Makings of a failed state

The context – call it the political situation in Nepal – is deeply disturbing. A depressing mire to say the least. A process which was supposed to be and was promised to be historical nation-building has stalled, trapped in deep divisions, malpractices and unrestrained quest for power. At the helm of affairs are people who seem to be deeply committed and fiercely dedicated to not to play by any rules except greed and self-interest.

From deep inside this unpromising milieu, looking at the history of the sub-continent is a revealing experience.

Not long ago, two nations – created out of one huge land ruled by foreign rulers for more than 200 years – started their journey with an attempt at nation-building.

The immediate challenges to both the nations were Herculean. An administrative vacuum created by sudden and ill-planned departure of the foreign rulers, a lack of social and political infrastructure with mostly illiterate people and few experienced leaders made things more difficult than one could imagine.

From the early days, the different paths chosen by these two nations and their contrasting foot prints explain us a lot about how serious a matter this nation-building is.

Glaring is to see where they stand today.

India, under the guidance of leaders committed to forging a nation based on principles, completed the constitution-making process within three years and there after evolved to become a reasonably stable democracy. Seeing the diversity and difference that lies within, many had predicted it would fall to pieces in no time.

Although the journey hasn’t always been smooth, it has been able to hold together the complex socio-political community as one. And what is more noteworthy, it has done so within the set up of an institutionalized democracy. This has made India a socio-political wonder of modern days.

Pakistan, though started fairly well under the leadership of the good-intentioned secularist Jinnah, lost balance after his death and started drifting into religious extremism. In retrospection though it seems very clear that a nation conceptualized on the basis of religion or hatred against other would have sooner or later chosen this path.

With divided politics and no leader strong enough to rally parties with different agendas together around him/her, Nepal can drift into an unwelcome area marked by failures and darkness for years to come.

Jinnah could not do more than convening a Constituent Assembly (CA) before his death in October 1948. In a supposed nation, falsely conceptualized on the basis of religion and deeply inflicted by divisions of regional, ethnic and feudal character, he was the persona around whom unity was forged.

With Jinnah out of the way, a mad rush of self-interest started within the members of the CA that in any case comprised of the feudal elites and not directly elected by the people.

For many years after Jinnah, Pakistan was ruled like a dictatorship by its paralyzed and bedridden Governor General Ghulam Mohhammad. He dismissed the CA formed by Jinnah in 1947 on grounds of incompetency in 1954.

The CA, with its average meeting of 16 days per year over a period of seven years, could produce nothing worth its name. With this, the first decade of Pakistan was marked by utter chaos and uncertainties in the making of the constitution, leaders entangled in political musical chair and an army becoming powerful day by day.

At this point, external players other than the British (who as the former rulers were influential), mainly US, started influencing the politics of Pakistan for their vested interests. With its huge investments in the army making it dependent, US enjoyed a great leverage in the internal political dynamics of Pakistan, which continues till date.

A new CA was put together in 1955 through indirect elections. As a result, in 1956, after nine years of its independence, Pakistan got the legitimacy of ruling over its people, but with shaky foundations. Because of the personal interests of the influential leaders of the time and the Governor General’s suspicious attitude toward a complete democracy, the constitution came to be a bundle of contradictions.

A powerful president, who could dissolve the elected body and appoint the prime minister at his discretion, was the contribution of the Governor General Iskander Mirza, who had ensured that he is appointed as the provisional president even before the constitution was ratified.

Within two years, Pakistan collapsed into a political chaos. East Pakistan’s grievances and dissentions kept growing. With Urdu being accepted as national language and Bengali which was the language spoken by people of East Pakistan not given the same status, the flare kept growing into other dissentions over representation and discrimination in allocation of resources.

The final blow to any hope of institutionalizing a rule of people and law (other than martial law) in Pakistan came in 1958, when President Iskander Mirza imposed martial law. Within 20 days, he was ousted by the Army Chief General Ayub Khan who took control of the country.

With this foundation, the journey of Pakistan as a nation has been one of dire failures. Most of the time was spent under military dictatorships; one as recent as in the 21st century under General Musharraf. It also had to do away with East Pakistan, which parted on the way to become Bangladesh.

Today, with one caught in deep religious fanaticism, bleeding with terrorism and surviving on foreign aids, and the other standing economically confident poised to become a super power, the contrast between these two colonial twins, as I said before, is glaringly evident.

Standing at this point in history, when Nepal looks forward to pave its way for the future, the example of Pakistan raises alarm automatically. With divided politics and no leader strong enough to rally parties with different agendas together around him/her, Nepal can drift into an unwelcome area marked by failures and darkness for years to come. Failing to draw lessons from history in the process of nation-building will cost irrecoverably for the future of the nation.

Heeding to external influence for personal, regional or party agendas can make the nation dependent and susceptible to unending meddling from outside for years to come. Let’s hope those on whom we have bestowed our hope are sensible enough to resist that. And strong enough to pull us out of this mire much of what is their own doing.

dinkar.nepal@yahoo.com