What's new

Democracy cannot work in Pakistan, not yet

faisal6309

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,861
Reaction score
8
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Democracy cannot work in Pakistan, not yet

19811-pakistandemocracyAFP-1387447469-389-640x480.jpg

In 2015, we will celebrate our 68th year of independence. In these 68 years, the world around us has changed a lot. For better or for worse, we too have changed as a country. The only thing that has remained constant for us over time is the ever prevalent outcry for a democratic political system.

To put it in the simplest of terms, a democratic system is one in which a government is elected by a voting process where every eligible citizen is entitled to vote. It is not however ‘majority rules‘ as many of us assume it is — that is a fallacy. Pakistan has tried to follow this political system, at least on paper. The trouble is however, with the implementation of this very system, and its eventual utilisation in a country like ours.

Does democracy function well in an economically volatile, politically unstable country like ours?

Common sense would say no, and perhaps it is time we pay some heed to it instead of listening to the mind numbing outcries for democracy that do not take our situation into context.

While it is true that a democratic system provides liberties and fair governance that is not possible in a dictatorship, be it military or civilian, what also needs to be accepted is that the democratic system works when the people accept the system (they don’t), understand the system (they don’t) and do not run amok with it (they always do).

History serves as the cold truth of how we have abused our very freedom, and how what we actually deserve is an absolute ruler imposing his will upon us with an iron fist until we the people — not just those privileged enough to be able to read this — are able to transition to democracy in a sustainable manner.

It is a trend evident from 1947 to date.

Never has a democratic election taken place in this country with the losing political entity accepting defeat gracefully.

From Bhutto vowing to break the legs of any elected Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) member who attended the inaugural session of the National Assembly after the Awami League rightfully won the elections in 1970, to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) whining about rigging in the 2013 elections to this day, and hoping for early elections in 2014.

If losing gracefully is beyond us, why do we even bother playing?

This does not imply that we did not protest when a dictator controlled Islamabad and made poor decisions the people were against. We protested vigorously, be it against the Ayub Khan, Ziaul Haq or Pervez Musharraf. However, when all is said and done, this country was on the fast track to development under Ayub, and this is something even the most biased of historians won’t deny.

The growth this country witnessed under Ayub has not been paralleled since, and this is evident through various economic indicators, the most prominent of which remains the 6.8 per cent real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth in the 1960s.

The 1970s saw the rise of Bhutto, and our votes gifted us an era of nationalisation that crippled Pakistan economically. In came Zia, closed the door on the Bhutto’s policies, and our neighbourhood witnessed the decade long Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan which played a major role in shaping Pakistan’s future.

While we were busy welcoming Afghan refugees and AK-47s on our western borders, we forgot that our economy fared pretty well compared to Bhutto’s era. Zia’s regime, for all its social flaws, had managed to implement a stable economic system during his 11 years in power courtesy of a deregulated policy.

Next came the 1990s, and we rode on a wave of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif euphoria in successive terms, oblivious to the fact that our votes had managed to ruin us yet again, as we foresaw one of our weakest eras economically.

This in turn was followed by the reign of Pervez Musharraf, who mind you, was welcomed with open arms in 1999. It was under Musharraf that our economy witnessed one of the highest growth rates in our history - 8.95 per cent in 2004, foreign investment in the country was bolstered, and the financial industry went through massive privatisation. Yes many argue this growth was an unsustainable bubble, but hindsight is always 20/20 isn’t it?

All of that went down the drain when we felt that a Chief Justice and an artillery carrying Muslim Cleric in Islamabad’s Red Mosque were national heroes.

We welcomed Bhutto’s curse back in 2008 on a wave of unparalleled sympathy vote which gave us one of our most horrific economic five years, and we followed that by electing a political party based on ethnic Punjabi prejudice.

This is not rocket science. This is not even science.

What we require is stability, and a system where policies can be drafted knowing that they will be implemented at all costs – whether in relation to the economy or national security etc. This not possible under a democratic system, and history has shown that to us in the ugliest of manners.

Our economic arm is not strong enough to handle democracy. Democracy requires adaptability, and an economic basket strong enough to handle sudden shocks. That is not the case with Pakistan.

