PAKISTAN: Democracy or Dictatorship?
Posted on 15. May, 2010 by Jeff in Letters to Editor
By Yasmeen Ali
Non Benevolent Dictator
The term “democracy “, like many other terms is often abused and misused. The classic debate one hears is a discussion on the merits and demits of democracy vs dictatorship. A definition of both needs to be made to clear the cobwebs.
The term “democracy”, comes from the Greek: d?mokratía meaning thereby “rule of the people”. Even though there is no specific, universally accepted definition of ‘democracy’, there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes: equality and freedom. These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to power, and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution.
This explanation raises many questions: Do our political parties within their cadre, allow it’s workers equal access to power? Can a worker within a party structure has the opportunity to rise to the status of the Chairperson of that party, in due course of time? Lady Warsi’s appointment as Conservative Party Chairperson and a full cabinet minister reflects on the progress the UK has made in terms of maturity in their political sphere. Unfortunately, in Pakistan, we remain stuck in the groove of dynastic dynamics and have not progressed from this point in over 62 years of our history.
From PPP to PML N to ANP to MQM and PML N and all shades of parties in between, we see the mantle of leadership being worn by the one who originated the party, and much like a family heirloom passed on from one generation to the other. Is this the much touted democratic order ?Where is the democracy WITHIN the party cadres themselves? Is heredity to determine who heads the party and merit to be ignored? When heredity becomes the corner stone of the political parties, this in turn inevitably leads to sycophancy and appointment by favoritism, not merit. There is no accountability within the party from those who purport to lead the party.
The second part of the definition deals with the right of citizens that is protected by the Constitution. These rights are determined from Articles 8 to Article 28 in the Constitution and deal with various rights of the citizen of Pakistan, for example, Article 25 professes that all citizens are equal before law and have a right to equal protection of law. Article 14 deals with inviolability of dignity of man and subject to law, in privacy of his home is inviolable, so on and so forth. However, words on a piece of paper without implementation loses any standing whatsoever, of any kind. And history proves, these Fundamental Rights are generally not respected.
Many think “elections” is synonymous with “democracy”. I am often told that once the system is “allowed to continue” it will lead to a “better democracy”. Those advocating this thought process fail to appreciate, that there are elections is a step only in the process of democracy, it is not democracy itself.
Democracy is a method of deciding who shall rule. It does not determine the morality of the resulting government. At best, democracy means that government has popular support. But popular support is no guarantee that government will protect your freedom. While democracy doesn’t guarantee either freedom or peace, there are many historical examples of societies that didn’t have either elections or legislatures, but in which people’s rights were strongly protected. Examples include the American Colonies before the Revolutionary War ,the American West in the 19th Century, where violence was on a ratio of one to ten of what it is in large U.S. cities today ,many cantons in Switzerland today which have little government … and the nations of Andorra and Monaco.
On the other hand is the much abhorred term , “dictator”. The term is used to define a ruler who assumes sole and absolute power (sometimes but not always with military control) but without hereditary ascension such as an absolute monarch.
However does this mean, that leaders who repeatedly come to power through national elections, and without first conducting party elections, which is the first rung of the ladder, and once assuming power, become all powerful and discriminatory are democrats at hearts? Or are they dictators in the real sense of the word, as they maintain a dictatorship role within the party cadre and once in power, fail to fulfill the requirements of the term “democracy”?
To achieve a free and peaceful world, we must restore freedom and individual liberty, not democracy.
In the current day scenario, with inflation that has sky rocketed, terrorism, power outrage, non availability of opportunities to improve one’s lot, is it not important to have a man(or a woman) who DELIVERS? Till when do we have to beat the drum of “democracy” thrust on us by vested interest groups?
The first step that must be taken is to conduct in-party elections on every three yearly basis. However, merit must govern, not heredity. No one, must be allowed to contest more than twice for a party seat. The same must hold good for the MNA and MPA elections as well.
Unless and until we appreciate that elections are means to an end, and, not an end in itself, unless and until we appreciate that those who come in power are there to serve not to be served, and, unless and until we appreciate that no system can deliver till it consists of people with a will to serve its people, Pakistan shall continue to flounder.
I am reminded here of Aristotle: “If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost.”
The writer is a lawyer and teaches in Beacon House National University, Lahore. She is a regular contributor to
Yasmeen Ali
Opinion Maker.
a WordPress rating system
50 Responses to “PAKISTAN: Democracy or Dictatorship?”
Leave a Reply
Join Us
 |
| Subscribe to Opinion Maker |
| Email: |
Zafar
15. May, 2010
Well written Yasmeen. But third world Muslim democracy is different than real democratic societies. In majority of Muslim world few families control 90%+ resources and governance, irrespective of democracy or monarchy. Pakistan has tested various systems in 63 years. Results are very clear on all fronts. Countries in each continent have progressed and in Pakistan we have gone backwards. There is great intellectual and academic disparity between rulers, middle class, suffering common man, and stakeholders. Please add the following tested models in you great contribution. Pakistan needs a combination of both democracy and authority.
1: Grass root level democratic model giving all the powers to local elected tehsil Mayor with 51%+ votes. Focus on local education, health care, business and industrial development.
2: Very strong dictatorial and authoritarian center, dealing with few portfolios.
3: We must involve defense forces at each district level (Successful China model). They must participate in infrastructure development and security. (they do all now but not recognized by incompetent politicians). Businesses must pay 2% tax directly go to them, not to federal government for their loot and perks. More emphasis be on state and local tax.
4: Presidential System with 51%+ votes and complete executive powers only at center and for global dealings.
5. Each division be a province with elected governor (Commissioner’s budget is enough while billions can be saved by abolishing provincial ministries). Those savings could be used for educational and economic development by each governor and mayor.
We have to be very focused on change or keep on watching decline. Regards.
