Adil Najam
Our most recent ATP Poll on which of Pakistan’s leaders did the most ‘harm’ to Pakistan was a sequel to our earlier poll on who did the most ‘good’, and like its predecessor this poll also generated quite a response – in discussion as well as in polling.
A total of 1,220 votes were cast in this poll by our readers and the discussion was, once again, interesting as well as insightful. As before, the current Pakistani government leadership was not included in the poll – although a poll to ‘grade’ the current government had been conducted recently.
We will leave a detailed analysis of what the results do or do not mean to our readers, but some key aspects are worth highlighting here.
- The poll was open for just around 2 full days and a total of 1,220 votes will polled. Once again, the poll and the discussion showed the passions as well as the thought that our readers put into the question. The poll was closed only after the general percentage for each leader had become fairly stable. Astute readers will note that the totals do not add up to 100. One assumes this is because the service we use simply truncates after the decimal point (instead of rounding it off).
- The result this time was even more clear than in the previous poll. Gen. Zia ul Haq was deemed to have done the most harm to Pakistan, with 42% of those who voted making him their choice. This was exactly twice as many votes as his closed challenger for this dubious title: Gen. Pervez Musharraf had that position in the poll, with 21% of our readers feeling that he had done the most harm to Pakistan. At the third slot was F.M. Ayub Khan with 12% of our readers considering him to have done the most harm. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto – with 10%, 9% and 5% votes, respectively – followed behind them.
- An interesting aspect this time is that the top three slots were held by the three military leaders in the mix – Zia ul Haq, Pervez Musharraf and Ayub Khan. It is indeed remarkable that 75% of our readers – a full 3/4th – believe that the most harm was done by one of these three military rulers!
- One surprise, at least to me, was the very high percentage of readers who considered Ayub Khan to have done the most harm. Before the poll I would have expected this number to be smaller. However, a number of readers made the argument that by setting the country on the path to military rule, it was he who caused the greatest harm.
- Another surprise – given the intensity of the argument against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto made by many in their comments – was that the number of people who considered Nawaz Sharif to have caused the most harm was about the same as for Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (9% v. 10%). I am still not sure what this might signify.
- I hope that readers will help us in contrasting this poll’s results with the last poll. However, it is quite clear that Gen. Zia ul Haq is clearly the most reviled amongst our readers. The least number of people have voted for him in the ‘good’ he did (2%) and the most voted that he did the most harm (42%). Gen. Pervez Musharraf was ‘second’ in both polls and about a similar proportion (23% v. 21%) felt that he had done the most ‘good’ or caused the most ‘harm’ to Pakistan. Similarly Ayub Khan was ‘third’ in each poll (15% v. 12%, respectively). Although any statistical aggregation is problematic in such polls, overall it does seem that our readership is most sympathetic and partial to Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto – 36% of our readers considered him to have done the most ‘good’ for Pakistan while only 10% of the readership believe that he did the most harm.
Those are just some preliminary and quick thoughts from me in looking at the results. Do tell us what you think, dear readers.
The Pakistani arrogance is amazing: if you do not like the answer then simply claim that the answer was wrong. Don’t like election results, it must be the feudals; don’t like exam results, it must be cheating by others; don’t like poll results, it must the ‘elite’ who messed it. Amazing is the belief that unless the result is what I wanted, it must be wrong.
Also part of this arrogance is the belief that all other Pakistanis must think the way I do, if they don’t they must be either CA agents, or “elites” or “liberals” or some other such thing, but of course anyone who does not think like me could not be a real Pakistani.
For God’s sake, yaar, maan lo … kabb tak bahanay banao gay that this site is visited by so and so or this and that or that and this and therefore everyone who voted differently from how you wanted them to vote must be illigitimate in some way!
As interesting as these poll results are, we should remember that they suffer from a self-selection bias. Although this blog does draw alot of readers from diverse backgrounds, it is a largely elite, well-educated, and relatively well off readership. A significant amount, if not most, of the readers here have probably attended an english medium school, have travelled at least once outside of Pakistan, and are generally well-read. So, while our responses to Dr Najam’s question makes for a great poll, and it makes us all feel warm and fuzzy on the inside about we’ve discovered so many other people that also share our dislike for General Zia-ul-Haq, this isn’t a scientific poll, and we really can’t draw any conclusions from it.
Now, if you were to hold both this poll and the one about “who did the most good” on, let’s say, pkpolitics.com, I guarantee the results will be very different. I’m getting slightly carried away here, but I would also be interested to see if the facebook group members would vote differently. I know, having a different facebook poll would negate the whole point of a Pakistaniat community, but it would make for a fascinating study of younger Pakistanis. How do they judge their historical leaders, and what lessons do they draw from history?
More comments from the ATP Facebook Page:
– “ayub.. the first military dictator”
– “so waseem you are saying all the Kalashnikov, drug and terrorism culture.. was Zia’s way of modernizing and beghairto-fying Pakistan..? Banning student unions.. Raping religion to the core..stripping it to a hypocritical oath and practice rather than real feeling inside.. Try reading up Charlie Wilson’s War and you will get a sense of what Zia was all about.. I am not for Musharraf.. but please before you write something please verify your “facts”. Promoting development of women is not to be equated with Fahashi.. women are where there are because of some of the retro-gressive steps of Zia’s regime..”
– “No one has done more harm to Jinnah’s Pakistan than Zia and his mullah squads.”
– “Of all the evils that befell Pakistan ZIA-UL-HAQ was the worst …..he was a hypocrite,jo bismilla se har jhoot bolta tha aur qaum ko dhoka deita tha…aur musharraf to uss ka baap hai …..zia ul haq ne mazhab ke aar le kar iss qaum ke illiterate awam ko dhoka diya….KK aur heroin uss ke daur mei bahut induct huwe…..muhajir aur pathanoo ko larwaya aur hundreds qatal huwe…..agar uss mei zara se bhe insaniat hote to 3 mths mei free and fair elections karwa kar wapis barracks mei jata”
– “all have done”
Zia is to Pakistan what Yazid is to Muslim Umma. On this point there seems to be a consensus (ijma) now.
But I interpret the results of this poll this way: If Pakistan was compared to a boulder placed on a hillside, each one of the leaders after Jinnah kicked it or pushed it to pry it loose from the ground. Some pushed it mildly some hard. But Zia the “merde momin” used a crowbar to heave the boulder off the ground and send it rolling down the hill. The boulder hasn’t come to a stop yet.
The results are not very surprising. Although the bottom figures are probably insignificant, having Nawaz Sharif below Z.A. Bhutto makes very little sense. As has been mentioned already, the Sharifs owe their political clout to Zia-ul-Haq.
Furthermore, it was Nawaz Sharif who sent his party’s thugs to threaten and physically attack the sitting chief justice of Pakistan (Sajjad Ali Shah). What could be more damaging than to send this kind of message about the country’s apex couty?