Abstract
Political competition has been understood in Pakistan as the interaction between two dominant political forces: a state elite comprising a military-bureaucratic oligarchy, and a political elite that comprises political parties and their leaders. However, attempts to understand this political competition have focused on variables pertaining to the military: that is, military intervention in politics; manipulation of the electoral process by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI); party-less governance during martial law regimes; and the persecution of political leaders. While I do not dispute these factors, scholarship on Pakistan through its overemphasis on the military has neglected to observe the political elite, which either through cooperation or through competition with the military, has come to be a viable contender for political power. It is also pertinent to question what set of circumstances led the army to intervene in politics, or what allows the army to claim that an intervention was necessitated by the failure of political leadership. Political parties provide an important lens through which to examine the political system. They also function as fundamental conduits of political life as major agents of representation and institutions that order legislative life. For the voter, political parties provide critical information about the candidates and the programmatic agenda they stand for. For the politician, who is likely to be focused on the short term and his own personal interests, the political party is an institution which resolves a variety of coordination problems in pursuit of public office and state resources. Finally, political parties are essential to democratic governance because they serve as a bridge between the executive and the legislature and provide a critical mechanism to overcome gridlock. This is not to suggest that the function of political parties inevitably leads to democratic ends, but to argue that the prospect for democracy can be enhanced if strong and wellinstitutionalized political parties exist. This chapter is an attempt to redress the gap in the literature on Pakistani politics by examining the party system. One of the most glaring features of party politics is the rampant factionalism and indiscipline manifested by partyswitching and defections. Party indiscipline is not unique to Pakistan, but this particular weakness of the party system reveals much about political competition in the country. The inability of political parties to elicit credible commitment from party members inhibits the strengthening of political parties and consequentlyhampers the consolidation of democracy. In this chapter I have focused less on the debilitating consequences. Instead, I offer an explanation for party indiscipline that is rooted in the recruitment and selection process of the political elite by examining four political parties: the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), founded in 1967; the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), founded in 1949; the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), founded in 1997 (the MQM was originally created in 1978 as the All Pakistan Muhajir Student Organization); and the Awami National Party (ANP), founded in 1986. These four parties have been selected because they have had an average vote share of 76 per cent in the National Assembly and are, therefore, deemed representative of party politics in Pakistan.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have