Thread: Half of Pakistanis not keen on democracy

Originally Posted by Asim Aquil

But how does that explain the coups around the Islamic world?

In Pakistan's case its as simple as this: Forced democracy didn't work. We were almost bankrupt then. Musharaffocracy has worked, countries improved, freedom's improved. Now if we move into democracy after things are improved, only then would we see something beneficial.

It does explain, especially if you try after getting rid of a mental block.

Musharrafocracy works? Why? Because you say so?

More freedom? Who said so? FreedomIndex places freedom rating in Pakistan below that in Indian "occupied" Kashmir.

Economy? How did Musharraf help the ecomony before the billions poured in from the United States? 1999 to 2001 - what were his accomplishments?

Democracy hasn't worked with Pakistan because whenever it looked like it did, some crazy loon General has overthrown the electedgovernment.

Wasn't Musharraf going to be courtmarshalled before he decided to do the coup? Lahori posted that in one of the forums, he'll give you your sources. I think he quoted Dawn.

Even before the coup, your Army still held all power. The only reason Nawaz came to power was that the Army backed him against Bhutto. So even in the 90's, you were ruled by your Army in proxy, so how has democracy failed in Pakistan?

If democracy fails, it means the Pakistani people have failed. And that is not true, because democracy and the people were never given a chance in the first place.

And it is not a success story now either, despite Musharraf's image-building projects, the true legacy is there to be seen.

Originally Posted by Julie

Is Musharaff's actions genuine, or are they guided by the "tight-rope" you mentioned? I just feel that is important at election time.

They are as genuine as his War Against Terror. There, I've said it. The rest is up to interpretation.

Originally Posted by Julie

Is Musharaff's actions genuine, or are they guided by the "tight-rope" you mentioned? I just feel that is important at election time.

Well the good actions are restricted by walking a thin line on the tight rope, not that he has to do something good while wanting to do the bad things all the time.

For example he's been accused of being anti-Muslim, so while implementing secular policies he has to make sure he's not further sidelined as an anti-Muslim leader. The noose that gets pulled around him (and which he resists very strongly btw) is by the Mullahs not the moderates.

So he's not doing good things because he has to walk on a tightrope but doing so in spite of it.

So he's not doing good things because he has to walk on a tightrope but doing so in spite of it.

Actually, he is doing it because he has to. He doesn't have too many other options.

Of course the propaganda machine would liek to make it seem as Mushie being the new age messiah of Pakistan without whose enlightened moderation everything would be doom & gloom.

Not many fall for it tho.

Even before the coup, your Army still held all power. The only reason Nawaz came to power was that the Army backed him against Bhutto. So even in the 90's, you were ruled by your Army in proxy, so how has democracy failed in Pakistan?

Srirangan,

If you read Musharraf's book, it will show that the Pakistani Army always had a finger in the pie and he makes no bones about it that the Pakistani Army is the Arbiter of Pakistan's destiny in that it acts as the last word and referee for all govt internal hassles and external policies!

In India, if there is a disagreement it is solved by the PM or the President and the Supreme Copurt(if it is a Constitutional hassle). Musharraf states the whenever there is a hassle within the Govt, between the PM and the President or the Govt vs the Opposition, it is the Chief of the Army who decides what has to be done. He is the final authority! Not the President or PM!

Originally Posted by Ray

Srirangan,

If you read Musharraf's book, it will show that the Pakistani Army always had a finger in the pie and he makes no bones about it that the Pakistani Army is the Arbiter of Pakistan's destiny in that it acts as the last word and referee for all govt internal hassles and external policies!

Which is why it is hypocritical to see Asim abusing all Pakistani citizens telling them their democracy has failed when they weren't given even half a chance to ever be the masters of their destinies.

Oh look big bad India .. let us the macho Army of tall, pure, brave protect you!

Originally Posted by Ray

Musharraf states the whenever there is a hassle within the Govt, between the PM and the President or the Govt vs the Opposition, it is the Chief of the Army who decides what has to be done. He is the final authority! Not the President or PM!

Which would mean that Pakistan has never really been a democracy. So the system is of each government appointing which ever man they think best suits them for the post of Army General, is it?

Originally Posted by Ray

If you read Musharraf's book, it will show that the Pakistani Army always had a finger in the pie and he makes no bones about it that the Pakistani Army is the Arbiter of Pakistan's destiny in that it acts as the last word and referee for all govt internal hassles and external policies!

Sir,

I'm sure you didn't mis Musharraf's comments on this arbitrage by PA. Whenever civil governments faced internal crisis or conflicts, they kept running to the army to mediate.
PA isn't in power by force but due to Incompetancy of our politicians.

