[sacw] The Military Regime, World Economy & Pakistan

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch #2
2 December 1999
-----------------------------------------------
Of Military Regime and its future:
Perspectives for World Economy and Pakistan

By: Farooq Tariq
(General Secretary, Labour Party Pakistan)
Most of the politicians have been speaking of collapse of the "system."
The present Musharaf regime's main argument against Nawaz government is
that it had lost the ability to save the system from a total collapse. They
speak of building a new system minus corruption. Several politicians
including Shahbaz Sharif, Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Ashgar Khan have warned of
a bloody revolution if we could not save the system. It is eminent from
every aspect that the system is sick and unable to reform itself. All the
hue and cry for the reconstruction and reforms is a futile effort to buy
some more time.

Unfortunately, most of the players in the political arena have refused to
look for another alternative to their system that is "capitalism." Can the
system be saved from a total collapse in the ex-colonial countries? How for
the present regime with its technocrats-based cabinet will be able to go in
this direction? Can the "savior" General Musharaf repeat the performance of
US General Mcarther. The American General was instrumental in carrying out
the land reforms after the Second World War in Korea. These reforms laid
the basis for future tremendous growth of Korea even on capitalist basis.
Is the military coup in Pakistan fore runner of several more in other
countries who are facing the same sort of situations of corruption and loan
defaults. Lets look into some of the basic aspects of these questions and
analyze the options opened for this regime.

The essence of globalization

The world economic upswing of the 1950's and the 1960's ended in the
recession of 1973/75 and the world economy entered into a new period of
slower growth. Reacting to this crisis the big business internationally
launched an economic and political offensive against working people. The
main economic components of this attack were already being tested in Chile
where US big business had organized the military coup in 1973. The Pinochet
dictatorship murdered or drove into exile the leading working class
activists and smashed the trade union movement. This dictatorship was then
supplied with economists from the University of Chicago and the policies
that would evolve into what has become known as globalization were set in
motion. The difference between Pakistan and Chile's military coup is that
General Musharaf has so for avoided any extra-judicial killings, which was
the hallmark of the Pinochet dictatorship during the 70s. There is an
interesting identical situation. Pinochet invited experts from Chicago
while Musharraf has 'imported' Howard experts-serving IMF and World Bank.

Led by Thatcher in Britain and Reagan in the USA, the objective of this
worldwide assault was to make working people pay for the economic crisis
that was unfolding in the capitalist system through a decrease in their
living standards, rights and organization.

The main elements of globalization were the lifting of controls on the flow
of capital internationally, the deregulation of economies and workplaces,
the privatization of publicly owned sectors. It also meant the cutting of
social services and the forcing of working people worldwide into increased
competition with each other that is who could work hard for less. The
essence of globalization is that capital must be allowed to go where it
likes and do what it likes without any opposition, hindrance, or
regulation, especially any opposition from the masses.

This offensive was already under way when "Socialist system" collapsed in
Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union from 1989 through 1991 and was
replaced by capitalism. The same process began and continues in China.
These events gave even greater impetus to the process of globalization. Led
by US capitalism the big business classes in the main capitalist countries
moved aggressively to stamp their authority in the former Stalinist
countries and to increase their control over the former colonial countries
and to even more decisively force its globalization policies on the entire
world. No corner of the planet was to be allowed to resist the demands of
capital and especially U.S. capital.

Globalization-is-US

The thinking behind this as far as US capitalism is concerned is spelled
out by big business journalist Thomas Freidman in an article in the New
York Times of March 28th, 1999. He writes: "sustaining globalization is our
overarching national interest=8A. Globalization-is-U.S.' Freidman explains
what is necessary to sustain the policies of globalization when he says
that what is required is "a stable geopolitical power structure, which
simply cannot be maintained without the active involvement of the United
States=8Athe hidden hand of the market will never work without the hidden
fist. Mcdonalds cannot flourish without Mcdonnell Douglas, the designer of
the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon
Valley's technologies is called the United States army, air force, navy and
marine corps." In another article dealing with the US led NATO war in
Kosava and Serbia Freidman called for a "merciless air war" against Serbia.
"Give war a chance," he wrote. As with the Gulf war, the war in Kosava was
waged to show the world the "fist." A hidden fist is only effective if it
is taken out and used now and then for all to see.

