I have been watching the political situation play out quietly and patiently for over ten months now, the long awaited transition to democracy in Pakistan started in February 2008 and completed in principle with Musharraf's departure in August 2008. During this whole process there was a general sense of reluctance amongst the people and there were doubts about the effectiveness of this transition since Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League (PMLN) once again emerged strong with considerable popular support.
The general concern was if there was going to be a re-match of the 90's style politics between PPP and PMLN, then there were guarantees in the shape of Charter of Democracy and later on a Murree Declaration.
There were also concerns about the functionality of the coalition between the two parties as one was formerly seen as Liberal Nationalistic Party with a Socialist inclination by its origin and the other was considered a more of a Right Wing Conservative party with Religious inclination but, they had a common opponent in Musharraf. However, as the transition moved forward all agreements between the two fell apart and with Musharraf's disgraced exit it became clear that the two parties could not share the power and PMLN moved from being a reluctant coalition partner to a poorly defined opposition party.
President Zardari is now running the operation following the Musharraf model retaining all powers the dictator chose for himself and the Prime Minister once again is in no position to run the show. It was expected to be a difficult transition because of the anti-Pakistan policies of the Musharraf era which led to Pakistan being in a vulnerable economic state and a very weak foreign policy position. To top it off the current government made commitments with our 'foreign friends' to ensure continuity of the dictator's policies which were considered favorable by our 'foreign friends'.
We have all seen recent high profile confusion of the Pakistani Government where they have failed to call the obvious bluff by our neighbor. Our President has been seen making poorly worded statements coining terms he obviously does not understand, defending actions taken by other States and hoping that he would get concessions because of his connection with the late former Prime Minister Bhutto.
All of this has re-ignited the debate if Pakistan is ready for Democracy? Closet Musharraf supporters are using this argument to convince themselves and hopefully others that autocratic regimes are a practical solution for Pakistan for two major reasons:
- All politicians are corrupt.
- People are either under educated or completely illiterate.
As evidence they can use this utter state of confusion prevailing in Islamabad and negative tactics adopted by the political parties during the 90's and now.
Before we draw any conclusions we must first admit to some realities:
- Pakistan has never had a real run of democracy, those who use the 90's as evidence of incompetence of the political forces overlook the fact that just like now the elected governments back then were not free to make decisions they did not have the powers to run the country and the decision making process was blatantly influenced by a certain organization which should be working for the government.
- Elected representatives of the people were arrested, exiled, deported and disgraced in every possible manner, the dictators in all cases got safe passages or glorious funerals with no accountability. Shouldn't the Musharraf / Azziz administration be held accountable for the current state of affairs in Pakistan? Shouldn't they be investigated for violations of Pakistani Laws?
- There is a well defined system in place to derail every democratic government within the first year of its formation.
The general concern was if there was going to be a re-match of the 90's style politics between PPP and PMLN, then there were guarantees in the shape of Charter of Democracy and later on a Murree Declaration.
There were also concerns about the functionality of the coalition between the two parties as one was formerly seen as Liberal Nationalistic Party with a Socialist inclination by its origin and the other was considered a more of a Right Wing Conservative party with Religious inclination but, they had a common opponent in Musharraf. However, as the transition moved forward all agreements between the two fell apart and with Musharraf's disgraced exit it became clear that the two parties could not share the power and PMLN moved from being a reluctant coalition partner to a poorly defined opposition party.
President Zardari is now running the operation following the Musharraf model retaining all powers the dictator chose for himself and the Prime Minister once again is in no position to run the show. It was expected to be a difficult transition because of the anti-Pakistan policies of the Musharraf era which led to Pakistan being in a vulnerable economic state and a very weak foreign policy position. To top it off the current government made commitments with our 'foreign friends' to ensure continuity of the dictator's policies which were considered favorable by our 'foreign friends'.
We have all seen recent high profile confusion of the Pakistani Government where they have failed to call the obvious bluff by our neighbor. Our President has been seen making poorly worded statements coining terms he obviously does not understand, defending actions taken by other States and hoping that he would get concessions because of his connection with the late former Prime Minister Bhutto.
All of this has re-ignited the debate if Pakistan is ready for Democracy? Closet Musharraf supporters are using this argument to convince themselves and hopefully others that autocratic regimes are a practical solution for Pakistan for two major reasons:
- All politicians are corrupt.
- People are either under educated or completely illiterate.
As evidence they can use this utter state of confusion prevailing in Islamabad and negative tactics adopted by the political parties during the 90's and now.
Before we draw any conclusions we must first admit to some realities:
- Pakistan has never had a real run of democracy, those who use the 90's as evidence of incompetence of the political forces overlook the fact that just like now the elected governments back then were not free to make decisions they did not have the powers to run the country and the decision making process was blatantly influenced by a certain organization which should be working for the government.
- Elected representatives of the people were arrested, exiled, deported and disgraced in every possible manner, the dictators in all cases got safe passages or glorious funerals with no accountability. Shouldn't the Musharraf / Azziz administration be held accountable for the current state of affairs in Pakistan? Shouldn't they be investigated for violations of Pakistani Laws?
