You are on page 1of 13

Anatol Lieven-Pakistan: A Hard Country

I Introduction: Understanding Pakistan

Janus-faced internal structure that is useful for keeping extremism in check, but also a source of stagnation. Climate change, not extremism is the countrys most latent threat. Sympathy for attacks on US and India do not reflect support for extremism, rather they reflect a hatred of these two superpowers and the power of nationalism. In fact, hatred of America runs so deep that US intervention could truly unsettle the state. Relationship with India made Pakistan more co-operative security actor, but unwilling to allocate resources to the right places. And they view the Afghan Taleban as legitimate fighters of foreign occupation in Afghanistan. In fact, strategy with Afghanistan driven by fear and ambition. This had led to relations between Pakistan and the Afghan Taleban as they convinced US going to fail, leaving a power vacuum. Self-interested, only started fighting them in 2009 when they began to be a threat. Before they were a nuisance, and not as bad as the Northern alliance leaders. In eyes of west, ambivalent actor, willing to combat its own extremism though tacitly accepting others. Most of Pakistans different ethnicities have lived alongside each other for millennia, have been Muslim for hundreds of years, and have often been ruled by the same Muslim dynasties. A political base that existed before the nation state. Islam a very divided movement-clan based, so Islamic citizens tend to have multiple identities. Rule through patronage (rentier state article). . Clan identities outweigh other identities. Politics of patronage and protection-Corruption is often favouring your clan over others, minimal identity theory. Kinship networks largely a response to the ineffectiveness of government. Clan structure conservative force, difficult to reform and progress but provides underlying stability. The government of Pakistan not changed deep structures of Kinship. See why doesnt match European models of urban political development. Only institution which breaks this pattern is the army, and it has turned into a clan itselfserving its members interests. Compared to states that Pakistan shares a history with, its moderately successful, and not particularly repressive. Human rights abuses are rarely ordered by government, same as in India. Pakistan demonstrates the frequent irrelevance of democracy. The majority of human rights abuses stem from a mixture of freelance brutality and exploitation by policeman, actions by local landlords, and punishments by local communities for infringements of their moral code.

Institutions in Pakistan do not work, so the people would be sceptical of democracy. Need to solve the former to achieve the latter. Two forces of modernity-Western and Islamist. State over-populated and current water use unsustainable. Long term problems. Needs to develop water-management infrastructure. Water crisis. World Bank 2004 Report. 2009 Woodrow Wilson Study. Aid encourages long term water management is best, also provide jobs ect. Look at current aid, strengths and weaknesses. Pakistan poor, though because of patronage few in absolute poverty. State bad at providing services, though as succeeded in some projects-motorway building, dams of the 50s. Development indexs for Pakistan (GDP per person, literacy rate) reflect its position as an undeveloped nation.

Struggle for Muslim South Asia

Pakistani Islam used to be a very powerful force. Nostalgia of this, explains its militarism. Also long history of resistance to Western power. However the current wave of resistance has a fairly young source; the collapse of communism and the strengthening of the AmericanIsraeli alliance. Legacy of British Empire. Empire was kinder to Hindus as it saw Muslims as the main source of opposition. Hindus tend to be more prosperous than Muslims, and the two groups separated themselves. Pathan areas where Taleban tend to reside and recruit, also a main source of anti-imperialism. Two Nation Theory-That Hindus and Muslims are separate entities, and national borders should reflect this. Coexistence. Pakistan largely created because of the inability of the Muslim League and the Government of India to co-operate. Pakistan was expected to be a secular state with a Muslim majority, but strong Hindu and Sikh contingent. But because the Muslim league could not achieve its goals constitutionally, it turned to radical measures and adopted a more radical, Islamic ideology. East and West Pakistan-years of conflict and failure. East Pakistan became Bangladesh. The separation not a tragedy, but how they separated was. 1971-Pakistan as we know it founded. One reason why India been more prosperous-its progressive movement endured still exists today whereas attempts to modernize Pakistan, and movements such as the Muslim league have failed. Pakistans thin base of support-security state. Whether civilian or military, all Pakistani governments have failed to reform Pakistan-in consequence, Pakistan, which was ahead of South Korea in development in the early 1960s, is dreadfully far behind today. Leaders have to depend on elites to remain in office. The elites use this link to government for their own

