Coalitions will again be crucial in Pakistan elections
Contesting and winning elections in Pakistan or in any transitional democracy is neither simple nor easy. It is a very complex affair because of the fragmented political loyalties of the electorates, falling along narrow clan, social, caste or baradari lines. On top of this, there are just too many political parties representing ethnicities, religious sects, old and new political elites and familiar centrist political groups and parties. More than 100 parties are registered, and scores of these are fielding candidates in the 2018 elections. On average, there are more than five candidates in each constituency.
The number of candidates in every constituency defies rationality in the first-past-the-post, single-member constituency electoral system that we have in Pakistan. No matter how many candidates are running, only one wins. In many cases, the number of votes for the winning candidate might be lower than the votes for all the losing candidates put together. Historical experience suggests that, if we run this system of elections, over time it will produce a two-party system. Why? The losing candidates, after many failed attempts, will reconsider their options and join the two dominant parties or form electoral alliances. However, it would take time before such a rational calculation registers with the electorate and among the competing candidates.
There are a number of tendencies that show political divisions along so many dimensions —ethnic, regional, religious, sectarian and clearly marked political lines. Political fragmentation actually promotes further fragmentation, as it raises the confidence of smaller groups and parties, allowing them to emerge as players in the power game.
When one party has lost dominance or a new party has yet to win a majority, the use of coalitions to contest elections and to form governments becomes inevitable. The process of coalition-building starts at the constituency level. In every constituency, we see at least two rival coalitions that represent either parts of the same social groups or very different ones. Smaller social groups forge alliances to challenge the power and influence of the larger and more powerful group. This is a natural law of electoral politics in societies where narrow, localized social group identities remain an essential feature of social structures.
At the national level, coalition politics has been the norm, particularly to counter a single dominant party. Nine political parties of contradictory ideologies formed the Pakistan National Alliance against the Pakistan Peoples Party in the 1977 elections. In the 1990 vote, two rival coalitions — the People’s Democratic Alliance and the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad, the former led by the PPP and the latter by the Muslim League factions — emerged. In the 2018 elections, only the religious parties have formed an electoral alliance under Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal. Another example is the Balochistan Awami Party, which is an alliance of prominent Baloch tribal leaders. In Sindh, smaller groups and parties have formed the Grand Democratic Alliance for better electoral prospects against a powerful and deeply-rooted PPP.
As the PML-N is confronted with many challenges — the disqualification of leader Nawaz Sharif and his conviction for corruption, plus defections from its ranks — it appears unlikely that it will re-emerge as a single majority party at the national level.
Rasul Bakhsh Rais
The three parties — the PPP, the PML-N and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf — that dominate the center stage of Pakistani politics have mixed features of national and regional parties. In the 2013 general elections, they formed governments in three different provinces. Only the PML-N had a coalition government, in Balochistan with the Baloch National Party.
As the PML-N is confronted with many challenges — the disqualification of leader Nawaz Sharif and his conviction for corruption, plus defections from its ranks — it appears unlikely that it will re-emerge as a single majority party at the national level. The emergence of the PTI represents a challenge and resistance to the two formerly dominant parties. The PTI symbolizes a new political coalition of youth, disaffected party workers of the PPP, PML-N and religious parties, and the urban and emerging rural middle classes. The political narrative and program of the PTI has focused on corruption, bad governance, national decline, bad image, poverty, inequality and loss of national faith, which it argues is because of the systematic theft of national wealth by the leaders of the PPP and PML-N. This narrative has set the PTI against all the other parties.
The established political parties are likely to cobble a coalition together — disregarding the mutual character assassinations and past confrontations — if the PTI is not able to gain a decisive majority. In case the PTI does get a majority, the rest are likely to form an opposition alliance to make it difficult for it to implement its ambitious reform agenda, particularly surrounding accountability. Sadly, the past and the emerging coalitions are neither driven by ideology or public interest; they reflect the personal interests of the dynastic rulers, and the naked struggle for power. We may see more of the same old politics for some time to come.
• Rasul Bakhsh Rais is Professor of Political Science in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, LUMS, Lahore. His latest book is “Islam, Ethnicity and Power Politics: Constructing Pakistan’s National Identity” (Oxford University Press, 2017). Twitter: @RasulRais
