Pakistan independence: 60 years of shattered dreams
Pakistan celebrates its 60th anniversary on 14
August 2007. Those years have been dominated by right-wing military
rule, a parasitic capitalist class and feudal landlords in rural areas.
The working class and poor face grinding poverty. KHALID BHATTI, of the
Socialist Movement Pakistan, reports from Lahore.
MILLIONS OF POOR Muslims from all over India rushed
to the new homeland of dreams when British imperialism announced the
partition of India in August 1947. The Indian subcontinent was divided
on a religious basis, which paved the way for hatred and communal
violence between Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims in which around two million
people were killed. This laid the basis for the hostility and long-term
enmity between the newly independent neighbouring states of India and
Pakistan.
Millions of people migrated to Pakistan for a better
life for them and future generations. But their dreams have been
shattered by the parasitic ruling class and successive governments.
Chronic poverty, unemployment, hunger, super-exploitation, repression,
injustice, police brutality, religious extremism, military domination,
and the rotten capitalist and feudal system, are the everyday realities
faced by the masses after 60 years of independence. The majority of the
population is still living without proper healthcare, education,
sanitation, clean drinking water, housing and transport. The masses feel
betrayed by the ruling elite, the majority seeing no future. Feelings of
disappointment and desperation are running high.
The whole history of Pakistan is full of crises,
wars, military interventions, betrayals, experiments, working-class
movements, and social and political explosions. The weak indigenous
ruling class, the colonial state structure, the strong establishment and
imperialist domination, created many problems for the new state which
not only still exist but have become bigger and more complicated. To
understand the present situation, it is important to see how the
Pakistani state, ruling classes, working class, economy, political
movements and society in general have developed over the last 60 years.
A weak ruling class
PAKISTAN INHERITED A weak ruling class mainly
consisting of Muslim feudal lords, ex-officials of different small
states called rajs (there were many small states in British India with
limited sovereignty), Muslim traders, a few capitalists and former civil
servants.
A mass Pakistan movement did not develop until the
1940s. The leadership of the Muslim League (the political party which
started the campaign for a separate Muslim state) was mainly from the
aristocracy and Muslim elite. They developed this party to protect their
class interests against the rising Congress Party. Quid-e-Azam Muhammad
Ali Jinnah (the official founder of the nation) was the only leading
figure in the Muslim League to have authority amongst the masses. He
died in 1948 after just one year of independence.
He left behind a bunch of opportunists and power
hungry politicians with little mass support. They failed to finalise a
constitution for the country or hold general elections (the first
general elections were held in 1970 after 23 years of independence). The
ruling Muslim League did organize provincial elections in Punjab and
East Bengal (now Bangladesh) in the early 1950s. But the results were a
nightmare for the ruling elite. They lost miserably in East Bengal and
succeeded in Punjab only after widespread rigging. The majority of the
ruling class were feudal lords from Punjab and Sindh, as well as tribal
chiefs from Baluchistan and North West Frontier Province. They were
frightened of the masses and the consequences of general elections.
The lack of public support forced them to form an
alliance with the civil bureaucracy and military establishment. This
alliance led to the intervention of this establishment into politics.
Alienated from the masses, the ruling elite become more and more
dependent on the establishment to maintain power. The already very
strong civil bureaucracy became more powerful. Nearly a dozen prime
ministers were appointed and removed in just ten years.
Military domination
THE CIVIL ESTABLISHMENT took full advantage of the
weakness of the politicians and became a dominating factor in politics.
The judiciary also sided with the bureaucracy, and a powerful nexus
developed which was to play an important role in the future.
The constituent assembly finally agreed a
constitution in 1956 and general elections were planned for 1958. But it
was clear that the ruling Muslim League would be routed in elections and
that the radical left nationalist National Awami Party (NAP) would win a
majority. NAP was a mixture of communists, radical reformists,
intellectuals, nationalists and left-wing individuals. It was a
pro-Soviet Union party and considered to be anti-imperialist.