Zafar Bokhari
Habib
15. May, 2010
Ideas and articulation in perfect sync once again.
Excellent stuff.
HH
Anjum
15. May, 2010
YAAjee you Struck once again, The Usual Perfection
Bajwa
15. May, 2010
Yasmeen Ji: Very well said. A balance approach on a controversial issue. I honestly enjoyed it. You also tackled the bitter facts about In-Party-Elections in an extremely palatable way. If I may add: Looking back on the history, we notice that we had been ruled by Hindu/Muslim /British Kings/Queen for ages, prior to the independence. Our people never tasted the fruits called Equal Rights, Fairness or Liberty. Even after the Independence people remained subjugated in one form or the other. The media remained gagged too. To bring about a positive change, don’t you think a gradual induction of those fruits is the answer to the teething problems at hand? I say so because “change is a challenge”. Every change has to go through the process of rejection, ridicule and acceptance.
Yes, one may argue as to why India did not face similar issues. I would not like to muddle the subject by getting involved in a non-pertinent issue and digress from the subject.
K. Bajwa
Laila Isphandyar
15. May, 2010
The basic question — why democracy did not take roots in Pakistan?Tthe foremost condition for the growth of democracy is acceptance by all the sovereignty of the people.A weak and highly politicized central government, has been unable to cope with regional disorders.
Due to the domination of state institutions over political institutions, Pakistan has not experienced a steady consolidation of democracy over its fifty year history. This is manifest in the lack of roots of constitutionalism, the absence of fully autonomous judiciary, a well developed party system and regularly held fair elections.
The greatest beneficiaries of partition have not been the Musalmans of undivided India, but civil and military bureaucracy and the corrupt members of the society. Corruption is rampant which goes deep down into the blood vessels of our countrymen and democracy can never thrive under a corrupt atmosphere and that is why democracy has failed in Pakistan. It has never been given a try even, every ruler harped on democracy and every ruler even elected by the so called democratic institution has acted and ruled like a despot in right royal moghal style. The death of Liaquat Ali Khan, which was a result of palace intrigue, gave rise to more intrigues and under an ambitious General Iskender Mirza, Ministries were falling like nine pins. When he could not hold the scepter singly, he shared it with Commander-in-Chief of the Army General Mohammed Ayub Khan. Kingship knows no kinship and General Ayub Khan overthrew General Iskender Mirza in twenty-one days, this was the first blow to the infant democracy of an infant country.
The democratic death of democracy was perpetrated by the President of Pakistan Muslim League Mian Nawaz Sharif when he inserted 13th amendment in the constitution, where the members of Parliament lost their freedom of thought and freedom of speech. History of Pakistan is a sad history of failure of democracy because of Pakistanis themselves and because foundation of Pakistan has been laid negatively on hatred and not positively on progress, reforms and solidarity of the country.
Democracy is government of the people, for the people and by the people at the same time it should also have confidence of the people and then and only then democracy can thrive. Pakistan never had any democratic blood in its veins.
Mumtaz A. Piracha
16. May, 2010
In Pakistan, we either had military dictatorship or civilian dictatorship. Democracy was praised, envied and demanded mostly by those who themselves turned out to be dictators in power. How can a party demand democracy when its own organization does’nt have democracy in its wings. Look at any political party worth its name and you will find hereditary or elitist control. Democrats are born out of struggle for decades, not by rhetoric.
Democracy will remain an illusion and a dream never come true unless we, the civil society, strives for it. It takes hundreds of years to root in democracy. It is not that easy.
Yasmeen Ali
16. May, 2010
Thank you for the input Mr Piracha. However, the question is:who will bell the cat?
YAA@Mumtaz A. Piracha,
Laila Isphandyar
16. May, 2010
Good Question.Any answers?
Laila
@Yasmeen Ali,
Khan Zia
16. May, 2010
Yasmeen, this is indeed a very perceptive piece. Enjoyed reading it.
‘ ———— no system can deliver till it consists of people with a will to serve its people, Pakistan shall continue to flounder.’ Adding just a little, the ‘will to serve’ may not be enough. They also need the requisite knowledge, expertise and administrative experience in the field of their activity. Running a modern state is a complex affair that calls for great management skills. It takes opportunity and time to groom people for the job. Good and competent people can make a go of even a bad system but no matter how good a system it cannot work if those who manage it are not up to the task.
Regards. Zia.
Ijaz Khan
16. May, 2010
Extremely perceptive article cutting through the frills.
The social and political infrastructure is in a state of collapse. ?National sovereignty? is a farce and hardly anybody believes in the state?s independence. Imperialist intervention and domination is on a greater scale today than it was in 1947, the year of Pakistan?s creation.
Now the US is even trying to control sections of Pakistan?s armed forces and intruding its military corporate contractors to take over ?security? in several vital parts of the country. These include former Blackwater now XE securities, DynCorp and others.
As the PPP is a populist party it lacks democratic structures, with no democratically elected bodies and no revocability of the leadership. Hence an atmosphere of pusillanimity and conformity prevails inside the party where compromises and deals are the prerogative of the leader alone. The working masses have no alternative yet.
naveed tajammal
16. May, 2010
even, the mughal set up,based on the,”mansabdars”,
was in reality,on merit alone,a son did follow the father or the grandfather as is seen, however all started from the lowest ,cadre,and gradually arose,the same was the case
in the ottoman empire.our brain drain to west proves our intellect,however, they too, need a chance within the country
to thrive,provided the dynastic british created rulers,step aside, & let them do so.
