36
IT seems that our infatuation with ‘saviours’ in uniform remains unwavering, even after the uniform has long been set aside. So it is with retired Gen Pervez Musharraf who has been holding forth on several forums and, in the process, burnishing the argument for the military’s apparently ‘reluctant-but-necessary’ foray into politics. Delivering a talk in Karachi titled ‘Pakistan’s past, present and future’, the former president spoke of how during his own tenure he had refrained from imposing martial law and instead introduced a civilian-run system watched over by the military so that civilians could be prodded to deliver; “there are no angels in Pakistan,” he said.
It is regrettable that our military has yet to realise that its hand on the wheel, both overt and otherwise, can only take the ship of state off-course. Each khaki intervention — invariably on the pretext of ‘saving the country’ — has progressively undermined political institutions to a point where civilian misrule has become a self-fulfilling prophecy, and the denunciation of the democratic system a national pastime. The unvarnished truth is that democracy has never been allowed to take root in this country; elections have been manipulated and governments destabilised; and many of the so-called political mafias have flourished with the encouragement of the establishment that has used them for its own cynical purposes. There are indeed no ‘angels’ in this country, as Mr Musharraf pointed out — but that is not only true of the civilians. At the same time, it must be said that the political class has contributed in full measure to its own degradation by its flagrant disregard for the needs and aspirations of the people. Moreover, the judiciary — the upholders of the law and Constitution — has more often than not through Pakistan’s history, given legal cover to interruptions in the democratic process instead of strengthening its institutional underpinnings. Lastly, the media — divided and corporatised — has also taken the path of least resistance instead of exploring the long-term, corrosive effects of military ‘oversight’.
Published in Dawn, October 4th, 2015
On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play
Read more
On DawnNews
Comments (36) Closed
Oct 04, 2015 03:44am
How does one know that Pakistan's civilian institutions would have been stronger and the government less corrupt had there been no military interventions in the past? To be completely fair, this is hypothetical. There are numerous countries in today's world where civilian institutions are in worse shape, corruption is more rampant, and citizens' quality of life is far worse - despite the absence of any military rule in the past. I guess it would be wrong to act "absolutely sure" that miliary interventions have either helped or hurt Pakistan.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 04:47am
I fully agree with Dawn's above editorial. The Pakistan Army should only look after the external defences of Pakistan. It is only the politicians who can strengthen the fledgling democratic process.
For this the politicians will have to work hard. Might be with two or three relatively clean elections things will improve in Pakistan.
Army is no solution.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 05:09am
Military direct or indirect rule as today has basically killed democratic institutions. Nobody listen or care about democratic institutions as everybody know they don't have much power.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 05:44am
It was civilians who supported army's takeover, rejoiced and than got involved in intrigues. The basic fault with both, the army Generals and the Politicians was that they did not give due importance to trade and education. All failed to emulate Malaysia and South Korea. The later was an economic wasteland. Today, it is not only the world’s 11th largest economy, but also a vibrant democracy and an emerging cultural force.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 06:02am
The above editorial makes a lot of sense. Democracy has never been allowed to develop and nurture in Pakistan.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 06:27am
It is unfortunate that Army has never allowed Democracy to flourish in Pakistan and judiciary is too weak or incompetent to provide the necessary checks and balances. But I can honestly say that Dawn is one of the finest newspaper that I have come across and that gives me a ray of hope that things can change for the better. I hope you will continue to be a pillar providing the necessary underpinning for democracy representing the third estate.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 07:33am
The “democratic system” referred to in this editorial can be either representational or direct but only the former can lend itself to “misrule” whether military or civilian as is, unfortunately, more often the case in the modern world.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 07:40am
Of course democracy has not be allowed to flourish starting from general Ayyub Khan to Musharraf. Since these individuals have not been tried or punished for their crime and they got away with their crime. This gives incentive to future dictators to take over at their will. The People of Pakistan must adhere to the constitution and punish who break the constitution whether they are in uniform or not.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 08:29am
How can democracy be allowed! Wadera's dont want it. Army doesn't want it.
