Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) observed October 12 as black day against the military coup by a then Army Chief Pervez Musharraf in 1999. Addressing to party workers here, Senior leader of PML-N, Arbab Khizer Hayat Khan said that October 12 was the darkest day in history of Pakistan because it was the day when a dictator humiliated the parliament and the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Khizer paid tributes to the political forces which stood against the long dictatorial rule especially head of PML-N Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, party leaders, office-bearers and workers and said on this day a dictator toppled the democratically elected government. He said that military regimes always caused great loss to the country and had democratic system not be sabotaged there would not have been serious problems like terrorism, loadshedding, price-hike and unemployment, he added. In anothers significant move, a PML-N Senator recognised how historically dictators have benefited from opportunistic politicians giving them support, and called for a vow from all parliamentarians that they would never support a dictator under any circumstances in the future while also being critical of his own party’s cabinet members who benefited during Musharraf’s reign by aligning themselves with him. Nevertheless, the Senators were careful not to ruffle too many feathers and qualified their condemnation with praise for the current military leadership and the job they were doing. While the Senators’ strong words are certainly encouraging, a cursory glance at the political and media discourse across the country would reveal many worrying realities. It should be considered unfathomable that barely half a decade after seeing the back of a much reviled dictator, the country’s political consensus would be dangerously close to calling for another military coup, but such is the fickle public memory of Pakistani citizens and media. The lesson of October 1999 seems to be that we have learnt no lesson at all. While the achievements of General Raheel Sharif in combating terrorism are certainly praiseworthy, it is baffling to imagine that since he is performing his duties well, he should be elevated to the status of head of state. There is a concentrated campaign where short-sighted civilians clamour for intervention by the army chief in matters where the army has no business being involved. Every time a military dictator has swooped in to take all the power for himself and his institution, he has been welcomed with trumpets blowing and has been hailed as the answer to Pakistan’s problems. And yet every time, the country the dictator leaves behind after roughly ten years of power has been much worse off than when he took the reins. His exit is then marked with equal vociferousness and his memory spat upon. This cycle keeps repeating itself ad nauseam. Why do military dictatorships keep on imposing themselves with such regularity in our political history and, more importantly, why does the public forget the pitfalls of unquestionably following the previous strongman? The basic cause seems to be the failure of civilian governments to satisfy a diverse and fractured populace due to incompetence, in-fighting or corruption; so busy have political parties in power been in the past to see the back of their opposition that they have repeatedly dropped the ball on actual governance and have let the system necessary for their survival be put in jeopardy. The lifeblood of dictators has been turncoats and opportunists in the political class and complicit judicial institutions who prefer to ensure their personal interests over the health of democracy and the constitution. The final factor working in favour of military dictatorships is the manufactured public consciousness that holds that the only way to govern Pakistan is with a tough, uncompromising hand, which only a strong institution like the military possesses. Western powers, the so-called champions of democracy, are equally complicit as they have unfailingly supported each dictatorship for reasons largely of expediency. The predilection of politicians for corruption is true but they are not alone in this game. While they are turned into popular punching bags and scapegoats, the military benefits from being turned into a holy cow that resists any attempts at accountability as its integrity is deemed unquestionable. The media has failed to use the freedom afforded to it responsibly and has led the public astray for its vested interests. People should look around: the protests and activism taking place at the moment where people are free to voice their concerns and campaign for a better future can only happen in a democracy.
pk.shafaqna.com