Ibrahim
16. May, 2010
The U.S. invasion of Iraq was to bring a Western style democratic regime to Iraq. Or at least it was the pretention of the American led coalition that invaded Iraq and brought down the undeniable dictator that was Saddam Hussein. Taking a closer look at the methods used by this coalition to supposedly bring democracy to this country at best shows their utmost amateurism or at worst a deliberate strategy to bar the Iraqi nation from democracy. For, why would the coalition deliberately create a de facto three-headed power in the country by encouraging an independent Kurd region, by allowing Iran take to control of the Shiite factions and by completely eliminating the previous political elite to replace them with weak Sunnite leaders with no experience whatsoever in governing such a complex nation as Iraq ? The result is an instable Iraq in permanent civil war incapable of taking its own future into hand. When the time arrives for the coalition forces to pull out of Iraq, the situation would have worsened to such an extent that the International community will have to impose a reconsideration of the pull out to save the country from total chaos, thus establishing a permanent military and influence base for the U.S. in the region.
The last American ?democratic? cause in the region is Afghanistan. With the claim that Al Qaeda is still active in the country, which still needs to be proven for they have been completely removed from Afghanistan and pushed into Pakistan, the U.S. and its allies are creating havoc in Afghanistan in a series of attacks that are led against unknown factions. They are arming tribal chiefs, obviously weakening the central government of Karzai. All was done during the last elections to weaken Karzai. The elections were turned into ridicule first by pushing the announcement of the results to its most possible extent, more than two months after the elections, an international record. By first alluding to a first round victory of Karzai and then pushing him into a humiliating second round with his opponent Abdullah, who immediately pulled out making Karzai a discredited re-elected President in the absence of an opponent. The result in the long run will be a feudal system in the image of the Middle Ages in Europe. A country in permanent civil war with no efficient central power, and mostly a base for destabilizing neighbouring Iran and Pakistan when needed, for the frontiers of Afghanistan with its mountainous landscape are impossible to control. Thus infiltrating armed groups for terrorist actions into neighbouring countries will be feasible.
Why destabilize Pakistan ? Pakistan is not a homogenous nation. Destabilizing a country formed of mostly tribal groups and so many divisions including amongst its own army is easily done. A chaotic Pakistan can be a threat to its two major eastern neighbours, China and India two nuclear powers that the West cannot intimidate. The war with these two nations who are moving closer and closer to each other is economic. By controlling Iranian, Iraqi and Saudi Arabian oil reserves and by creating chaos in the Muslim regions of India and China, neighbouring Pakistan, the U.S. will definitely bar their access to the gas and oil they need to continue in their insolent economic growth. The Muslim path is the only one the West has found to halt China and India. The latter is already a Democracy and the U.S. cannot use the lack of liberties to agitate Indians. The non-Muslim majority is very rooted in their caste system and their ?fate? philosophy. Poverty and general poor conditions of living are not a source of trouble in India, for the majority think that it was their fate to be born poor and therefore put their hopes for a better life in their reincarnation. The Chinese, without having the same philosophy are more attached to their economic success and in general do not cultivate individualistic values. Therefore, political agitation in China is a feat, as we saw with the Tianamen events, a massive uprising is not evident in China. However, the Muslim populations less prone to general interests, for their faith is based on an individualistic relation with God, are easily moved to protest against the Central power. The U.S. has intelligently chosen the correct path in their destabilization strategy in the Far East.
It is therefore justified to affirm that a great democratic nation as the United States of America has no interest in exporting their model to a region that in their interests should not have access to the same liberties as themselves. That is the greatest mistake in American and generally in Western thinking. If peace has produced prosperity in the Western world, then it is obvious that it would have the same result in the Middle East. For despite the difference in religion, the Middle East population is much closer culturally to the West than generally believed. The cultural base for what used to be the Persian and Ottoman Empires, the entire Middle East, is also Greek and Roman. Or if we go further back, the cultural base of what is today Europe is the Mesopotamian culture. We share the same values. A vast democratic Europe and Middle East can not only prosper but also live side by side in peace and brotherhood as the European nations have proven its feasibility since World War II. The only hope of the Iranian and Middle-Eastern people is that the European Union with their new centralized institutions will awaken to this fact and put an end to their blind following of the outdated U.S. strategy in the Middle East, for wherever the U.S. treads democracy does not spread.
Rizwan Beg
16. May, 2010
Interesting articleQuestions arise Who will implement the wish list?Who are resposnsible to maintain the present status ?Those who talk of democracy and equality are they not the part of the problem?Are the the so called Islamist not the ones committed to a cause? [ however one may disagree with them]Has Historically power ever been given up without being taken away by force ?I am reminded Us say barah munafiq nayee koeeJo zulm to sahta hay baghawat nayee karta
Riz
Ayaz
16. May, 2010
liked it. Very succint. Any one with any honesty, could not disagree.
However, why not lift the erstwhile voter (within and outside the party) from the scruf of his neck and analyse him and his role?
After all, the crook as well as those crooked ( specially repeatedly) are equally responsible for our woes today. I would like you to dwell on that and spread the light and give hope. I am sure you will come up with an opinion moving exposition.
Attagirl!.
A
Amir Suhail
16. May, 2010
The primary cause of failure of democracy in Pakistan is that democratically elected governments have not been allowed to function and to serve out their tenures, which in turn leads to a lack of strong democratic institutions. Another cause may be low literacy rates amongst the masses. However, given that the situation will not change dramatically in the near future, we should also analyze another important factor that contributes to the failure of democracy, that being the parliamentary form of government.
The major issue with the parliamentary form of government is that even though the Prime Minister is the Chief Executive of the country, a President who is appointed by the Prime Minister is the official Head of State. The same holds true of the provincial governors. Hence we see that even though the President and the Governors are heads of the country and the provinces, they are appointed and not elected. At the same time the people do not directly elect the Prime Minister who is the Chief Executive, either. A fallacy here is that a President who is appointed by the Prime Minister or a Governor who is appointed by a Chief Minister can throw them out of office and can unilaterally dissolve the elected assemblies. Another problem that comes up is the power sharing between the troika of the President, the Prime Minister and the Chief of Army Staff, thereby lending credence to the maxim “Too many cooks spoil the broth”.
