Hi Guys,
A couple of days back there was a news that, there may be another coup in Pakistan and similar news was there just after the General Election in Pakistan.
So, I just wanna know what difference the Constitution of Pak and India has to allow such a thing. I heard from people that Its not possible for Army to take over in India but in Pakistan. So whats the fundamental difference for the same.
Please, do not start debating over whether democracy is better or dictatorship is better for Pakistan on this thread. Also, would really appreciate if mud slinging can also be avoided in this.
Give your input from your understanding of the situation.
Thanks
The biggest difference is that out leader Liaqat Ali Khan was assasinated , when our democracy was - young.
This created a dependency on non democratic institutes to come in take over, if we had steady dosage of democracy for 10-20 years we would not have been in this situation
Who killed Liaqat Ali Kahn its debatable - perhaps its about JFK assasination of public voice and , people's representation in power
But if you analyse
Iran's Mossadeq assasination
Saudia King Faisal Assasination
Our own Liaqat ali khan assasination
Egypts Anwad saddat assasination
Bhutto Assasinations by Zia
Then Bhutto (benazir) again assasination luckily we had no army intervention
so that is good sign
Also assasination of leaders in Bangladesh that normally democracy was derailed by assasinations -
That is the difference - In last 50-60 years, most of the local Muslim democracies have been intentionally derailed by assasinations to keep the countries from developing democrative institutes - because there is alot of money involved..
Also the cream of the crop ppl like Fatima Ali Jinna not winning elections when being most popular leader after Jinnah and also leaders like Imran Khan not being in government has been a sad affair of our national democracy. Imran Khan is an ideal person to lead pakistan based on his character and social work aspect -even thou his kids are with jewish heritage, to me he is the best ideal candidate to lead pakistan in new century.
I think in our history , if we had democratic gov under Fatima Ali Jinnah or may be even liaqat ali khan for 5 years each that was the 10 years under civilian rule we needed in our first years.
Again you cann't say more becasue we know how India took pakistani land by force , and our democracy was fragile - back then. So that played a role in destabalizing our institutes -
Our Army is a great institute but we prefer our army to focus on protecting borders with our Indian friends.
There has been great development in democratic process in Pakistan - and hopefully the political parties will start coming to elections based on mandates rather then family name or heritage ... etc which is what slows our democracy
Untill - an average joe has a chance of representing ppl of pakistan - we can't say our democracy is doing well.
There are still major flaws in how our political parties handle population issues -
Constitution is not a major element as it has been written and over written several times - based on who ever ruled our nation.
But lately we have made positive strives towards a normal democracy and next 20-30 years I am positive we will have a solid democratic institution
Also any successful democracy must have seperation of
State and
Population - this is why some of the most successful countries like US have that seperation of state and population.
The current political - cloud in Pakistan has been seperated , into specific families and specific name brand or ethnicity , and that is quite backward. Unless , leaders are pushed up with out a consideration if they belong to a certain , family or group neither we nor india can claim we have true democracy.
Most political parties fight an election with no specific goal or reason , its all sentimental choices, either its someone coming back from exile and they win sentimaltal win , or someone's family member died so win a land slide victory -
No one ever - comes out with a clear plan that look if our party comes to power we will eliminate the electricty crises by 90% in country
Or no one comes with mandate that when we come to power we will create 200 universities all over country .....
The only person who has done something in past 10 years is obviously a military leader , Mr. Musharaf - who did incresed our national reserves, and established out IT sector and also established gwadar port development ...And our banking sector has seen great improvements in last 5-8 years. Also the privatization of telecom sector also improve communication with in the country - I think if we had created the DAM water projects in our country perhaps our energy crisis would have been solved.
But as we know , our sentimental choices made him leave the country and reside in England for time being to promote his book -
So things improved to great extent under musharaf's watch it was just bad luck that he had to slow down his initiatives for country due to the war on terror.
So we do get some development but we are slowed down as something that should be our political parties job is being done by a person.
What system is better - Political Parties , or Army - hard to tell but ideally the decisions should be made thru a political party. But our Political Parties Lack the professionalism that is needed to successfully run a country -
Our country needs ppl who have PHD in political science - and humanites - and less of the feudal lords or people who are coming to power based on just family last names.
Untill that culture is established where the best educated , and talented are pushed forward we can operate to full potential, I think the
PHD or BA in political Science should be mandated for all people interested in standing up in elections -
Marshal Law - is a temporary state that should not last more then 7-10 days - in state of emergency such as a president or primeminister is killed or major earth quake or desaster ... its never a mean to rebuild a nation , never was and never will be