This was a nightmare situation for US imperialism
because Pakistan was its key ally in the region against Stalinist
Russia. The US encouraged the military senior command to impose martial
law and cancel the planned elections in 1958. Political activities were
banned. General Ayub Khan became the country’s first military dictator,
fully backed by US imperialism with all sorts of financial aid and easy
loans. This dictatorship lasted for more than ten years, the beginning
of a long period of military interventions and domination which is still
continuing (the only exception was the period of the early 1970s). Now,
Pakistan is experiencing its fourth military government since 1958.
During the dictatorship of General Zia-ul-Haq in the
1980s, the generals became the most powerful factor in politics. The
military not only increased its political influence but also developed
its own industrial and commercial business empire. Generals and
intelligence agencies became so dominant in politics that they started
to decide who would form the next government even before elections.
All the major political, foreign policy and
important decisions since the 1980s have been taking by GHQ. The
military generals have become the ruling class or, at least, the most
powerful and dominant section in the ruling elite. The main capitalist
political parties and politicians accepted this domination and fully
capitulated to GHQ. The generals and intelligence agencies have been
running the affairs of the country with comfort for 25 years. There is a
deadly nexus between generals, feudal lords, capitalists and big
business, and the mullahs – the generals being the senior partners
supported by reactionary mullahs and feudal lords. Religious political
leaders joined the ruling class in the early 1980s and have further
strengthened their position since.
Today, the situation has started to change again as
resistance and opposition to military domination is on the rise. People
have begun questioning the military’s intervention into politics. The
generals have directly ruled this country for 31 years and failed to
solve a single problem faced by the working masses. It is becoming
increasingly difficult for the army generals to justify their rule and
political domination.
State in crisis
THE INCREASED POLITICAL, social and economic crisis
has developed serious tensions within the state institutions. The
crushing military domination over all the other state institutions has
created a situation in which different sections have started taking on
each other, fighting to control the state apparatus. There is a very
strong reaction from some sections of the civil bureaucracy and
politicians against military domination. Former and serving senior
military officers occupy almost all the key posts in the administration,
as well as public-sector departments and corporations. The most
attractive civilian posts also go to military officers.
The regime of General Pervez Musharraf was forced to
change the decades-old policies of the Pakistani state after the 9/11
events in the US. Pakistan was forced to change its long-held Afghan
policy. There was a dramatic policy shift on many issues. The Pakistani
state was forced to act against the Islamic fundamentalist groups which
it created and developed in the 1980s and 1990s. Musharraf also made
some changes in Kashmir policy and started dialogue with India. He
started speaking against the jihadi culture and banned some Islamist
organisations. But these policies have not only enraged Islamic
fundamentalist elements in the state apparatus but also hurt the
feelings and interests of conservative and nationalist elements.
The recent removal of the Chief Justice has brought
a change in the attitude of the judiciary. It has reacted strongly
against the removal and started to take independent decisions against
the executive. There are members of the higher judiciary who still side
with the executive, but they are isolated. It is the first time that
these two old and traditional partners are standing face to face.
Most state institutions have already lost their
credibility with working-class people. The people have no respect for
the police, the most hated state institution. The army was the most
respected in many parts of the country and among many sections of the
population, but now even the army has started to lose that credibility.
There is a massive fall in support for the army because of its political
role.
The state has practically lost control over many
parts of the country, to Islamist groups or nationalist militias. Feudal
lords and criminal gangs have developed their own respective states
within the state. The national question is becoming a very explosive
issue in Baluchistan and Sindh. The rising tide of Islamic extremism,
including armed groups, is directly challenging the writ of the state as
they run parallel administrations in many areas. The rising social and
political polarisation along with increased class tensions are further
increasing the state crisis. Sections of the ruling class and state
officials are becoming increasingly concerned about the situation.
