Islamabad, Dec. 25 (PTI): Even as the movement by the Opposition to oust the military regime is gathering steam, a recent study claims a majority of Pakistanis back army rule in the pre-dominently Muslim nation with Bangladesh being the only other South Asian country to follow the trend.
“The idea that the country should be governed by the army was endorsed by six out of every 10 responses in Pakistan and Bangladesh,” said the “State of Democracy in South Asia” report adding that about half the Pakistanis opinioned both the democratic or non-democratic forms of government made no difference to them.
The least support for army rule is in India, the report said, adding the support for the Army rule diminishes in the countries which are educationally forefront.
But overall, the South Asians overwhelmingly support democracy with Sri Lanka emerging as the country where democracy was most popular, while India was placed third in terms of the percentage of people expressing support for the democratic system, the study said.
“The people not only approve of democratic arrangements, they find it suitable for their own contexts. Seven out of eight responses in the region, higher than in East Asia, held that democracy was ‘suitable’ or ‘very suitable’ for their own country,” the report said.
The study found that the citizens of South Asia do not simply like democracy; they prefer it over authoritarian rule. “With the exception of Pakistan, about two-thirds of those who responded preferred democracy over any other form of government,” the report added.
First the Economist, then the IRI, and now this survey which includes participation from England’s Oxford University. All showing how people are largely rejecting politicians in favor of military-led rule.
In this thread let's discuss this subject with light on the military aspect rather than the 'political' rhetoric concerned with military rule.
i.e. how classic strategists and military men have viewed 'military rule' or 'bonapartism' as the phenomenon is generally referred to.
Some of the most popular arguments for military rule are examples of Napolean Bonaparte himelf, and very often the Islamic Caliphate is referred too.
What do you guys feel about this? Leaving emotion and hardcore love for 'democracy' (whatever it has come to mean in modern day) aside, if military rule works, could it be accepted and appreciated as a valid form of govt or what can be the drawbacks, glitches etc, if any?
An amazing phenomenon occured inl ate 60's when masses stood against military rule of Pakistan.. before that there was no sense in peopel who wa ruling them.. Today we as Pakistanis can claim that we stood against Zia's military rule.. when guards become intruders .. bomb the civilians.. hang people at will.. no law to check them.. they become gods..
Is there any mechanism or any court in paksitan that can try army generals of corruption, army land mafis, any voice to stop self-claimed actions in Balouchistan, waziristan, handing of Pakisatnis to USA etc.
Today, we are just slaves to the will of army goofs..
Is there any mechanism or any court in paksitan that can try army generals of corruption, army land mafis, any voice to stop self-claimed actions in Balouchistan, waziristan, handing of Pakisatnis to USA etc.
well, a mechanism did work and removed bhutto from power. somethings do work, I guess. :D
Is there any mechanism or any court in paksitan that can try army generals of corruption, army land mafis, any voice to stop self-claimed actions in Balouchistan, waziristan, handing of Pakisatnis to USA etc.
Today, we are just slaves to the will of army goofs..
Unfortunately that is correct.
It is these so called 'defenders' of Pakistan who will remembered as the biggest cause of Pakistan's destruction when we end up like the fmr.Yugoslavia. :(
I think Pakistan is slowly turning itself around… Balochistan is obviously a problem and everyone realizes it. I think the situation will gradually improve.
I think the biigest problem is from NWFP and the FATA militants… They could really make life difficult for Pakistan
It is sad that so many are getting complascent about being ruled by a military government. Are we lulled by short term gains and sops so much that we forget and are ready to forsake freedom? It is sad that a country is happy about jumping from the fire into the frying pan.
^Have any better alternative? And if so, how do you propose to bring it about..
Pakistanis have to live with the circumstances and make the best of it...
yes and it is not very complicated. have a real democracy; focus on economy and society. develop a very tight foreign trade with China, Afgans and Iran. also with India - India and China are predicted to be big powers and states in between should be in good position to benefit due to geographic position - even if that means giving up on traditional border disputes about kashmir which I think is causing too much military expenditure and power for military. and yes, STOP being a lackey for Usa
I could have told you that…
Democracy is easier said then done, especially considering its pakistan… Military isnt going to give up power without a fight, even if they do return to the barracks, they will still control things from behind the scenes…
^ that "especially pakistan" part is what is most disturbing. what's wrong with the country / people? how come it works in India but won't work in Pakistan? same history, culture, problems, attitudes....what is the difference? tell me why?
Not really, Indian politicians are very seasoned, if you do a little bit of insightful reading you will clearly understand how they have been fortunate to have generally good politicians, while we on the other hand have had very few that outclass them, but on the whole we have nitwits are still unsure where their loyalties should stick to.
^ from what little I know I think you are right about that; even though if you look at some Indian news sites there have been some politicians, even ministers, who have criminal background. May be that is a difference - because the news said they actually convicted a federal minister.
But basic question is - then why India can have 'good politicians' and not Pakistan? that's what I want to understand