interest. The result of this is stagnation; government funds do not get invested properly, and reforms have to be severely tempered. Elected authoritarians. Politicians and elites able to place huge pressure on civil servants and subordinates, bad for governance. Attempts at reform and devolution also hindered by the inexperience and ineptitude of civil servants. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (1971-1977)-created the Pakistani Peoples Party-still dominates South Asian Politics. Top down modernisation through state industries. Involved breaking the power of existing elites. State companies used to curry favour in the end. And landowners merely broke up land and gave it to their friends, allowing them to retain real control over their property. Failed to create a big enough support base to sustain his position in office. PPP not strong enough to terrorize Pakistani society into submission. But was strong and vicious enough to raise hatred of Bhutto to a degree not seen of any Pakistani ruler before or since. Zia-Ul-Haq, Bhuttos successor tried to re-organise the state on religious lines and increase state power, but failed. Islams diversity truly demonstrated in Pakistan. Shaped politics though in creating a party with a real identity not tied to vested interests, the Muslim League. A two-party system now exists because of Zia and Bhutto, foundation of competitive leadership. Still bad government though. Parties though have to conform to existing Pakistani social and political structures, can only survive through patronage and kinship and do not behave like democracies.

3. Justice
Taleban justice is free and achieves results, unlike state justice. Overall loathing of state justice because corrupt and ineffective. People turn to Taleban not because they agree with them but because the state is so inept. Taleban also offer Sharia justice, which resonates with the people. Distance between Pakistani law and the people. Same structure as the English. People dont see it as legitimate and merely twist it for their own benefit. And it is contest with Sharia law and local practices. Competition of judicial codes between State, Local and Sharia. Pakistan is a negotiated state. Authority is a matter of negotiation, compromise, pressure and violence. Law in Pakistan resembles international law more than national law. Honour, and the restoration of honour is a big part of justice. Moral law overrides state law. Violence also used to leverage an outcome. No Sadar, however rich, can afford to be seen as a coward by his people. Councils and Elders often have very important role in settling disputes. Loose justice system from which state excluded. Judgements through consensus. This means that those disliked, or seen as unethical by the community will get worse sentences. Justice is built around honour and compensation. Why Sharia and Traditional systems are favoured by ordinary people.

Two levels of justice-formal and informal. Need for informal practices and local customs, as the formal ones too weak. Police need to work with the customs and rely on Jirgas to settle disputes, as that is what the various tribes respond to. Importance of negotiation, and interplay between formal laws and informal customs. Police chiefs adapting to this culture of compensation, and are trying to align it with state law. Restorative Justice. Need for changerapid population growth and urbanisation will make the Jirga system unsuitable in the future as it relies on personal knowledge of the groups and of the power relations and consensus, which cannot happen amongst large groups. Customs keep communities segregated. Justice in Pakistan is incompatible with liberal democracy, especially the treatment of women. Or it relies too much on consultation and democratic procedures, resulting in barbarism. Rough justice stops feuds from escalating. State justice fails because of Kinship. If you really want to arrest one person here and prosecute him, you may need to arrest ten-the original suspect plus three for perjury, three for bribing the police and judges, and three for intimidating witnesses. And if the family has any influence, the only result will be to get yourself transferred to another district. So Im afraid that it is often much easier just not to arrest anyone. Moral law of protecting Kin justifies lying, coercion and manipulation. Fake cases also brought to courts to harass opponents and force them to withdraw. Police are also underfunded, undermanned and suffer low morale. Because of this very corrupt and brutal, so the public avoid them. Can be changed, look at the success of the motorway police. Judicial system very overloaded, and lacks resources to successfully prosecute criminals. And they distrust cases brought by the police as they are corrupt. At the same time though police complain about well known murderers and gang leaders who have been brought before the courts, yet not been sentenced. Encounter Killings by police now common. Key failure of courts is hearings largely conducted in English, which alienates a lot of people. Also lawyers often have a poor grasp of English, making it difficult for them to articulate their arguments. This is of course a godsend for defence lawyers. Only democratic procedures in justice are the Jirgas, and these dont represent women, and tend to favour local elites. The official judiciary is necessary to preserve the rights of women. Difficult to reconcile that most Pakistani men prefer the illiberal practices of the Jirgas. They oppose the progressive, democratic movement Lawyers movement-progressive, liberal movement constraining leaders through popular protest. Though many members conservative, joining because of their resentment of Musharraf and the US and India. Explains why several terrorists and extremists often released without charge. Movement does not have long term strategy, and at times borders on delusion. Opinion of the movement tied to the justice system, which is on the whole disliked. Lawyers also been known to use violence and intimidation to help them win cases. Violence and power in Pakistan.