The rich who are the controllers of Pakistan don't want it. Easier to control a dictator
rather than a diversified Government, so they don't want it! Do the Pakistani people want it? Well wanting a single handed leader rather than a honest political is their passion! So really they do not want it either! God Help the people of Pakistan.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 09:34am
your editorial has done a good analysis of the situation concerning the civilian leaders and the military. However, we should not forget that extreme corruption, nepotism and incompetence of these leaders has played a big role in the sad condition that Pakistan is in. We all love democracy but not at the cost of destruction of the country. Where from did Zardari get the money to be so rich? And there are many others like him. More of these examples are coming out since Rangers are investigating. I think Musharaf was absolutely right in pointing out the weakness of our system.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 11:16am
Yes the beauty of democracy is such that it does allow time after time the same corrupt, inept, non-achievers, looters and dynasty families to be voted into power unabashedly. And look who does that -us, the ignorant voters who cannot tell the difference between evil and the rightful.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 11:26am
Sticking ones neck out in a country where journalists tend to disappear or get knocked off by proxies of the power elites, needs guts and bravery.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 12:27pm
I agree fully with what the article says. Civilians have made mistakes, but so has the army interference. In a country ruled by army boots either directly or indirectly since its inception, the failures and successes must be directed at the army. It appears creating jihadists in our midsts was done by the army and we do not know how to eliminate them. Reading such editorials makes me feel me optimistic about Pakistan. As long as there are voices like Dawn, we should have hopes in the future.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 01:02pm
Very surprising to read the article. I respectfully disagree with the article from across the border. When politicians and democracy were not given enough time even after 68 years to mature how can you expect them to work hard? Can you honestly say/ believe that right now the PM is the sole decision maker but still he is bashed for every decision he has not taken? Please grow some guts and blame the right party-the army.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 02:10pm
Pakistan never had democracy Plutocracy and dynastic despotism is unacceptable
So there is no case for undermining the Army
Let all economic indicators be compared under both system so far and see how miserable Demoncrazy has been
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 02:47pm
Here is an individual whole cast aside the democratically elected leader and still allowed to roam free and even astonishing, voice/support military take over. Well, In democracy, politicians/politics take time to make mistakes, weed/cast aside bad ones and mature. In Pakistan the masses think the army is the saviour when every crucial decision is taken by the army and still the politicians get all the criticism (or plain bashing). what can you say, good luck Pakistan
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 02:49pm
Who will bell the cat and control it?
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 03:11pm
Free and independent press is an essential educator of the public so that people are informed, about politicians, in making their decision to elect democratic leaders. Dawn has taken that initiative and it is expected that others will also do that, without fear or favor.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 03:20pm
The drumbeats of the savious syndrome is in full display these days with a major story about the messiah being displayed across the media almost every day,maccompanied almost inevitably by a picture in full khaki regalia along with an almost 'eulogising' text. It is only Dawn and some other independent minded media houses which have shown resistance in this respect. The armed forces can earn a much greater and lasting tribute from the masses if they can control their adventurous insincts if they can limit themselves to background while helping civil governments help firm up civil institutions. There is no other short cut however popular a saviour!
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 03:43pm
All of our systems are decaying. The entire system of the government as well as of the judiciary and legislature needs to be torn down, redesigned and rebuilt. This simply cannot be done in the present state of the flawed "democratic" system, so a competent technocrat government with no political constituency and fully backed by the Army is required for 5 to 7 years in order to complete the planning and implementation of the badly and urgently needed reforms. After the reforms have been implemented, we can have elections and begin the first phase of democracy.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 05:04pm
@Jalaluddin S. Hussain
Have the repeated election helped the democracy in India?
The people who get elected are corrupt, religious thugs, murderer like Modi. A so called democracy which commits genocide in Kashmir.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 05:13pm
The military intervention in national politics has always led to corruption within the military itself, which makes them take their eyes off their main job of securing the defenses of the country. There are no countries that come to mind where military rule is "good" for the people of those countries. Unfortunetley the military in the country where they rule is usually the most corrupt institution.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 06:57pm
Pakistan was more democratic and prosperous under Musharraf, then compared with any other "elected" civilian government. PPP had 5 years and have nothing to show, lets see where PLMN stand in 2018.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 08:13pm
Democracy is no panacea. Rousseau to Robert Dahl have described its faults. It is preferred because it is moral. It is moral because it lets the ruled choose their rulers. Its short comings are a function of the moral putrefaction of the society.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 09:32pm
corruption, inefficiency, nepotism, writing-off loans, grabbing state land, is all due to OUR DISHONETY. This does not increases whether there is military or politicians running the country. Example, Singapore, one man rule, whether you call it autocratic or democratic, for over 3 decades, made Singapore the best place to live, to work. What brought about this change, HONESTY is the key. As long as the general public is DISHONEST, the Land of the Pure will never ever see any improvement in the lives of its poor.
