The fight for democracy and social justice
Great leaders are known for the indelible imprints they leave permanently for posterity. Martyred Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was the most prominent leader of Pakistan to have done that in the 20th Century. Recently I was asked what Bhutto Sahib’s outstanding achievement was.
I could have said his daring, his commitment and his defiance of a super power at the cost of his life to make Pakistan crash land in the exclusive nuclear club. If not that it could be Simla agreement with India after the defeat in 1972. It was, indeed, his masterly stroke of statesmanship that despite being the leader of a vanquished nation he skilfully negotiated with victorious Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi an agreement that has given peace to the two countries for 44 years to date.
In view of the uncertain relationship between India and Pakistan, one would like to emphasise upon the leadership of the two countries to emulate the wisdom shown by the two leaders in Simla. It is time we move onto a course that could give a chance to peace and tranquillity in the region.
One had hoped that following Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s surprise visit to Lahore to meet Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would set the pace for a meaningful dialogue and lay the foundation of trust. It seemed likely by the subsequent events but for the Pathankot incident. The notorious non-state actors have succeeded in subverting moves for normalisation.
I would like to recall here on Bhutto Sahib’s death anniversary his outstanding achievements. I believe at Simla he snatched an honourable peace from the jaws of defeat and humiliation. Whether it was success at Simla or his defiance of the west in pursuit of nuclear deterrence—each one was his unparalleled achievement.
As a student of history and politics I believe the 1973 Constitution was his most astounding achievement. It resolved the divisive issue of the quantum of autonomy for the province in the light of Quaid-e-Azam’s assertion that in Pakistan federating units would have more autonomy than the states in the United States of America. It is no denying the fact that the 1973 has proved to be strongest binding force keeping provinces united—more powerful than the religion itself.
Unfortunately some misguided elements or those representing the vested interest that flourishes under the strong centre with Paetorian diktat in the country want to do away the Constitution. Reaction of the provinces in this context is very hostile and they want to be genuinely autonomous rather than be a colony of Islamabad or Lahore.
Doubts have been expressed on the ongoing operation of Rangers in Karachi on the pretext of eliminating terrorists and criminal. People feel that terrorism is not confined to Sindh only, it is a national malaise. However, they accuse the federal government of double standards since it has been reluctant to authorise Rangers or army to act like wise in Punjab that has been recognised as epicentre of terrorism within and outside. The recent mayhem in Lahore has proved that Punjab is the source of terrorism with 64 terrorist organisations freely operating for reason best known to the provincial administration that keeps harping on the mantra that all is well and under control.
Smaller provinces have as such valid reservations. Voices have been raised describing it as invasion of Sindh by the federal government. Independent constitutional experts, however, have a different view. For them it is perhaps a calculated attempt by the establishment to undo the 18thAmendment as it stands contrary to centralised authority being the sole arbiter of power.
This brings me to what I believe the singular feather in ZAB’s cap as the saviour of Pakistan after 1971 break up. Notwithstanding the ignominious role of General Yahya and his junta in not handing over power to the elected representatives of the people as the immediate cause, fear of the possibility of history being repeated makes it imperative to discuss here those irreversible factors that would have led to the break up in any case. And after East Pakistan, other provinces too could have followed suit. There are experts who are very concerned about the future of Balochistan now which according to them is looking at the Bangladesh example to follow.
Bhutto Sahib had identified the main cause that forced East Pakistan to go independent. It was much similar to the breakup of India in 1947. Religion had nothing to do for the establishment of Pakistan; the partition was due to economic disparities and conflict of interests between Muslims and Hindus pertaining to employment in services, equal opportunities in business, equitable share in power and resources.
East Pakistan became Bangladesh for the same reasons mainly its economic exploitation by the Centre, step-motherly treatment in power and inequitable resource sharing despite it being the majority province. A similar situation existed in the three smaller provinces of West Pakistan that had been merged into One-Unit to reduce them to the status of colonial fiefs of Lahore.
After the fall of Dhaka in 1971 the prospects of creation of three more states became imminent especially when the Soviet leadership in early 1972 had made it clear that it stood for the right of self-determination of the smaller nationalities. Much before Bangladesh in the smaller provinces fissiparous forces had been demanding independence.
The writing on the wall was clear. Something substantive had to be done to resolve the question of quantum of autonomy. It was a challenge for Bhutto and to save Pakistan from yet another break up, he vigorously lobbied with the elected representatives of the smaller provinces to remain inseparable component of the federation in which they were to have more powers and greater autonomy than enjoyed by the states in the United States of America.
Bhutto sahib convinced them that their salvation lies in a federal Pakistan with maximum autonomy to the provinces. They joined ZAB to be the framers of the 1973 Constitution incorporating the inalienable concept of autonomy. It is fact that the 1973 Constitution is the product of the collective wisdom of the elected representatives of the four provinces-among them being many constitutional experts.
General Ziaul Haq for acquiring absolute power distorted the Constitution with arbitrary amendments. It almost amounted to doing away the letter and spirit of 1973 Constitution yet neither he nor later General Musharraf—had the dare to abrogate it.
Martyred Benazir Bhutto had learnt the lesson from history. She made it clear to her party leaders and others who were with her in the long struggle for the restoration of democracy—that Pakistan could only be saved by maximum autonomy to the provinces and collective wisdom of national leadership as the country had become extremely problematic.
She is no more but her successors– the PPPP and Asif Ali Zardari as President (2008-2013)—fulfilled her promise through 18th Amendment. Since it has made the provinces really autonomous, it has become a bone of contention for the other two centres of power—the Praetorian establishment and the federal government. Best tribute to Bhutto Sahib would be to sustain the 1973 Constitution at all cost.
ZAB considered politics not an end in itself but a means to ushering an egalitarian order for the alleviation of the sufferings of the masses, unshackling them, giving them voice to speak and stand up for their rights. An authority on politics of Pakistan Professor Ian Talbot believes that ZAB “is occupying a public space as a charismatic leader arising from coalescing social, political, cultural and economic factors. To put it simply, Bhutto’s charisma was rooted in his embodiment of popular aspirations for social justice”. Despite his perpetual adversaries out there to undermine him Bhutto Sahib continues to rule from his grave the hearts and minds of poor people of Pakistan.
The author is the former High Commissioner of Pakistan to UK
