Pakistan isn�t ready for the democracy yet.
The change of government by force is a time honoured tradition which the people of Pakistan have followed religiously since the time of their independence. Based on its history, one can easily predict a mass political unrest which might lead to yet another military take over before the end of this year.
The departure of President Musharraf at this juncture will add severely to Pakistan�s political woes. He may not be the best leader; he is much better than the ones Pakistan has had so far. The country has done relatively well under his rule.
He can be credited for making good decisions overall, save one (restore democracy) which might cost him his government. President Musharraf should have known that Pakistan is not ready for the kind of democracy he is being forced by the West and the Pakistani political parties to implement.
The democratic system of government is based on the principal of the majority rule. Since a majority of the Pakistani population (66%), that lives in the rural areas is either Taliban influenced or religious fundamentalist; asking for democracy would mean asking for a Taliban type of government.
Have the West and the Pakistani opposition parties forgotten the outcome of the recent election in Palestine? Do they want similar election results in Pakistan? If asked behind the closed doors, these very political groups who are clamouring for the restoration of democracy would answer this question with a resounding no.
Why? Because they know the consequences. However, despite knowing the consequences, they pretend to uphold the principles of majority rule in public only to achieve their selfish political goals.
Pakistani political parties that are now clamouring for the majority rule are the ones mainly responsible for the failure of democracy in Pakistan. They never allowed the democracy to take roots in Pakistan. Once in power, they acted mostly in contravention of the democratic principles.
In order to keep the reins of power securely in their hands, it appears that they deliberately kept the populace impoverished and uneducated so as to prevent them from thinking beyond the satisfaction of their basic needs, i.e. food, shelter and clothing. This is what all of them wanted, and this is what they've got; an impoverished nation with the literacy rate below 50%.
Due to their greed for power, they have turned a large portion of the Pakistani population into uneducated, hard headed militants who are completely devoid of the concepts of political freedoms and liberties.
It is due, in large part, to each successive government�s disregard for the establishment of a modern education system that Pakistan is now witnessing a rise in the numbers of Madressas in the rural areas. The curriculum used in these Madressas is based on the religious fundamentalism that promotes hatred and violence against those who oppose their brand of lifestyle and religious philosophy. Unfortunately, the number of Madressa educated people have grown to an extent that in a fair and freely held elections, they will be able to take control of the government with considerable ease.
The control of government by such elements will spell disaster for Pakistan�s integrity and solidarity. It is with such dire prospects in mind that I oppose the implementation of democracy in Pakistan. Pakistan does not need democracy. It needs economic progress and prosperity. Democracy is not the panacea to Pakistan�s ills, as some would have us believe. To restore its health, Pakistan needs to invest all of its efforts and energies into the development of its economic and education system. In other words, Pakistan must make economic development its top priority. Political reforms can wait until such time as Pakistan has achieved a high degree of parity with the developed nations with regards to the literacy and economic development.
To do that, Pakistan must take a page from China's recent advances on the economic front. Despite international pressures for the democratic reforms, China remained strictly focused on its economic development. Under the leadership of the late Deng Xiaoping, China in a short period of time, emerged on the world stage as the economic power to be reckoned with. China is now well on its way to becoming a super economic and military power, not just in the region, but on the world stage. The main factor responsible for China�s ascend to the super power status is its rapid progress in the economic and technological fields. If Chinese can achieve such a feat in a span of few decades, so can Pakistan. However, to do that, Pakistan needs a sincere, honest and strong leadership that has the will and courage to lead the country on the path to economic progress with unwavering determination.
It will be only after the accomplishment of the above objectives that Pakistan should turn to implementing the democratic reforms. Until then, Pakistan must not succumb to the pressures from the West for the introduction or implementation of democracy. The notion of the Western democracy being feasible for every culture and society is not only erroneous but utterly absurd at best. Pakistan needs to develop its own form of democracy that not only takes its traditional, cultural and religious sensitivities into account but that it also conforms to the psyche of its people.