- There is a well defined system in place to derail every democratic government within the first year of its formation.
- The much talked about corruption charges were withdrawn by the dictator to reinforce his own administration so they can not be considered anything more than 'gossip' at this stage, there was ample time available to the dictator to prosecute those cases, why were they used as political tools rather than actual criminal charges?
None of the above are conspiracy theories, these are well known facts, then we should also be able to agree on the following:
- Zardari / Shareef represent political forces in Pakistan but they are not by any means an academic definition of a Democracy because they exist within the system but are not the democratic system, and we must accept that we can disagree with them as much we like but we can not use the conduct of either of the two to prove Democracy as a failed system for Pakistan, because if the system is allowed to run and if the people are convinced that Zardari / Shareef do not represent them, they will be voted out of their positions.
- The maximum period an elected government can hold office is 5 years based on the much amended barely surviving constitution of Pakistan, however, as per the system if they perform well they can get re-elected, on the other hand a dictator will hang on to power through any means possible for as long as possible because they are well aware that they are on a one way track to disgraced anonymity even if they follow all flight safety precautions.
- Elected governments have to focus on the people for strength and all our dictators have looked to our foreign friends for recognition and have done everything to please them.
- Alleging that our people are collectively incapable of making the right decisions is more of an ' Elitist Fantasy' than a reality. Pakistanis have shown great political awareness each time they have been given the opportunity, and this can only improve if they are allowed to participate in the system consistently. We have all seen how the Q league was removed from power by the people.
- Another interesting concern has been corruption, and I am convinced that it is a genuine concern, but we must accept that corruption in some shape or form remains in every system designed by humans, even in the US in a far more mature democracy there are numerous examples of politicians taking advantage of the powers vested in them by the people and I am not going to quote names because we all know them really well. The method to minimize corruption can only be 'controls built into the democratic system', replacing the democratic system by a far more corrupt system is definitely not a practical solution. We have seen that Musharraf / Aziz administration was as corrupt as a democratic government could possibly have been if not more, the biggest difference is these gentlemen are actually getting a chance to enjoy the proceeds of their crimes unlike the elected Prime Ministers who were arrested and exiled. One good example of a control within the system is an ' independent judiciary'!!
In the end, we must understand that democracy is not a perfect system but it is definitely better than an Autocracy because it empowers the people and allows them to politically eliminate elements who do not represent the will of the people, which makes the system self cleansing but it must be allowed to function to be effective. It is designed to improve the efficiency of its own organs. When the democratic system functions we will see that leadership from the people will emerge and the people will take charge of their destiny, it is a slow yet certain process, therefore, we must stop hoping for some hero to rescue the nation and start focusing on not allowing anyone to interrupt the system this time.
None of the above are conspiracy theories, these are well known facts, then we should also be able to agree on the following:
- Zardari / Shareef represent political forces in Pakistan but they are not by any means an academic definition of a Democracy because they exist within the system but are not the democratic system, and we must accept that we can disagree with them as much we like but we can not use the conduct of either of the two to prove Democracy as a failed system for Pakistan, because if the system is allowed to run and if the people are convinced that Zardari / Shareef do not represent them, they will be voted out of their positions.
- The maximum period an elected government can hold office is 5 years based on the much amended barely surviving constitution of Pakistan, however, as per the system if they perform well they can get re-elected, on the other hand a dictator will hang on to power through any means possible for as long as possible because they are well aware that they are on a one way track to disgraced anonymity even if they follow all flight safety precautions.
- Elected governments have to focus on the people for strength and all our dictators have looked to our foreign friends for recognition and have done everything to please them.
- Alleging that our people are collectively incapable of making the right decisions is more of an ' Elitist Fantasy' than a reality. Pakistanis have shown great political awareness each time they have been given the opportunity, and this can only improve if they are allowed to participate in the system consistently. We have all seen how the Q league was removed from power by the people.
- Another interesting concern has been corruption, and I am convinced that it is a genuine concern, but we must accept that corruption in some shape or form remains in every system designed by humans, even in the US in a far more mature democracy there are numerous examples of politicians taking advantage of the powers vested in them by the people and I am not going to quote names because we all know them really well. The method to minimize corruption can only be 'controls built into the democratic system', replacing the democratic system by a far more corrupt system is definitely not a practical solution. We have seen that Musharraf / Aziz administration was as corrupt as a democratic government could possibly have been if not more, the biggest difference is these gentlemen are actually getting a chance to enjoy the proceeds of their crimes unlike the elected Prime Ministers who were arrested and exiled. One good example of a control within the system is an ' independent judiciary'!!
In the end, we must understand that democracy is not a perfect system but it is definitely better than an Autocracy because it empowers the people and allows them to politically eliminate elements who do not represent the will of the people, which makes the system self cleansing but it must be allowed to function to be effective. It is designed to improve the efficiency of its own organs. When the democratic system functions we will see that leadership from the people will emerge and the people will take charge of their destiny, it is a slow yet certain process, therefore, we must stop hoping for some hero to rescue the nation and start focusing on not allowing anyone to interrupt the system this time.
