Daily Times

Former Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification in the wake of Panama leaks has created ripples in political milieu of Pakistan and has brought Pakistan on the verge of political conflict between different stakeholders, be they political or non-political actors, as they are all are trying to extend their jurisdiction more assertively in order to occupy greater space in a political system that is in transformation post-Panama Papers-instigated Prime Minister’s disqualification. Conflict, on the face value, might be considered a bane for any political system but, in the light of historical developments and theory of social change, conflict is a boon for any political system. This is not what I assert; rather, it is the crux of an article published by Lewis A. Coser in “The British Journal of Sociology” titled “Social Conflict and the Theory of Social Change”.

Post-Panama ensuing political conflict – which engulfed the former prime minister and has allowed all the stakeholders to flex their muscles on the political chessboard – that is in transformative phase has, I think, turned out be a boon for Pakistan; it helps us subscribe to postulates of Lewis vis-à-vis the role of conflict within any society. Following are the sound reasons which help us to look at ensuing political conflict in the wake of post-Panama PM’s disqualification with half-glass full approach, and with the hope that the looming political conflict has seeds of innovation and creativity which will make political system in Pakistan more resilient and more sensitive to public concerns.

The foremost upside of the political conflict instigated by the Panama leaks was that it not only brought one of the perennial issues that had been gnawing at its development for decades – which is corruption – into the spotlight, but also resulted in the ouster of a prime minister who was on his way to completing his third stint in order to make his way to the fourth one. The other positive aspect of this political conflict is that top judiciary’s verdict was inspirational; it was obeyed in letter and spirit, and had popular backing. Very few times has this happened in Pakistan’s history that the judiciary could assertively act in its jurisdiction without interference. A strong and neutral judiciary is good omen for a stable, democratic political system in Pakistan.

Moreover, the media, though, at times, seemed playing to the gallery of their vested interests stewarded by particular political parties in the unfolding of this conflict; yet the media’s 24/7 coverage of the issues brought everything into public’s own homes and informed the masses about every latest development, thus making them completely aware about the political system of which they were a part. This is what happens in any ideal political system in which the public is not an object, but rather, it is a subject. Dissemination of information on the part of plethora of media channels did not let politicians play with the masses over the issue (even when they tried!) and, thus, the former prime minister – even though he had a thumping majority in parliament – could not save himself for which the credit goes to the media which helped build an informed public opinion about the issue. Rarely has this happened in Pakistan!

Most importantly, the check that the media kept over the unfolding of the issue helped not only in ouster of the former prime minister through legitimate means (unlike the past in which a prime minister would get deposed through collusion of political parties with the establishment or through a military coup), but has also given birth to precedent in the making: in the sense that the former prime minister has, instead of hijacking the system for vested political interests through popular protests, decided to make his way back into the system through legitimate way by appealing against the verdict of the court in the same court.

Conflict, on the face value, might be considered a bane for any political system but, in the light of historical developments and theory of social change, conflict is a boon for any political system

Whether that conflict will morph into a more violent form and more radical cleavages, or will it translate itself into more innovative and creative way, according to Lewis, depends upon rigidity of the political system. A rigid political system, that does not allow expression of grievances in any conflict, gives birth to violent conflict. In the case of elastic political system, the conflict brings about positive changes.

So far, the ensuing political conflict in the wake of former prime minister’s disqualification has, through creating ripples in the status quo, brought much needed changes which have been illustrated in the above passages in detail, but, in the coping with vicissitudes of the political conflict that are still to come, there is a dire need that those who are at the helm, through political acumen, show due consideration for law and do not cap the organic growth of political conflict through any approach dictated by vested interests so that the ensuing changes that the political system has been getting in its wake keep coming and let the political system grow in innovative ways.

The reason for why I advocate the dire need for not tampering with current political conflict on the part of those, who are at the helm, for vested interests is informed by two quotes. One is by Lewis who posits that “A well-integrated society will tolerate and even welcome group conflict; only a weakly integrated must fear it.” The English liberal Jhon Morley also said it very well. “If [the men who are most attached to the reigning order of things] had a larger faith in the stability for which they profess so great an anxiety, they would be more free alike in understanding and temper to deal generously, honestly and effectively with those whom they count imprudent innovators.”

The writer is an MPhil scholar studying International Relations at Department of Political Science in University of the Punjab, Lahore. He can be reached at uinam39@gmail.com

Published in Daily Times, August 28^th 2017.