Contradictions of PPP

Keeping in mind the recent fifty-fourth founding anniversary of Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), there is no better way to comment on the Party than by saying this: The PPP remains Pakistan’s truest “national party”. This may not be in the sense that it has presence all across Pakistan (it no longer does), but it is a true “national party” in the sense that it embodies a quintessential “Pakistaniyat”.

The PPP started off as a mass party that rode a wave of popular dissent and disillusionment into national relevance. Then, it turned into a highly organized institution and, at one point, tried to develop its own armed wing. Soon after, it fell into disarray, recovered and fell and recovered again, on and on, quite like the fortunes of its country. It has espoused a leftist ideology at one point, but has then moved to the right-of-center of the political spectrum. It has flirted with Islamism; then, opposed it; and, later, accepted it. It gave Pakistan its first female Prime Minister, who came to power struggling against a male-dominated “old guard” within her own party; its first female Speaker of National Assembly, who presided over a house full of men (including PPP’s own parliamentarians); and, its first female Foreign Minister, who originally rose to prominence as a stand-in for her male relatives – not to take away from her ability, acumen or persona, at all.

The People’s Party has heralded democracy and maintained a constitutionalist stance. In fact, it is the party that gave Pakistan its current constitution and then became the party that revised it back to its original form, after it had been ravaged by two military juntas. Yet, the Party has also remained given to dynastic politics, with a succession of relatives serving in leadership positions, and to exercising extra-constitutional means to achieving political ends at least a few notable times.

The Party fights the cause of the poor and pays attention to things like health or education far more than others, while at the same time centering its public image and electoral cry on a cult-of-personality; and its electoral success, on the support of traditional centers of power, such as feudal lords and Pirs, et al.

In short, PPP is an amalgam of many contradictions quite like the country to which it belongs. If one is to simply swap Pakistan for PPP in the above, one may yet see what is true for the PPP is also true for Pakistan, and vice versa. So, in this way, the People’s Party and Pakistan are mirror images of each other.

Since it is the very nature of a contradiction to create or remain in a constant state of flux, so it is with Pakistan and its old companion, the People’s Party. Just as Pakistan must, at some point, resolve its many contradictions before it can move forward and onward to prosperity, so too must the People’s Party. And, just as with Pakistan, the Party’s contradictions are deep, complex and, in many cases, mind boggling and seemingly irreconcilable. Yet, a reconciliation must come, just the same.

A key reason why the People’s Party today must devote time and energy towards reconciling the amalgam of contradictions that it has become, is that the party’s historical and internal contradictions have come to define its politics. When the general public looks at the People’s Party, it does not see one whole. It sees many things, mostly self-contradictory. It is, therefore not a viable option to anyone, except, of course, a narrow, traditional voter base in Sindh. It seems to stand for nothing. It no longer seems to stand against anything in particular either. It is an alternative to none. Even if this is workable for now, it is definitely not sustainable in the long run.

Thus, as the People’s Party completes its 54th year, it must set about consolidating and reconciling all the various contradictory things it has come to mean over half a century into one coherent, and new, whole. It must come to stand for something – the more specific and meaningful the better. It must also stand against something – which, ideally, should also be something specific and meaningful. The Party needs to emerge as a clearly identifiable, and singular, alternative to someone or something. Above all, it must come to be seen by the general public as such. None of the aforementioned is really possible without first reconciling the many contradictions that the PPP today embodies all at once.

What that reconciliation would mean, how to go about, what would emerge afterward, and similar questions, ought better to be left to the party itself. It is a thinking organization, after all, and has many brilliant minds within it. The past of the People’s Party is its own, and so is its present and so will be its future. The Party must remain the sole arbiter and determinant of what all three of them are, and what they must come to mean. The Party must not let vague notions of legacy, or history, or other socio-political actors within society, take up the task of defining its past, present and future. This has gone on for far too long as it is. The responsibility is the Party’s own.

The sooner the Party takes the task up, the better. For as “Pakistaniyat” is vital to Pakistan, so may be one of its most spectacular embodiment – the Pakistan People’s Party. If nothing else, then the Party remains extremely important to the health of democracy in Pakistan, to the country’s polity, and to its governance. The beginning of its fifty-fifth year is as good a time as any to get on with the task at hand.

Behzad Taimur is a researcher and development professional who is affiliated with a private university in Lahore.