Though it will be a long and arduous process; it will be doable nonetheless. It will need the cooperation and collaboration of the academic and religious scholars over a long period of time to draw up a constitution based on the universal as well as religious principals of democracy. Until that happens, Pakistan does not need to rush into implementing the Western concept of the democracy which the Pakistani masses in general neither fully accept nor understand.
Keeping in view the present political realities in Pakistan, it appears that the above proposed task cannot be accomplished through the democratic process. Though it might sound like an extremely controversial proposition, I do not hesitate to suggest that Pakistan under the present circumstances needs a benevolent dictator who will have to accomplish the above task with the iron fist. That is the only way that Pakistan can join the ranks of the highly developed and democratic nations in the world. democracy
22 Sep 2007 | 388 T. Shabbir says: Location: Nebraska , USA Posts: 3
I read your article with great interest and awe, it is always nice to hear the voice of reason. Sometimes I wander if the freedom given to the media is really being utilized properly. Not even the most respected journalists seem to hold rational view points such as yours. There is a mass-hysteria like situation that has gripped our nation, which is truly very frightening. I have just joint this site and posted a few blogs, I hope you will read them, all comments and criticisms are welcomed. My veiwpoints are somewhat similar to yours. Please keep writing Pakistan needs rationalists like you.
T. Shabbir NE, USA
T. Shabbir NE, USA
04 Nov 2007 | 404 Muhammad Khan Says:
Why are we always looking to the west to provide us answers to our problems. Let us be practical, Pakistan was created in the name of Islam and is called the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, why then may I ask, Why then do we have an "ENGLISH LAW" hammered out by our British Masters and we oppose the introduction of Islamic Law I mean the "Sharia" What kind of Muslims are we?
We believe in the Oneness of Allah (Tawheed), believe in the last Messenger(PBUH) of Allah, believe in Allah's Prophets, his Books and in Angels and also in Life after Death. We also believe that the Quran and the Sunnah and the life of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) is the perfect examples according to which one should lead his life. Why then, when it comes to implementing the Sharia Law we look the other way and accept English Law as the true law of mankind but are reluctant to accept Islamic law.
What kind of Muslims are we?
We believe in the Oneness of Allah (Tawheed), believe in the last Messenger(PBUH) of Allah, believe in Allah's Prophets, his Books and in Angels and also in Life after Death. We also believe that the Quran and the Sunnah and the life of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) is the perfect examples according to which one should lead his life. Why then, when it comes to implementing the Sharia Law we look the other way and accept English Law as the true law of mankind but are reluctant to accept Islamic law.
What kind of Muslims are we?
22 Nov 2007 | 429 Mohammed Khan says: Location: Toronto Posts: 3
dear fellow pakistani-canadian,
i understand your concerns about pakistan's future economic prosperity, but your prescription for how to deal with pakistan's ills is based on precisely the type of arrogant reasoning that was fashionable amongst our former colonial masters. the argument that we are not fit to govern ourselves, and that only after a period of 'civilization' under the rule of an so-called enlightened despot will we emerge as worthy of political freedoms is the oldest trick in the colonial chest. it's sad when we pakistanis start mimicking our masters and prescribe the same solutions on our fellow citizens.
for the record, it was under general zia that madrasas flourished, a martial law ruler. musharraf, despite his assurances to the west, has done little to change these madrasas. the reason madrasas have flourished and religious parties have been either courted or appeased is because these these two despots suffer(ed) from a crisis of legitimacy. in order to legitimize their undemocratic and authoritarian rule, they either directly enabled the religious establishment/parties (zia), or else refrained from directly attacking it (musharraf). such courting would not be necessary under democratic rule since the vast majority of pakistanis are moderate. that is why religious parties have never won more than 10 % of the vote in national elections. i concede that elected governments have also made alliances with the religious establishment, but only when they themselves were suffering similar crises of legitimacy (e.g. benazir as a woman needed the religious parties to first give her legitimacy as a female head of state, and later when corruption charges emerged).
