Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts

Saturday, 16 August 2008

The Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention Crashes and Burns

Back when I was in college, I briefly toyed with the idea of going into the field of International Relations. One day I interrupted a friend studying for a test in her IR course. Upon asking her what she was studying, she replied she was memorizing the "golden rules" of international relations. What, I asked sceptically, were these rules? The first golden rule, she replied, was that no democracy ever goes to war with another democracy.

It was at that point that I knew IR wasn't really for me. I just knew too much history to be able to buy into these kinds of simplistic, uninformed and ignorant "golden rules". In the laa-laa land of American academic IR theory these self-serving theories may have great traction but in the messy, complex, unsimplified reality revealed by history they serve little purpose but to obfuscate the facts.

But wait a minute, these kinds of theories haven't just stayed in laa-laa land but unfortunately have leaked into the public consciousness through ignorant hacks and bestselling writers such as Thomas Friedman, author of the utterly simplistic and mostly wrong cheering chorus of a book on globalization, "The World is Flat" (and incidentally someone who attended the same college I did, which might explain where he gets some of his ideas).

Take for incidence this passage from one of his articles:
So I’ve had this thesis for a long time and came here to Hamburger University at McDonald’s headquarters to finally test it out. The thesis is this: No two countries that both have a McDonald’s have ever fought a war against each other.

The McDonald’s folks confirmed it for me. I feared the exception would be the Falklands war, but Argentina didn’t get its first McDonald’s until 1986, four years after that war with Britain.

Now I don't understand why Thomas Friedman is so popular (in the past few months two different people have enthusiastically recommended his abysmal book to me), but then he's just a mediocre popular writer, who will (hopefully) be forgotten a few years down the line. The thing is its not just him, serious scholars buy into this kind of thing.

At this point one may be prompted to point out that the Kargil War between Pakistan and India happened when both had plenty of McDonald's franchises and democratically elected governments to boot, but one could argue that Pakistan and India don't rate high on the democracy scale, or, if you believe Nawaz Sharrif, that the Pakistani army started the war on its own without taking the democratically elected leader of the country into confidence.

But as various bloggers have pointed out, what about Georgia and Russia?

More on this here and here.

Wednesday, 14 November 2007

We Are Mindless...

While discussing the political situation in the country the other day, a cousin of mine turned to that other great Pakistani obsession: cricket. Trying to describe her feelings, she quoted the ex-captain of the national team, Inzamam-ul-Haq, who, when once asked if he had minded batting first in the match replied in broken english in his usual dopey manner, “No… we are mindless.”

My cousin had earlier been arguing that she had refused to participate in any protests and supported the Emergency, because Musharraf, despite all his faults, was still better than Benazir. It’s a very common argument, and a powerful one. I have to confess at being struck by a strong feeling of despondency and hopelessness in the last few days. Even if, somehow, against all odds, the Emergency would be lifted and Musharraf should bow out gracefully, what did we have to look forward to? Would it be a return to the bad old days of the 90s, with its rampant corruption, ethnic violence and drowning economy? Is Pakistan really doomed to be stuck in a cycle of one disastrous regime after the other, differing only in the particulars of the grotesques in high office. What good would a return to democratic rule do? What is it that we should be striving for? One can’t help but feel stricken by a sinking feeling, a paralysis of indecision, because its hard to conceive of a future that offers much hope. How should one feel about these matters? Truly, one feels mindless.

For most people, those who struggle to make a living at subsistence wages, these political matters seem far removed from their immediate reality. What matters most is the fact that the cost of everyday staples such as flour, milk and sugar have risen dramatically in the last couple of years, a rise that has far exceeded any rise in wages. Their biggest concern is how to make ends meet. Its instructive that in the recent “sugar mill” scandal, where it was found that a small cartel of sugar mill owners were hoarding sugar in order to artificially drive up prices (by over 100%), the cartel included several ministers in the current pro-Musharraf government, it included Chaudhry Shujaat of the PML(Q), Shahbaz Sharif of the PML(N) and Asif Zardari of the PPP. So what does the average person care whether Musharraf, Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif come to power? All belong to the same class of uber-rich who are not averse to exploiting and cheating the common man whenever they can, and all, when in power, will exert every effort to continue doing so.