Sharia is a simple and quick form of justice, though punitive and biased against women. Not appropriate for a modern state. Though based on compensation and reconciliation-a justice system Pakistan familiar with. Three competing codes of justice-government, sharia and tribal. There is also the Taleban Pashtunwali Sharia and the more liberal Peshawar Sharia, as well as the scores of local interpretations of the code. Why Islamist revolt unlikely, they dont agree on anything so resist an imposed justice. That said, given Pakistans poverty violence relatively low. The problems that Pakistan face are redolent of South Asia.

Islamic character of Pakistan only an internal issue if state tries to impose its version of Islam. Too diverse for this to be succesful Pakistan has one of the highest charity rates in the world: 5% of GDP. Religion a motivating factor for this. Edhi Foundation Religion conservative unlike other me countries-not going to start a revolution. Many Islamist groups look to protect women, as in many parts of westernised Pakistan they are exposed to unconstrained abuse. In the blaring, stinking, violent world of the modern third world Muslim inner city, the mosque provides an oasis of calm and reflection. Islamic parties dont have mass appeal because Islams a fragmented movement and the urban elites dont support them so they dont have the skills to appeal to a wide array of people or offer solutions to the countries problems. Radical moves, such as attacking religious symbols such as shrines alienate people from religious extremists. Taleban have to adapt to local customs. Fundamentalism vs Mysticism. Muslim Saints also a source of religious authority along with the more fundamentalist and moderate versions of Islam. Powerful sect, and the spiritual power which they hold is hereditary. Saints often marry other powerful families and form Kinship networks, increasing their political clout. Taleban hate them as they believe the shrines are the equivalent of false deities, distracting people from the true scripture of god; the Koran. Pir and Sajjadanashin families. Traditions and structures which prevent Islamist revolution and civil war also keep much of the population in a state of backwardness and deference to the elites. Pirs very much involved in this structure and make allegiances with politicians so they can support each other through their respective spheres of influence. Their political, property owning and sometimes criminal role co-exists with the beneficial spiritual and social functions. Help ease social situations, but use their clout to increase their power and influence. Shrines source

of great superstition. Good reason to think they hinder Pakistan, and reinforce hereditary rule and authority. Shrines around Sehwan Sharif have a carnival atmosphere-break stereotypes of Islam and contrast to the reformist and fundamentalist movements which preach moral conservatism. Ambivalence in reformist Jamaats approach to terrorism. Condone the Taleban, but condone action against them because they are fighting the US. Ghazi-American policy misguided. How much have you spent on this so-called war on terror? Trillions of dollars. If you had spent on this on helping develop Pakistan and Afghanistan, we would have loved you and never attacked you. The only way for America to resolve the security issues it faces in the ME, is to win the popular opinion of the people who live there. Many militants are protest movements-explains why they have no clear policy or strategy.