Under the Presidential form of government the President is elected through direct adult franchise or as in the case of the USA through the Electoral College, which in turn depends upon the population of each state. The President is not only the Chief Executive, but is also the Head of State. State governors are also elected directly by the public. Similarly, the members of the Congress and the Senate are also elected directly by the public. The president then appoints his cabinet members, who are not part of the elected representatives. The members of the Congress and Senate perform their primary function of legislation and act as watchdogs on the President and the Cabinet. The cabinet members are usually technocrats who are experts in their respective fields.
In the case of Pakistan we see that most political parties have no manifestos and in many cases the elected representatives routinely switch political parties, depending on which side their bread is buttered. At the same time the public votes for Bhutto?s party or Nawaz Sharif?s party and in the absence of a clear manifesto, the success or failure of a party depends upon the charisma of its leader or the individual influence of the candidates.
Looking at the above analysis, why should we not revisit the issue of the form of government for Pakistan? In my opinion, the presidential form of government is a truer form of democracy and is more suited to the Pakistan environment rather than the parliamentary form, which is not only cumbersome but also very expensive.
Mughal
16. May, 2010
How can something survive when it does not exist? Democracy in its true spirit has never been allowed to take roots in Pakistan. Since its independence in 1947, a military-bureaucratic establishment has always governed the country. Army generals usurp power at their own convenience and quit only when they are forced to quit by mass political movements or by a sudden unexpected death.
When forced by external or internal pressures, democracy is given a chance but in reality a group of army generals keep controlling the decision-making. This direct or indirect military influence is the greatest impediment to the evolution of a stable governing system in Pakistan.
Military rule has ruined the state structure of Pakistan as a whole with only the elite benefiting from the system and no benefit being passed over to the general public. History is witness to the fact that Pakistan has lost territory while under direct military rule. The dictator mentality and military’s love for the use of force has fanned various separatist movements in the country.
National economy has gone bankrupt and national budget has become all foreign aid dependent. Islam was the ideology that gave life to Pakistan movement and later Pakistan itself, but is now infested with sectarianism. Military policies gifted the country with cross border terrorism and three million internally displaced people. Despite having the largest chunk of the national budget and being the seventh largest army of the world, Pakistan army is now in a mess of its own creation with little of its hard earned prestige left to its credit.
Sqn Ldr S. Ausaf Husain (Retd)
16. May, 2010
Yasmeen Ali has very rightly discussed the topic. I fully agree with her thoughts about the democracy. In Pakistan we are far from a democratic society yet. Democracy has to prevail as it is the only way forward. We all have to play our part in whatever capacity we can to improve the state of affairs in our beloved homeland.
In our country politicians always talk that democracy has been spoiled three times by the military dictators.But what happened when there was or is a so-called democracy in Pakistan. The common people in Pakistan do not understand what is true democracy. They are interested in ” Roti, Kapra and Makan”, and of course security by the government to protect their life, honour and property and true justice. Whichever government fulfill this requirements they are happy with that government. Unfortunately, it has never been provided by any civil or military rulers so far.
Elections in our country whenever held are always said to be free, fare and transparent. This is what the media propagate every time after each election. But what happen during the election campaign is no secret. Political parties contesting the elections wants to win the elections by hook or crook.Candidates of each party start throwing their money to buy the people of their areas, their party activists go area to area, house to house and intimidate the people so much that they promise them to cast their vote to their party whether they like it or not for fear of their safe future. Thus they go and cast their vote.
If elections are held in a way that there should be no political rallies, no banner displayed, no con-selling and no visit by the activists of candidate fighting the elections after the date is announced for election by the government and people are left free to vote for their chice then one can expect the true will of the people.
After the announcement date of the election Section-144 should be imposed by the interim government so that there are no rallies, no movement of people with arms. no use of loudspeaker for delivering speeches then people will feel free to vote the candidate of their choice.
Unless the above measures are not taken people will not feel safe and and will no be able to cast their vote at their own will.
Yasmeen Ali
17. May, 2010
An excellent discourse Ausaf Sahib.
YAA@Sqn Ldr S. Ausaf Husain (Retd),
TJ
16. May, 2010
“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.”
(Sam Adams)
Rizwan Beg
16. May, 2010
Enjoyed the comment & well said TJ!
Riz@TJ,
Baqi
16. May, 2010
I’m tired of the logic blaming the military. Ever stopped to think WHY military has to step in?Because of the failure of the power hungry,greedy,self serving,despotic,non nationalistic,insufferable,lying politicians!
FM Shah
16. May, 2010
Democracy in post-colonial states like India/Pakistan means a government off the people, far the people and buy the people. We Pakis/Indian did not take tea, Mr Lipton introduced tea to subcontinent. Alike Politics and democracy were introduced by Mr Humes in subcontinent according to faulty designs in line with our colonial masters interests. Much of our issues dates back to strategic fault lines in our history still unexplained and undisclosed, starting from Sir Syed Ahmed Khan flawed education policy (made by Macaulay), pseudo-leadership of Colonial Indopak (Ghandi/Nehru/Jinnah/Liaqat) Creation of Congress by Mr. Humes, Creation of Muslim League (ML) on advice of Viceroy. All political parties Congress, ANP and ML were friendly opposition, B Team and Sarkari tools of establishment from their start.
FM Shah
16. May, 2010
The roles of Sir Syed, Jinah, Agha Khan, Nehru, Ghandi and Bacha Khan for pre-47 colonial establishment/British Empire are almost the same. These all were friendly opposition, B Teams and Sarkari Leagues. The product is same, however target markets are different in time and space. Therefore different labels and different colors.
How many colonies have been retained by British ? They had to leave, what is so great of Jinah/Liaqat or Ghandi/Nehru ? Some thing is terribly wrong with Jinnah Pakistan, Gandhi India or Mujeeb Bangla Desh.