Abstract Globalization

=46reidman writes about what he calls this "abstract globalization" system
that is being imposed on the world. However, it is far from abstract. The
living standards of all working people in all areas of the world are being
driven down by this "abstract" system. What has been happening and who is
paying for the rise of the billionaires and the casino stock markets is
demonstrated in figures for wages as a percentage share of national income.
These refer to a few countries in Latin America but they are indicative of
the worldwide experience. In 1970 wages as a percentage share of national
income in Argentina stood at 40.9 percentBy 1989 the figure was 24.9%. In
Chile the equivalent figures were 47.7% and 19.0%. In Mexico 37 percent and
28.4 percent. This enormous transfer of wealth from working class people to
the rich is what globalization is all about.

The main features of globalization under IMF and World Bank instruction
have been the total monopolization of the world economy by the multi
national companies. Many local industries were destroyed and workers laid
off. The political and social outcome of this process was sharpening
polarization between the rich and the poor. In Pakistan, for instance,
according the present regime, it is only 25 "top" companies who took more
than 60 percent of the total loans by the national banks. Only 200 rich men
through out the world have more than 45 percent of the total wealth of the
world. Under these conditions, particularly in the ex-colonial countries,
the question has become more important, how the masses are controlled,
through democracy or by means of military dictatorships? Pakistan has taken
a lead in an effort to answer this question.

Seizing the opportunity given by the collapse of Stalinism, the big
business in West launched an ideological offensive. They used all their
resources to proclaim there was no alternative to capitalism. Their message
was simple: Socialism/Marxism was dead. It lay in the ruins of the bankrupt
systems of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. This was their
propaganda as they dishonestly linked socialism and Marxism with Stalinism.
Their ideological offensive gave impetus to the economic and political
offensive they had been carrying out against the working class worldwide.
And as this was taking place, capitalism, especially US capitalism,
increased its investment in and utilization of new technology.

However, while not underestimating the power and extent of the onslaught of
big business, the main reason that the boss' offensive has had the success
that it has is due to the policies and role of the leaders of the workers'
organizations. These leaders form a bureaucratic privileged caste, which
control the potentially powerful organizations of the working class. The
potential power, which they control and paralyses, has the strength to
change the world, if it was mobilized and linked with the non-unionized
workers, the poor peasantry and the youth worldwide.

There are 125 million workers organized in 206 union centers in 141
countries under the umbrella of the International Confederation of Free
Trade Unions alone. These 125 million workers have the power to control
transport, communications, manufacturing, and the financial system
worldwide and to give a lead to the working people of the world. Yet the
leadership of this powerful force surrendered to the offensive of the
bosses without a fight. Seeing no alternative to capitalism, believing that
the working class is incapable of building a new society, they accepted the
argument of capitalism that capital alone can rule the world. That because
of this it must be allowed to go where it likes and does what it likes, and
workers must compete against each other for its favors. From Chile 1973 to
the struggles and strikes of the present day, capitalism has emerged intact
and in most cases victorious from its attacks on the working class.

These successes and the fact that the working class is on the defensive and
in retreat have meant that capitalism has gained some room for maneuver in
dealing with the crises that it faces.

Capitalism has been enforcing its agenda. And having re-established itself
again in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union and being well on the
way to doing so in China, capitalism has been doing this on a world scale
to an extent not seen in the previous seventy years.

It is even more important to recognize that the past period has also
demonstrated that capitalism remains a system that is incapable of solving
the problems of human society. It is not a healthy vibrant system but the
opposite. It has made, and is making, life for the majority of the world's
population worse, and the health of the planet sicker. In spite of its
stock market highs, in spite of its ideological offensive, in spite of its
claims concerning the potential of new technology, capitalism remains a
system that is rotten and that can no longer take human society forward.

The Hard Realities

The United Nations Development Program recently issued its report. The
facts it contained confirm this. It estimated that an additional $40
billion dollars per year in spending is all that is necessary to provide
universal access to basic education, basic health care, adequate food,
clean water and safe sewers for all, plus reproductive health care for all
women. This is less than four percent of the combined wealth of the 225
richest people in the world. But the capitalist system cannot bring about
this, what is in reality, a tiny transfer of resources. This fact alone
means that capitalism is a system that is rotten and cannot be reformed.

