Democracy lovers in the West are worried because the cause of liberal democracy is suffering not only political reverses but is also in intellectual retreat. Democracies, practically everywhere, are manifesting by their conduct that, lacking a propensity for tolerating and managing differences, rival groups therein are reducing democracy to a ruthless struggle for power that is ultimately wearing down the state institutions.
This is one of the major conclusions of the report entitled "Freedom in the World 2010: Global erosion of freedom" published by Freedom House, a lobby group based in the US. A recently published book - "Democracy kills: what's so good about the vote?"- by the renowned British journalist Humphrey Hawksley also reflects the same painful realisation among Western lovers of democracy.
The role played by democratic politicians is now convincing democracy supporters that success of this political system ultimately depends on whether it can deliver the basics like security, justice, and a steady drop in economic disparities. Paul Collier, an Oxford University professor, supports this view by asserting that in the absence of other desirables like the rule of law, democracy can hobble a country's progress.
This is precisely what is happening in Pakistan. The promulgation of the NRO was the single most visible act of circumventing the law, and the government's latest effort (a belated realization about the politician-damaging consequences of NRO's being struck down) to re-build this despicable legal faced for defending corruption manifests how much the present 'democratic' dispensation cares about the "rule of law".
In the context of Pakistan's economy, by their wayward conduct, the politicians are proving right the once condemned view of former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yee, who believed that the Western brand of multi-party democracy often led to disorderly conduct by the politicians and disrupted economic progress. The sheer size of the fiscal deficit and bad governance that is inflating it, prove Lee Kuan Yee damn right.
Democracy lovers still believe that, at the very least, a culture of compromise coupled with stiffer accountability and limits on state power, can prevent democracies from making catastrophic mistakes or resorting to criminal cruelty because no one group, no matter how enlightened or well-meaning, can lay claim to knowing what is best for a complex society like Pakistan.
Yet, on a daily basis, Pakistan People's Party's (PPP) spokespersons make such claims and assert PPP's right to go on administering Pakistan for five years because, impliedly, after electing the PPP for this term the electorate no longer has the right to hold the PPP accountable for its actions. The electorate simply has to wait helplessly until March 2013 allowing the PPP to do exactly as it pleases. Accountability - heart of democracy - must stop for now.
Anyone, including the judiciary acting on behalf of the aggrieved masses, can't question the actions of the state and its institutions. Should the judiciary make the mistake of doing so, and pass a verdict on bad governance by the state, the state will decide in its own time whether to implement the court verdict. This is the sort of democracy now being practised in Pakistan. Great news for Pakistanis everywhere!
Arch Puddington, Humphrey Hawksley, Paul Collier, Lee Kuan Yee and others of this clan can say or plead for whatever they like, but PPP couldn't care a damn because PPP's Pakistan is on a different planet. What applies to democracy anywhere on this planet, doesn't apply to the PPP-administered Pakistan, and the "self-styled experts on democracy" better keep that in mind. Stunningly logical stuff yet again from the PPP!
The present regime is indeed one of a kind. How often do you hear about parliamentary democracies, especially the federation-types, wherein the country's president and governors of its federating units - all supposedly symbols of the federation's unity - openly pursue the divisive aims of a particular political party? Pakistan has this distinction, with claims to be an exemplary democracy. Isn't that a mind-boggling claim?
Dishing out the logic that until corruption allegations against them are proved, instead of resigning, politicians are clinging on to the public offices they hold. According to PPP, only in 'weak' democracies do politicians immediately vacate their offices to contest any allegations. No PPP politician accepts that not doing so can imply holding on to power to influence probes into the alleged crimes. That's another 'first' for Pakistan!
What are the benefits of all these distinctions that we now have? Sadly, instead of appreciating them, the "doubters" the world over, especially risk analysts, go on downgrading Pakistan's country risk basing it on eroding institutional integrity, bad governance and rampant corruption. Incidentally, these "doubters", highly respected otherwise, include many that PPP had nick-named "the Friends of Democratic Pakistan."
In this scenario it is no surprise that Pakistan's Finance Minister recently demanded of these highly respected "doubters" not to treat Pakistan as "un-touchable" in the context of fulfilling the aid promises they made a long time ago. He obviously doesn't know that unless democracy can guard against all manner of ills, ranging from outright tyranny to larceny at the public expense, its image will remain suspect.
On the diplomatic front Pakistan is treated as "un-touchable" for another reason as well: even its avowed ally (the US) and its perpetual adversary (India) hold almost the same view about its involvement with terrorist organisations. While the country's armed forces have tried to dispel this view at a huge cost, its interior ministry achieved little in defending the country's credibility, courtesy the ministry's many unpunished gaffes.
Finally, the axiom that in democracies politicians can afford to go on vacillating, arguing, and being loud and disagreeable, is no longer fit even for text books. In Pakistan, politicians no longer have the luxury of time to "vacillate"; it reinforces instability. What we witness is a level of instability that threatens the very existence of democracy in Pakistan, and there is none to blame for it except its self-styled defenders of democracy.