RETIRED Gen Pervez Musharraf’s flawed opinion of democracy that he expressed during an interview with the BBC is certainly not without precedence.

Other Pakistani military rulers before him, especially Ayub Khan and Ziaul Haq, shared similar views: ‘Western-style democracy does not suit us.’ Ayub Khan spoke of ‘Basic Democracies’ and developed a constitutional scheme in which the federal parliament and the two provincial assemblies were indirectly elected.

The president himself was elected, and Fatima Jinnah defeated, by an indirect vote cast by 80,000 Basic Democrats. Yet, the moment the field marshal-president was out,

Know more: Western democracy cannot be enforced on Pakistan: Musharraf

Gen Yahya Khan abrogated the 1962 constitution, and we were back searching for a new form of political existence. Because their regimes had a weak political base, Ayub, Zia and Musharraf had to rely on the bureaucracy, which in due time became a political instrument and perpetuated the status quo.

The result was a rise in regional and ethnic tensions and popular discontent. In contrast, the 1973 Constitution has shown resilience and survived distortions and quasi-judicial nostrums because it was anchored in one sound principle: every government must have the people’s mandate obtained on a regular basis — to wit, democracy must not be preceded or followed by any caveats or hamstrung by any reservations.

Pakistan’s unfortunate political history, including the 1971 trauma, has made us grapple with the cause-and-effect riddle. Were Pakistani politicians responsible for military interventions or did the military’s ambitions make it act?

In other words, was it the quality of politics and politicians that led to the coups or was it the prolongation of military rule that stunted the growth and evolution of a stable political system and compromised the competence of the men who ran it? Why ‘Western democracy’ doesn’t suit Pakistan has never been explained to us, and no viable alternative has been demonstrated.

Let us also note that Muslim countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh and Turkey are functioning democracies. Unfortunately, the military often enough finds support from some right-wing lobby or the other, which objects to parliament’s unrestricted right to legislate.

However, all Pakistani constitutions have invariably included clauses that refer to Islamic values as the source of legislation. In addition, the 1973 Constitution gives every citizen the right to go to court and challenge a piece of legislation if it is violative of the Constitution.

What Musharraf said is anachronistic, for last year’s general election was a watershed in Pakistan’s quest for a democratic polity, because it saw a constitutional transfer of power.

While poll reforms are essential to ensure greater transparency of the exercise, this trend must be allowed to continue uninterrupted. All constitutions and systems must evolve. This should also be the case with our nascent democracy.

The lack of political stability has not only cost us half the country it has also done incalculable damage to national security, because policy formulation and prioritisation have had an elitist rather than a national perspective.

Published in Dawn, November 27th , 2014