You say you want a revolution?

BY NADIR HASSAN ON 01 31ST, 2011 | COMMENTS (22)

There are few things as drearily predictable as

Pakistani hacks watching revolutions in
progress in other countries and wistfully
wishing we could have one ourselves. The
overthrow of the Tunisian government swiftly
followed by the likely removal of Hosni
Mubarak in Egypt has provided lovers of facile
arguments a bonanza.

Beyond puerile platitudes extolling the virtues

of spirited street power and pleading with the
masses to storm the capital, no one seems
interested in explaining exactly who the revolt
should be directed against or even who will be
directing it. Unenlightening tirades against the ‘establishment’ do not count as an
explanation since they are about as specific as a stoned teenager railing against The
Man.

Pakistan right now has a flawed, nascent democratic system in place, one that is
incrementally becoming less imperfect and more secure. From the holding of elections
that were as free as any have been in the country to the passage of the 18th
amendment, we have made undoubted progress after the Musharraf blight. Sure, we
are all unhappy at the rapid rise of religious extremism and the government’s cowardice
in tackling the blasphemy issue. Endemic corruption and a growing economic crisis
please no one. But using that as bait in calling for mass upheaval is extremely childish.
Democratisation is better achieved through a slow process of elections, bitter political
debates and give-and-take between transient governments and the permanent military.

Since the revolutionary brigade have not progressed beyond the “let’s occupy
Constitution Avenue” stage, I’ll be charitable and assume they want to revolt against
army control. A nice sentiment but one that does not hold up to scrutiny when you try to
figure out the composition of the would-be freedom fighters.

There is only one force (with an important exception I will get to later) capable of rousing
enough people to action: the political parties. As they’re the ones in charge right now, it
would be odd, to say the least, for them to march against their own inability to rein in the
army. “Remove the men in khaki/I am only their lackey” is not a particularly stirring
slogan.

Any large-scale, street-level protests against the current government by opposition

parties will serve only to strengthen the military, which will use civil unrest as an excuse
to assume overt control. If there is one lesson to be learned from the Pakistan National
Alliance and its anti-Bhutto protests of 1977, it is that the army is only to eager to take
advantage of a divided body politic. At the height of the protests in ’77, Begum Wali
Khan of the ANP told Maulana Mufti Mahmud of the JUI, “Let martial law be imposed
because only such a step would guarantee holding of elections within 90 days.” People
writing in support of revolutionary fervour are exhibiting similar naivety.

The word-processor warriors are also deluded in their belief that there are sufficient
numbers to launch a liberal movement. Outside of the political parties, the only people
with the numbers and will to take to the streets are those who feel Pakistani is
insufficiently Islamic. Just consider the attendance at pro- and anti-blasphemy law
rallies. Such an arithmetical gulf is usually only seen in the difference between our
politicians’ bank balances and tax returns.

The second-hand fumes of the revolutionary fervour in Tunisia and Egypt has so
intoxicated normally level-headed people that, like the drunkard who will hit on the first
human being to cross his or her path, they want any revolution no matter how much
they might regret it the next morning. If they get their way we will be left with the
hangover of a lifetime.