The glitz of new technology and the long growth cycle of the 1990's should
not confuse anyone. Only 2% of the world population have access to the
Internet. In Bangladesh, it would take eight years of average income to buy
a computer. And the average annual growth in the 1990's growth cycle has
been below that of the 1980's and the 1970's. In spite of the Internet, in
spite of the 90's growth cycle, 6 million children under five die of hunger
and preventable disease every year. And this is getting worse. Since 1990,
the time of advance of new technology and the long growth cycle, 300
million more people in the world have had to make do without proper
sanitation. And capitalism cannot halt this worsening catastrophe.

The ex-colonial countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America have plunged
even deeper into poverty and starvation. In the advanced industrial
countries, the working class majority has experienced worsening conditions,
working harder for longer hours for less income. The pollution of the air,
sea and land plus global warming has been proceeding apace. And
internationally the inequality between the rich elite and the mass of the
population has reached unprecedented heights. Capitalism remains a system,
which offers no way out for human society. It is over ripe for change.
There can be no compromise with this system. It has to be opposed, and the
movement that has to be built must be dedicated to its overthrow.

The collapse of ex Soviet Union, the victory in the Gulf War for the
Imperialist powers and the economic growth cycle of the 1990's, have
allowed capitalism to restrain somewhat the effects of its worst
contradictions over the past ten years. The power of US Imperialism and its
apparent economic success of the 1990's has given the ruling class of that
country increased dominance internationally plus a certain authority and
room for maneuver which it has used to dampen down some of the potentially
explosive contradictions that exist. It has been able to get away with
increasing use of military action from Iraq, to Sudan to Afghanistan and
the Balkans as it has stepped up its campaign to impose its wishes and
increase the exploitation of the ex-colonial countries and the former
Stalinist world.

While recognizing the decline in socialist consciousness that has taken
place there is also another side to the developments of the past years. Big
business internationally has been enforcing its agenda with ruthlessness
and arrogance. One of the effects of this has been to lay bare the workings
of capital much more clearly for all to see. As a result there has been an
increased awareness of how capitalism works, the power of capital, the
manner in which capital controls the political and legal systems, the media
etc. In other words the real nature of capitalism and the class system that
exists is better understood.

The meaning of this process in Pakistan has been that with each turning
point in politics, system is even more exposed. Unfortunately with each
political change, a so-called intellectual circle starts crying, now it
will be better, and it will be able to reform and reconstruct the system.
It makes noises that a more reliable ruler, unlike the past, has come to
power and will be able to do something. Within two three year. Another
"savior" is found every couple of years and same arguments are repeated in
a new way.

A serious economic downturn would increase the tensions amongst capitalism
worldwide. Protectionism would threaten to gather pace with all the
negative affects this will have on the world economy. And with this,
increased conflicts of a military character will be likely. Part of this
process will be a further fragmentation and break up of states. The Balkan
wars, the Rwanda/ Burundi conflicts, such catastrophes can become more
widespread. Conflicts such as those between India and Pakistan, tensions
such as those that exist between China and the rest of South East Asia
backed by the US can worsen.

And there is hardly an area of the world where the potential for such
conflict does not exist. While nuclear conflict of a regional character
cannot be ruled out, the pressure of the working class, the pressure of
other non-combatant powers and the fear of retaliation still makes this an
unlikely prospect in the short and medium term. An all out nuclear war of
the world's major powers does not appear to be on the cards at this time.

While the Balkans and Rwanda/Burundi show what can develop where capitalism
sinks deeper into crisis, and the working class cannot show a way forward.
Where it is too weak to exert any significant pressure against religious,
nationalist and tribal conflict, on a world scale the working class has
neither been destroyed nor fundamentally weakened. While it has experienced
some reduction in its strength in the former Soviet Union and Eastern
Europe, and in parts of the ex-colonial countries it has also suffered, and
in countries such as Britain it has been weakened, on a world scale it
remains potentially the decisive force. And in the USA it has been
strengthened as investment increased in the past decade, the working class
expanded and became more integrated racially and in gender.

The flow of investment into the ex-colonial countries, especially South
East Asia, over the past period has also strengthened the working class in
some of these areas.

