Settlement Village Town City Large City

COLONIAL RULE

Administrative Centres

Industrial Centres

OECD

COLONIAL STATE Post Colonial State

What Experience Distinguishes the Developmental Path of a Third World Country like Pakistan with that of an OECD

Country?

How was Colonial rule different?

Earlier Rulers

Simply replaced the top and Did not touch the social structure

Recognized internal dynamics of diverse and autonomous constituent units

‘Creative Political Mechanisms of Compromise and Collaboration’ Geographical Identity =/= Political Identity

Direct, Personalized rule

Differentcultures

ReligionsEthnicities

CastesClass

Ruler

How was Colonial rule different?• Conflation of Geographical and Political Identity implications on colonial

legal system, institutional structures, Indian Ideology and Politics

• ‘Western concepts of contractual law and impersonalized sovereignty’

• Rule bound, Impersonalized, Indirect Rule

• ‘Bureaucratic Authoritarianism’

• ‘US’/ Rulers vs. ‘Them’/Ruled

• Scorning the principles of accommodation and compromise

• Centralized Institutionalized Structures of the British raj

How was Colonial rule different?

Muslims

Hindus

Brahmins

Rais

British

Extractive Goals: Revenue Collection and Curbing Rebellion i.e. Maintaining Law and Order

Social Engineering: intensifies the scramble for power and resources along religious, caste, class and regional lines

Communalism: Hindus vs. Muslims

Divide and RulePunjabis

Nawabs

How was Colonial Rule different?

• Access to Institutions limited to a select few

• Reduced Social Capability

• Many Muslims categorized as illiterate

• Discouraged Industrial growth

The Administrative Legacy

‘…the division of the British Indian administrative structure is a key

factor in assessing the differential inheritances of India and Pakistan.’

Jalal, Ayesha, “Democracy and Authoritarianism in South Asia”, Pg. 18

What happened after Partition?

• India inherited the British apparatus

• Pakistan had to build a new one

Indian Civil Services

• Almost one third of ICS personnel were left in India after Partition

• India could cope up because of a central state apparatus

• Pakistan had to rely heavily on the few people that were qualified

Bureaucracy

• Methods of bureaucratic control and centralization sustained in both countries

• It was more convenient and practical to rely on the bureaucracy

• This was justified by its need to counter law and order problems in the country

Bureaucratic Power

• This power lied in their proximity to the main representatives of the people

• Hence, politicians could not even think of mustering such support from the people

• Also, the politicians were unfamiliar with the workings of the state

Façade Democracy

• Both countries stressed on bridging the gap between the state and the citizens

• But these were hollow claims that were perhaps partially implemented in India

• Still, both countries’ leaderships could not disguise their dependence on the colonial bureaucracy

Participation

• Authoritarianism comes to the foreground

• Justified by communal unrest

• Community and caste used to mobilize

voters

The ICS & The Bureaucracy

• ICS used to exert control by centre

• Justified using national integration

• Policy criticized

The ICS & The Bureaucracy

• Agreements with provinces

• Provinces would approve central recruits

• Use of quota system

The ICS & The Bureaucracy

• Control exerted mostly in princely states

• Especially in western Pakistani provinces

Why Pakistan?

• Lack of state apparatus

• Disorganized ruling party

• Unequal division of state apparatus

The Economics of Partition and Separate Defence

• At independence, Pakistan was left with inherently meagre resources.

• State left militarily vulnerable.

• 17.5% financial assets.

• 30% defence forces.

• Defence expenditure outstripped that of pre-partition India within the first year.

Financial Assets

Pakistan

India

Defence Forces

Pakistan

India

• Set precedence for extraordinary defence budget.

• Set precedence for minimal share of social sector in budgeting.

• Led to a range of new provincial taxes.

What did these trends lead to?

Social Sector Expenditure• 1951:

– Pakistan: Rs.1 crore; centre siphoned-off large portions of provincial resources.

– India: Rs.25-30 crore; was able to fund up to 35% of its provincial development programmes.

