|
November 6,
2002
Incompetence, not Islamicism

Svante E. Cornell
Three weeks ago, an alliance of
religious parties known as the MMA made a show of force in the
parliamentary elections in Pakistan, greatly increasing their share
of national votes and gaining control of the two smaller of
Pakistan's four provinces. Then, last Sunday, the pro-Islamic
Justice and Development Party (AKP) emerged victorious in the
general elections in Turkey, capturing 35 percent of the vote and a
majority of its own in the parliament. These electoral results in
two major allies in the war on terrorism have been largely misread
as a proof of rising Islamic militancy. However, these results are
due not to an increase in Islamic extremism, but to deeper social
and political problems in these
countries. A revival of religiosity
has been observable both in Pakistan and Turkey in recent years,
just as it has in the United States. However, this phenomenon has
only limited relevance to the electoral results, which have much
more to do with decades of mismanagement and corruption at the hand
of mainstream political parties, which have alienated mainly
moderate populations. Because of
mismanagement, incompetence and corruption, the Turkish mainstream
political parties have steadily declined from 1991 until the last
election. The traditionally dominant center-right has gone from 52
percent in 1991 to 15 percent last Sunday, marred by internal
bickering, fragmentation and corruption scandals. In its place, the
predominantly conservative Turkish electorate has found itself
forced to try new alternatives. In
1995, this meant the pro-Islamic Welfare Party (WP). The WP came to
power in 1996 and failed miserably, challenging the secular order of
the country and being deposed by a backstage military intervention.
Voters then deserted it, opting for the Nationalist Party (MHP). The
Nationalists then took part in a coalition government that presided
over Turkey's worst economic crisis in decades. The disgruntled
electorate now moved to the only remaining non-establishment
alternative, the moderate pro-Islamic AKP. Not so much because it
was religious, but because it was an untried alternative that could
perhaps do something about Turkey's economic problems. The AKP
earned respect for its track record in administering Turkey's major
cities such as Istanbul and Ankara successfully for the better part
of a decade — one reason that has prompted even some devout
secularists to vote for them. The
Pakistani case is more complicated. Though Turkey is more
secularized than Pakistan, religious parties have generally failed
to attract the Pakistani electorate. Yet, in the last election, they
moved forward considerably, capturing 52 (19 percent) of the seats
in the National Assembly, leading to headlines of an extremist,
anti-American wind blowing through the country. Yet, the MMA's
advance was much more related to other social and political
factors. It was the first time that
Pakistan's diverse and bickering religious parties appeared as a
united front, instead of competing for the same
seats. Secondly, they benefited
from the discrediting of the two mainstream political parties, the
Muslim League and the People's Party, which were both twice in
government in the 1990s and blatantly mismanaged the country.
Thirdly, Gen. Pervez Musharraf
went out of his way to undermine these two parties, leaving the
playing field open for the MMA, while the government-sponsored
"King's Party" fared worse than expected. Also, observers often fail
to note that the MMA only really gained votes in Baluchistan and the
Northwest Frontier Province, both bordering Afghanistan. In the
populous Punjab and Sindh provinces, which elect 209 of the
parliament's 272 members, the MMA only got nine seats. In
Baluchistan and the NWFP, the MMA triumphed because the local people
have felt a tangible sting from the war on
terrorism. Since September 11,
Pashtuns that inhabit Pakistan's border regions with Afghanistan
have seen their income from cross-border trade and smuggling
decrease dramatically. Moreover, the 5 million-strong Tribal Areas
were allowed to vote for the first time this year, adding 11 seats
to the parliament from the most fiercely religious areas of the
country, of which most were captured by the
MMA. The elections in Pakistan and
Turkey should not be seen as a sign of Islamic extremism, for they
are not. They testify to the deep political malaise of these two
countries, and to the determination of voters to express their
dissatisfaction with a discredited political establishment. These
states are, and will remain, crucial U.S. allies, as long as proper
attention is paid to their real internal problems and their grave
economic dilemmas.
Svante
E. Cornell is the editor of the Central Asia-Caucasus Analyst, a
publication of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, Johns Hopkins
University-SAIS.
Back to
Opinion/Editorial
|