The myth of dynastic politics

Asked the inevitable question in his recent BBC HARDtalk interview, PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari defended dynastic politics as it relates to his party. For obvious reasons, he said, he wouldn't go into the merits and demerits of dynastic politics which has no place in modern democracies, but that it is a reality in South Asia. He said all parties in Pakistan rely on it to a certain extent, but the PPP's case was different, claiming that neither he nor his mother Benazir Bhutto chose to be in that position, they were chosen to play that role. Only three days after his mother's assassination, the PPP Central Executive Committee (CEC) asked him to lead the party. He could not have refused, he asserted, as he wanted to continue his mother's mission-whatever that may be. He surely has got the gift of the gab. But facts are facts.
The case of PPP is not any different. It is worth recalling how the entire affair was managed by his father Asif Ali Zardari, leaving the CEC with no choice but to play along. The central leadership was presented with the assassinated leader's will in which she had named her husband as her successor. And in turn the husband decided to install Bilawal as chairman also thoughtfully adding Bhutto to his name, and himself as co-chairman. In the case of Benazir, it is true that the situation arising out of her father Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's ouster by a military dictator and then execution forced her to lead his party through trying times. But once in power she wouldn't allow anyone to displace her. She got the CEC to sack her own mother, Begum Nusrat Bhutto, as party head and herself 'elected' as life chairperson. That she did on suspicion that the mother wanted to bring in her son, Murtaza Bhutto, to take that position.
Indeed, the sad reality is that almost all major parties are headed by hereditary politicians. Although the PML-N Supreme Leader Nawaz Sharif himself is a first generation politician, he too has been trying hard to have his daughter succeed him despite rumblings of resentment within the party. Surely in this country of over 220 million, there are many individuals better able than the present set of party heads, to lead their respective parties. They are deliberately kept down. For fear such persons might come into their own and throw leadership challenges, even at the provincial level weak persons are appointed to top political and party offices. There is no way second tier leaders, no matter how talented they might be, can get to the top.
Yet the phenomenon of dynastic politics is often unfairly attributed to our cultural ethos. The people vote in the name of leaders they know and love, goes the argument, and want to see them in those positions generation after generation. Ignored is the fact that the people cannot dislodge them. They can make choices at election time, but only from what is on offer. Familiarity may be an important factor in electoral politics, but there are other more important factors. The PML-N, for example, holds appeal for the religious right and the moneyed business class. Its vote bank has mostly stayed intact all these years because Nawaz Sharif never moved away from the party fundamentals. He continued to protect and promote the interests of his support base. Under-privileged sections of society and other progressive elements supported the centre-left PPP for championing their cause. The process of alienation started first when Benazir Bhutto embraced neo-liberalism, eliminating the defining line between her party and the PML-N, and then got embroiled in the Surrey Mansion and other financial corruption scandals. Whatever was left of the party's goodwill was destroyed by stories of corruption and incompetence rampant throughout PPP government's five-year rule at the Centre under Asif Ali Zardari. Punjab was where the PPP was founded and remained its stronghold for several years. Many politicians earned name and fame under its banner. Now it is difficult to name a prominent party figure in Punjab except Qamar Zaman Kaira; all others have run away because the PPP voters have run away.
The argument that dynastic politics is alive and well because of public loyalty to hereditary politicians is negated also by the rise of PTI. Before he entered politics Imran Khan was a highly esteemed public figure due to his brilliant sporting career. He had also earned much respect for his public service project, Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital, in Lahore. Despite his status he badly lost his first electoral bid. Second time in 2002, he managed to win just one seat- his own. Apparently, the people still had hopes the two major parties, the PML-N and PPP, would deliver what they had been promising them. Gradually disillusionment with the leaders and their policies set in. The PTI boycotted the 2008 election, but emerged as a strong contender in the last one. It seems to be gaining more and more popularity because of what the party chief stands for rather than his pedigree. The reality is that dynastic politics owes its existence to its beneficiaries' power lust, not something peculiar to our culture. [email protected]