The main conclusions are drawn from the present world situation therefore
is: From an economic and social point of view capitalism is at an impasse.
It cannot take world society forward. It threatens humanity with
catastrophe. At the same time the means of production distribution and
exchange are developed well past the point where the potential exists for
the building of a new society based on the collective ownership and
collective running of society on an international basis.

But this potential can only be realized if society is fundamentally
reorganized. That is on a collective and international basis. The working
class on a world scale has the potential power to reorganize society in
this way. It remains potentially the most powerful force on the planet and
the only force that can show a way forward. Objectively therefore society
is ripe for revolutionary change. So we live in the epoch of world
revolution, that is where the central task facing human society if it is to
have a future, is the overthrow of capitalism and its replacement by a
genuinely democratic socialist society on a world scale. Such a change is
only possible if the working class internationally is unified in a movement
with a leadership capable of taking power in its own hands and ending the
dictatorship of capital and the capitalist class.

This is where the obstacle lies. While economically and socially the world
situation is ripe for revolution that is the economic prerequisites for a
socialist world is present. The working class internationally has the
potential power to build a new world, the working class is not conscious of
its own power and the role it has to play. So while objectively society is
ripe and over-ripe for socialist revolution, subjectively this is not the
case. The crisis is one of the leadership and the consciousness of the
working class. If the working class is to understand its own power and the
role that it has to play a new leadership of the working class has to be
forged.

The logjam that we now face is the role, policies and strategy of the
leadership of the working class and the effects these have on the
consciousness of the working class. This is what holds the working class
back. And as the working class is the only progressive class today, the
only class that can take society forward, this is what holds society back.
The crisis of society therefore, the crisis of the human species in our
time is the crisis of the working class leadership. It is to this task of
building a new leadership of the working class that we have to address
ourselves.

Under the tyranny of globalization, the main trends have been
monopolization of the world economy, hence, more exploitation of the third
world countries. One of the main tactics used by the so-called civilian
governments of the third world has been to introduce more repressive
character of the state. But there is a limit to that process. The Nawaz
Sharif government had tried strengthening itself by more dictatorial powers
through different institutions of the state. He tried to introduce the
fifteenth amendment to enhance this process. If he would have been
successful in getting it passed, there might not be need of the military
rule to implement the unfinished agenda of IMF and World Bank. The
experience of Pakistan can be repeated in other third world countries.
There could be a new wave of military dictatorship in different parts of
the world. When the so-called democracy is unable to deliver the goods,
then more repressive regimes are inevitable. Already, the foreign minister
of Indonesia has warned of Pakistanisation of Indonesia. He said if the
present civilian government failed, then military could take over.

Future of the regime

Present regime can not achieve its goal of collecting the required amount
for the repayments of the debts. Hitherto RS 8 billion have been recovered
despite all the military might. It is peanuts and will not resolve the
present economic crisis. Collection of loans from defaulters will have a
major negative effect on the running business and running capital will be
taken away thus paving the way for more industries to collapse. The present
campaign will have also very negative effect on the small business and
small farmers.

But there are questions to be discussed like the nature of the present
regime, how for it can last, its strategies, its effects on the working
class and its movement, response of the main bourgeoisie parties, its
demagogy of ending feudalism, economic and political agenda, its
relationship with Imperialism and so on?

The present regime will not be able to collect the loans and even if it is
able to collect it, it will not be spend on the working people. The regime
has come to power to fulfill the incomplete agenda of the IMF and World
Bank. That is to do rapid privatization, repayments of the debts, lowering
of the tariffs, devaluation, raising of the fuel prices, reintroduction of
general sales tax and related economic measures.

The present so-called liberal phase of the regime is temporary, as it has
not met with any resistance. Its liberal face was exposed when it raided
the office of weekly Mazdoor Jeddojuhd Lahore to harass the staff on
publishing a title story against martial law. When the economic failure of
the regime will be in sight then the regime can become much more
oppressive. The coming months will expose the real nature of the coup. The
regime has not got the mass support for its actions, rather it has got the
benefit of masses negative response to the Nawaz government.

