Religion and politics

RELIGION influences voters’ choices for a variety of reasons, ranging from

candidates’ perceived religious/moral character, to the enforcement of the
Islamic order or system of governance. While religious-political parties
highlight their largely religious agendas and credentials, to satisfy voters’
religious sensitivities other political parties, too, manifest a religious leaning —
or at least don’t go against the prevailing religious standpoint on critical issues.

Religion, though, is only a part of what constitutes the majority of Pakistani

voters’ choice spectrum. Had religion been among voters’ top priorities, the
religious-political parties would have been a primary choice. But Pakistan’s
electoral history shows that these parties have failed to impress voters to a
significant extent. Mainstream parties, meanwhile, have broader agendas to
attract voters, which are apparently as religious as their political constituency
demands.

The electoral participation of groups like the

ASWJ is everything except deradicalisation.
Indeed, the extent of religion in their manifestoes determines the political
tendency of a party. During the last three decades, mainstream politics has
mostly fluctuated between the right and the centre — only occasionally moving,
though slightly, to the left when the PPP led the government in the 1990s and
2008. On the other end, the proliferation of far-right parties has been pushing
voters towards the rightist and centrist parties.

The turf between the far right and right is mainly claimed by the traditional
religious political parties, from the right to centre by the PML-N and the PTI,
and from the centre to left by the PPP and ethnonationalist parties. In almost
every general election, parties have largely formed alliances or supported each
other on this orientation, with few exceptions. The 2018 elections won’t be
different either, except for a few new developments.

Centralist politics seems fluid for the moment as anti-establishment sentiments

are shaping a new discourse. On the other hand, new actors have entered the far-
right domain, which is partly an outcome of the state’s counterterrorism
strategy. Some among the new far right are being launched as part of a so-called
mainstreaming and deradicalisation campaign. Other entrants are being seen as
a substitute to the militant groups, but they are equally radical and largely
depend on exploiting society’s religious and sectarian divides.
The new far right includes Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP), Milli Muslim
League (MML) (which is contesting the election from the platform of Allah-o-
Akbar Tehreek), and old sectarian groups such as the banned Ahle Sunnat Wal
Jamaat (ASWJ), Sunni Tehreek and Majlis-i-Wahdatul Muslimeen, etc. Many
small groups are also part of this cluster. Most of these actors are seen as
spoilers, ie they can do some damage to mainstream parties and change the
results in a few constituencies. The new far-right actors have diminished the
bargaining prospects of smaller religious parties like the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam
(Samiul Haq faction) and factions of the Jamiat Ulema-i-Pakistan.
As far as the mainstreaming of the MML and ASWJ through political
participation is concerned, it could prove a risky plan. After the National Action
Plan was launched, the banned groups had come under pressure. But their
participation in elections has provided them with space to breathe. For instance,
the MML sees in it an opportunity to build its soft image both domestically and
internationally. It has given 13 tickets to female candidates and engaged
religious minorities to run their electoral campaigns. For ASWJ, which is
contesting elections from the platform of the Rah-i-Haq Party while its head is
contesting as an independent candidate, participating in the election is an
opportunity to regain its lost space. Their participation in the election is indeed
everything except deradicalisation.
Interestingly, traditional religious political parties that have reunited under the
platform of the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal are trying to keep their distance from
the far right, but at the same time presenting themselves as the only potent
shield against the liberal and secular forces in the country. This is a political
tactic to keep their conservative vote bank in Balochistan and KP intact, and to
challenge their electoral rivals ie the mainstream political parties. However, the
MMA is also eying a share in the future government, manifesting the art of
political pragmatism mastered by MMA chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman.
In the 2013 election, centre-right parties (mainly the PML-N and PTI) were
concerned about the Pakistani Taliban movement and both had promised peace
talks with them in their electoral campaigns. This allowed them the freedom to
run their electoral campaigns across the country without any terrorist threat. On
the other hand, the PPP and ANP, which fought against the militants, were
brutally targeted by the Pakistani Taliban. However, in 2018, mainstream
parties are concerned with the TLP factor. The use of religion by the
mainstream parties is not a new phenomenon in Pakistani politics; however, the
recent spiritual transformation of Imran Khan also has political mileage. The
PTI knows the consequences of vote banks crumbling, and a spiritually
transformed leader can stop this erosion and attract the voters towards the party.
The PML-N has emerged with different electoral credentials in this election as
its campaign is based on two narratives; the first being anti-establishment and
the second development. Among religion-based actors, it sees the MMA as its
partner but, at the same time, the PML-N’s image as a more centrist than right-
wing party is also developing.

Though the political parties are using religion and religion-based actors for their
electoral successes, very few are talking about the threat of extremism and
terrorism. Not a single party has presented any plan or strategy to deal with
extremism. The terrorist attacks in recent days, in which over 150 people
including two political candidates were killed, is an indication that the threat of
terrorism still looms large. Silence on this critical issue will only further expand
the turfs of the far right and their radical agendas.