Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi

 

Last week, my column was titled “Who is the real threat to Pakistan’s democracy?” The article dealt mainly with the protests led by Imran Khan, leader of the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, and the Pakistani cleric Tahir-ul-Qadri against the elected government of Nawaz Sharif. They are demanding the resignation of Sharif on the pretext that the elections were rigged.



In the article, I voiced my apprehensions that these protests might lead to undermining the nation’s stability, as well as adversely affecting its economy and development, and even prompting the intervention of the army once again to seize power as has happened on a number of similar occasions in the past. I cited the examples of the military coups led by Field Marshal Mohammad Ayub Khan, General Yahya Khan and General Zia ul-Haq.



I mentioned in the article the first military coup, led by Ayub Khan, the then commander-in-chief of the army. Ayub Khan was succeeded by General Yahya Khan who installed a military government in both East and West Pakistan. During his rule, political unrest and revolt erupted in East Pakistan led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, president of the Awami League party.



Yahya Khan imposed emergency in the country to contain the revolt and then held free and fair general elections. But the selfishness and vested interests of leaders turned out to be more important than the nation’s broader interests, resulting in a civil war and the secession of East Pakistan. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, leader of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), was satisfied with the rule of the remaining part of the country (West Pakistan). During the rule of Bhutto, elections were held, but the opposition alliance took to the streets accusing Bhutto of widespread rigging in the elections. This led to another military coup, led by General Zia ul-Haq.



I received a large number of e-mail messages commenting on last week’s article. Several readers also posted their comments on the newspaper’s website. I was surprised to see that most of these messages and online comments raised objections to what I wrote. Some of them accused me of ignorance while others blamed me for being biased in favor of Prime Minister Sharif and downplaying PTI leader Imran Khan while others supported me. I extend my thanks to those who supported me as well as to those who objected to my point of view.



I would like to inform everyone that I do not have any special interest in supporting one party or another. I do not have any association with Sharif whom I have never met. Similarly, I do not have enmity toward Imran Khan. On the contrary, I was a fan of Khan when he was a cricket player. However, I hold the same opinion that I expressed in my article last week. It is quite unfortunate that those who opposed what I wrote in the article did not stop to ponder over the points that I underlined. What I stressed was that Nawaz Sharif was out of power when the elections were held, and hence it is unfair to accuse him of rigging them. Moreover, independent observers have confirmed that the election was free and fair, and that it was one of the best organized elections ever held in the country. Even the ruling PPP accepted the verdict despite its poor results in the election. This fact was acknowledged by everyone at the time, including Imran Khan, whose party won a considerable number of seats.



Those who won seats in the election attended parliament sessions. Had they boycotted parliament sessions immediately after the elections, their latest demand would seem more logical. Those who attended sessions of parliament regularly for more than one year are now staging protests and issuing threats of starting a civil disobedience movement and disrupting the normal life of people. In my view, this is an explicit call for the army to intervene and take power through another military coup as has happened in the past.  



Similarly, those who oppose my viewpoint have not explained what will happen if Sharif resigns as demanded by the protesters. Who will take over the post of prime minister and on what basis? Do they support another takeover by the army? Does this scenario have anything to do with democracy? Is it not better to have a strong and responsible opposition, which supports the government in such things that it deems right and demands the elected government to correct its mistakes and put an end to corruption? At the same time, the opposition can make preparations to win the next general elections by convincing people that they are the best alternative. They can also strive to win the trust of the public through better governance of the municipalities which they rule.



Finally, I wish for progress and prosperity as well as security and stability for Pakistan and its people under a government elected by the people with full freedom.   

 

— Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi is a former Saudi diplomat who specializes in Southeast Asian affairs. He can be reached at algham@hotmail.com