E1.A | Interview with Ismat Shahjahan on the Revival of Left Politics in Pakistan
Translation:
Arsalan S: Hello everyone, I am Arsalan Samdani and you are listening to Jamhoor Radio.
Jamhoor is a left-wing magazine that covers issues and progressive politics in the South Asian region and amongst the diaspora. You can read our articles on jamhoor.org. The first season of Jamhoor Radio focuses on progressive and revolutionary politics in Pakistan. In this season we will be discussing the activities of various left-leaning organizations in Pakistan, and speaking with their members.
Do not forget to subscribe to our podcast.
Our first interview is with a person who has always been at the forefront of Pakistan’s revolutionary movement. Belonging to District Karak of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Ismat Shahjahan has played a vital role in left-wing and progressive movements in Pakistan, including the student and feminist movements. Ismat is currently the chairperson of Women Democratic Front (WDF) and the deputy general secretary of Awami Workers Party (AWP). Along with this, she has also been deeply involved in the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM). Let's hear from Ismat about the current Left movement in Pakistan.
Ismat Shahjahan: Historically in Pakistan, there has been a gap of 20 years in the Left political movement. The collapse of the Soviet Union, followed by intense political struggle has resulted in the fragmentation of the Pakistani left. The National Awami Party (NAP), which comprised the Communist Party and Awami National Party, was dissolved in 1990. After this the Qaumi Inqilabi Party, a mainstream left party, was formed and eventually dissolved. Then, there are several other smaller parties and organizations, like the Communist Party, Laal Khan’s group (International Marxist Tendency — IMT), and the Mazdoor Kisan Party.
So keeping in perspective that the Left in Pakistan is very fragmented and that Pakistan is in a state of war, we decided to form a new party. In 2012, we held conversations with left-leaning parties. The National Workers Party and the Communist Mazdoor Kisan Party merged to form the Workers Party in 2012, after which two more parties joined: the Awami Party which was led by Fanoos Saab (Fanoos Gujjar) and the Labour Party which was led by Farooq Tariq. In 2014 all of these groups merged to form the Awami Workers Party.
The Awami Workers Party is not like a conventional communist party, and as a result of all these mergers, it is now the biggest mainstream left party in Pakistan. It has participated in the last two general elections and has tried to redefine the electoral narrative of Pakistan, which relies on crores of rupees invested in billboards and advertisements with the help of business interests and agencies. Pakistan, this way, will never be able to establish genuine democracy. So we brought in our own narrative in these general elections. Along with this, the future vision of the left was also redefined and our slogan continues to be “Mutabadil Mumkin Hai” (An Alternative is Possible). Traditionally, the left's focus has always been limited to the class question. The Awami Workers Party has given a new vision to the Pakistani left, and has emerged as a new nucleus for the entire left front. It has raised questions and debates over issues of the past decades, and has brought experiences for many 21st century socialist movements from across the world. For example, the communist movement in Nepal, the electoral methods introduced by Chavez to form the proletariat democracy, and the experiences of the Syriza Party in Greece amongst others. We saw all of these movements and changes, and continued to debate amongst ourselves. And so we succeeded in forming a mainstream left political party in Pakistan. Therefore, along with the traditional class question, the Pakistani Left is taking up the national question as well.
I believe that the birth of the Awami Workers Party has opened up many possibilities for the Pakistani Left and has brought feminist and and nationalist questions to the central agenda. The imperialist wars, also known as the “War on Terror'' have always been taken up historically by the Left. The Left has also opposed Pakistan’s intervention in Afghanistan. However, this time, with all of these left parties united and collaborative efforts with like-minded groups, important questions of missing persons, class, feminism, imperialism, nationalism, and religious extremism have been brought forward as major agendas of the Pakistani Left by the Awami Workers Party. As we speak, there is an ongoing discussion about possible merger with two additional parties: the Mazdoor Kisan Party and the National Party led by Hasil Bizenjo and Dr. Malik (Baloch).
In my understanding, the significant attempts in the last decade from 2010 to 2020 have been to revive the Left and to be responsive to contemporary, structural changes. For instance, there has been an information revolution which has changed the ways of being political. People often sit in their rooms and do political commentary without stepping on to the streets. We have also established networks with many people through social media, and led many campaigns.
I’ll come to national questions now. For example the Pakistani Left was always hesitant on the national question, but the Awami Workers Party has fully supported the Baloch and Sindhi nationalist struggles. Awami Workers Party workers have supported the Pashtun national struggle, and have been quite instrumental in the formation, and particularly in shaping the political ideology of the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM). Secondly, we have also worked on the student uprising during this time.
