Women as political leaders: how different will Mehbooba Mufti be?

 “Heav’n has no Rage, like Love to Hatred turn’d, Nor Hell a Fury, like a Woman scorn’d.” in the William Congreve play The Mourning Bride

The world that we inhabit is a great advancement over the world of, say, 200 or 300 years ago. Mankind has made strides in almost all domains of life. Be it technology, society, economy, politics, development and what have you, the contemporary world would be unrecognizable to a Rip Van Winkle who would wake up today after a hibernation of just hundred years. From the perspective of social sciences- a discipline which examines the nature of the social life of groups and individuals and relations between them-, the changes are profound as well. One ubiquitous example is the role of women of society and gender and power. Historically, women were relegated to a second or third class status in society.(It needs to be stated here that Islam recognized and granted rights to women when the idea of women’s rights was anathema to society-especially in medieval Arabia).  Women, generally , were held to be chattel; power and social structures of societies and polities militated against women and by and large, women , save for exceptional instances, were excluded from power and power relations. Historical, political, economic and social forces went against women.

Fast forward a few centuries. Women are now more visible: they have heft and clout in society; in the developed world, women are almost at par with men(some may quibble that the ‘glass ceiling’ still exists albeit in a more subtle form), they hold management, leadership and academic positions and society , except in some very primitive forms of society, accepts women as having a great if not equal role(s) in society.

This gender emancipation is indeed a great idea. Why deny and deprive women of their rights and due role in society just because power relations have historically been forged by men?  We agree and are in accord with the idea that women should neither be subjugated not denied legitimate aspirations and rights.

But the question we pose is, how do women perform in positions of political power?

In theory, women, if rights are equal for all, should be allowed and hold positions of power as well. Well, nothing wrong in this but the empirical record suggests a rather dismal record of wielding or aspiring for political power by women.  This is not a case of misogyny or chauvinistic prejudice against women. It’s just that the record demonstrates that while can be good leaders but they, at the same time, can be ruthless, mercurial, impulsive and even vindictive. Beginning from Cleopatra, to Indira Gandhi, to Margaret Thatcher to Shaikh Hasina, all these women , who occupied the highest offices in their respective lands, in some form or the other, demonstrated ruthlessness and vendetta in power.

Speaking about and assessing Margaret Thatcher’s politics and personality, Peter Tatchell, an Australian born, human rights activist has said:

“Her strong autocratic streak was revealed when she massively centralised state power, emasculating local government by stripping councils of their traditional autonomy and power. Her government boosted police powers to the detriment of civil liberties and the rights of the citizen.During the 1984-85 miner’s strike, the unions were ruthlessly crushed on her orders. She oversaw the use of police state methods. Pit villages were occupied and put under virtual marshal law. Baton-wielding police struck down peaceful miners. People travelling to support the strikers were pre-emptively arrested. Union members at Orgreave were framed on false police evidence, which the Independent Police Complaints Commission is only now finally investigating”

Indira Gandhi- heir to Nehru’s legacy and politics- initially known as ‘goongi gudiya’( dumb doll) by those who inititated her into politics not only silenced her critics and detractors but excluded them from politics. Ms. Gandhi is attained notoriety for imposing Emergency Rule in India- held my many sober analyst to be India’s flrtation with authoritarianism.  Ms. Gandhi also was famous for arm twisting methods and coercion. Infamously, she ordered the Army to storm the Golden Temple when Bindranwale and his militants were holed inside the Temple. Ironically, Ms. Gandhi paid a price for this with her life.

In neighboring Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina Wajid, leader of the BAL, has silenced her critics and opponents especially from the Jamaat e Islami by ordering their hangings.

All this is not to state or even insinuate that women are bad leaders. They can be good and prudent leaders too. The reasons for delineating the historical perspective and citing some examples, is to attempt to understand the implications and consequences of female leadership on the state of Jammu and Kashmir. For all practical purposes, barring a debacle or an unforeseen contingency, Mehbooba Mufti is likely to become chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir. How will Mehbooba fare as Chief Minister of Kashmir?

Mehbooba is known to be a bit mercurial and impulsive. But she may have mellowed down and become more temperate and now that the burden of leadership has fallen on her, she  could be more sober and prudent. However, the historical record of women in leadership positions suggests otherwise. Here we would qualify our assertion: women can be great and prudent leaders too.  We don’t have any prejudice towards women. We have just laid out the historical and even contemporary record. Will Mehbooba be any different? Time will tell.

Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now

MONTHLY	Rs 100
YEARLY	Rs 1000
LIFETIME	Rs 10000

CLICK FOR DETAILS