Distorted economic growth
THERE HAS BEEN high economic growth for the last
four years, averaging more than 7%. But this high growth has failed to
decrease poverty or improve living conditions of the poor and
working-class people. This is not a new phenomenon in Pakistan as
history shows. The 1960s were called the decade of development and
economic growth, the so-called ‘golden decade’, averaging 6.7%. It was
also the era of industrialisation. On the one hand, this gave rise to
the famous 22 richest families in Pakistan controlling most of industry
and the economy. On the other hand, it created the sea of poverty in
which 46% of the population was living. This high economic growth and
accumulation of wealth laid the basis for the biggest revolutionary
uprising of the working class in the history of Pakistan, in 1968-69.
The economy had been developed to benefit the elite.
Pakistan was an agricultural economy at the time of independence with
more than 85% of the population living in rural areas. Agriculture was
the main contributor to GDP. In the industrialisation of the 1960s and
1970s, the rural population started to move to the industrial cities.
Now, nearly 40% of the population lives in the
cities and towns. A few hundred feudal families dominate the rural
economy (industry is also owned by a few dozen families), with
agriculture employing 43% of the workforce and contributing 23% of GDP.
Nearly 60% of the population is still dependent on agriculture which is
in severe crisis. Feudalism, water shortages, highly expensive
electricity, fertilizer and seeds, decreasing land for cultivation, very
low output and yield, and old methods of farming, are the main reasons
for this crisis.
The textile industry is the main industry in
Pakistan, and is also in crisis. More than 300 textile units have been
closed down in the last two years. Textile exports are falling as
competition from China, India and Bangladesh intensifies. There has been
growth in automobile, IT and electronics, and the services sector is
also booming, especially banking. Bank profits have surged from $130
million in 2002 to $1.8bn in 2006. Pakistan stands third for bank
profits, only behind Colombia and Venezuela.
Pakistan’s economy is largely dependent on foreign
aid and loans. In the 1960s and 1980s Pakistan received aid, assistance
and loans worth $40bn. In the 1990s economic growth was around 4%, but
fell to 3% in last two years of that decade. In the first three years of
2000, the growth rate was around 3.5%. This was the period when the US
imposed some sanctions and the IMF and World Bank attached hard
conditions for loans.
Super-rich, desperate poor
THE PAKISTAN ECONOMY kick-started after 9/11. In the
last four years, it received aid and loans worth $12bn. Annual
remittances of Pakistani migrant workers in the US, Europe and Middle
East have crossed the $5bn mark, with nearly $21bn in the last four
years. This flow of money has pumped new life into the financial and
banking system. Stock market shares are at a record high, real estate is
booming. The banks are offering generous loans for consumer spending.
Consumer loans stand at $6bn, when total bank deposits are around $20bn.
It is not sustainable in the long run. These loans and increased
remittances have developed and maintained a layer of the middle class.
But this layer cannot be maintained in the long run.
There is no doubt that the present economic growth
has benefited the ruling elite, creating a new layer of arrogant
super-rich. But it has left behind the majority of the people. The poor
have become poorer: 88% of the population live on less than $2 a day;
63% live below the poverty line (less than a dollar); and 72% have no
access to clean drinking water or proper sanitation.
Inflation and price hikes badly hurt the working
masses. The prices of food items and everyday essentials have doubled in
the last few months. There are 200% to 300% increases in the cost of
food items and other commodities. There was an increase of six rupees in
the price of flour from 1947 to 1997 but, in the last ten years, the
increase has been eleven rupees. The price of cooking oil has doubled in
recent months. These unprecedented price hikes have made life even more
miserable for the working class.
There are 35,000 primary schools in the country
without proper facilities like running water, sanitation, boundary walls
and proper seating arrangements. Seventeen thousand schools are without
proper buildings, and 12,000 middle and high schools are without
laboratories and scientific instruments. There is an acute shortage of
power, with breakdowns becoming part of everyday life. Karachi, the
largest city and industrial hub of Pakistan, faces power cuts lasting
for hours. Unemployment is rising. Living standards are falling.