Recommend
0
Oct 04, 2015 11:17pm
We in Pakistan unfortunately have a fairy tale view of the world. Nobody is ever going to "give" democracy to us. "We, the people" will have to somehow get it and then make it work. We have to get our own rights, but at the same time recognize others' rights too. For all that, we have to have the rule of law, for which we need a functional judiciary and not just a pantomime of lawyers and judges and courts. As long as these are not there, the Army will be there to do the needful, and we should be grateful for their work in National development. After all they are Pakistanis too.
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 06:17am
@sid Do you think this present government will complete its term of five years. They have a very shady history of governance from the past to present.
What good can you point out that this civilian government has accomplished. I hope they can deliver good governance to Pakistani's and its subjects of this family run government, who are self serving families in power. The Mian's,the Chaudries,the Wadera's and the representatives from KPK, and poor Baluchi's and Pushtoon.
Can all leaders of these ruling present, past political parties bring back all Pakistani assets plundered from Pakistan and have deposited in foreign banks back to Pakistan. And can they then show their clean hands to masses and mobilize the Pakistani democratic system forward by eliminating corruption from top to grass root levels. A Pakistani society without any earning from illegal gratifications and free from any illicit behavior in every walk of life. What a pity for all poor citizens of Pakistan. A dream only.
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 09:06am
@Shahid. Military officers are trained to fight against foreign aggression and defend country's borders. Combat specialty personnel train and work as members of combat units, such as the infantry, artillery, or Special Forces. For example, infantry specialists conduct ground combat operations; armored vehicle specialists operate battle tanks. Combat specialty personnel may maneuver against enemy forces and positions and fire artillery, guns, mortars, or missiles to destroy those positions. They may also operate various types of combat vehicles, such as amphibious assault vehicles, tanks, or small boats. Military training does not include how to run a country. Since they are not elected by the people, they are not accountable to anyone. Most of their time is spent on how to stay in power and not on developing the country's resources. Actually their oath as military officer forbids them to take part in country's politics.Please name the countries which are worse off under democracy?
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 11:08am
we always talk about army and politicians, what about bureaucrats who in actual make policies and are hugely corrupt.
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 11:24am
Rtd Gen Musharaf was not overseeing but running the govt ; he was using civil govt as a veneer . Come on man; you cannot fool all the people all the time . Have the courage to accept your failure to
deliver any improved governance . You made some very disastrous blunders in domestic and foreign policy areas .
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 12:28pm
This is why, I Love Dawn.
Loud , clear & to the point.
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 12:52pm
An apt editorial with logical analysis.
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 01:39pm
An excellent analysis Dawn. Look forward to your editorials and opinion in general. If allowed to rule without interference from the powers that be, democracy would in the long term learn from its mistakes, no doubt with the active participation of civil society's demands and awareness....
Recommend
0
Oct 05, 2015 01:50pm
Though i am against Military Interventions, but i do not agree with the point that all would have been Ok if Military had not taken over in the past, see our neighbors for example they have had democracy . are they any smarter after such a long democratic process have they not elected the Govt. on basis of Religion and bias.
I agree there are more Minus then Plus in Military take over, but maybe sometime their is no way out and trust me Civilian Govt are the bigger culprit in Military take over then the Military itself.
Recommend
0
Oct 06, 2015 04:17pm
Frequent military interventions are generally said to be the reason which prevents democracy from taking roots in this country. This is to shield the real malaise that afflicts the kind of democracy we have been witness to under civilian stints in the corridors of power.
It is only their grab and go tendency and the mismanagement galore that makes the civilian rulers unpopular with the masses. It is history that after any civilian government has been in power for sometime, people start becoming increasingly frustrated and disillusioned with it. The simple reason is that the level of corruption and mismanagement under every new government invariably surpasses that of its predecessor.
To create an effective deterrence against military coups, the civilian governments in their own interest should be infused with a strong motivation to perform better than khaki rulers so that the masses could experience the difference. The masses would then prove a bulwark against military take overs.
Recommend
0
Oct 06, 2015 07:31pm
@Ghalib
I fully endorse your view that it is the civilian set up that is responsible for military takeovers. If the civilian government discharges its functions honestly and sincerely by keeping the interests of the masses supreme, no adventurer can take the risk to subvert the popular will.
Look at the governance of the present rulers. Their most recent heavy baggage includes the Nandipur Project, floating of Dollar bonds at exorbitantly high rate of return, highest ever rate of sales tax on petroleum products etc., to name just a few.
Our rulers consider only themselves to be entitled to all the resources of the country, to gobble as much as and as fast as they can.
Recommend
0
