The obstacle in social mobility in Pakistan

I just ran into these interacts out of curiosity to see what is up with the Social Mobility and turns out that many of the Jawans were ready to walk over the Field Marshall. Pretty disappointing! I may not agree with Romair on some aspects of life, but he is one of the very few decent fellows on Chowk.

Yasser, you have not joined PPP right now and your demeanor is ready to rip your opponent apart. Just think about all the arguments and opponents you will run into that will drive you nuts. What are you going to do then? Get excited and heated up on each and every thing?
On a serious note: You need to go through some rigorous training to be on a path where you let go of things. Otherwise, your system will hold all the fossil fuel in your head and heart and devoid you of achieveing anything.

By the way, whether you choose to join PPP or PML or IJT, it`s your prerogative. Since you have aquired all the wisdom on the face of the earth by delving into Stanley Wolpert, I am sure you know all the nuances of life. Well good for you and certainly good for your future better half!

Ref hamidm2 #153

[chowk staff - please ban romair for a few weeks ............please]

Isn`t he one of the founders -- and thus a beneficial owner -- of Chowk?

So what you are asking is out of the question, I am afraid.

re. fuzair #163:
Actually, it makes perfect sense, no confusion at all.
Pakistanis want the Army to keep the politicians in line and more or less under control (as when Kakar forced both Ghulam Ishaq Khan and NS to resign and brought in Moeen Qureishi) but not to rule directly.

Ah, but then this is interference in politics, is it not? And the last time I checked, Politics was about `running the state`.

Pakistanis also want Pakistan to be an Islamic state (whatever that means) and its laws to be based on 7th century Arab tribal customs but don`t want mullahs to rule directly or be involved in politics.

Ah yes, the distinction between the religion and the clergy. When has there EVER been a religion without one, or a theocracy without a special class of `interpretors` whose fatwas can, ultimately, have no basis in public opinion and consensus?

Pakistan already IS a Muslim state. When folks say they still want a state based on Islamic idelogy, what else can they mean BUT Shariah, in some degree or other.

I stand by my original contention: Pakistanis are in state of deep-seated confusion. And it`s not difficult to see why.



#162 by PM on October 31, 2003 8:21am PT
A STATE OF (IN?) CONFUSION:

From the posted survey results in #159:

A clear majority of the Pakistani respondents, and even larger majorities in NWFP and Balochistan, said the army should not participate in the politics.
yet
54% per cent voted for army`s permanent institutionalised role in running the country, and 51% approved the establishment of the National Security Council

and

An overwhelming majority of the respondents said all Pakistani laws should be based on Islam...
but
However, 59% felt that religion should be separated from politics and that there was no place in politics for religious leaders.

And there you have it. We want what we don`t want. And so we get exactly the same!

To any normal human being ... non-theocratic would mean secular... but not so for Romair...

Fuzair #163: I would agree.

Though I don`t think the Pakistanis want the laws based on 7th century customs. They just want some Islam in their public life. But not of the 7th century variety.

I try to follow surveys to figure out what the views of Pakistanis. And one thing I have become convinced of is that those views are very different from the views expressed by a majority of Pakistanis on Chowk. All the surveys I follow, Herald, BBC, Davos, etc. generally have the same results. So they must be portrying the correct picture.

The surveys same to indicate:

Pakistanis love politics and civilian democracy, but trust the Army as an institution quite a bit more than they trust the politicians as an institution.

On the whole, Pakistanis do not want a theocracy. And they don`t like Mullahs. Even the recent rise of MMA has more to do with good political maneouvring, US actions in Afghanistan, and most of all voters being completely fed up with the more secular ruling parties which have screwed NWFP and Baluchistan.

At the same time, Pakistanis do not want a secular Pakistan. This is why there is no party in Pakistan which is purely secular (except maybe Tehrik-i-Istaqlaal of Asghar Khan). Parties like PPP etc. are non-religious, though not secular.

Pakistanis really like Islam in their private life (hardly any Pakistani ever switches religions, even the ones on this site who hate Islam). And they want a non-theocratic non-sectarian moderate form of Islam in their public life, i.e. they don`t want to be Iran and they don`t want to be Turkey of old (even Turks don`t want to be Turkey of old, and Iranis don`t want to be Iran of Ayotollah days anymore).

Interestingly, on this site, there is always a battle going on between individuals who want Pakistan to turn into Iran and others who want to turn it into Turkey. And both groups seem convinced that Pakstanis want that. Perhaps they should follow more surveys.