I think one answer to this line of questioning is that, right now, one has to push for the independence of the judiciary and the media – the two institutions that have been most blatantly undermined by the current Emergency. When Musharraf claims that his rule will create the conditions for “true democracy” in Pakistan, he seems to believe that this involves forcing everyone to go along with whatever he believes should be done. This rather absurd and limited understanding of “true democracy” will take us nowhere. One would have imagined that it was precisely in strengthening the judiciary and establishing an independent media (the second of which, up till recently, looked like becoming the crowning glory of Musharraf's achievements), that the conditions for a “true democracy” were being put in place. No particular leader or party will "save" Pakistan by coming into power. Rather, it is only when it will become exceedingly difficult for those in power to operate by whim, that matters will improve.

The sugar mill case is instructive in this regard. An investigation by the NAB (National Accountability Bureau) into allegations of price-fixing was killed by the government, with the excuse that the investigation itself was driving up prices. After an outcry in the media, the Supreme Court took suo moto notice of the case and ordered that the NAB should complete the investigation and present its report to the Court. This was duly done and the identities of those who were part of the cartel revealed, to the embarrassment of the government. Attempts to prosecute those involved, of course, floundered in the wake of the Emergency. So when Musharraf talks about the embarrassment of law enforcement officials summouned to the Supreme Court, and the unsound business environment being created by its suo moto notices, we know what kinds of cases were on his mind.

The point here is, given that our next government, no matter what its exact composition, or the quality of its democratic crededentials, is not going to be a ‘clean’ one, it is vital that there be a free and independent media, and an ‘activist’ Supreme Court to act as checks and balances on its actions. In this regard, the current civil society movement also has an essential role to play. Whether or not its goals are achieved in the current crisis, its very existence is a victory of sorts, and a harbringer for better things to come. It is essential to create awareness, to coordinate, organize and educate ourselves for the many, many battles we are going to have to face in the coming days. It is essential that we no longer be mindless, but make up our minds that there is a future we can hope for, and, though it may be a long journey, one we must work towards.

Friday, 20 July 2007

The Pakistani Media

An interesting look at the Pakistani media and its relationship with the state.

IZ

Friday, 6 July 2007

The Declaration of Independence

Another 4th of July has come and gone, celebrated by hysterical warnings of terrorist threats and elaborate fireworks displays. Amidst all this brouhaha its easy to lose sight of the actual document itself and the fact that it truly did have some interesting things to say - not least to for a Pakistani hoping for the restoration of democracy in the country.

Lets remind ourselves about some of the salient points in the Declaration:

- The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

- He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

- He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

- He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

- For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury.

- For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

- For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:


Now replace the King of Britain with General Pervez Musharaf and what do you see?

IZ

Sunday, 17 June 2007

Pakistan News Blogs and NAB

I came across a very interesting blog that basically reprints news articles about Pakistan news, current affairs etc. called Watandost. I've added it to my blogroll. Interestingly the blog is maintained by Hassan Abbas, the former NAB official who is currently at Tufts and is the author of 'Pakistan's Drift Into Extremism.'

Also check out excerpts from his 2004 Dawn article on the rise and fall of NAB here. (Its the second article in the post.) Its very very informative and makes for interesting reading on how NAB became THE repository for both the hopes of all the people who thought Musharaf would be good for Pakistan, as well as a justification for Musharaf's rule.

Abbas shows how NAB was caught in a catch 22 situation because Musharraf need it to at least appear to be successful to show that he was making good on his promises to 'clean up' Pakistan while also cutting deals with the very people NAB was investigating in order to consolidate his hold on power. Also, NAB was a new institution with very little funding or experience in investigative techniques. To bolster it and speed up the visibility of its functioning a new set of ordinances that undermined judicial procedure were promulgated and the ISI and other intelligence agencies were turned to in order to provide funding and manpower.

Needless to say this was not good for NAB in the long run. Nor for the country.

IZ

P.S. Another Pakistan news blog with a decidedly pro-democracy slant is Civil Society Pakistan.

Thursday, 14 June 2007

Quote of the Day!

This breathless statement from Patricia Cohen in the IHT:

"Developments around the world have been tearing sizable holes in what has been a remarkably powerful idea, not only in intellectual circles, but also in Republican and Democratic administrations - that capitalism and democracy are two sides of the same coin, trends that reinforce each other."

'Does Capitalism Lead to Democracy, And How?' the article asks. Cohen quotes a who's who of political studies departments in the Unites States as they all scratch their heads and puzzle over why capitalism hasn't been democratizing the world as their theories insist it should.

My response to the above statement? ORLY?

IZ