plus, under both zia and musharraf, the vast majority of foreign aid has gone directly to enriching the military establishment, because it has been the main source of their legitimacy, and the only establishment that is able to ensure continuity of their autocratic regimes. (this is not to excuse benazir and n.sharif, both of whom have enormous faults of their own.)
you mention the lack of public funding for secular schools, this has a lot to do with the washington consensus that emerged in the 1980s i.e. neo-liberal economic policies or as some would call it 'market fundamentalism'. constraints on the role of the state under the auspices of structural adjustment policies of the IMF/world bank have gone a long way to eroding the ability of the pakistani state, and many other developing states, from providing for the health and educational needs of their populace. it's these same policies that are now being implemented by musharraf, just look up the privatization of pakistan steel mills. the only arm of the government that has questioned this hasty capitulation to domestic and foreign capital has been the judiciary under former CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry. the media has also played a role in bringing this to people's attention.
economic liberalism has it's place, and has worked wonders in some states i.e. india, but this has been done gradually, and with impeccable planning by manmohan singh and his ilk while he was finance minister. india has alot more 'illiterate' people than we do, but is a functional democracy nonetheless. and the fact that india's economic reform policies were implemented by an elected government made them alot more palatable for the populace because representative institutions allow for citizens' interests to be accomodated in the economic reform process. unlike in pakistan, where the unaccountable military holds the levers of power, it's illegitimacy naturally makes people question it's austere measures.
i agree we need more investment in secular education because the mullahs in these madrasas exploit the poverty and desperation of poor pakistanis in order to advance their own ideological/religious agendas. but maybe we need to actually look at the way economic neo-liberalism is contributing to the erosion of the state in pakistan, leaving no room for the government to provide funding for schooling, and thereby contributing to huge economic disparities in pakistan as the poor have no opportunities for advancement without education.
what also needs to change in pakistan is the feudal system of landholding. this is where i fault past elected governments for capitulating to the interests of the landed elite, instead of thinking of the landless peasants. india largely abolished its feudal system, why are pakistani politicians so afraid to confront entrenched power.
the problem with pakistan is not that we're unable to govern ourselves democratically, but rather than WE need to empower and respect the existing checks and balances in our system of government, meaning an independent judiciary, supremacy of the constitution, the seperation of powers (executive, legislative, judicial), a free press, and a robust civil society - all the elements that musharraf has been crushing since nov. 3rd under the guise of fighting islamist extremism. when i say we, i especially mean the military, which needs to return to the barracks and follow the instructions of civilian rulers. also, what pakistan needs are multi-party coalition governments (like india has had) rather than single-party structures so that corruption of the political process can be curbed through mutual regulation.
only a representative democracy with built in check and balances and respect for the rule of law can produce more equitable policies and lead to progress and prosperity for ALL pakistanis. the alternative is martial law, and increasing discontent, and eventually revol, precisely what we've been seeing over the past year.
i understand your concerns about pakistan's future economic prosperity, but your prescription for how to deal with pakistan's ills is based on precisely the type of arrogant reasoning that was fashionable amongst our former colonial masters. the argument that we are not fit to govern ourselves, and that only after a period of 'civilization' under the rule of an so-called enlightened despot will we emerge as worthy of political freedoms is the oldest trick in the colonial chest. it's sad when we pakistanis start mimicking our masters and prescribe the same solutions on our fellow citizens.
for the record, it was under general zia that madrasas flourished, a martial law ruler. musharraf, despite his assurances to the west, has done little to change these madrasas. the reason madrasas have flourished and religious parties have been either courted or appeased is because these these two despots suffer(ed) from a crisis of legitimacy. in order to legitimize their undemocratic and authoritarian rule, they either directly enabled the religious establishment/parties (zia), or else refrained from directly attacking it (musharraf). such courting would not be necessary under democratic rule since the vast majority of pakistanis are moderate. that is why religious parties have never won more than 10 % of the vote in national elections. i concede that elected governments have also made alliances with the religious establishment, but only when they themselves were suffering similar crises of legitimacy (e.g. benazir as a woman needed the religious parties to first give her legitimacy as a female head of state, and later when corruption charges emerged).