Just my $0.02

Originally Posted by Neo

Sir,

I'm sure you didn't mis Musharraf's comments on this arbitrage by PA. Whenever civil governments faced internal crisis or conflicts, they kept running to the army to mediate.
PA isn't in power by force but due to Incompetancy of our politicians.

Just my $0.02

Play the chicken and egg, are we?

Why would they "run" to the Army if the Army didn't yield any political power? That's right, they ran to the Army because the Army held all the political power, and that is not how it should be in a real democracy.

Originally Posted by Ray

Srirangan,

If you read Musharraf's book, it will show that the Pakistani Army always had a finger in the pie and he makes no bones about it that the Pakistani Army is the Arbiter of Pakistan's destiny in that it acts as the last word and referee for all govt internal hassles and external policies!

In India, if there is a disagreement it is solved by the PM or the President and the Supreme Copurt(if it is a Constitutional hassle). Musharraf states the whenever there is a hassle within the Govt, between the PM and the President or the Govt vs the Opposition, it is the Chief of the Army who decides what has to be done. He is the final authority! Not the President or PM!

That's quite true. Musharraf has been the first one to openly admit to this fact. But he says that as something thats a point of shame for Pak that it has to fall back on the Army. In fact, the Army was pulled into politics all the times by elected officials (except for when Musharraf came in).

The Army chief has always been called in by the President before activating Article 58-2b (Till recently, the President's impeachment powers). This is so because the laws weren't made with enough checks and balances. If something screws up the President was given the authority to kick the PM off , but it would've been a one man show, since the President historically enjoyed no powers. So in order to make sure the PM listened to the President the Army chief threw his weight behind the President.

So the Army has ALWAYS been involved and mostly on request not by force. The thing to understand here with that is, the Pak Army has been the most formidable institution Pakistanis have been able to fall back upon. When writers call it Pakistan's savior they are not off by a whole lot. Another thing to realize is that by large there is nothing sinister at play here by the Army. The three Army chiefs that rose to power as Presidents were all brilliant for their current situations. Zia gets a lot of heat for the laws, but the main issues around him those days were of stopping the Soviet Army in Afghanistan. The only one that is recognized as a total failure is Yahya, who is largely remembered as a drunk bastard. He only came to power because Ayub resigned.

Musharraf has been trying to correct this problem of falling back on the Army and it is partly the reason he doesn't give up his uniform. He's an Army Chief that understands that this has to go. The idea of the NSC has still not caught on in Pakistan, but that so happens to be the answer to Pakistan's democracy and impeachment balance.

The goal is to make a body like the NSC the supreme refree and arbitrator whenever there are problems instead of the President or the Army Chief. What Musharraf believes is that the more distribute the power the more checks and balances there would be.

Largely the fate of all these reforms solely rests on the 2007 elections. If Musharraf gets the support, and people actually understand what is happening here and the long term impact on the future of Pakistan.

Originally Posted by Srirangan

Which is why it is hypocritical to see Asim abusing all Pakistani citizens telling them their democracy has failed when they weren't given even half a chance to ever be the masters of their destinies.

Oh look big bad India .. let us the macho Army of tall, pure, brave protect you!

I am being practical and don't mean any insult to my fellow citizens. I am old enough to remember the 90s era of elections and I can tell you straight up people voted for Nawaz Sharif saying "O Sada Praa ay!" (oh he's our brother). He too got something 90% of the votes but his popularity plummeted in 2 years in his case too I won't say he cheated he was really that popular and for no good reason.

Let's say he was popular because Benazir was unpopular.

People vote like this because they have wrong concepts of what is good for the nation. Even while knowing a person's credentials full well they'd vote for the lesser guy because they are lead to believe a politician would be there for them.

When the nuclear tests happened and Pakistan was placed under sanctions, we saw how much support Nawaz gave us. That was the litmus test of our Praa. He withdrew his dollars and then froze all dollar accounts. That ended up drying away ALL foreign investments from Pakistan.

People ask what did Musharraf do before 9/11, he got people to invest (not Americans) into Pakistan again despite their skepticism. Pakistan was a risky investment for them because of Nawaz's stupid knee-jerk move.

Originally Posted by Neo

Sir,

I'm sure you didn't mis Musharraf's comments on this arbitrage by PA. Whenever civil governments faced internal crisis or conflicts, they kept running to the army to mediate.
PA isn't in power by force but due to Incompetancy of our politicians.

Just my $0.02

That could also be the case and one cannot deny that.

However, in my personal opinion, if politicians are no good, that is the fate of the country and lousy politicians are not solely in Pakistan. The world is full if them and many of them are deciding the destiny of their nations!

Srirangan's point too is worth mulling over since it has much truth.

The issue is that once a Tiger tastes blood, it becomes a maneater!