Countries and nations are liberated and gains Freedom by Blood not democratic mean.
American Vs British :
Same blood , Same Language, Same Race, Same Religion.
But Americans give Blood and Take Blood. And expel British Raj and become World Empire.
Whereas we were trying to expel British thru Bacha Khan and Ghandi Non-violence and Muslim League Democratic means. How much funny?
Ghandi India, Jinnah Pakistan and Mujeeb ur Rehman Bangla Desh were supposed to be prostitute states ruled by local Establishment for their Western Masters.
Durrani
17. May, 2010
Thank you for challenging the myth that if a (flawed) system was “allowed to continue”, it would lead to improvement. Logically, it should go from bad to worse.
Boodhun
17. May, 2010
It may be interesting to know that I am not a lawyer, politician or Pakistani. I am not even a “Muslim” per the Pakistan Constitution. Fortunately I live outside the “land of the Pure” and as such I have retained my freedom of belief.
Having been in touch with many Pakistanis, I think they are still not sure of their identity. They are very confused about Religion and loyalty to country of residence.
I think that the saddest part of Pakistan is “Mullahcracy”. So long that the Mullah will have anything to do with the running of the state, the problem will continue to be viral.
In order to put Pakistan back on track among the committee of nations, the following must be done:
1) No party should be allowed to have a “religious name”
2) The country should abrogate all laws that has to do with religion.
3) People should be made aware that “secularism” does not mean “antireligion”.
If this is not done I am afraid that in the future the Mullahs will continue to eexcel in making more “Muslims” into “non-muslims”.
Dr Mohamed Boodhun
Newfoundland, Canada.
Tariq
17. May, 2010
THANK YOU FOR SHARING THIS THOUGHT PROVOKING THINK PIECE.
BEST,
Tariq
Saeed
17. May, 2010
How to convince or force the political parties to hold elections in their parties is a big question. Almost all the political parties in Pakistan are owned by certain families or individuals, looking like fiefdoms. You are right, this a mockery of the claims they flaunt about making Pakistan a truly democratic state.
Saeed Qureshi
Adnan
17. May, 2010
‘If your heart is a volcano, how shall you expect flowers to bloom?’ –
Kahlil Gibran
Faisal
17. May, 2010
Detest democracy?
Product of a shabby do nothing dictatorship?
Salute the concept because that is all that is required to feed egos.
Give up our rights to some egomaniac!
Love the Big Brother!or more likely the Half Baked Father.he gives u your home,your salary,now even your education.he hangs over your shoulder all the time.for the poorer brothers it is the taat school and subsistence in menial jobs.for the destitute it is the Madrassah;food , clothing,brainwashing,and to be used as surrogates whenever required.
What a wonderful quality of life we have created.if the people try to do anything for themselves;Holy Father infiltrates and tries to get it’s piece of flesh.
These leeches which were created to rob the public by the colonialists have now started to divide the spoils and keep the people poor.
U can see the institutionalised investment in their living quarters;their domains.
Long live dictatorship;and the saluting maintality which is in the corridors of power!
Just some thoughts about the form of govt we have had.
Warris
18. May, 2010
Dear YAA
As expected you researched the subject and wrote well . In Pakistan we
all talk about democracy and Dictatorship without appreciating its
finer points or practices. The ultimate aim of both the systems should
be welfare of the people and progress of the country. No system is
good or bad , Only its practioners make it so.
Regretably in the pakistani context we have never had proper democracy
and ceratinly not a decent dictatorship. It’s been a hodge -podge in
each case. So the country has regressed in both times.
I see no real escape from either of the sysytems . One major factor
which has crept in , determines what system we follow and in which
form . Every one knows that our governments are formed by consensus of
USA/UK and Saudi Arabia. They broker the deals. They decide who will
serve their agenda best. We are just pawns. Whatever system out of
the two we get , it will be corrupted , twisted and manipulated by the
powers to whom we take our begging bowl. I have yet to see one
national leader stand up to pressure .
So the discussion about which sytem is better than the others is
purely academic in our case . We had a dictator who buckled under
after one call from State department. He white washed all sins of our
present leaders in a deal brokered by USA to keep himself as head of
the state.
We have a government , democratic in name only , which caters to every
whim and fancy of US/UK. Our lord and master is now IMF.
Who says we are a sovereign nation, able to choose our own system of
governance and future. Right now just about every power dictates to
us. It will not be long before Karzai, the Mayor of Kabul , will be
telling us to what to do. .
Iftikhar
18. May, 2010
Islamic system of government has been embraced by Norway and its religion remains dominant in the polity of the state. The 7th century concept is far better than any system because it is ordained by the All Knowing. It will remain current till eternity. It needs to be read understood and implemented. Islam has bee left to the unread. Those who have the Allah’s blessed ability have abandoned it. It is does not ask any one to abandon Aristotle, Plato, Shakespeare, Milton, Dickens, Jane Austin, Keith and Shelly for that matter all the English literature, or the study of other civilisations and Philosophy, Razi ,Roomi,Ghazali Umar Khayam etal. Keeping that in background study this final revelation on the final Prophet after whom there shall be no messenger with prayer to the Almighty for the light I have no doubt the idea democracy in the real sense will beclear.
I try not to discuss religion but the observation on the subject were such that I felt compelled to give my view.
The present democratic system so admired by all and considered panacea is poison.
Look closely ad dispassionately on the globe all the countries and judge yourself what it is doing to their own people.
Democracy is to serve people.
Mahmud
18. May, 2010
It is wisely said that in times of brooding blinding darkness ” instead of cursing the darkness…light a candle.” Islam is that Candle! MAS
Munir
18. May, 2010
It would be better to discuss what do we understand by the Islamic system of government. I think when it comes to state’s responsibility there are 4 principles which need to be adhered to, which have been given in the Quran and all state policies must be weighed according to that standard:
1. Rabubiyyat :
2. Rahmaniyyat
3. Rahimiyyat
4. Malik
Any system of government which is able to conduct itself on these principles will guarantee the progress of that society.