The neo-liberal economic policies of
counter-reforms, privatisation, deregulation, structural adjustments and
trade liberalisation began in the late 1980s and early 1990s, known as
the era of the ‘free-market economy’, giving rise to price hikes,
unemployment and poverty. Seventeen percent of the population was living
below the poverty line in 1988, increasing to 34% in 1999 and increasing
again in the last eight years. This shows the brutality and
super-exploitation of the capitalist system, coexisting with feudalism,
in Pakistan.
Trade union movement
THERE WERE A dozen trade unions in Pakistan at the
time of independence. The rail union was the largest and most militant,
and played an important role in the development of a strong trade union
movement. There were other unions in Karachi’s port and shipyard, the
post office and a few industries. The trade union movement flourished
and gained strength in the last years of the 1960s. Industrialisation
gave birth to the proletariat and this ‘virgin proletariat’ played the
leading role in the revolutionary uprising of 1968-69. From 1967 to 1974
can be called the golden era of the Pakistani trade union movement.
Thousands of new trade unions were formed and hundreds of strikes,
occupations and protest movements were organised in this period.
Before 1968, politics and political parties were all
about the ruling class. There was no mention of the working class and
its political role, in the media or among the intelligentsia. But that
all changed. The working class rose onto the political scene with an
exceptional revolutionary movement, which started as protests against
the regime of Ayub Khan led by students in November 1968, growing to a
general strike led by the working class within a few months.
Workers started to occupy factories and peasants
took over lands from feudal lords. In some areas, the peasantry
organised armed struggle against the landlords. Tenants refused to pay
rents. The working class took control of the cities and started to run
the administration. A few cities remained under workers’ control for
more than two weeks. Socialist revolution could be smelt in the air.
Socialism was the main slogan in the movement. The ruling class was
terrified.
The founder of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP),
Zulifqar Ali Bhutto, came to its rescue. There was no revolutionary
party and leadership able to carry through the revolution and overthrow
capitalism and feudalism to establish a workers’ state. Bhutto took
advantage of the situation and derailed the potential socialist
revolution into a reformist democratic movement. The working class lost
this opportunity and later paid the price for this failure. Respective
regimes viciously attacked the most militant and conscious layers of the
working class, introducing laws to prevent strikes and the formation of
unions, and banning trade union activities in many sectors of the
economy.
The trade union movement started to decline in the
1980s and has weakened significantly since, the last 15 years being the
most difficult time. The collapse of Stalinist Russia and the Stalinist
states of Eastern Europe also affected the trade union movement. Many
left-wing unions, federations and their leaders fully capitulated to
capitalism and started preaching free-market economy to their ranks.
Leaders betrayed many struggles against privatisation and
neo-liberalism. The main trade union leaderships also adopted the policy
of compromise and opportunism against government attacks on workers and
trade unions. Now, only 3% of workers are affiliated with trade unions.
The trade union movement is at a crossroad.
Compromise and capitulation will lead to further weakness and decline.
But struggle and organised resistance can provide strength and much
needed confidence to the labour movement. And the numbers of trade
unions have begun to increase as new sections of the working class have
started to organise. Some important struggles and strikes have emerged
in last few years, including the historic strike of PTCL
(telecommunications) and textile workers. Teachers are also fighting for
their rights, and industrial workers have won some important battles. In
next few years, there will be a resurgence of workers’ struggles and
strikes.
Rise & fall of the PPP
THE PAKISTAN PEOPLE’S Party was founded in 1967 with
just 35 people. Zulifqar Ali Bhutto was the founding chairman. He was a
big feudal lord from Sindh and served as minister in the military
government of Ayub Khan. He was a clever politician. He correctly
understood the mood of the masses and put forward a radical programme
with socialist slogans. He put forward demands for bread, houses and
clothes for everyone. He also talked about a socialist planned economy
and a classless society. In the absence of an organised left party and
movement, he came forward with radical anti-capitalist and anti-feudal
slogans.