The mass consciousness will change very rapidly again about the present
regime. When the burden of economic measures taken by the present regime
will be felt and it will be felt very soon. The present attitude of "wait
and sea" will change. The masses have no particular illusions for any
bourgeoisie party. The Muslim League will not recover. Peoples Party have
lost grounds and main beneficiaries could be religious fundamentalist
forces and to some extent, the Left.

The regime will not last very long like its predecessors had. The military
dictatorship of Ayub Khan and Zia had last for 10 long years each because
of a different world situation. The Ayub dictatorship in the sixties had
the benefit of a long period of development of capitalism in the
industrialized countries. While Zia lasted because of 'God gifted'
intervention of Soviet forces in Afghanistan and in return its special aid
from the American Imperialism.

The present regime has come into power in a period of deep economic crisis
of capitalism in the ex-colonial countries. It can get special favors from
the Imperialism. They can live with it but not open outright support for
the regime. This is not because they are fundamentally opposing to military
dictatorships but they have to face and satisfy their own masses. As the
regime in Pakistan gets more repressive, the continuation of its support by
the world imperialism will be more difficult. The information technology
revolution has meant that every repressive measure in Pakistan will be
noticed within minutes throughout the world, thus creating sympathies for
the democratic forces.

Almost all the bourgeoisie opposition parties have supported the coup
initially. But they can change their position in the coming period. It is
particularly true for the religious fundamentalist forces. The military
regime has not used the cover of the religion as Zia had done. The main
reason behind this move is to please the Western Imperialism. The religious
forces have already criticized this. The Muslim League of ex-Prime Minister
will not fight as Peoples Party fought back Zia dictatorship.

It is possible that within a year or two, when the present regime is not
able to hold "accountability" according to its whims, it will become more
repressive. If the regime becomes more repressive, under the pressure of
world working class movement the imperialist countries may exert pressure
on this military regime to revert to democracy. Some sort of civilian and
military hooch pooch has already been established. How the regime will
depart, it is not clear but a new so-called democratic phase can return in
a completely different form. The military will have its much more influence
on this set up, may be a constitutional legal role. The Turkey and
Indonesian models of democracy can be followed.

The effect of the present regime on the working class will be very
negative. When military was asked to help in the running of the Water and
Power Development Authorities (WAPDA) by the previous Nawaz Sharif
government, the first demand of the present Chief Executive who was the
army chief at the time was to ban the unions in WAPDA. It's anti workers
attitude can be judged from an other recent event. Pakistan Railways had
announced the recruitment of 4000 new workers. Over 100,000 workers
applied, 4000 were scrutinized and were on the verge of joining. The
military appointed a new Railway Secretary, an ex-army general, who has
stopped this recruitment and have ordered to check the possibilities of
early privatization of the Railways.

It is clear that fuel prices will be increased. Devaluation will be done;
rapid privatization is on the agenda. All these measures will put a lot of
economic burden on the masses. There is a ban on all public demonstrations.
The regime has already reduced the price of the cotton, thus benefiting the
textile bosses. The cotton farmers and peasants increased the price after a
massive protest. They were not satisfied with that increase in the price of
cotton. Now the reduction of this unpopular price will have big blow to the
standard of living of the peasants and small farmers. This regime has come
to power to fulfill the incomplete agenda of the IMF and World Bank. Under
the noise of accountability, the real losers will be the masses and not the
rich.

General Pervaiz Musharraf, the Chief Executive has spoken to end feudalism
in Pakistan. Can he do that? Military cannot abolish feudalism in Pakistan.
The main reason is that military general and officers have also big land
holdings. Can they be ready to surrender those? It is highly unlikely. He
can not be General Mcarther who had forcefully introduced the land reforms
in Korea after the Second World War.

The illusions of masses in the military regime are fast turning into
disillusionment. Similarly, the real agenda of the government is unfolding.
The finance minister has already hinted at the increase in the petrol
prices, introduction of GST, and privatization. These steps will bring this
regime in contradiction with the masses, especially, the traders. If the
government will attempt to implement these policies through force, it will
have to face resistance, nationally as well as internationally. This will
lead to the exit of this regime perhaps much before its plan and wishes.
__________________________________________
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WEB DISPATCH is an informal, independent &
non-profit citizens wire service run by South Asia Citizens Web
(http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since1996.