It’s time we take the bitter pill, and accept that sustainable growth can only be achieved via a stable government that reigns supreme with an iron fist, and not one that is teetering on the verge of collapse every day.

Democracy cannot work in Pakistan, not yet – The Express Tribune Blog
 
. .
$tupid assertions.


The reason economy got better during Ayub's time was?

-- Pakistan worked hand in glove with USA. We had US airbase for spying on Commie Russia.
-- Dollars flowed in, and economy got better.
-- Pakistani entreprenurs were the real heros as they established everything and anything and made the country progress.
-- Ayub's policies were centrists. while bureaucracy and professors were all leftists.

Bhutto's time

-- was the revenge of the commies and leftists against Pakistani free market industrialists, banks and schools colleges.
-- Pak economy went into $hit hole.


Zia's time

-- Afghan war-1 brought dollars
-- but industrialist was too scared to step in again, so our economy muddeled along

Nawaz Sharif stint-1
-- Government swung to the free market and pro industry
-- Big infrastructure projects were launched.
-- But leftists struck back and NS-1 was finished in a little over a year.
-- So it was too short of a time to let a democratic right of center policies to work and show results.

NS-2
-- Thanks to BB's leftie policies, big infrastrucutre projects were hard to come by
-- But he pushed economy along
-- Then stupid nukie bumbs drained country from all the $$$
-- Economy tanked


Mush

-- His policies were similar to Ayub
-- Americans came back with Afghan War-2.
-- Dollars flowed in not only from US, but the whole world went ape on real estate investment.
-- Thus Mush's economy was the result of global real estate bubble and not so much of free market industry


Zardari

-- No solid industrial policy
-- no strong dollar flow due to global crisis
-- no economic development

NS-3

-- Jury is still out
-- The world is still recovering from global real estate crisis
-- Pakistan is slowly coming back towards right
-- but it will take some time before we see any results positive or negative



Now you guys can see, that issue is not purely democracy vs. dictatorship. That's at best childish discussion.


The issue is with economic policies and the role Pakistanis and Pakistan government plays in the international arena.


Chinese, S. Koreans, Indians etc. are all making huge progress within the context of their own societies.

And they are all different.

The only thing common among Chinese, Indians and S, KOreans is that citizens from all these countries are welcoming to Western tourists and Western businesses.


From that perspective,

Pakistanis will be much better off with a democracy at the top, and pro-West population at the bottom.


And economy will flourish.

Peace


p.s. Oh and there was BB-1 and BB-2 around NS-1 and NS-2, but BB did not move the country back to center so the economy didn't have a chance to improve. She had lot of charisma but economies do not improve with Charisma but real pro-industry policies.
 
Last edited:
.
good article

if the democratic forces were organised enough and were giving out results and if they had brought prosperity and concentrated on the economy and good governance, we never had dictatorships

the fact that those democratic forces failed to deliver opened doors for martial law

i agree with the point about PTI, they are trying similarly like 90s to have mid term elections, other wise there is no reason to pursue for rigging after 6 months, they should all have gone back to producing results in KPK rather than concentrating on proving the rigging, they were the ones who agreed on ECP and trusted on it
 
.
good article

if the democratic forces were organised enough and were giving out results and if they had brought prosperity and concentrated on the economy and good governance, we never had dictatorships

the fact that those democratic forces failed to deliver opened doors for martial law

i agree with the point about PTI, they are trying similarly like 90s to have mid term elections, other wise there is no reason to pursue for rigging after 6 months, they should all have gone back to producing results in KPK rather than concentrating on proving the rigging, they were the ones who agreed on ECP and trusted on it


Elections are just drama a way to let our feelings out and known.

Real engine of economy needs the following

1. Pro-West masses and educated elite
2. Pro industry and pro-mega farm policies that produce goods and food efficiently
3. A country known to be good global citizen and fully connected to the global trade.


These are 3 simple rules.

you can implement them using one party dictatorship a la China
you can implement them using 100 party drama like in India
you can implement these 3 golden rules using S. Korean model


Take your pick with party and elections. They are good to have as a show


But do not ignore the economic engine if you want to be prosperous and powerful.
 
.
It takes time to stabilize institutions and make democracy work. You had a complete civilian govt for the first time in history only recently.
Ruling with iron fist has its negative consequnces which far outweights the positives.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom