IT has been almost 20 years since the PML-N and PPP signed the Charter of Democracy in exile. With the Musharraf dictatorship at its zenith, the country’s two biggest mainstream parties seemingly realised the significance of collectively resisting militarisation of state and society. Today, both are part of a regime that couldn’t care less about ‘civilian supremacy’. Only a few months after the passing of the 26th Amendment to clip the tails of an already compromised, anti-people judicial apparatus of state, the government is now gearing up to pass the 27th amendment. This will further cement the security establishment’s role as Pakistan’s arbiter of power. The 18th Amendment, widely perceived as the biggest success of Pakistan’s emaciated democracy in recent times, may also be rolled back.

To put it bluntly, the Charter of Democracy has largely been consigned to the dustbin of history, effectively replaced by a ‘Charter of Oligarchy’. Barely two years after a dubious electoral exercise that brought the current regime into existence, Pakistan’s political order is further than ever from representing the will of its people. What do I mean by a ‘Charter of Oligarchy’? Many associate oligarchy with the domination of political dynasties like the Bhuttos and Sharifs. In a similar vein, the security establishment’s centrality to the structure of power tends to be reduced to the current top brass. The rot actually runs much deeper.

More than 50 years ago, Pakistan’s most celebrated Marxist thinker Hamza Alavi theorised class rule in Pakistan as being the preserve of landowners, big business and global capital, with what he called the ‘bureaucratic-military oligarchy’ playing the role of ultimate arbiter. While Alavi’s insights need considerable amendments, the basic skeleton of power that he described is very much intact in contemporary Pakistan.

The Charter of Democracy has been consigned to the dustbin.

Unelected, bureaucratic state apparatuses remain at the top of the pile. Alongside coercive powers, they articulate an autonomous agenda of profit maximisation through official ‘development’ projects, as well as a vast corporate empire including real estate, construction, logistics, banking and other business initiatives. The establishment shares economic interests with the propertied landed, business and foreign capitalist classes. Put differently, mainstream political parties are not guided by a foundational economic agenda — meeting the needs of Pakistan’s working masses — that is at odds with the ‘bureaucratic-military oligarchy’.

The high stakes of the political-economic game certainly generate conflict between various segments of the ruling order but the establishment remains more coherent than any other player, thus maintaining its role of arbiter. Meanwhile the propertied classes, which dominate all mainstream political parties, don’t want ‘civilian supremacy’ enough to remain out of governmental power for too long. So they wax lyrical about democracy, the plight of the peripheries and working masses when in the opposition, then cut a deal with the establishment to find a way back into power.

The Charter of Democracy was largely silent about the underlying economic logics of the militarised power structure. These logics do not determine everything, but are as important as any other aspect of the game of thrones. The question is how to transcend the palace intrigues masquerading as democracy. A comparison with a not dissimilar oligarchic context may help. Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York City’s mayoral election has electrified Pakistanis. He is young, proudly owns his Muslim-Indian-Ug­andan heritage and speaks to arguably the world’s most ethnically diverse city. But arguably, the si-ngle biggest reason for Mamdani’s triu­mph is his explicit socialist agenda foc-using on the needs of working people in opposition to the ba­­rons of Wall Street. Mamdani also speaks truth to Zionists, and the Trumpian White House. He names many shades of the US oligarchy, including the establishment within the Democratic Party itself. Time will tell whether or not he can deliver on his ideals. But the point is that there really is no democracy without challenging the oligarchy that dominates existing power structures.

The responses to Mamdani’s victory in Pakistan have largely been tragicomic. The PPP has been reciting its roti, kapra, makan mantra, not mentioning that it has shown no commitment to socialism or challenged the establishment for at least a generation. PTI supporters have given to declaring Imran Khan the Pakistani Mamdani. Others are bashing Pakistani Marxists as irrelevant. Beyond the banter, a meaningful analysis of Pakistan’s structure of power is the bare minimum to democratise it. Challenging capitalist robber barons comes next.

The writer teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

Published in Dawn, November 7th, 2025