Certain countries in the world have been ruled by the military dictators as well as the democratic leaders. Pakistan is one of the finest examples of such a system. In Pakistan, military and democratic government exchange hands time and again and this chain goes on. This is evident from the past experiences. This is also evident from current economic crisis of the country after a long period of dictatorship. It seems that the democratic system is better for Pakistan.
Although the military plays vital role in the security of a country yet it has nothing to do with the politics of the country. Politicians and military officers have quite different jobs. Politicians are supposed to run the government and the military is supposed to provide security to the country. As it is evident from history that whenever, military dictators ruled over Pakistan, at the end, everything got messed up because of their inability to rule.
iraq
Iraq
English: Chief Justice Sheikh Anwarul Haq's resign...Although, in their regime, Pakistan flourished in certain fields but there were many drawbacks as well.
Every military dictator in Pakistan, when he came to rule, initially claimed to work for the betterment of the people just to keep the people loyal to him but later he became involved in his personal interests. A military dictator is not under the influence of the people and he makes his own decisions. On the other hand, a politician comes to power by public voting and the public chooses him/her from within themselves.
If we look at Musharaf's regime, we can easily find out that we ended up where we started from. A lot of problems arose in Musharaf's regime e.g. load shedding problem, judiciary problem, terrorism, problem of the Lal Masjid, operations in tribal areas and inflation. Also, Pakistan had a very unbalanced foreign policy. It only emphasized its relations with America and much less importance was given to other countries. But America did not support Pakistan when India was blaming us for the Mumbai attacks. Everyone in Pakistan is blaming the current government for all these problems but no one is blaming the original culprit, the military dictator.
Not only Pakistan, there are examples of many countries like Thailand, Indonesia and North Korea in which military dictatorship is said to be responsible for spoiling the economy of the country along with other impacts. Iraq is another example. Ten years of military dictatorship had a devastating effect on the social life of the people of Iraq. Sectarianism is a gift of Saddam to the people of Iraq. It seems that the people of Iraq hate Saddam Hussain the most. So, obviously the military can do better job on the border than in politics.
This can be well demonstrated with the help of an example of a physician and a surgeon. If the physician is asked to do a surgery and even if he/she does it correct, he/she will not be called a surgeon. Similar is the case with military officers in civil jobs. A military officer can not do the job of a civil officer properly.
Another disaster for Pakistan was the separation of East Pakistan. This was also caused by the negligence of a military dictator. The rights of the people of East Pakistan were not protected. Injustice and unusual military interference in politics caused their separation from West Pakistan.
Wars of 1965 and 1971 were also fought during military regimes. Today Pakistan has a very bad image in the world. One might ask who is responsible for this? In the 1980s, General Zia-ul-Haq and America united to create Al Qaeda. It was created solely in the name of Jihad but now it is a sign of terrorism and is a threat for the sovereignty of the country.
On the other hand, democracy is "Government of the people, by the people, for the people" (Abraham Lincoln). As democracy is government of the people i.e., people of a country elect leaders from themselves, nobody is worthy of blame for his/her misdeeds. Blaming them means blaming ourselves because we have elected them and they are from us.
The democratic rule has proved quite beneficial for us. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto nationalized the banks, steel mill, Pepco and many other private companies which was a radical step for the prosperity of the country. He also started the Pakistan Nuclear Program. The Pakistan Nuclear Program was completed in the era of Nawaz Sharif who made Pakistan the first nuclear power of the Islamic world. There is also "Benazir Income Programme which has been proposed by the government in Public Sector Developmental Programme (PSDP) 2008-09 to provide relief to the depressed segment of society in the wake of price-hike. The programme meant purely for the poor initially features Rs. 34 billion that would be increased upto Rs. 50 billion, according to a budgetary document." (PSDP, 2008-09). This proves that politicians do something for the people.
In conclusion as Churchill says "There is no such thing as the "perfect form of government" on earth, but any other form of government produces even less desirable results than democracy. Until today, no other form of government has been invented that could regulate public affairs better than democracy". Even if democratic government is not the perfect form of government, it is best suited to the situation and the people of Pakistan which is evident from all the discussion.
Works CitedPublic Sector Developmental Programme (PSDP) 2008-09http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=234947152Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)http://www.democracy-building.info/definition-democracy.htmlSir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)http://www.democracy-building.info/definition-democracy.html
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen (right) esco...
English: Location of Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) in Is...