POL101Y1 Lecture 9: LEC9.pdf
Democracy and authoritarianism in Pakistan,
Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka 12-11-28 1:10 PM
-how do we evaluate and assess democracy
• India’s case – more successful in the procedural and representative
components but less so in other aspects such as responsiveness
and accountability
Sri Lanka
-characterized by majoritarian politics
-engulfed in civil war
-Pakistan and Bangladesh have seen frequent reversals to authoritarian rule
Agenda
-variation in democratic development in South Asia
-Trajectories of democracy in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka
-key questions and themes
• why did democracy consolidate in the early years after
independence in India and not in Pakistan
• Why have Pakistan and Bangladesh seen oscillations between
democratic and authoritarian rule?
• Even in its democratic periods, why has Bangladesh remained a
“partial” democracy, characterized by pervasive corruption, lack of
transparency, normless political behaviour, political instability and
lack of accountability?
• Implications of ethnic conflict and majoritarian politics for Sri
Lankan democracy
Comparative trajectories in South Asia
India
• consolidation of democracy
• varied performance in terms of procedural aspects, representation,
responsiveness and accountability
• conducting an election in India is a logistical challenge
• has been successful in encorporating more groups
Pakistan and Bangladesh
• oscillation between democracy and authoritarianism
• far less participatory than India or Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka
• long standing democracy but ethnic civil war and majoritarian
politics
o Protracted civil war has affected sri lanka for over 30 yrs
• largely characterized as an illiberal democracy
o contrast to its prospects at the beginning of independence
Polity Scores
-polity – codes the regime type
• largely focuses on the procedural aspects of democracy
o political participation
o constraints on executives
o and degree to which executive recruitment is actually open
• capture basic essentials of democracy
-a score of 6 is considered the “Cut-off” for what’s a democracy
Pakistan Timeline
-nature of ethnic divides in the country influenced the democratic
consolidation of the country
-first full election (under Yahya Khan’s regime – 1971)
-Zufilkar Bhutto forms the first civilian gov’t in Pakistan (since 1947)
-General Zia ul-Haq
• changes the relationship between religion and state
-1988-1999 – constant turnover of power between PPP and Pakistan Muslim
league
• considerable instability
-theme – military has retained considerable authority within Pakistan
Early challenges to nation and state building
-strong early challenges to both nation and state building Pakistan
• affected the turn and transition towards democracy
-Muslim League’s strength and Pakistan’s boundaries
-India had inherited the bulk of the bureaucratic and economic structure of
the colonial time
• Pakistan inherited a much more weaker structure (especially in
terms of civil service)
-varied visions of new state
• 9 years before first constitution in 1956
• role of religion and democracy
• first nation wide elections only in 1970
-eastern and western wings
• political and economic inequality between east and west Pakistan
o led to the formation of Bangladesh
• cultural differences
Pakistan’s democratic performance
-Zufilqar Ali Bhutto (1971-1977)
• 1970 elections
• Islamic socialism and populist measures
o Land reforms, tight controls on business and industrial sector
• PPP and patronage
-Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif (1988-1998)
• Political instability: elections in 1988, 1990, 1993, and 1997
• Low electoral turnouts
• Governance deficits and corruption
PPP governments (2008 on)
• A return to civilian gov’ts
-continued strength of military establishment
Explaining divergent democratic trajectories in India and Pakistan
-five main hypotheses explaining divergence (Jaffrelot)
• 1) variation in colonial experiences of india and Pakistan
o punjab’s militarization (Br viewed it as a security threat)
translated to a different structure of colonial rule (more
bureaucratic authoritarianism )
didn’t have the democratic experience that many of the
directly ruled areas of india did
• 2) State structure and priority of national security
Document Summary
How do we evaluate and assess democracy: india"s case more successful in the procedural and representative components but less so in other aspects such as responsiveness and accountability. Pakistan and bangladesh have seen frequent reversals to authoritarian rule. Trajectories of democracy in pakistan, bangladesh, sri lanka. Partial democracy, characterized by pervasive corruption, lack of transparency, normless political behaviour, political instability and lack of accountability: implications of ethnic conflict and majoritarian politics for sri. India: consolidation of democracy, varied performance in terms of procedural aspects, representation, responsiveness and accountability, conducting an election in india is a logistical challenge, has been successful in encorporating more groups. Pakistan and bangladesh: oscillation between democracy and authoritarianism far less participatory than india or sri lanka. Sri lanka long standing democracy but ethnic civil war and majoritarian politics: protracted civil war has affected sri lanka for over 30 yrs largely characterized as an illiberal democracy, contrast to its prospects at the beginning of independence.