Sweden adopted these principles, in their own way with a different brand name – “Social Welfare State” in early 1900′s when one third of Swedish population migrated to USA. Sweden at that point of time was much more poorer than any other country in Europe.
Their starting point was to emphasize on:
1. Education
2. Health
3. Basic Salary structure
4. Equality of all citizens – by declaring all professions EQUALLY IMPORTANT for the society’s progress. Thus giving respect to all professions.
Since Social Democrats policy makers were at that time engineers, they created used mathematical formulas which could be applied in policy making so that Sweden should progress in every field by maintaining the RATIO of the equation.
The equation was and is still being maintained:
Price of Milk ( SEK) : Basic Salary (SEK) : Price of KWH (SEK)
6 : 6,000 : 1
It is interesting to see how the making of state policy by sticking to this apparently simple equation (without any ideologies or hi-fi sounding philosphical terminology) Sweden was able to become an examplerary Welfare State within a 50 years.
The ideology was put in very simple words: “We will make our home beautiful”, also coined by those very pioneers – Social Democrats.
The logic of the equation was also quite simple.
The first emphasis was the health of the common man. If he can’t get food then make the price of milk such that every one should be able to afford it from his salary.
If this price of milk has to be kept constant then the supply of milk and demand of milk has to be brought up to that ratio. Hence, the cow which is not giving sufficient milk, must give more milk. Hence their development in their agriculture.
To modernize agriculture, energy was required, and thus development of energy sector and with that the industry, – essentially forestry and later other industries. However, the focus was all the time that the State was serving the individual, and via that route was serving the interests of the state.
Also, there has always been the element of honesty in every walk of life. Perhaps this is because historically Swedes have lived very close to nature, and have had values which they picked up from the Laws of Nature.
The mentality of a Swede even today is like that of a village person. That has helped the people to remain simple in spite of their riches. To show off ones wealth is looked down upon. Drinking in public is bad, kissing on the streets is not on.
When won studies this system from the Islamic principles of the state, then Scandinavian Socialism comes the closest. A balanced system and also based on simplicity.
The democracy which is practiced here is not the Westminster style, nor the American style but they developed it here in the forests and lakes of Scandinanvia, drawing lessons from the Laws of Nature and applying those lessons very HONESTLY for the benefit of the human being – the highest form of creation, and successfully.
Perhaps God is not concerned by the brand names – only His principles. Whoever follows are showered with His Blessings in the form of PEACE (ISLAM) individually as well as collectively as a nation.
May Allah shower His Blessings on Pakistan as well. Amen.
Warris
18. May, 2010
A country which is not economically strong will never gain the
military strength to repel aggression. We will remain at the mercy of
outside interference as long as we are do not learn to survive on our
own.
Unfortunately not only are we weak in economy we have rampant
corruption and misgovernance which is making us weaker . This effects
our sovereignty and independence. On the other hand India for the
first two decades took far reaching decisions. Itt banned at princely
states. It banned all large land holdings. It banned imports of all
items which were not essential.It had economic managers and patriots
who thought of the country first. Our noble Governor of Punjab wants a
bullet proof Merc worth 25 million because his old one is not good
enough. These guys are worse than dictators . If they were democratic
leaders representing the people they would think of the people .
Munir
19. May, 2010
Are we stuck up with the form of democracy and its application or are we concerned how they managed their affairs to become a welfare state. Surely when Sweden made all their citizens equal, that also entailed that the state recognized all their rights. Give any name to that form of system.
Population: 9.5 million
Area: Almost as big as Pakistan.
Trees per capita: 40,000
Patents per capita: highest in the world. That is the contribution of this small country to humanity.
What ever is marked “Made in Sweden” is considered the BEST. SKF Ball bearings, Volvo, Hasselblad Camera (which was taken by Niel Armstrong to the Moon) etc etc.
Munir
19. May, 2010
1. The disadvantages which Sweden faced during their journey:
- Climate and weather conditions: extreme winters for almost months of the year.
- that gives very less time for their crops and other agriculture produce.
- Less population forced them to bring out their women folk to the factories and fields.
- Except for the forestry and lakes, the only other mineral which is available is Iron ore.
- No rivers, as such no hydro electric power generation
2. Advantages of Pakistan:
- Climate and weather : from north to south and east to west, we have all weathers.
- Pakistan is agriculture country and quite self sufficient in food, if farmers are organised.
- Population is a plus factor, and that is an edge over Sweden.
I think the biggest plus which Sweden has is not 9.5 million manageable population, but the corruption free governance.
The checks and balances in the system are such that a political party leader can get hauled up for using official “credit card” instead of his private card to pay off a taxi (mind you it was just an unintentional mistake). That particular party leaders was to be the future Prime Minister, but the party was forced to replace him.
Right now, these days some of the Commune members have been hauled up for awarding contracts of counsel houses (construction of buildings ) to the same contractor. It is head lines. Within a week the matter is the courts, the charged persons fined and given jail sentences.
The charge was that they mis-used the Tax Payers money. The longest prison sentence is not for murder, but tax evasion. That is the biggest crime.
Of course other countries must be having their own checks and balances, when it comes to contain corruption in governance. However, Sweden has done a creditable job of making their citizens a conscious human being.
By the way, speaking purely from religious point of view:
1. Every Swedish citizen pays tax. And a part of that tax goes as grants to developmental projects in less developed countries of the world. And there are no strings attached. So in effect they are paying “sadqah and zakat” regularly. Obviously there is some reward for this in the eyes of God.
2. They look after their orphans: all sorts of allowances for children etc. The best being that the handicapped persons in Sweden are looked after by the state with attendants.