There is no PML in Pakistan... this is a lie... and the Air Marshal knows it... it is a winners club... many of the PML Q winners were only a few years ago in the PPP... case in point: Gulzar Khan and Waqar Khan...

This PML (abcdefghijk etc) is not a party... it is a bunch of people who always win due to the biradari system and then play with the emotions of the people by using names like PML and jinnah and quaid-e-azam...

But who can explain it to a loser like the air marshal?

-YLH

Ferozek,

First of all ... I don`t think BB`s position within the PPP is appointed, but rather is due to the charisma of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto family has some what of a cult status in the PPP... Benazir is the chairperson because the common PPP worker wants her to be ... she is symbol of Bhuttoism to them. PPP`s stalwarts... those like Aitzaz Ahsan etc realize full well that they are there because of that strong symbolism. Bhutto`s cult lives on and his daughter is what the voter in Pakistan rallies to.

I mean let us be fair... parties in South Asia are not exactly like the parties in the west. The parties in South Asian Countries revolve around a demand, a cause and a charismatic personality.

1) Gandhi stayed outside the Congress but still the Congress high command got its marching orders from Gandhi`s ashram...

2) Jinnah appeared for elections every year, but there was no doubt that he could have done without it, as he was the `Quaid-e-Azam`...

3) Nehru was Party leader and he was replaced by his daughter.. and his daughter was replaced by her son, and now the italian daughter in law leads South Asia`s OLDEST political party... all because of the cult of personality.

4) Awami League continues to be led by Hasina ... cult of Mujeeb still at work.

5) BNP is led by Khaleda Zia... cult of Zia ur Rahman at work

6) The leadership of ANP remains within the family of Wali Khan.... cult of Bacha Khan lives on

7) MQM`s Quaid for life is Altaf Bhai.... again the cult of personality


I can go into regional and sub regional groups and the list is endless... but the fact all major parties of the Subcontinent which have been popular amongst the people have been this way is indicative of our current stage of political maturity. No doubt someday we might convert our political parties into more of the western prototype, but right now it is wrong to assume that...

I think this is the dictator`s trick... to talk about intra-party elections... the only parties which have intra party elections are parties like PML Q ... and Imran Khan`s Tehreek-e-Insaaf (which again is a personality cult though very unsuccessful one no matter what the Air Marshal will have us believe)... the result of the dictator`s trick is that a virtual nobody.. somebody who couldn`t have imagined in his wildest dreams ... became the prime minister of Pakistan. So much for intra-party elections.

-YLH

Re the Field Marshal`s comment about how all the folks in the Pak Army below the rank of Colonel or Brigadier are so honest.

If I remember correctly, in the Indian Army one gets a promotion based on time served up to the rank of Major or Leutenant Colonel. Meaning, 2 years as 2nd Leutenant to get promoted to Leutenant, 3 years as Leutenant to get promoted to Captain, etc. Unless of course one is caught in some really ugly situation that get one court-martialled. I don`t think the rules are any different in the Pak Army so what is the big deal about all ranks below Colonel being honest? They HAVE to be honest if they have any hopes of getting to the rank of a general officer.

Zakk #160: I will recheck my sources, and update. I am quoting these figures from what I remember from Balakh Sher Mazari’s book. I did say that the PPP did win seats in NWFP. The Sherpao family was a powerful PPP force in NWFP (until it recently split). However, if I remember correctly, it in no way controlled NWFP; nor was it the dominant party. NWFP in the 70 elections,

In 1970, PPP won 83 out of the 138 seats in West Pakistan. However, in NWFP and Baluchistan, the govt. was formed by National Awami Party together with their political ally, Jamiat-ul Ulema-i-Islam, JUI, (of Maulana Mufti Mahmood got clear majorities in Baluchistan and the North West Frontier Province)

The religious parties votes this time around were 11%. They were actually higher in 1970 at 15%. (http://www.newsline.com.pk/NewsNov2002/cover1nov2002.htm).

The PML has split up into six or seven factions. PPP only has one split faction PPP(Sherpao) group in NWFP. If you were to combine the votes of all the factions, PML would come out ahead. In the last elections, PML(Q) got 25-29% of the vote (depending on whose figures one follows). PML(N) got 11%. They were head to head in Punjab, specifically in Lahore. If they had one candidate, he/she would have won out. For example, Nawaz Sharif competing in Lahore would have gotten the whole PML(Q) and (N) vote. Even when the PML vote was divided, PML(Q) still ended up controlling the Punjab provincial assembly.

