TRENDS IN AGRARIAN MOVEMENTS IN PAKISTAN DURING ITS EARLY YEARS

Abstract

At the time of the creation of Pakistan, there was an uneven and lopsided development of capitalist relations. Most of the country had a feudal structure based on the exploitation of the tenants and the peasantry.1 The bureaucracy, conditioned by the authoritarian traditions of the British imperialism, played an overwhelmingly reactionary role in Pakistan's economic development.2 The ruling party, the Muslim League was not only a communal NLUJ Academic Use Only party, but virtually its entire leadership, comprised capitalists and feudal elements of Punjab and Sindhis, and among Mohajirs. So it was obvious that the policies of the Muslim League would have its bias in the favour of these propertied classes at the cost of the masses. In this regard the observation of Keith Callard, who visited Pakistan several times, is quite significant. He says, "Jagirdars and Zamindars, Pirs and Mirs, Makhdooms, Khans and Nawabs retain vast political influence. A glance through the lists of members of Legislative Assemblies shows how many such hereditary leaders or their near relatives were active in political life."3 All the promises made to the masses at the time of independence, were discarded. Any demand for land reforms was considered as a crime in West Punjab. An arbitrary agrarian legislation was enacted in 1950. According to the Act, if a tenant raised the demand for land reforms in a public or private meeting, then he could be ejected. The Zamindari System, which was introduced by the British, remained unchanged and the landlords imposed a number of illegal exactions.4 By the beginning of 1950, peasant movements started gaining momentum in most part of the West Pakistan. This paper attempts to look at the economic situation in Pakistan during the initial period of its formation and why and how the increasing grievances of the peasants gave way for widespread movements in both the wings of Pakistan. It also looks at the response of the government to these movements, and whether this response was for the benefit of the peasants or for the entrenched elite and feudal class. The first part of the paper has focussed on the prevailing economic condition; part two deals with the movements led by the peasants and their organizations; and part three is about the government measures in the wake of rising movements.