Historically, the question of land has traditionally been limited to land reforms. In contrast, we have highlighted its urban aspects, e.g. the issue of kachi abadis (informal housing/settlements) and their unauthorized takeovers by jagirdaars [landlords, typically those who were granted land under the British revenue system], and the formation of large [housing] colonies by sections of the military (such as Bahria Towns, Defence Housing Authority (DHA), etc) typically on occupied agrarian land. We have also helped build resistance within these kachi abadis, for example in Karachi against the new DHA being built there we have the Karachi Bachao Tehreek (Save Karachi Movement) and Indigenous People’s Alliance.
And finally, this is the first party in Pakistan that defines itself as Socialist-Feminist and is firm on the question of women. This is the political landscape today. We understand that many other contemporaneous questions are emerging and we are faced with new forms of capitalist struggles, e.g. take the problem of maaliyaati sarmayadari (financial capitalism). Many countries, and especially Pakistan are under huge (international) debt and the Pakistani state has become a rentier state. We continuously analyze this and work towards including these issues in our struggle.
It was a huge win for the left when we carried out the slogan, “Jab laal-laal lehrayega, to hosh thikane aayega” (When the red flag rises, only then will you learn). The Left has been standing with the student organizations, and the marches and rallies [of the student movement] have been thoroughly red. The credit for the revival of [student] unions also goes to leftist student organizations. So these developments in the past decade have been very promising.
AS: So you are in Awami Workers Party (AWP), and also in the Women Democratic Front (WDF), and you have also played a role in the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM). So can you please talk a bit more about your work on the Left.
IS: I am one of the founding members of the Awami Workers Party, and I have already spoken about the party itself in detail. I was elected the deputy secretary of the core committee during the 2016 party congress. Women Democratic Front is an independent socialist-feminist organization; it has no organizational affiliations to any political party. It's an independent organization. The various forms of struggle by women in Pakistan, be it within trade unions or in nationalist struggles, feminist, or class struggles, we want to bring all of these struggles together. We have formed a base in all four provinces of Pakistan. WDF is the most powerful feminist organization in Pakistan. The number of women who have joined us is less, but we are strong and loud. For PTM, I have played a role in its formation and growth, but I am not an officeholder within PTM. I am not a member of any of their core commitees. I support them from my party platform or from WDF’s independent platform. Awami Workers Party and Women Democratic Front both support PTM’s demands unconditionally.
In addition to party work in support and solidarity with PTM, of course, this is very personal, given my relationship with this region [Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa]. We have lost our homes and have been in Islamabad as internally displaced persons (IDPs) for many years now. My region is burning and I consider it to be a personal matter. My village is close to the border of Waziristan, and more than half of the people in my village have joined the Taliban, including some of my relatives.
So I think that even from the point of view of the left, the national question also has to be defined and approached from a progressive political angle in the PTM, so that we can also fight the narrow-nationalist tendencies within PTM, for it to be able to take a progressive-nationalist position and continue to remain a secular and non-violent force. There has been so much weaponization, and the establishment also wants to draw PTM towards militancy. Similar to the Baloch, they want to break our political movement, so that people pick up arms, take to the mountains and then the state can kill them with their jets. All of these tendencies within PTM also have to be fought with.
All the feminist support for PTM has been organized by the Women Democratic Front. For example, for the Lahore rally, while recognizing that all the feminist groups are quite conscious and aware, we invited and led them during the event. The same is true for the feminist circles in Karachi, who I met and was in conversation with during the mobilization work for the Karachi rally. For the biggest rally in Peshawar, about 200 of the women who gathered were from our organization.
These three political organizations have different objectives and have different politics, however, their politics is intertwined. We believe that the national question is linked to the class question, and we believe that the question of women is linked to the national question. When there is war or religious extremism, the biggest threat of violence is faced by women. We believe that the overgrown patriarchy in Pakistan is related to the overgrown state, which basically finds its roots in colonialism. To keep the war going and continue providing it with cannon fodder, the state itself enabled this violent and fascist patriarchy during Zia ul Haq’s time. This doesn’t mean that patriarchy wasn’t present within our society before then, or before the creation of Pakistan; in fact, we find its roots in colonial times. When the Shariat Application Act was enforced on matters related to land and settlement, and in 1905 when Bahisti Zewar was written, when Deobandis were brought in and their madrassahs were constructed, and then Ziaul Haq made more of them. This violent, extremist and fascist patriarchy that we see on our streets... a little child who resembles a woman, anyone who is remotely feminine including khwaja sira (usually translated to “third gender” and may encompass transgender)...nobody is safe from this patriarchy.
Pakistan has approximately 3.9 million weapons, civilian guns which are used on people in the streets, also used on women. So we consider that the fight against war in Pakistan is also a fight for women. And the fight against class differences is also a fight for women, because agriculture in Pakistan has been feminized as men move away due to the scarcity of jobs. Pakistan’s biggest export is labour; Pakistan functions on remittance. As a result women are overburdened with free labour. And then due to austerity measures, the burden of social care has also fallen on the women, which even neoliberal economists understand as the ‘care economy'. I believe that class oppression and exploitation, national oppression, and gender oppression or patriarchal oppression are all intertwined. So I keep trying to take these struggles forward through whatever platform possible, but these three organizations are all independent organizations.
