Pakistani voters accused anti-democratic power centers of trying to “eliminate” political opponents. Voters were convinced that Imran Khan’s popularity would increase in inverse proportion to the repression that Imran Khan and his supporters were reported to have suffered. Voters’ steadfast rejection of intimidation and various obstacles to polling stations is seen as a sign of uplift for Pakistan’s troubled democracy. Because in those days, political parties of all sizes, often nudged by men in uniform, unleashed a pattern of canceling opposition, and Imran Khan himself is not innocent of this act. . The verdict is laudable because it defies the country’s humiliating culture of political intolerance. In doing so, it has also marginalized media critics, who tend to go beyond their position as the trusted eyes and ears of democracy.
Could a similar situation occur in India in May? The need is overwhelming, given the flourishing of cancel culture under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s watch and the newly revealed tendency to jail dissidents and oust opposition members from parliament. Mr. Modi first called for an India without a parliament, but he also expanded his focus to other opposition groups.
It is unfortunate, of course, that South Asian countries have long suffered from a “cancellation” stagnation rooted in Cold War-era conflicts waged in the region’s young and fragile democracies. Although the Cold War is over, new conflicts involving new great powers continue to fuel political intolerance that serves national interests.
Julian Assange’s team helped unearth undeniable evidence that foreign claws are sinking deep into what is now a halo of regular political conflict across South Asia. A diplomatic cable from Delhi published on Wikipedia reveals that in May 2005, Bharatiya Janata Party’s Arun Jaitley accused the United States of letting down a party that claimed to have taken India-US relations to new heights. It was revealed. This reference was probably to Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s leadership from 1998 to 2004. “Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson and former commerce minister Arun Jaitley recently said that the controversy over Modi continues to rage within the party, and that the prime minister’s visa cancellation is a move against the party leader who started the transformation of the United States. “It is seen as a personal attack on India.”
It is unfortunate that South Asian countries have been plagued by fears of “cancellation” for a long time.
The Guardian newspaper published a cable on December 1, 2010, showing that Nawaz Sharif is projecting himself as the US ambassador to Pakistan in Washington’s best interest. Nawaz said, “The best thing America has done recently is [to] Arrange for the appointment of General Kayani as Chief of Army Staff. “This appointment has boosted military morale and increased the level of public respect for the military,” the Telegram said. “As evidence of his pro-Americanism, Nawaz reminded us,” [the] “The ambassador said he overruled his chief of staff’s order to send Pakistani troops to join the US coalition in the first Gulf War,” the Guardian quoted the cable as saying. Mr. Sharif reminded the envoy that the PPP opposes sending troops to Saudi Arabia.
Recently, Imran Khan was at odds with the US on various grounds, including claiming that Pakistan had no intention of locating the superpower’s military bases on its territory. Global interests have previously called for the removal of civilians from the country’s political scene in order to launch a US-led military operation in Afghanistan. First to drive the Soviets out of Kabul, then to avenge 9/11. The much-touted emancipation of Afghan women seemed like an unconvincing afterthought, as Afghan women had clearly obtained more promising deals during the communist rule in Kabul, and perhaps even earlier.
Like those in Pakistan, political parties in India also face challenges from the steady hollowing out of democracy. Despite winning an unparalleled majority in 1984, Rajiv Gandhi was never able to return to power. Reasons for his downfall included an unproven role in the tainted Bofors firearms trade. He also tried to strike a balance between Muslims and Hindu conservatives, but lost the support of both. But a less-discussed element of his political demise was his opposition to refueling U.S. fighter jets heading into the U.S.-led Desert Shield operation against Iraq.
When his widow was perceived to be close to power, she was vilified as a ‘foreigner’, but strangely this expression was not applied to the Nepali princess who became the ‘Rajmata’ of the Hindutva family. That was never the case. Previously, Indira Gandhi’s second coming was canceled not only because she upset Sikh sentiments, but also, inevitably, because of her thoroughly partisan foreign policy. One of her last acts seen as hostile to powerful foreign interests was at the 1983 Non-Aligned Nations Summit in New Delhi, which she chaired, forcing the United States to accept Diego Garcia’s He called for the surrender of military bases. Her death marked a significant setback for India’s relations with the former Soviet Union.
Indira Gandhi is usually considered to be the first South Asian leader to call off her protests under the 1975 Emergency Rules, but the move was reportedly a response to her pro-Soviet rule by China and the United States. It was a controversial measure devised in Moscow to thwart the twin challenge. However, a closer look shows that ZA Bhutto is an early candidate for the podium canceling his opponent. His rejection of his Bengali rival’s claim to lead the government left the defense establishment furious, shooting itself in the foot. After seizing power in 1977, Junius Jayawardene, a champion of Western-style free markets, barred Sirimavo Bandaranaike from elections. Bandaranaike’s support for socialist economic policies was seen as brash, and her closeness to Marshal Tito and Chou Enlai was viewed with suspicion in the West. Although she built friendly relations with India, a non-aligned country.
The politics of canceling opposition was freely pursued by subsequent Sri Lankan actors, who preferred to silence their opponents rather than confront them in a democratic contest. This tragedy did not leave Bangladesh or the Maldives unscathed. The best hope is that Pakistan’s stunning verdict foreshadows similar challenges to the undemocratic tendencies prevalent in other struggling democracies in South Asia.
The writer is Dawn correspondent based in Delhi.
Published at Dawn on February 13, 2024