Very effective institution-relative efficiency in their own area is contrasted with the failings of civilian politicians. Because of this performed some of the functions of government as politicians and police are corrupt. More effective because more resources. Pakistan very militarised state, over 700,000 trained and highly motivated. Compare to highway police-why function well-better paid. 17.5% of gov budget goes to military. Similar statistic to India. Drained resources from other key areas. Immune to kinship interests, though acts like a kinship group-look after their members. Neccesary up to a point though to protect soldiers. Fauji Foundation-firms run by the military with profit used to help soldiers. Very successful in China-china also has high levels of corruption, but it occurs alongside economic growth. If model could be reproduced in Pakistan-big step forward. Emphasis on loyalty and moral used to compensate for an army that is weaker than India. Need strong military culture to retain morale. Pakistan looks after soldiers and their families. Honest, well functioning institution that should be emulated as much as possible. Collective spirit. The success of the military though largely at the expense of civilian institutions. Needs to be a greater balance between two spheres. American pressure though could lower morale to a level that creates a vacuum for mutiny and extremism. Dissilusioning fighting the Taleban, as they are seen to mean well and have a common interest of ousting America, but are so misguided they have to reprimanded. Key passage 175.

Various external and internal threats warrant strong military; Afghanistan over Panthan regions, India over Kashmir, sectarian violence and terrorism. Relative size and geography have contributed greatly to the sense of danger, often spilling over into paranoia, which characterizes the Pakistani security establishment. Key areas of Pakistan such as Lahore and the Lahore-Karachi highway are very close to India. Dislike the Afghan-Indian alliance. Why they support Afghan Taleban. Army more diverse institution than used to be-drawing from the Sind region north of Punjab. Problems with this-they poorer and less educated so army has to compromise standards to integrate these people. Meritocratic-you advance with education and knowledge of English-military therefore provides opportunities which the Pakistani economy cannot. Colonel Abdul Qayyum: at heart the vast majority of the army are nationalists, and take whatever is useful from Islam to serve what they see as Pakistans interests. The Pakistani army has been a nationalist army with an Islamic look. Pakistan, India, the Taleban and American relations form the nexus of public opinion on the military, and an environment where anti-americanism occurs alongside heavy American pressure and reduced taleban violence could turn public opinion against Pakestan military, ruining it. Main problem with Pakistans army is obsession with India and Kashmir. Obsession with the region since the birth of Pakistan. Blame them for Bangladeshs independence and the Baloch nationalists. Other terrorist groups which the Pakistan government have sponsored such as the Lashkar-eTaiba (LET) /Jamaat-ud-Darwa complicate the security situation in the region. They do not directly target Pakistan as they hate India, and if the gov looks to break them up then the gov portrayed as Americas puppet and the members of the organisation bolster the Taleban. This creates problems for the military. Instead, Pakestan uses these organisations to serve its interests in Afghanistan and India, to the dislike of the international community. Pakistani security forces are now afraid of the creature they helped create, of its possible sympathizers within their own ranks, and of the dreadful consequences if it were to join with the Taleban and the sectarians in revolt against Pakistan. Pakistan anticipating a power vacuum in Afghanistan which will be filled by a proxy conflict between Pakistan endorsed forces and Indian sponsored Northern Alliance. They dont like the Taleban but they are useful. Questions of how deep the relations are between ISI (inter-services intelligence) and terrorist groups have potential to be very unsettling. Also very difficult for ISI to constrain and keep track of the militant groups it has links to. Also, placing LET members to on trial or breaking

up the organisation through public institutions would compromise the ISI, as the ISIs involvement in terrorist attacks would be revealed. Nuclear weapons-driven by fear of India-deterrent. Also pride and prestige-nuclear weapons and power in world politics. Look at Waltz and Mearsheimer-stabilizing effect but then critics such as Sagan. How Pakistan fits right into his theory. A.Q.Khan-important figure-US tolerated him before 9/11but now because of amplified terrorist threat. In fact biggest fear is Islamification of Pakistans nuclear programme. Highly unlikely, Pakistan military exists to protect the country, and Pakistans weapons are very secure (IISS page 201). Most likely scenario is use of bomb under US and Indian pressure. External threats most likely to de-stabilize and radicalize Pakistan.

