Huzaifa

Muhammad Huzaifa
22020247
POL 221-Comparative Politics  

Spiritual Democracy, Theocracy or Secularism; What’s Best for Pakistan?

Pakistan, since the day of its independence, has been a victim to transitions
in the forms of its government. Irregular shifts from democracy to dictatorship and
vice versa have hindered the country’s progress to a major extent but it does not end
there. Apart from military and politics, another salient feature of Pakistan’s history
has been the turbulent but rigorous progression of Islamist ideology on the part of
various institutions; sometimes it is military, sometimes it is the national parties like
Jamiat Ulema e Islam and sometimes it is the political alliances like Muttahida Majlis
e Amal which consist of conservative, religious, Islamist and mostly far-right political
parties. Regardless of who are the players of this game, its impact is always huge;
dethroning of the Nawaz government in 1998, conflict between MMA and General
Pervez Musharraf and so on. Given the history of Pakistan, the country now needs a
fixed and efficient system with strong political institutions, impactful judiciary and
active enforcement of country laws. In order to achieve this, it needs a sharp and
permanent shift in not only its form of government but also in the ideology that is
deeply enrooted in the minds of Pakistani’s. Although Pakistan’s foundation was laid
on the basis of Islam and it is a Muslim state with strict obligations towards Islam, it
is high time that the state should declare itself secularist in order to promote
inclusivity for the minorities and produce better social and economic outcomes thus
heading towards a more stable form of a regime. 
Before going into the depth of this argument, it is necessary to know that
“secularism is not antithesis of religion; it does not defy the religious doctrines of a
state” (Khalid). The only thing that it does is freeing people from the oppression of
following the majority religion and defies the monopoly established by a single
favored religion. A democracy is always preferred to an oppressive militarism and the
proof of this comes from the “Vali Nasr’s Military Rule, Islamism and Democracy in
Pakistan” where he draws a clear comparison between the state of Pakistan under both
dictatorship as well as democracy. The country has always progressed more under the
democratic rule rather than militarism; Ayub khan’s regime is the only exception.
 Huzaifa

However, a democratic regime also demands more space and inclusion for minority
rights and especially for a country like Pakistan, who has dedicated a part of its flag to
the minorities inhabiting the country, it is a big challenge to rise to this claim of equal
minority rights. Islamism is the biggest obstruction in meeting this challenge; the
distinctions and the conflicts among different sects has played a huge role in shaping
of the current policies which have not only harmed the least favorite sects but also the
minorities living in the country. Pakistan itself was created to cater to the religious,
prior to the economic, social and other needs of the Muslim minorities living in the
sub-continent and even though the “article 20 of Pakistan’s constitution gives every
national the right to choose their religious affiliation, the laws must pertain to the
dominant Islamic ideology which is Sunnism” (Sharma), and which is supposed to be
followed by every national.  “We have many examples of secular states with
underprivileged ethnic minorities such as Iraq’s era of modernization
under Sadam Hussain, Turkey’s secularity where Ataturk granted equal rights to
religious minorities, and not to forget rise of BJP in secular India” (Khalid), and there
are three things common amongst all of them. They are secular, they are ethnically
diverse, and they are ensuring equal rights for most of their minorities. 
Apart from becoming an inclusive state for minorities, it would also be much
easier for Pakistan to progress economically and socially as a secular state rather than
as a theocratic or spiritually democratic state. “First of all, we should know that the
view of secular constitution as atheistic constitution is altogether wrong, it only
provides built-in guarantee of religious freedom” (Khalid). For a “religiously
pluralistic state” (Nasr), like the one that Pakistan is, if religion is excluded from the
constitution, then consequently the citizenship would be held in higher regard than
religion, which is critically essential in a pluralist state. “Secondly, it makes it difficult
for the negotiation to take place among religious groups in a society because a
religious constitution will always have a privileged religion, and no matter how
accommodative government or judiciary might be, the primal force to carry the
decision making will have to adhere to the religion of the state- that necessarily means
the diminution of another” (Khalid). This means that the inter-religious conflicts can
be far less strained if they are targeted towards the state rather than another religious
group. The example for this can be extracted from Ahmed Feroz’s “Ethnicity, Class
and State in Pakistan. Economic and Political Weekly”, where it shows how
preference given to citizenship over religion can produce better economic as well as
 Huzaifa