Generally, the Punjabis view PML as their party now. Just like Sindhis view PPP as their party. And Muhajirs view MQM as theirs. And the Pathans view ANP as theirs. And the maulvis view MMA as theirs.

“Secondly I don`t think you can discount the PPP as the dominant party,”

PPP is definitely a dominant party. In terms of total votes/seats as a combined party, I would place it at no. 2 behind a combined PML. What I am stating is that Pakistan’s vote is so split, that no one party now has appeal nationally. They are all popular in portions of the country. Unlike the USA or Canada, where two or three parties are everywhere.

Perhaps a better way to look at the seats is provincially, by combining all the factions:

Following are the results from the provincial assembly:

---

Punjab Sind NWFP Baluchistan
PPP + PPP (Sherpao) 62 51 17 2
PML(Q + N +Z +J + F + Jinnah) 151 21 10 10

The only place the PPP vote was split was in NWFP. The PML vote was split, everywhere, specially in Punjab. I really don`t think PPP can win 62 provincial seats in Punjab, against a united PML. And the most popular party in Punjab, invariably, is the most dominant in Pakistan. Even in Sind, MQM had 31 provincial seats in comparison to PPP`s 51.

Also, in my opinion, a true test of popularity can only be seen in the urban vote, where voters are more free to vote for whomever they want. The urban vote is split between PML, MQM, PPP, and MMA, ANP (even PTI) much more evenly than the feudal vote. The feudal vote is nearly all PPP and PML (with Baluchi tribals and MMA, and ANP only having some vote).

Romair,

The only one in a state of denial is you. I have asked you a simple question... Why has this great `NATIONAL` party called MMA scored less than 1/3rd of the votes of what the PPP did?
1 Million paltry votes... and even Zakkk has admitted that there was the Afghan Refugee vote in them. The truth is that the PPP was not allowed to mobilize and still it whooped every other party`s rearend.

By the way where does this `United PML` exist, what is its manifesto, and why does it have universal appeal... remember this `United PML` of your dreams has nothing to do with the original league (infact PPP has more to do with the original league than this `United` PML`)... PPP has grassroots support in all provinces... as even your buddy zakk has pointed out. Your United PML and PML Q are parties of those remnants of feudalism which were once represented in great numbers in a party called the Unionist Party.


You keep on quoting figures after figures which in no way prove any of your points... you are the Pakistani version of that Indian character Sadna who used to bore us in quite the same fashion with half truths and lies based on nuggets of fact, few and far between a plate full of venomous hot sauce of lies. God save Pakistan from losers like you. Thank God you are living in Canada... well I feel bad for the Canadians... but hey better them than us.

-YLH

Romair,

The only one in a state of denial is you. I have asked you a simple question... Why has this great `NATIONAL` party called MMA scored less than 1/3rd of the votes of what the PPP did?
1 Million paltry votes... and even Zakkk has admitted that there was the Afghan Refugee vote in them. The truth is that the PPP was not allowed to mobilize and still it whooped every other party`s rearend.

By the way where does this `United PML` exist, what is its manifesto, and why does it have universal appeal... remember this `United PML` of your dreams has nothing to do with the original league (infact PPP has more to do with the original league than this `United` PML`)... PPP has grassroots support in all provinces... as even your buddy zakk has pointed out. Your United PML and PML Q are parties of those remnants of feudalism which were once represented in great numbers in a party called the Unionist Party.


You keep on quoting figures after figures which in no way prove any of your points... you are the Pakistani version of that Indian character Sadna who used to bore us in quite the same fashion with half truths and lies based on nuggets of fact, few and far between a plate full of venomous hot sauce of lies. God save Pakistan from losers like you. Thank God you are living in Canada... well I feel bad for the Canadians... but hey better them than us.

-YLH

Actually, it makes perfect sense, no confusion at all.

Pakistanis want the Army to keep the politicians in line and more or less under control (as when Kakar forced both Ghulam Ishaq Khan and NS to resign and brought in Moeen Qureishi) but not to rule directly.

Pakistanis also want Pakistan to be an Islamic state (whatever that means) and its laws to be based on 7th century Arab tribal customs but don`t want mullahs to rule directly or be involved in politics. Remember, mullah is still pretty much an insult for most of us: along the lines of, ``itnay bhi to mullay na bano!`` and worse.