3. They look after their elders, until their death.
4. They also look after their drug addicts and alcoholists. Special hospitals are there to treat them.
5. They look after their wild life and their cats and dogs and their flora and forests.
Every citizen is taken care of his/her material needs from the day he/she is born to his/her death by the state. The intellectual needs are guaranteed by free education not only for the Swedes but also for the many foreign students who are studying in Swedish Universities.
We, as Muslims, should be able to translate all these plus points and admit that God has blessed this country.
Habib
19. May, 2010
I may be wrong ,but perhaps Sweden is not a good model to follow. Her
achievements are lopsided , to say the least. In particular , moral
and social environment has fast degenerated over the last decades.
Suicide rate is amongst the highest. Institution of marriage is almost
gone. Sexual promiscuity knows no bounds. Social inter-personal
relations and community living are pathetic. My friend?s next door
neighbor died days earlier, she was only bothered when the foul smell
became unbearable. Family life is a thing of the past. Religion has no
place in the society. I confess this is not first hand, but one hears
things.
Munir
21. May, 2010
As for moral and social environment is concerned:
1. To speak out the truth is a habit which is ingrained in the Swede from childhood.
2. Honesty: so much that foreigners think the Swedes are stupid. That is the secret of their tax systems success.
3. Faithfulness between partners (husband and wife, or living together partners) that neither partner cheats on the other, as long as they are together. This faithfulness is also displayed in their professional life. They are focussed and honest in their endeavors to achieve the best. That is the secret of so many “bests” they have been able to put in the world market.
4. The institution of family, admittedly is not understood as we understand it. And I think that is the reason of two aspects of Swedish psyche: “Loneliness” and “Shame”. These two factors added to the dark winters have added to the high suicidal rate amongst the Swedes. The immigrants in Sweden add their religious belief system as a “topping” to the already near perfect system, and stick to their family system, which do not make them a victim of Loneliness and the adverse effects of dark winters.
5. Sexual promiscuity in Sweden is something which is fantasy of the American mind and the rest of the world. The reason being that Swedish woman is known for her beauty especially (fair skin, blue eyes and golden hair) in the western literature. She has never been portrayed as something vulgar. After the publication of “Lady Chatterlleys Lover” in 1935, when promiscuity infiltrated English literature, is the time when Swedish woman also became the victim of the western literature changing morality.
Just for information: Alcohol is sold in government stores only (System Bolaget), there are no striptease night clubs in Sweden, there are no “Repa Bann” of Hamburg. And there is not kissing on the streets. So much for sexual promiscuity in public.
Magazines, video films are available in the market for rent and for sale. But when you want to buy those, there stares which makes you blush with shame. Similarly, if you have walked out of the System Bolaget, you have to be discreet and careful. Not that there is some secret service following you, but the general public does not approve of drinking habit.
That is Swedish every day life. You are free to do what you want, but the society keeps a watch on you. To my mind that level of morality is at a higher level of consciousness than as a consequence of a reward of Paradise and the fear of Hell Fire. That can be debated.
5. The good news:
- Islamophobia is under control here in Sweden.
- One of the Gothenburg University professor, Ake Sander, has recently published his 20 years research paper on Islam in Sweden, which has been taken up by policy makers and changes in the Swedish policies are already visible. Sander has argued that it is not enough for the society to be “tolerant” towards the Muslim citizens but they must learn to have “mutual respect” if Sweden wants to become a healthy multi-cultural and multi- religious society.
- The academics are studying Islam and so is the general public.
- The teams of Tablighi Jama’at might have been welcomed in Norway, but in Sweden they have had not the same response.
I hope the Swedish people will have a better picture. This is coming from a person who has lived in this society for 30 years, with a Pakistani wife and children who are returning to Pakistan for their careers there. Just because they want to be in their homeland and are sure that Pakistan is the future.
Best regards,@Habib,
Haidre
20. May, 2010
U r right that Democracy means and implies ‘Equality and Freedom’ for ALL citizens in All spheres of life. With this definition of Democracy in view, when I draw a list of the enemies of democracy in Pakistan, MULLAH tops the list. So Democracy just CANNOT take roots and flourish in Pakistan, JAB TAK YEH KHOTA KHOO SAY NAHIN NIKALA JAE GA !!
Sorry for the word KHOTA but firstly, it is part of a well known Punjabi idiom and secondly, there is no more suited word for the class that I am referring to…………
Thanks for a very thought provoking article.
Regards. Haidre.
Rafiq
21. May, 2010
YAA ? A thought out of the box ? Democracy vis-?-vis Pakistan
All (great or supposedly so) thoughts, democracy is one of them, were orchestrated and perfected by (in our case of time) the elite of our order. I suppose they picked the end product first before they chiseled it into our 1973. They were children of the British order, so they gave us an orchestrated form of theirs. Could they think different, I suppose not. Were they bigger than life, like Messiah?s; I suppose not. Did they give us something that our father believed in, definitely not? He was secular in beliefs.
Let me say this, I would not have expected better.
Not that I am privy unto mundane honesty of man, let me simply say this that they meant well. Whatever the scenario, as a result, we got ONLY a piece of SOFTWARE.
No matter how good a piece of software, it does not exist on a shelf or in vacuum to deliver results. It must be put into effect with the advent of its users to derive the intended goods out of it.
The goods you have detailed sound simply beautiful. But, that is all theory.
Why is it that so many (so called) democracies in one form or another in our order and abroad have failed to deliver that beautiful product you name? I was in the US when Bush was picked for the second term. I stopped by in a store and got into discussion about results of the elections with the floor person. He told me that he voted for Bush because he believed that Bush stood for morality and righteousness. I was simply saddened.