2010 floods may destroy rural kinship networks as the damage to agriculture has starved the rural elites of the necessary resources to curry favour. Governments fail because they unable to keep their promises and reward their allies. And when their allies are not rewarded, there is no benefit to the relationship so they desert the government. System largely result of loyalty to family and clan, and corruption seen as ordinary. Political parties built around powerful actors in society; urban bosses, landlords, chieftains and dynasties. Charismatic authority. FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) and MQM Karachi exceptions to this rule. Civilians have used the ISI and IB (Intelligence Bureau) for unconstitutional ends. ISI only has power to change results in some constituencies, and cannot make big swings. Lack of revenue and patronage explains Pakistans poor growth rate. Prevents negative and radical change though, as some of the patronage reaches the poor. And the lack of high-profit ventures in Pakistan sets limits on embezzlement. To gain money through the state you need supporters, and they in turn need to be paid. Patronage flows through society. Why compared to Nigeria, India and US has relatively low Gini Coefficient (equality rating). Pakistani families try to dominate the private and public sectors-so patronage does not leave the family. Why different family members also stand for multiple parties-to ensure that whatever outcome they get a good result. Family in Pakistan the most enduring unit of society, so despite changes in party and policy, very little actually changes. In different parts of Pakistan though elites have different types of power and authority, changing their ability to shape politics. E.G in Barochistan need to win over the Pirs and the tribal chiefs. Land reform in NWFP reduced power of elites. NWFP tends to follow free market politics-those who achieve success, rather than inherit position tend to be more powerful.

Urbanisation has also reduced the role of kinship, though not as greatly as standard models predict. Because demographic change has not produced cultural change yet. Urban peasants as still rely on protection of kinship group. Also because they are often informally employed. Pakistani politics similar to the middle ages in Europe, though they work through a loose democratic structure. The currency of Pakistani politics is honour and prestige. Politicians have to work very hard to gain this, through bribes, visits to villages, weddings ect. People are very fickle and easily insulted. Retaining supporters very time consuming. Winning support more important than policy. Media channels reflection of Pakistani middle class. This often very conservative and very religious. Media turned against Musharraf because of strong nationalist sentiments. Media help mass mobilization, but unable to predict whether this for positive or negative ends. Media though been useful for exposing corrupt practices of the police. This ability to embarrass though, could become integrated into current political structures. Ability to provoke new thought encouraging though. The PPP (Pakistan Peoples Party) (Led by Bhutto-Zardaris) (Broadly Nationalist, stronghold in Punjabi) Most family centred party which display mannerisms of monarchs and party leadership is hereditary. Didnt change Pakistan under Benazir Bhutto as promised. Because it couldnt as depended on conservative support. Nothing has changed in the PPP over the past twenty years because little has changed in the economy, society, culture and politics of the Sindhi countryside, which is the PPPs most essential base. Party most commited to womens rights (though this hardly makes it a champion of them). Relies on personal and charismatic authority. This placed party in crisis as Zardari Bhutto (husband of assassinated Benazir) is an ineffective leader. Losing support with urbanisation, as urban dwellers are less drawn by Kinship, which the PPP depends on more than other parties. Also the growing Islamic middle class in the urban Punjabi regions are at odds with the westernised leadership style. May need to adapt a more explicitly anti-American strategy. (241 key extract). The PML (Pakistan Muslim League). (Led by Sharifs) (Punjabi and NWFP) Strong Punjabi element to party, resilient support base but limited national appeal. Pro Business whereas PPP has had brief flirts with socialism. Businessmen favour this party. Gives the party a clear edge over the PPP when it comes to economic policy and efficiency in general. More middle class support base than Bhutto, which has a more feudal structure. Both rely on patronage though.