Mantolives:

If you are considering to join PPP, then I would like to extend my heartiest felicitations to you. However, Feroz Saheb has quite appropriately advised you on few shortcomings of this decision. Some pointers from my side:

1. PPP used be a party of the poor and for the poor. This is no longer true. If you look at their elected parliamentarians now, almost all of them are feudals.

2. The PPP folks are extremely frustrated in their own constituencies. They have been out of power since 1996 and need to show authority and ability to develop their areas. Since they are no longer able to do that, the future is grim for them. I am absolutely positively sure that in years to come, PPP will futher dwindle in size and popularity.

3. Due to the profile of an average PPP person, you may find yourself a bit out of place, except if you spend time with people like Ch. Aitezaz, N.D. Khan, etc.

A STATE OF (IN?) CONFUSION:

From the posted survey results in #159:

A clear majority of the Pakistani respondents, and even larger majorities in NWFP and Balochistan, said the army should not participate in the politics.
yet
54% per cent voted for army`s permanent institutionalised role in running the country, and 51% approved the establishment of the National Security Council

and

An overwhelming majority of the respondents said all Pakistani laws should be based on Islam...
but
However, 59% felt that religion should be separated from politics and that there was no place in politics for religious leaders.

And there you have it. We want what we don`t want. And so we get exactly the same!

Omair, Again some comments of mine, the PPP did win seats in NWFP in the 1970`;s and also polled a respectable number of votes (if I rememebr it was well over the double digits)even now if you combine the PPP seats in NWFP they`d be the second largest parliamentry party after the MMA.It has also often wo the odd seat provincial one in Baluchistan..

Secondly I don`t think you can discount the PPP as the dominant party, lacking it`s main crowd puller the party did not contest th election as actively as it could have.

Thirdly, when you combine the vote of all the PML`s you forget they all contested a large number of seats, combined they had more candidates on the field, so in the First past the Post system you can expect a higher number of votes to be shown in that mainstream group which had the most candidates. Using the same argument one should include all the PPP components vote and I am fairly certain the combined PPP would have been the largest party in votes polled and seats bagged.

Zakk #156: Your views about NWFP are quite accurate. Anyone denying them, is him/herself in a state of denial. Following was a survey carried out by BBC Urdu service, prior to the last elections. I will print out the NWFP related portion of it. The full survey is available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/10_october/03/pakistan_opinionpoll.shtml

“The opinion poll commissioned for bbcurdu.com is the biggest of its kind in Pakistan and was conducted in advance of the general elections on Thursday 10 October 2002

It was conducted in 99 cities and towns and more than 100 villages throughout Pakistan.
A total of 2,827 Pakistanis of voting age were asked their opinion about the elections in face-to-face interviews.

The poll demonstrates major regional differences on issues such as allegations of pre-election rigging, the ban on militant organisations and the performance of the military government.

General Musharraf enjoyed considerable support in North West Frontier Province (NWFP) with 60% saying his tenure has proved good for the country.

A clear majority of the Pakistani respondents, and even larger majorities in NWFP and Balochistan, said the army should not participate in the politics.

54% per cent voted for army`s permanent institutionalised role in running the country, and 51% approved the establishment of the National Security Council.

More than half the respondents supported the ban on militant and sectarian organisations.

However, the arrest and handing over of suspected al-Qaeda members to the United States was opposed by 58% of the respondents.

An overwhelming majority of the respondents said all Pakistani laws should be based on Islam, with 100% support in NWFP.

However, 59% felt that religion should be separated from politics and that there was no place in politics for religious leaders.``

The opinion poll results were completely different, depending on which province was being polled. This showed up in the results of the elections, as well.

Interestingly, 100% in NWFP wanted laws based on Islam. And a majority opposed handing over Al-Qaeda suspects to USA. And 60% in NWFP though Musharraf was doing a good job.

This proves what I had been stating. PPP really has little voter base in NWFP. NWFP is a PML, ANP, MMA province. And even though NWFP voters thought Musharraf was doing a good job (60% approval rating), they still voted for MMA. Which indicates that it was the pro-Musharraf parties (PML(Q)), and not the PPP, that lost out in NWFP.

So even if it was rigged, Musharraf would have basically rigged away the popularity of his own party PML(Q) in favor of an opposition party (MMA).