 | Email: info@yespakistan.com | Privacy Policy