AS: These three organizations are all independent but, in a way, they reflect your philosophy of change. So with this perspective, what is fundamentally your vision of change?
IS: Obviously, for us change is not Imran Khan’s tabdeeli (change). Our vision of change is revolution. And revolution means up-side-down, so that power and resources are redistributed. So that the foundations of systematic oppression are dismantled. Patriarchy is dismantled. Class structures are dismantled. The regime of national oppression is dismantled. This vision obviously includes an end to oppression and coercion inflicted by people on each other, and the establishment of a new society without all these forms of inequality. And a person is able to fully express their capabilities and lead a dignified and creative life. This is our vision.
Obviously, the socialism of the 21st century...a revolution like 1917 cannot happen again. Because...the industrial proletariat here...if industrial development took place, it was through the military. Most factories belong to them. There is hardly any civil industry, most people work in the service sector. So Pakistan’s own objective and political conditions will determine the form that our organic movement will take, which reflects our land, our society, our history. We have decided that irrespective of the struggles that take place in Russia or China, for us the Pakistani context is the most important. Previously, movements have been divided on the basis of the different schools of thoughts emerging from Russia and China, so now we have decided that an organic movement should emerge from within us and not take outside support. It should not be supported by Chinese money or Russian money, it should run on membership fees, with a local agenda, not an international agenda. We understand that we have to keep an eye on, and participate in, global politics but we will define our own agenda.
AS: When we speak about revolutionary politics in Pakistan, we cannot ignore the role of the military. What is your position on this question?
IS: There is a military hegemony over all aspects or institutions of the Pakistani state: Pakistan’s economy, politics, judiciary, and social brainwashing of the masses, propagated through Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) movies and songs. So there is no doubt that there is an army hegemony over the Pakistani state. But behind the Pakistan army also are two demons - Saudi Arabia and America. I say that Pakistan is probably the most colonized country in the world. We are a colony of Saudi Arabia, who uses us to protect their ideological borders to sustain their monarchy under the guise of religion. And Pakistan continues to fight their wars because they don't have a [strong] military of their own. Be it Yemen or Palestine, wherever it may be, Pakistan is their garrison. They keep renting out the Pakistani army to sustain their monarchy and ideological borders.
America uses Pakistan for strategic interests, China for its economic benefits and economic expansion, and continues to hold ties with the Pakistan army in the form of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Therefore, Pakistan is the most colonized country in the world and we believe that their hegemony [of these powers] has to be demolished.
The issue of ideological engineering is particularly important. For example the narratives, militant stories and books written in Nebraska University for the purpose of propagating Jihad; and the books produced in Islamic seminaries here; the songs, posters and pamphlets made in military barracks; and the arms that were imported have now spread beyond military bases into the wider society and masses. They are now for example in the videos of Tariq Jameel [a popular cleric] when he speaks about how Jannat (heaven) is going to be, with descriptions of women and hoors (virgins of Paradise), etc. Also, the cultural oppression required to win this war, the idea that “Islam has arrived, there can now be no relationships between men and women,” and the way the stature of women was lowered… the entire narrative that was constructed has now finally found firm ground in the popular imagination. Universities, Farhat Hashmi’s schools, Islamic seminaries are all teaching this. There are far more madrassahs than schools or universities in Pakistan. They are also better funded than the regular education system. Therefore, the most dangerous of all is this ideological hegemony. The military has not just taken over the state and the economy, but also people’s minds, where it established a hegemony and propagated its narratives — that the army is the saviour. However, this is not the case. So to establish civil supremacy, send troops back to barracks, and question their hegemony over the entire system, is a huge part of our struggle. We believe that it's not even possible to establish a simple welfare state in Pakistan right now. When you exhaust the entire budget on the war, then where will you find the money for education and health care? Our vision is to establish a ‘people’s democracy’. Far from a people’s democracy, we can’t even establish a simple welfare state, so this is a part of our struggle.
AS: People’s democracy.
IS: People’s democracy.
AS: Ok Ismat, you said earlier that imperialist forces are standing behind this military power. But on the question of imperialism we find a lot of confusion among the Pakistani left. Especially since 9/11, this confusion has become quite apparent. Now we even see China as an emerging imperialist power. So what is your position on CPEC, Chinese and American imperialism?