Difficult situation in Punjab as they cannot control or deter the Taleban, they losing credentials on law on order, something that is necessary for a government in Pakistan. They are gaining support as a party that will stand up to America though, particularly in the NWFP and the Jamaat Islamic movement. Because of Pakistani dependence on US aid, and their business base though they will be unable to reset the relationship with the US or take Pakistan in a more Islamic direction. And because of the need for patronage will not be able to make real economic changes. Like PPP no internal elections. Dynastic party-led by the Sharifs. Small c Conservative. The Muttahida Quami Mahaz (MQM) (Karachi) Middle Class Progressive Party. Ethnic party based in Karachi, holds considerable clout there. Become popular with the success of Karachi-party can help create prosperity and urban growth. Comparably less corrupt as well. Relies on women. Threaten and coerce the media. More professional than PPP and PML. Very involved in Pakistani society, a social organisation as well. Because Karachi a new society compared to the PML and PPP strongholds, the MQM not so reliant on Kinship. It has many of the properties of pre 1945 European Nationalist parties though, but at a regional level for the Mohajirs-MQM Activistwe cannot afford to give an inch, because we have our back to the sea. The Sindhis have Sindh, and the Panthans can go back up to their mountains, but we have nowhere but Karachi.

56 percent of population live in this province and 75 percent of industry centred here.-biggest contributor to armed forces and the agricultural and industrial core of the state. Punjab is the heart, stomach and backbone of Pakistan. Indeed, in the view of many of its inhabitants, it is Pakistan. Fragmented-like India politics of compromise, and several divisions; ethnicity, religion, geography, language. But unlikely break Pakistan apart because of structures and the alternative to united Pakistan much worse. Several overlapping identities in the Punjab province, why it often said to dominate Pakistan, it is as heterogeneous as the state. Nucleus of the state, Punjab very committed to Pakistan. The official language of region is the official language of Pakistan, Urdu and English. Kinship very entrenched here-new elites work with the system through marriage.

Capital city Lahore-westernised but facing real issues and citizens in the city strongly associates the government with the US. Achievements of the city though shows how Pakistan not a failed state. No revolutionary mood though and relatively safe region Pakistan behind other developing countries in terms of water storage-fault of the politicians. Arrested development. Migration has weakened feudal patterns in North Pujab. South Punjab did not receive as many immigrants so is more feudal. Evidence of how Pakistan can change-look at urban development models. Emerging Punjabi consciousness (281)-largely as a reaction to other regions blackmailing their way to unfair amounts of resources. Personal ambition and family loyalty, as well as the need to accommodate others, has prevented this consciousness from changing Pakistan. Loose community of sentiment, though one which is endlessly cut across by personal and political ties. Progression and development in Pakistan will require politicians to pay more attention to developing the business environment than rewarding their friends. Requires a political party to generate a strong support base which has the ability to override the pressures of Kinship. Sectarian extremists and Taleban work together in Punjab. Situation could get worse as there are other radical groups such as the LET and the Jamaat-ud-Dawa which could be drawn into the conflict. Anti-Shia militancy. Difficult prosecuting members of these groups as people scared to give evidence. Most radical part of Punjab is the poor Multan region.

Frequent violence in Karachi. Situation greatly improved. Now violence against political individuals, not ethnic groups. Relies on the army for order though. Sindh biggest Hindu population of Paksitan. Biggest threat water, flooding, drought and rising sea levels are all problems. Karachi has grown exponentially-finance capital of Pakistan. Ethnic violence and tension between Mohajirs, Sindhs and Panthans. Particular contempt amongst Mohajirs for Panthans as Panthans on whole less educated. Karachi less than 50 percent of Sindhs population but produces 2/3s of Sindhs GDP. Political party alliegance key part of Pakistani identities, as political parties are the official faces of the Tribes.

MQM punch above their weight and have disproportionate influence because they are organised. Why they so unwilling to compromise with Panthans-because they vastly outnumber them and need to retain control of the city.