I theorize that all men are primarily run by their socio-economic (more socio) order as being the paramount basis. Our democracy and even our religious practices are governed by our socio order and thought pattern. We are not going to get THERE unless we have the socio order in definite compatibility with the SOFTWARE.
I am sure you know our socio order better than me but let me put it into engineering terms. We are ruled by let us say 0.1%, who have changed coats and colors from Army to N to P and on. There are families out of this 0.1%, who have members in all parties. They just pick and choose their direction by the direction of the morning/evening breeze. Then we have another perhaps 3% like you and I. We mean nothing. We just write letters like the one you did and the one that I am responding you by. Our democracy is decided by the rest of 95% plus. They are bonded; physically, mentally, financially, so on and so forth. The fate of the world?s democracy lies with these 95% people, give or take.
Let us look back globally. The Greeks dished out a beautiful dream eons ago. Do you truly see its fruit anywhere, I mean in totality. If not, why? Man, my dear, man!
By the way, watch our news, my thought is in practice ? in our motherland abound.
saqib omer
24. May, 2010
Perfect article. If really democracy means rule of people than where is actually people, common people rulling in PAKISTAN?
Yasmeen Ali
26. May, 2010
Thank you for the input Mr Saqib, we need to make it a democratic nation,not just in words but in spirit. Please continue reading & commenting.
YAA@saqib omer,
Afzal
26. May, 2010
Dear Yasmeen Ali,
You have sent me a very good presentation about Democracy and Dictatorship. I say with 65 year experience that we should feel shame that we are neither fit for any of the above. We could not produce any independent type of Leaders. All of the Leader present and past are the Flower pots grown up under Militery Dictatorship. The founder could not get time to complete the Constitution and abolish Land Lords, Sardars and Wadaras. In his time he Abolished Zamindari in East Pakistan. We could not like his Lieutelant and murdered him. Not only this all his picked up Leader were also eleminated.
First and most thing is for Democracy is to abolish Zamindaries, Maliks and Wadaraism and educate the people up to 70% or 80%. Which these people will never allow.
If we compare it with India where these Isms completly removed but still there is only saying that democracy is there but it is not The conditions of 70% of poor people are worst than people of Pakistan.
These are my views and I feel Dictatorship is better for the Country.
Regards,
Afzal
Fayyaz Shah
19. Jun, 2010
This is probably the only Democracy that is Dictated, I call it the-mockracy, some believe that we are so good that we were given consultancy to work on the George junior’s election, sorry Al Gore you were talking too much Environment.
In our kinda Democracy its all for one and none for all.
Atique Mirza
27. Jun, 2010
I firmly believe that the democratic experience in Pakistan has been a dismal failure. All it has accomplished is legitimization of corrupt politicians whose sole purpose in life is to “enrich themselves by hook or by crook, at the expense of poverty stricken Pakistani public”. The reasons for this failure are as varied as the Pakistani public.
One of the primary reason for this failure is that democratic parties are run by fuedal landlords. This particular group of Pakistanis believe that the universe exists to serve them. They believe that such power is their legacy and their birth right. In a true democracy, the leaders are public servants. Not so in Pakistan – here these fuedals/leaders call themselves “Rulers”. How can politicians with “Ruler” mentality be public servants. The concept of public service to these fuedal landlords turned politicians is as foreign as the greek concept of democracy. Such self centered approach promotes corruption amongst the political movers and shakers.
The second most dominant reason for the failure of Democracy in Pakistan is its poor literacy rate. Democracies don’t thrive in nations with a literacy rate of less than 90%. For democracy to take firm root in Pakistan, we must improve Pakistan’s literacy rates.
The third big reason for failure of Democracy in Pakistan is lack of “Nationalism”. We are a disparate group of people who have yet to discover their national identity. We are more comfortable calling ourselves Punjabis, Pakhtoons, Sindhis, Baluchis etc. as opposed to simply being Pakistanis.
And the list goes on….
For Democracy to succeed and take firm root in Pakistan, these issues would have to be resolved. The answer lies in indigenous solutions and not foreign imported plans.
If that solution happens is to be a benign and patriotic dictatorship, so be it.
Unfortunately, such an opportunity presented itself in 1999, but the foolish General Musharraf squandered this golden opportunity by making deals with the same old politicians (thieves) i.e. the Chaudhary brothers Shujaat Hussain and Pervez Elahi.
Dr. Imtiaz Hussain
02. Jul, 2010
Yet again a very important isue touched by Ma’am Yasmeen Ali.
Those who today so overwhelmingly talk of Khilafat as alternate system must know that its a dictatorial system. In hich a dictator follows the path of Allah and its Apostle PBUH.
Democracy is a system in which a 100 donkeys can select a donkey only never a horse however similarly 100 horses will elect a horse
so for democracy to succeed the elctoral must have to have to be horses not donkeys. The present scenrion of Pakistan is self explanatory.
If we look around the modern history in third world the nations which have globalized have done so under a dictator who always fortunately for them happenned to be horse who transformed all donkeys inturn to horses and handed over to them the democracy than . Unfortunate for us we had donkeys all overs , dictators and politicians alike…… so lets wait for one horse who will transform all us donkeys into horses, after all carrying weight is not the only goal, having vision and wisdom is also required to manage a nation ….
Dr. A.K. Tewari
09. Jul, 2010
Pakistam : Still sitting on the horn of dillema .. At present being governed by both .
fxwjhqpov
02. Aug, 2010
n8Gl96 cjzpmwcomxwb, [url=http://rdemmutqaiaj.com/]rdemmutqaiaj[/url], [link=http://fdffqbpkexmf.com/]fdffqbpkexmf[/link], http://mqcsknagljox.com/
Night Vision Camera
06. Aug, 2010
Hi Guy, this good blogs, thanks
Daniyal
31. Jan, 2012
Hi guys,but i think we should consider that when dictatorship was brought to any country,trade barriers have inducted which causes the main economy of the country