Context-

Recent developments in South Asia, particularly in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and India, suggest a silent democratic backlash is underway. While these nations have experienced different post-colonial trajectories, a comparative analysis of India and Pakistan sheds light on how both countries are witnessing social forces reclaiming democratic space amidst varying degrees of authoritarianism.

Contrasting Political Systems: India and Pakistan

●      Comparisons between the Indian and Pakistani political systems often focus on why democracy endured in India but not in Pakistan, despite their shared colonial legacy. Scholars highlight various reasons for this divergence: India's mass-based political party system contrasted with Pakistan's weak political organization; the dominance of India's middle classes in the Indian National Congress versus Pakistan's landed aristocracy in the Muslim League.

●      While these comparisons help explain each country's political trajectory, they also obscure significant democratic and authoritarian dynamics within both systems. India is increasingly exhibiting authoritarian tendencies despite its democratic credentials, while Pakistan's political landscape continues to feature a complex interplay between authoritarian impulses and democratic aspirations.

India's Shift from Accountable Democracy to Executive Overreach

●      India has traditionally been regarded as a functional democracy with a history of free and fair elections, adherence to the separation of powers, and civilian dominance over the military. Despite the imposition of the Emergency in 1975, India's democratic institutions largely remained accountable, avoiding military dictatorship. This was partly due to the constitutional vision of leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, who maintained civilian supremacy over the military, as well as personalities such as Defence Minister Krishna Menon, who aimed to prevent the armed forces from becoming a political force.

●      However, the political landscape in India shifted with the rise of Narendra Modi in 2014. Under his leadership, India began to move towards a more authoritarian model characterized by executive overreach. The democratic exercise started resembling a presidential system, with a focus on creating an "Opposition-free" democracy, as evidenced by the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) campaign for a "Congress-mukt Bharat" (Congress-free India).

●      The Modi administration's approach has involved the politicization of national security and the armed forces, as well as attempts to reshape educational institutions into symbols of religiosity and nationalism to counter democratic dissent. This shift has marked a significant departure from India's earlier democratic norms, where political diversity and separation of powers were more pronounced.

 Pakistan's Authoritarianism and the Push for Democracy

●      Pakistan's post-colonial political trajectory has been marked by a continuous struggle between democratic and authoritarian forces. Since its independence, Pakistan has been plagued by military and bureaucratic dominance over its political process, which led to several periods of military dictatorship starting in 1958. However, these authoritarian regimes consistently faced mass protests and civil discontent, leading to their eventual downfall.

●      For instance, the mass protests of the late 1960s culminated in Pakistan's first general election and the subsequent disintegration of the state in 1971 — an unintended consequence of the military's oppressive measures. Similarly, General Musharraf's military rule ended following widespread public protests and the lawyer's movement, which highlighted the deep-seated desire for democratic governance.

●      Since 2008, Pakistan has held four general elections, marking a tentative transition towards democracy. However, this transition has faced significant resistance from the military, which continues to exert considerable influence over the political process. Notably, Pakistan's political elites have frequently allied with the military to secure short-term political gains, as seen in the last two general elections (2018 and 2024). These alliances have often led to efforts to marginalize political opponents, but they have also come at significant reputational costs.

 Military-Political Alliances and Public Resistance

●      The recent political history of Pakistan illustrates a growing contradiction between the political class and the military regarding who should govern. The alliance between the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government and the military initially appeared stable, as both adhered to a "one-page" strategy. However, this partnership eventually unraveled, with opposition parties like the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) — PML-N — leading public rallies not only against the PTI government but also against the military's interference in politics.

●      After the PTI government was ousted through a successful vote of no-confidence, the party adopted a similar stance, targeting the military for its role in its dismissal. This resonated with a public increasingly skeptical of the military's political engineering, resulting in the PTI emerging as the largest political party in the recent general elections, despite facing significant opposition from the state apparatus.

●      This outcome demonstrates that while alliances with the military may offer short-term political benefits, they often lead to long-term consequences as an increasingly aware citizenry questions both the military's political role and the legitimacy of such alliances.

 Democratic Pushback in India and Pakistan

●      Recent political developments in both India and Pakistan illustrate a broader democratic pushback against authoritarian tendencies. In India, the general election signaled resistance to the BJP's authoritarian politics. Despite a growing authoritarian model of governance under the current regime, there remains significant democratic space where opposition parties and civil society actors challenge attempts to centralize power.

●      In Pakistan, the military-political nexus has come under scrutiny, with public protests and widespread questioning of electoral legitimacy. While Pakistan's middle classes have historically favored military rule over chaotic democratic politics, a younger generation is increasingly critical of the military's role in politics, demanding greater democratic accountability.

 Historical Perspectives on Democratic Attitudes

●      Both India and Pakistan have seen fluctuating public attitudes towards democracy and authoritarianism. In India, segments of the middle class have at times expressed support for authoritarian governance, such as during the Emergency in 1975, believing it to be more efficient in managing the country's diversity and social challenges. In Pakistan, the middle class has often favored military rule to avoid the perceived instability of democratic governance. However, there is now a discernible shift among younger generations, who are more critical of the military's political involvement.

Conclusion

A comparative analysis of the democratic trajectories of India and Pakistan reveals that while both countries have experienced democratic backsliding, they are also witnessing new forms of democratic assertion. In both nations, citizens are increasingly using digital platforms and other means to advocate for democratic values and accountability. In India, this has contributed to stable political transitions, despite growing authoritarianism. In Pakistan, the future of this democratic backlash remains uncertain, but it is clear that social forces are actively seeking to reclaim their democratic space.

While India and Pakistan continue to diverge in their political paths, the broader trends in South Asia indicate a growing movement among social forces to challenge authoritarian tendencies and reclaim democratic space in their respective countries.

Source- The Hindu