Pakistan’s Centralised Power And Historical Crises: Lessons From 1971 To Today |
The burden of a centralised state—from One-Unit politics to military action in East Pakistan to curb Bengali nationalism—eventually led to the dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971, twenty-four years after independence. The ethno-linguistic nationalities in smaller provinces in what remains of Pakistan reel under the same burden, despite the passage of the Eighteenth Constitutional Amendment, which guarantees provincial autonomy—Farah Zia, The Struggles, Victories and Debate on Human Rights in Pakistan, LSE, 14 November 2022.
The tragic memories of the fall of Dhaka (Dacca) on 16 December 1971, the subject matter of a large number of books and poetic expressions, are a loud reminder to thinkers and researchers to reinvestigate the evolution of the State of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan from the perspective of recolonisation in contradistinction to decolonisation in the wake of the exit of the British Raj. The military-judicial-civil complex of Pakistan, since its inception, has been reinforcing the colonial institutions, giving them invincible power to exploit national resources, control, and subjugate the citizens of a so-called independent state.
The milito-judicial-civil complex successfully, rather shamelessly, eliminated the author of the Myth of Independence through a judicial murder, a fact finally acknowledged via a constitutionally binding judgement of the highest court—the autonomy, supremacy, and independence of which was recently ended by an elected (sic) Parliament, commanded and controlled by men in uniform. The government’s ministers openly and joyfully celebrated their “subjugation” under what they call a “hybrid plus” arrangement.
Pakistan’s 27th Amendment: Centralised Power, Judicial Upheaval And Military Dominance
When an elected prime minister, often accused of supporting dictators till 1971, challenged the imperialists and their cronies and resolved to continue with the nuclear programme, he was warned, “We will make a horrible example of you”—he was hanged! We know the rest is history. Another one, presently incarcerated (once proud to be on one page with his benefactors), many say is bound to face the fate of his two predecessors, father and daughter, after openly defying the power that matters in the Land of the Pure. His main fault is identical: committing the mistake of “defiance,” not budging to admit it, and refusing a “deal.”
The powerful publicly expressed their wrath without mincing any words, dubbing him a “traitor,” “security threat,” and “mentally ill”; the charge sheet also includes........