Politics of “nepo-babies” – Newspaper

PAKISTAN politics continues to be dominated by dynasties and family networks that manage to maintain control of the country’s top political posts and a significant number of parliamentary seats.

Many legislators come from political dynasties and inherited seats from their parents, spouses or other family connections. Hereditary politics continues to dominate, and power is distributed among relatives by those in high positions. The mold of dynastic politics was broken with the emergence of the PTI, but although its leader was not a dynasty, the party included scions of powerful political families.

Pakistan is no exception to a phenomenon seen around the world – political families and dynasties dominating the political landscape. The so-called political “nepo-children” are visible almost everywhere. A political non-child is usually defined as a beneficiary of nepotism – a descendant of someone who has achieved high political office and thereby rises to power. This phenomenon also includes spouses or siblings who achieve success in politics through family connections.

Many countries in Southeast Asia are run by non-babies. Patongtarn Shinawatra in Thailand, Bongbong Marcos in the Philippines, Hun Mane in Cambodia and Kim Jong Un in North Korea are all children of former rulers who now rule their countries. Likewise, Indonesian Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka is the son of former President Joko Widodo. Singapore was ruled for two decades by Lee Hsien Loong, son of Lee Kuan Yew, the country’s founder and first prime minister.

In South Asia, Bangladesh’s recently ousted Prime Minister Hasina Wajid owed her political rise to her father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. In India, three prime ministers came from the Nehru-Gandhi family; her descendant Rahul Gandhi is now the leader of the opposition. Latin America also had its own political families. Argentina saw the Perons and the Kirchners. Former Uruguay President Jorge Luis Batlle came from a family of three presidents. The President of Honduras, Xiomara Castro de Zelaya, is the wife of the ex-president.

Political dynasties were also common in the West. The Kennedys, Bushes and Clintons are prime examples in the US. There is also Justin Trudeau in Canada. In Europe, the Prime Minister of Estonia is the daughter of a former prime minister. Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo and Marine Le Pen had politically prominent parents in France.

Dynastic politics undermines institutions and the very concept of meritocracy.

The track record of non-babies is varied. Some managed well, others did not. But there is no disagreement that no matter how “qualified” they were, it was their surname that helped them come to power. Their privileged background gives them an advantage that contradicts the very concept of meritocracy. When the political playing field is skewed by their privileged DNA and offers unequal access to other political contenders, it does not make political competition fair or equitable. This has adverse consequences for democracy.

A study of “hereditary democracy” by Australian academic Dr James Loxton highlighted its detrimental impact on the political system. It has been found that mediocre leaders are more likely to rise to power when political positions are limited to those with family ties to politics. In some cases, they even lack formal qualifications. Voters are also frustrated that when they choose relatives of famous politicians, they tend to assume and expect similarities in leadership or policy.

However, selected descendants or relatives may differ significantly from their predecessors, resulting in confounding voters’ expectations and poor representation. An article published earlier this year in Economist The subtitle “Flawed Dynasties” argues that in some Asian countries, dynasties hampered economic growth because their interests and the interests of their friends clashed with the need for reform. Moreover, dynastic rule discourages the creation of strong institutions because individuals take on excessive roles and seek to dominate institutions, becoming impatient with institutional constraints on their power. They also prevent the institutionalization of their own political parties.

Why people vote for out-of-breed children is an important question, but there is no single answer as the political context and conditions vary from country to country. Generally speaking, name recognition and people’s familiarity with a famous personality are important reasons for their support. As well as their perception that a parent or relative of a political leader has previously met their expectations and his/her successor will bring stability. Dynastic leaders are also more common in developing countries, where political culture is organized around patron-client networks and patronage lubricates the functioning of the political system.

Although every country with ruling dynasties has its own characteristics, the case of Pakistan differs from the others in an important respect. Since political interference by the military has been widespread throughout Pakistan’s history, it has often chosen to ally with one political dynasty or another to counter a common political enemy.

This helped strengthen their position and revive their political fortunes, even as their public support waned. They were also a means of maintaining the status quo. The two major political parties led by dynasties today enjoy establishment support as they serve as a counterweight to Imran Khan’s PTI.

Two dynasty-led parties, the PML-N and the PPP, alternated in power for over four decades (when the military did not assume overt power). An assessment of how they managed must be done separately. It is noteworthy that although the country is moving forward, politics is still stuck in the old hereditary regime. Representative politics and systems of government are increasingly out of step with the social and economic changes that are reshaping the country’s landscape. These changes include greater urbanization, a shift of economic power from rural to urban areas, the expansion of a more assertive middle class, the emergence of a diverse civil society, and a more connected and informed population thanks to the spread of technology.

These changes give rise to different social expectations and aspirations. The growing middle class wants to see a meritocratic political system, free from the dominance of dynasties that are seen as representing the past, not the future. The key question is whether this growing disparity between the demands of a growing middle class and politics dominated by families or clans can create a dynamic that will ultimately lead to more competent and accountable governance.

The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and the UN.

Published in Dawn magazine, November 4, 2024