social results, in terms of class equality, “because now the excluded minorities
like Ahmedis and disenfranchised ethnicities like Kashmiris, Bengalis etc. also get
equal opportunities for jobs in both public and private sector” (Feroz). Similarly, this
approach can also work in managing the Shia-Sunni conflict in the country. Thus, it
shows that secularism can be an efficient way towards promoting class equality and
producing better economic outcomes. 
The biggest argument that comes against the declaration of Pakistan as a
secularist state is the ideology that is deeply enrooted in the heart of Pakistani history
and nation. The ideology “Pakistan ka Matlab kya, La Ilaha Illallah” (Sharma) was
the steppingstone for the foundation of the state. The major trigger for the mass
mobilization at that time was religion; Pakistan was founded to make it a laboratory
for experiments on Islam. However, the history is clearly evident of the harm brought
by this extremist ideology to the country. The role of the Islam was most emphasized
after the 1971 breakaway of Bangladesh since now the identity of Pakistan had come
into question. “Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto came to power amidst the political confusion with
an Islamic socialist program and centralized the role of religion in national identity
creation” (Nasr). This was used as a base for his successor to reshape the regime
through his famous wave of Islamization. “Zia’s Islamization process went against the
grain of the people who were religious in their private lives but not necessarily in their
public lives and so an unexpected outcome was a further division of the Pakistani
society-by relying on a policy grounded in Islam, the state fomented factionalism”
(Nasr). Similarly, the way the Sunni perspective was held superior to the other sects
did not only lead to a Shia-Sunni conflict but also gave birth to the “ethnic
disturbances in Karachi between Muhajirs and Pakhtuns, increased hostility
towards Qadiyannis and the revival of the Punjab-Sindh tensions” (Nasr) thus, it
shows that Islamist ideology has done more damage to the nation’s peace than it has
benefitted it. 
To sum up the discussion, secularism might not be the most effective way to
bring peace and prosperity into Pakistan, it sure is a better option than adopting
Spiritual Democracy that promotes majoritarian agenda and excludes the minorities
from the decision-making of a country. Consequently, this lays the foundation for
them to revolt and rebel as well as the theocracy which encourages the progression of
an Islamist ideology which again meddles with the rules of a country’s constitution
and opens the ways to discrimination among people based on their religious
 Huzaifa

affiliations. “The whole idea of a secular society is to democratize religious

sentiments among the public institutions; by privileging no particular religion and
ensuring equal rights for all” (Khalid). If only the educational system would start
welcoming people belonging to every religion, many new horizons into the fields of
science, technology and research can be explored by our next generations. Moreover,
if the system would start acknowledging the work of Dr. Abdul Salam in theoretical
physics instead of vilifying him, we would be much more tolerant and grateful
towards our religious minorities. It is the immediate need of the hour to establish a
rule of law, which can thrive without oppressing the voices of religious minorities. 

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
                                                        
  
  
  
  
                                            

Bibliography
 Huzaifa

Ahmed, Feroz. “Ethnicity, Class and State in Pakistan.” Economic and Political

Weekly, vol. 31, no. 47, 1996, pp. 3050–
3053. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4404794. 
Khalid, Ayesha. “Should Pakistan Be a Secular State?” Pakistan
Today, www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2016/04/05/should-pakistan-be-a-secular-
state/.  
Nasr, Vali. “Military Rule, Islamism and Democracy in Pakistan.” Middle East
Journal, vol. 58, no. 2, 2004, pp. 195–
209. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4330001. 
Sharma, Fowpe. “Jalib, Habib. Pakistan Ka Matlab Kia (What Does Pakistan Mean)
Trans.” Ten Poems by Habib Jalib,
revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv9n1/jalibpoems.htm.