plus, under both zia and musharraf, the vast majority of foreign aid has gone directly to enriching the military establishment, because it has been the main source of their legitimacy, and the only establishment that is able to ensure continuity of their autocratic regimes. (this is not to excuse benazir and n.sharif, both of whom have enormous faults of their own.)
you mention the lack of public funding for secular schools, this has a lot to do with the washington consensus that emerged in the 1980s i.e. neo-liberal economic policies or as some would call it 'market fundamentalism'. constraints on the role of the state under the auspices of structural adjustment policies of the IMF/world bank have gone a long way to eroding the ability of the pakistani state, and many other developing states, from providing for the health and educational needs of their populace. it's these same policies that are now being implemented by musharraf, just look up the privatization of pakistan steel mills. the only arm of the government that has questioned this hasty capitulation to domestic and foreign capital has been the judiciary under former CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry. the media has also played a role in bringing this to people's attention.
economic liberalism has it's place, and has worked wonders in some states i.e. india, but this has been done gradually, and with impeccable planning by manmohan singh and his ilk while he was finance minister. india has alot more 'illiterate' people than we do, but is a functional democracy nonetheless. and the fact that india's economic reform policies were implemented by an elected government made them alot more palatable for the populace because representative institutions allow for citizens' interests to be accomodated in the economic reform process. unlike in pakistan, where the unaccountable military holds the levers of power, it's illegitimacy naturally makes people question it's austere measures.
i agree we need more investment in secular education because the mullahs in these madrasas exploit the poverty and desperation of poor pakistanis in order to advance their own ideological/religious agendas. but maybe we need to actually look at the way economic neo-liberalism is contributing to the erosion of the state in pakistan, leaving no room for the government to provide funding for schooling, and thereby contributing to huge economic disparities in pakistan as the poor have no opportunities for advancement without education.
what also needs to change in pakistan is the feudal system of landholding. this is where i fault past elected governments for capitulating to the interests of the landed elite, instead of thinking of the landless peasants. india largely abolished its feudal system, why are pakistani politicians so afraid to confront entrenched power.
the problem with pakistan is not that we're unable to govern ourselves democratically, but rather than WE need to empower and respect the existing checks and balances in our system of government, meaning an independent judiciary, supremacy of the constitution, the seperation of powers (executive, legislative, judicial), a free press, and a robust civil society - all the elements that musharraf has been crushing since nov. 3rd under the guise of fighting islamist extremism. when i say we, i especially mean the military, which needs to return to the barracks and follow the instructions of civilian rulers. also, what pakistan needs are multi-party coalition governments (like india has had) rather than single-party structures so that corruption of the political process can be curbed through mutual regulation.
only a representative democracy with built in check and balances and respect for the rule of law can produce more equitable policies and lead to progress and prosperity for ALL pakistanis. the alternative is martial law, and increasing discontent, and eventually revol, precisely what we've been seeing over the past year.
28 Dec 2007 | 457 jon says: Posts: 2
I am born in the west. I live in the west. My ideals come from the west. I am an American.
I see no reason why Islamic law should not be the law of your land.There is also no serious reason that Islam and democracy cannot co-exist in the same house. There is no reason Islam cannot be followed closely while your leaders are held subject to all laws---all of your leaders. And not one of them should EVER be allowed under any circumstance to hold himself above that law. All of your leaders must be fully accountable to those they lead.
There MUST be equality. Not one person is born in Pakistan who is "better" than any other person born in Pakistan. There must be some way to recognize all of your birthrights. There are many of them and no person has any right to deny you of them.
