AS rumour and speculation in Pakistan continue and sections of the political opposition and media drop all pretences of differentiating between the PPP-led government and the overall democratic system, it has fallen to Nawaz Sharif to provide some dispassionate analysis about what is really at stake. Speaking to the media on Thursday, Mr Sharif warned that continued rumour and innuendo risked inviting an extra-constitutional intervention by the army and firmly moved to dispel any doubts that he or his party would support anything other than the continuation of the democratic process. No saviours, no 'Bangladesh model' of army men and technocrats running the country, no one but the duly elected representatives of the country had a right to rule, Mr Sharif insisted. It is a welcome intervention in an alarming discourse that has gripped swathes of the country in recent days. That the comments have come from the man who is the leader of one of the two largest poli- tical parties in the country is even more welcome. Since his return to Pakistan, Mr Sharif has shown admirable consistency in his support for the democratic process, despite many voices inside his own party calling for a quick wrap-up of the Zardari-led PPP government.

Two points in particular are worth making here. Neither is new but they do need to be reiterated. One, the army does have not solutions to Pakistan's governance crisis. Four dictators have tried and failed and there is no reason to believe a fifth will succeed. The reason is not one of commitment or application. Even the most committed and capable of self-appointed saviours will suffer from a lack of political legitimacy that will eventually erode his standing. To take Pakistan forward, a sustained effort is needed over several decades but it is difficult to imagine how any dispensation can survive without genuine political legitimacy for that period of time. When back to square one, or worse, is the almost guaranteed result at the end of a dictator's term, why go down that path at all?

Two, the civilians will have to raise their game and improve their performance if they are to be given the necessary time and space to govern. Unfortunate as it may be, the reality is that the space that ought to be the preserve of civilians is occupied by a domestically predominant army. To expect that space to simply be handed over to civilians regardless of their performance is un-realistic. Until the civilian leadership develops the ability to deliver better results, the threat to democracy will never really disappear.