The PPP became the largest political party in
Pakistan in just a few months, in the aftermath of the revolutionary
movement of the working class. It became the largest party in West
Pakistan, while the Awami League trounced the other parties to win a
landslide in East Pakistan in the first ever elections in 1970. The
military and civil establishment refused to hand over power to the Awami
League and this resulted in a civil war and then the separation of East
Pakistan (now called Bangladesh) in 1971. Bhutto became the leader of
the rest of Pakistan. He came to power with popular support, introducing
a few reforms in the early period of his rule, and nationalising more
than 70% of the economy.
But he was frightened of a strong working class and
used repressive measures against the trade unions. He betrayed the
working class and started attacking its advanced layers. His support
started to decrease in the last years of his rule. The military
organised a coup against him in 1977 after a violent right-wing movement
against him. He was later hanged by the military government. His hanging
again made him popular with the masses, because it showed he had refused
to compromise with the military dictator.
His daughter, Benazir Bhutto, became PPP leader in
1979. The PPP organized a movement for the restoration of democracy (MRD)
in 1983 against the military dictatorship of General Zia-ul-Haq. Benazir
compromised with the establishment and became prime minister after the
1988 general elections. It was a new beginning for Benazir and the PPP.
She betrayed the millions of poor working people and party activists who
had spent years in prison. She completely capitulated to the ruling
class and US imperialism. The PPP government introduced neo-liberal
economic policies and led the way for privatisation and counter-reforms.
The PPP started to lose its support from 1993.
Thousands of die-hard workers have left, emptying out the party. It is
no more seen as a party of the poor and working class, but is still an
electoral force which can win elections – though only with the support
of the establishment. The PPP leadership consists of feudal lords and
big capitalists. It was never a traditional working-class party, but a
party with a leadership from the upper and middle classes with solid
support in the masses.
The present day PPP is not even a shadow of the old
party. It cannot be ruled out that in the absence of an alternative some
sections of the working class might vote for the PPP again. But it would
be a critical and protest vote that cannot be compared with the vote it
received in 1970 or even 1988. The PPP is finished as a party of the
masses and working-class people. The betrayal of the PPP was and still
is a big blow to working-class politics. No working-class party exists
in Pakistan at the moment.
What future for Pakistan?
MANY WESTERN AND US think-tanks and commentators are
raising serious doubts about the future of this country. They raise the
possibilities of Talibanisaton, disintegration and civil wars, but not
the idea of a possible working-class uprising and revolution. There is
no doubt that Pakistan is facing many serious problems, including the
rise of right-wing political Islam, an explosive national question,
crisis in the state, and a possible economic meltdown. But under
capitalism and feudalism there will be no future for working-class
people. The ruling class has failed to solve the basic problems faced by
the people. The ruling class has failed to establish a functioning
democracy. There is no prosperity, social and economic justice or
political freedom. There will be no change in the lives of the masses on
this basis.
The only class which can bring change and transform
the lives of the working masses is the working class. Socialism is the
only viable system to replace capitalism. The working class has not yet
started to move but once it starts the whole political scenario will be
different. There is a 43 million strong working class, one third of the
total population. The Pakistani working class and masses have showed
again and again that they have the potential, courage and capability to
conduct a revolutionary struggle against the rotten rulers. The working
class needs its own revolutionary party and leadership to organise the
struggle. Such a party, with a clear programme, strategy and tactics,
and mass support, can win the future for the masses.
Pakistan is heading towards another showdown between
the ruling and working classes. The outcome of this showdown will
determine the future of this country and for the masses. The working
class cannot take full advantage of independence and cannot enjoy real
freedom without the overthrow of capitalism and feudalism.
|