Pakistanââ¬â¢s next elections unlikely to bring democracy: Haqqani
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Pakistanââ¬â¢s next parliamentary elections are unlikely to transform the country into a democracy or return it to civilian rule, since Gen Pervez Musharraf has made it clear that he intends to continue running the country in uniform, according to a just-published analysis.
Pakistani academic and journalist Husain Haqqani wrote in the Journal of Democracy, published by the National Endowment for Democracy, that while Musharraf ruled Pakistan as a soldier in uniform, yet he claimed that he was bringing ââ¬Åreal democracyââ¬Â to the country. ââ¬ÅGiven Pakistanââ¬â¢s position as a critical ally in the global war against terrorism, neither the US nor other Western nations are likely to apply serious pressure for political reform.ââ¬Â
He wrote, ââ¬ÅAlthough generals have ruled Pakistan for more than half the stateââ¬â¢s existence, Pakistanis have still clearly considered democracy to be the only legitimate system of governance for the country. Acknowledging this reality, each of Pakistanââ¬â¢s four military rulers has tried to redefine democracy and claimed that he and the army were building democracy instead of bypassing it. The armyââ¬â¢s control of most levers of power has led to a gradual decline in the influence of political parties and the marginalisation of civil society.ââ¬Â
According to the author, under every military ruler, some Pakistani politicians had cut deals with the military for self-advancement, only to fall out of favour with a future general. He said that whenever a civilian leader had questioned the basic premises of the militaryââ¬â¢s vision for the country, he or she has been removed from power. Meanwhile, the military elite has had used the countryââ¬â¢s strategic location to secure aid from allies abroad; the elite considers such aid essential for the countryââ¬â¢s survival and economic development, yet such dependence on external powers has made Pakistan a rent-seeking state.
Haqqani noted that almost every Pakistani head of state and government had been imprisoned, assassinated, executed, or removed from power in a military coup or a palace coup backed by the military. He said that occasionally, governments had been voted into office, but none had been voted out. The military arrogated to itself the role of Pakistanââ¬â¢s saviour even before the first coup by Ayub Khan. He argued that given the influence of the intelligence services and their covert operations, political actors in Pakistan had not always functioned on their own. There had been a good deal of misinformation about the cause and effect of politically significant events, he said, adding that much that had appeared to be domestic political bickering had actually been the result of ââ¬Åmanipulation by intelligence servicesââ¬Â. Behind-the-scenes funding of political parties, the creation and breaking of political alliances, and the engineering of politiciansââ¬â¢ defections from one party to another had all been part of the Pakistani intelligence servicesââ¬â¢ agenda, he wrote. Manipulators had consistently adhered to the objective of ensuring that the political process does not acquire a life of its own and that the militaryââ¬â¢s ascendancy remained unquestioned, he added.
According to the writer, if Musharraf was to leave a legacy different from those of previous military rulers, he would have to tackle the contempt for civilians and the prejudice against politicians found in the higher ranks of Pakistanââ¬â¢s military.
As things stand today, however, Musharraf and the military have strayed little from the script of Pakistanââ¬â¢s earlier generals, he said, and added that not until the armyââ¬â¢s institutional thinking changed or its hold became weaker could Pakistan be expected to make a transition to democratic rule.
Courtesy DailyTimes.com.pk
http://www.pakistanlink.com/Headlines/Oct06/29/12.htm
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Pakistanââ¬â¢s next parliamentary elections are unlikely to transform the country into a democracy or return it to civilian rule, since Gen Pervez Musharraf has made it clear that he intends to continue running the country in uniform, according to a just-published analysis.
Pakistani academic and journalist Husain Haqqani wrote in the Journal of Democracy, published by the National Endowment for Democracy, that while Musharraf ruled Pakistan as a soldier in uniform, yet he claimed that he was bringing ââ¬Åreal democracyââ¬Â to the country. ââ¬ÅGiven Pakistanââ¬â¢s position as a critical ally in the global war against terrorism, neither the US nor other Western nations are likely to apply serious pressure for political reform.ââ¬Â
He wrote, ââ¬ÅAlthough generals have ruled Pakistan for more than half the stateââ¬â¢s existence, Pakistanis have still clearly considered democracy to be the only legitimate system of governance for the country. Acknowledging this reality, each of Pakistanââ¬â¢s four military rulers has tried to redefine democracy and claimed that he and the army were building democracy instead of bypassing it. The armyââ¬â¢s control of most levers of power has led to a gradual decline in the influence of political parties and the marginalisation of civil society.ââ¬Â
According to the author, under every military ruler, some Pakistani politicians had cut deals with the military for self-advancement, only to fall out of favour with a future general. He said that whenever a civilian leader had questioned the basic premises of the militaryââ¬â¢s vision for the country, he or she has been removed from power. Meanwhile, the military elite has had used the countryââ¬â¢s strategic location to secure aid from allies abroad; the elite considers such aid essential for the countryââ¬â¢s survival and economic development, yet such dependence on external powers has made Pakistan a rent-seeking state.
Haqqani noted that almost every Pakistani head of state and government had been imprisoned, assassinated, executed, or removed from power in a military coup or a palace coup backed by the military. He said that occasionally, governments had been voted into office, but none had been voted out. The military arrogated to itself the role of Pakistanââ¬â¢s saviour even before the first coup by Ayub Khan. He argued that given the influence of the intelligence services and their covert operations, political actors in Pakistan had not always functioned on their own. There had been a good deal of misinformation about the cause and effect of politically significant events, he said, adding that much that had appeared to be domestic political bickering had actually been the result of ââ¬Åmanipulation by intelligence servicesââ¬Â. Behind-the-scenes funding of political parties, the creation and breaking of political alliances, and the engineering of politiciansââ¬â¢ defections from one party to another had all been part of the Pakistani intelligence servicesââ¬â¢ agenda, he wrote. Manipulators had consistently adhered to the objective of ensuring that the political process does not acquire a life of its own and that the militaryââ¬â¢s ascendancy remained unquestioned, he added.
According to the writer, if Musharraf was to leave a legacy different from those of previous military rulers, he would have to tackle the contempt for civilians and the prejudice against politicians found in the higher ranks of Pakistanââ¬â¢s military.
As things stand today, however, Musharraf and the military have strayed little from the script of Pakistanââ¬â¢s earlier generals, he said, and added that not until the armyââ¬â¢s institutional thinking changed or its hold became weaker could Pakistan be expected to make a transition to democratic rule.
Courtesy DailyTimes.com.pk
http://www.pakistanlink.com/Headlines/Oct06/29/12.htm