IS: We are not against progress, if there is any international project, as far as CPEC is concerned. We feel that Pakistan cannot isolate itself from the rest of the world. Having said that, whether it's a Chinese project or anyone’s project that violates the rights and interests of nationalities, violates the rights of workers, and particularly on the issue of the environment...I forgot to mention this earlier that we have played a significant role in shaping the movement on the environment. So we believe that any initiatives that reinforce pre-existing inequalities or further subjugate the working class, or push women towards further servitude, trouble, exploitation or coercion, we are not in favour of any such project. This is our principled position. As far as CPEC is concerned, for example the Thar coal project, we have reservations. And the KPT (Karachi Port Trust) issue where the Chinese fired (Pakistani) workers, we took a stand against it. However if you see in global politics, there have been times where China has been supportive of Pakistan, e.g on the issue of India seeking Maulana Azhar Mehsud.
Although the world is not bipolar, like before where we had the capitalist bloc and the Soviet/socialist bloc, but even then there is an alignment in global politics, where China sometimes stands against the kind of global capitalism and imperialism, particularly against British, American and Saudi imperialist expansions, even though China itself is also involved in imperialist expansion, e.g. in the String of Pearls across these large ports [AS: in Africa..]. So we have to position ourselves in global politics also, and we will see wherever progressive forces stand, we will stand by them.
Now, how progressive these forces are is a separate question. On international political alignment, we think that Russia took a stand on Syria, and we feel that was the right stand, then when there was talk of attacking Iran (by the US), Russia took a stand. Similarly, there are many other instances where China gives some reserved statements. So in global politics our position is that whichever state, however progressive, stands against imperialism and oppressive designs or the very existence of capitalism, we will stand with them. We stood by Venezuela; in fact we were going to visit Venezuela but then that (coup against Maduro government) happened, so we couldn’t go. They had called a global assembly of the left, and had also invited us. I personally was also invited. So inside and outside Pakistan, we have this position that whether it's Chinese projects or Russian projects or whoever’s project, if they are not in the interest of the Pakistani masses, we will not support such projects.
The difference between Chinese and American imperialism, this was a big debate in the Pakistani Left and even created deep divisions in the Pakistani Left. There are tensions over this question. There is no difference of opinion in the Left’s position on international politics necessarily, but in China one can see how state capitalism took over, large (private) companies were built and how China invested in America, and now controls major capital shares there, so of course you cannot call China a socialist country. Now when there... just like in Russia, where your economic system is different and your political system is different, they’re not compatible. You can’t have a capitalist mode of production, and a socialist mode of politics, they just don’t go well together. So now China is at the stage where its economic policies are changing quickly but their political system is still a one-party system. But that is their choice. They have a political will and they are a sovereign state. If the people there feel that they want a democratic form of government instead, they will make that decision. For Pakistan though, we are talking of people’s democracy. We are not in favour of a one-party system in Pakistan. But for China, it's the political will of their people. We feel that there are contradictions in China as well, and in the near future, maybe in this very decade, there will be changes there. History tells us that this would happen. We have our own point of view, but things will change on their own. Either China will have to reverse capitalist developments, or re-align the political system according to its (current) economic system, this will happen. But it's our opinion that China is changing.
AS: Overall, you think foreign investment in itself is not a problem, since Pakistan needs this for industrialization…
IS: But direct foreign investment has never brought any meaningful change for the working class. We are clearly stating that direct foreign investment is no solution. We are saying that the state needs to do land reforms, build a planned economy, establish local industries, and make an independent foreign policy for Pakistan. As long as Pakistan uses terrorism as a foreign policy tool, Pakistan cannot do trade with its neighbours, like India. We are advising that if Europe and the rest of the world are able to get together and form partnerships and build new trade zones, why can't South Asia (including Afghanistan) have visa-free trade relations? So we are in favour of Pakistan transforming its foreign policy, putting an end to terrorism. If Pakistan begins trade and changes its foreign policy, Pakistan’s economy can develop.
Pakistan has a big problem of law and order. Here, ordinary small shopkeepers, especially Pashtun...during PTM we experienced this, that small Pashtun traders were called in by the army and ISI and told that we will destroy your businesses if you support the PTM. So these people have money but they are unwilling to invest because they never know when the state will uproot it, kill their child, or do something else. This is a prerequisite for industrialization, that only when people will invest, something will happen. And then even the state is not investing, because for industrialization you need infrastructure. So we believe that direct foreign investment is no solution. Pakistan is a resource-rich country. Pakistan has gold, oil, gas, five seasons, and more importantly we have labour power. 64% of Pakistan’s population is young people, so if Pakistan fixes its policies and introduces a planned economy, we will not even need direct foreign investment.
Fade out.
AS: This was Part 1 of our interview. In Part 2 of this interview, we will speak with Ismat about religious extremism, the environment, and the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM).
Do not forget to subscribe to our podcast. Take care, and thank you.
For Part 2 of this interview and other Jamhoor Radio episodes, visit jamhoor.org/radio