Those who twist and contort Islam into an excuse to behave animalistically are the ones who undermine the progress of your people. You know who I am talking about. Islam is a beautiful religion and when it gets ruined by a serial killer who pretends to be a religious fanatic, that is the great enemy of your people. He is the one who brings hatred where there was none before. Babies do not come to this life with hatred in them, somebody has to plant that seed in the child and then nurture it until supplants love and reason.
Who cares about western influence. We ( of the west) are not so great. We have our share of problems with our way of government , to be sure. Whether the influence comes from the west or not is not really very relevent. What matters is if government is applied with an even hand and with dignity and respect for those it is meant to serve.
Finally, your military is nearly out of control. The military has ruined our country (USA). They act beyond the supervision of our government. This is one of our great errors in this country. I believe Pakistan still has a chance to put its military in its proper place, but it must act soon....and it will be very difficult to do...and you certainly cannot do it with your country being so politically fractured. Don't make our mistake(s). Learn from ours and you may well be more successful than we can ever be.
I see no reason why Islamic law should not be the law of your land.There is also no serious reason that Islam and democracy cannot co-exist in the same house. There is no reason Islam cannot be followed closely while your leaders are held subject to all laws---all of your leaders. And not one of them should EVER be allowed under any circumstance to hold himself above that law. All of your leaders must be fully accountable to those they lead.
There MUST be equality. Not one person is born in Pakistan who is "better" than any other person born in Pakistan. There must be some way to recognize all of your birthrights. There are many of them and no person has any right to deny you of them.
Those who twist and contort Islam into an excuse to behave animalistically are the ones who undermine the progress of your people. You know who I am talking about. Islam is a beautiful religion and when it gets ruined by a serial killer who pretends to be a religious fanatic, that is the great enemy of your people. He is the one who brings hatred where there was none before. Babies do not come to this life with hatred in them, somebody has to plant that seed in the child and then nurture it until supplants love and reason.
Who cares about western influence. We ( of the west) are not so great. We have our share of problems with our way of government , to be sure. Whether the influence comes from the west or not is not really very relevent. What matters is if government is applied with an even hand and with dignity and respect for those it is meant to serve.
Finally, your military is nearly out of control. The military has ruined our country (USA). They act beyond the supervision of our government. This is one of our great errors in this country. I believe Pakistan still has a chance to put its military in its proper place, but it must act soon....and it will be very difficult to do...and you certainly cannot do it with your country being so politically fractured. Don't make our mistake(s). Learn from ours and you may well be more successful than we can ever be.
19 Jan 2008 | 510 Danish Iqbal Mahar says: Location: Karachi Posts: 3
Well,i may agree with my bros on one point that Musharraf has been a gud leader than anyother in Pakistan. But see only one man can't handle up all of the situations of the whole country. Its never a one man show. Look at the people holding the back of President Musharraf, can u assure about those people if they are as good as Musharraf to country. I know u hve no clue to say this because they are not really beneficial ones to the country. I think there is a need of a hybrid type of government which should be shared between PPP and Musharraf himself not choudries who have been the persons disliked by the majority of people of the country.
And as one of my brother said that the Islamic word should be erased from the complete name of the state which is known as "Islamic Republic Of Pakistan" at the recent. I would wish to ask him if you people had to demand the same thing then what was need of getting independence on the name of religion. We sholud have been better survived there in sub-continent as one. Changing of the name of the country is the bad idea ever since there is nothing wrong about the name of the state but its politics. If we people have to change something then it should be the order of the country not the name or such kind of things. And the only thing which should remain under discussion is to bring up the pure democracy in the country nothing else.
And as one of my brother said that the Islamic word should be erased from the complete name of the state which is known as "Islamic Republic Of Pakistan" at the recent. I would wish to ask him if you people had to demand the same thing then what was need of getting independence on the name of religion. We sholud have been better survived there in sub-continent as one. Changing of the name of the country is the bad idea ever since there is nothing wrong about the name of the state but its politics. If we people have to change something then it should be the order of the country not the name or such kind of things. And the only thing which should remain under discussion is to bring up the pure democracy in the country nothing else.