Centre

Provinces

Pakistan India

“Under the Circumstances the Pakistani provinces could not even emulate the most

modest achievements of their Indian counterparts in the financing of basic social services like education, public health and transport and reduce the differentials in the quality of life between the two countries…

So institutionally, strategically, economically and, consequently, politically,

Pakistan was left facing a grimmer reality than India.”

Jalal, Ayesha. “State and Authoritarianism in South Asia.” Pg. 23

Inequitable Distribution

• Pakistan (in terms of undivided India):

– 23% land mass– 18% population

– 10% industrial base– 7% employment facilities

Land Mass

Pakistan

India

Population

Pakistan

India

• Pakistan (in terms of undivided India):

– 23% land mass– 18% population

– 10% industrial base– 7% employment facilities

Land Mass

Pakistan

India

Population

Pakistan

India

Employment Facilities

Pakistan

India

Employment Facilities

Pakistan

India

Employment Facilities

Pakistan

India

Employment Facilities

Pakistan

India

Employment Facilities

Pakistan

India

Employment Facilities

Pakistan

India

Resulting Economic Policy

• Digging into Provincial Resources

• Soliciting foreign aid

Pakistan vs. India (1)

• Despite its own economic problems, India was still better-off when compared to Pakistan.

• Most industries of undivided India remained within post-partition India thereby allowing production of manufactured commodities.

• Pakistan relied primarily on export of raw agriculture produce and resources.

• Pakistan threatened with bankruptcy as early as 1947.

Pakistan vs. India (2)

Trade between India and Pakistan (1)

• Mechanics:

– Jute, cotton, hides, tanning materials and dyestuffs and so forth exported to India by Pakistan.

– Cotton piece goods, iron and steel products, soap, coal, cement, petroleum, sugar, a number of alkalis as well as a number of chemicals imported by Pakistan from India.

• 1948-9 (Indo-Pakistan Trade):

• 20% of India’s total foreign trade– 18% imports– 16% exports

• 41% of Pakistan’s total foreign trade– 37% imports– 61% exports

Trade between India and Pakistan (2)

Trade between India and Pakistan (3)

• Features:

– Pakistan more dependant on Indian goods despite latter's heavy reliance on raw jute and raw cotton.

– Indian state showed remarkable resilience/recovery through an increase in the production of raw cotton and raw jute after inter-state trade deteriorated.

Two-Nation Theory

Ideology questionedContradiction in the Two-Nation Theory

• Muslims were never a homogenous unit. The Muslim League capitalized on the reaction of Hindu symbolism used by Congress.

congress’s stance alienated the Muslims and left them vulnerable to ‘anyone offering an alternative cultural construct for their politics’

• Contradiction between Rhetoric and Reality

• Further Marginalization of the minorities left behind

• Elitist Movement

• The Ulema was against creation of Pakistan

• MONOLITHIC STATE IDEOLOGY OF ISLAM

Two-Nation Theory Challenged

• Sectarianism in NWFP, Sindh and Baluchistan

• Ethno-Nationalist Conflicts

• Language issues

• Separation of Bangladesh

• Water Disputes

• Kashmir issue

Colonial Legacy

• Living Pre-History• Ideological problems• Political problems• Differentiated Progress• Uneven Pockets of Development• Economic problems• Elitism• Feudalism• Administrative legacy• ‘Bureaucratic authoritarianism’

How is Our Colonial History Linked to the Developmental Status of

Pakistan?

Communalism

Ethno-nationalist Conflict + Sectarianism

Feelings of disenchantment, distrust, isolation, insecurity, loss of cultural identity, loss of dignity and unequal opportunity to develop

Uneven Distribution of Resources + Unequal Status of Citizens +Socio-economic deprivations in various regions

+Administrative Legacy i.e. The lack of responsiveness and accountability of an

authoritarian central government + Bureaucratic Authoritarianism

Monolithic State Ideology of Islam

Two-Nation Theory

Colonial Legacy or the BRITISH

Thank You sqjafery@gmail.com