by Hassan Zaib Abbasi
 | |||||
| Hamza Alavi (1921 - 2003) Photo Credit: http://tinyurl.com/qf4b2hb |
Commentators in electronic and
print media churn out analysis after analysis: dissecting events, building their
theses, and offering speculative explanations of political happenings. One need
only catch a glimpse of a television channel and it becomes clear that Pakistan
is in crisis. Not because the state faces imminent danger of collapse but
because of the frequency of seemingly unexplainable events whose true meaning always
remains just slightly out of grasp despite, or perhaps because of, the efforts
of numerous “analysts”.
Populist rhetoric promoted by
many of these “analysts” sees most political problems as emanating from a class
of corrupt politicians or ambitious generals which is hurling the country from one
crisis to the next. The inability to move beyond such broad strokes of generalizations
betrays the lack of analytical reasoning.
There is hardly any appreciation of the work of deeper thinkers who
might provide more durable analysis – minds like that of Hamza Alavi who had a
way of placing fast-moving events in their proper historical and theoretical
contexts. Alavi’s greatest gift, perhaps, lay in his ability to connect theory
with current events and provide a deeper structural understanding of not only
the actions but the actors.
One of Alavi’s major contributions
to political science in Pakistan was discussing the post-colonial state of
Pakistan and its “overdeveloped” institutions. His argument focuses
on the relative “over” development of the two arms of the state the military
and the civil bureaucracy. He cites colonial policy and requirement as the
reasons why these two arms of the state were overdeveloped and operated as “means of
social and political control and regulation in metropolitan interests rather
than the development of the colonized”.[1]
The constant tension between institutions of representative politics and the military-civil
bureaucracy can be traced back to this historical legacy. The theory is rich
enough to explain, also, how India and Pakistan differed despite common
historical roots.
While it is easy enough to
explain political developments through events and personalities, such analyses
rarely last. Instances of corruption on
the part of politicians are magnified, for example, to fuel the narrative about
a corrupt political elite which has no interest other than plundering state
resources. When generals seize power they use this very narrative. The
military’s overbearing presence in politics is explained by referring to the
ambitions of individual generals. The
historical legacy, on which present-day politicians or generals had no
influence, but which shapes the situation that they find themselves in, is not
considered. No wonder “analyses” have a
short shelf life, and “theses” keep changing, adding to the sense of crisis. A brave general of yesterday becomes the despot
of today, and a heroic politician of today will be branded a kleptomaniac
tomorrow to be restored again the day after.
Alavi encourages us to look beyond these daily events,
and to analyse them by building theory and paying attention to history. Take
the longer view while using emerging facts to update theory - that might have
been his advice to anyone disoriented by lurching from “crisis” to “crisis”.
The Hamza Alavi Foundation is
celebrating the 94th anniversary of birth by holding a seminar at
the Institute of Chartered Accountants, Teen Talwar, Clifton, Karachi, between
5 and 7pm on 18 April 2015.