21 Jan 2008 | 513 Mohammed Shahid says: Location: UK Posts: 5
Where does one start. What is democracy in Pakistan, is it the cronism of the fuedal landowners or the nepotism of the Industrialists.
With the recent events that have unfolded in Pakistan, namely the assasination of Benazir Bhutto, both the PPP and the PML(N) have come out denouncing the government for its lack of democracy. Why does no one question Nawaz Sharif about how he tried to subvert the judiciary, sacking the cheif justice in the process. Can someone ask him how many news outlets there were in the country when he was prime minister and of the ones that were around how many could get a way with critisizing his government. Can someone ask him about how the country was almost declared bankrupt on his watch, with the government having to take a loan from the chinese to pay civil salaries. He smack of hipocracy of the highest order. And this is the man that Pakistan might bring back to power - only Allah can save Pakistan.
Then there is the PPP, why did the PPP leadership allow Zardari to be the chairman, a man who is tainted to the core, with his appetite for the good life at the expense of the country and its citizens - he is a medicore politician who has been thrust into the limelight he so long wanted. Why did the PPP allow this, when they could have opted for someone who has resolutely stood for justice, I am talking about Aitzaz Ashan - the prominant lawyer who saw off the ill advised charges levelled against the chief justice.
So Pakistan calls being lead by either the PPP or PML(N) with their respective leadership, democracy?.
What Pakistan needs is a political force rooted in the educated middle class, a force that can rid the country of political dynasties who have no idea about governing but are more interested in furthering the cause of the dynasty. Only then can Pakistan flourish as a democracy.
With the recent events that have unfolded in Pakistan, namely the assasination of Benazir Bhutto, both the PPP and the PML(N) have come out denouncing the government for its lack of democracy. Why does no one question Nawaz Sharif about how he tried to subvert the judiciary, sacking the cheif justice in the process. Can someone ask him how many news outlets there were in the country when he was prime minister and of the ones that were around how many could get a way with critisizing his government. Can someone ask him about how the country was almost declared bankrupt on his watch, with the government having to take a loan from the chinese to pay civil salaries. He smack of hipocracy of the highest order. And this is the man that Pakistan might bring back to power - only Allah can save Pakistan.
Then there is the PPP, why did the PPP leadership allow Zardari to be the chairman, a man who is tainted to the core, with his appetite for the good life at the expense of the country and its citizens - he is a medicore politician who has been thrust into the limelight he so long wanted. Why did the PPP allow this, when they could have opted for someone who has resolutely stood for justice, I am talking about Aitzaz Ashan - the prominant lawyer who saw off the ill advised charges levelled against the chief justice.
So Pakistan calls being lead by either the PPP or PML(N) with their respective leadership, democracy?.
What Pakistan needs is a political force rooted in the educated middle class, a force that can rid the country of political dynasties who have no idea about governing but are more interested in furthering the cause of the dynasty. Only then can Pakistan flourish as a democracy.
18 May 2008 | 595 Ilyas khan Baloch Says:
www.pakpositive.com
Dear Sir/Madam,
Dare to raise your voice for the inevitable socio-political change in Pakistan, to empower the Pakistani , the country belongs to.
(MOD) : Post/account deleted, content from //forums.britishinformation.com/about6849.html
Dare to raise your voice for the inevitable socio-political change in Pakistan, to empower the Pakistani , the country belongs to.
(MOD) : Post/account deleted, content from //forums.britishinformation.com/about6849.html
And personally if u want my opinion there is only one way to fix our nations problems. firstly kill anyone who even metions the words islamic law in the country, destroy all madras and build real schools, remove the word islamic from the islamic republic of pakistan. religion has no room in our nations political process or identity we are a proud independant nation for people of all religion not just muslims. And if any imam even mentions his opinion about politics during prayer time or sumthin shoot him on the spot and if people want to roit well we have militray gunship helicopters use them. Our country will run much better with 70 million smart people rather then 150 million pawns who were send to this world no smarter the my fish.