Democracy is merely an ideal to aspire towards and the movement to acquire it may gain speed unpredictably and sometimes from the most unexpected quarters. Leaders can either respect this power and follow its lead, or force their own ‘wisdom’ and crush the possibilities of achieving that ideal. Realpolitik is merely a justification for taking the non-democratic route to power.
The real challenge that a manufactured democracy is likely to throw at civil society will be in the ability of a liberal-military government to act in the most authoritarian and violent manner and be able to justify it in the name of democratic dispensation. In its pursuit to ‘eliminate’ terrorism, the state may use any means it wishes while earning legitimacy from its liberal, populist government. In return, the ruling party will not be constrained by or held accountable to the people, for it will seek refuge under the patronage of the military.
By definition, reconciliation is meant to take place before transformation, unless to reconcile means to accept the inevitability of whatever form of governance is imposed upon us. Some liberals even suggest that Musharraf’s mistakes (presumably aerial bombings of villages and collateral damage during operations in Bajaur and Waziristan; and Lal Masjid, to name a few) may be forgotten and forgiven should he mend his ways. This is the kind of lease that liberals are willing to extend a dictator, to preserve, they say, democracy.
The aligning nature of the military-civilian divide is bound to have a long-term effect, not only on civil society but on a recently revived and increasingly confident, citizenry. Hence, for now, the most expedient way to bring in meaningful democracy would be through the disbanding of Musharraf’s liberal club at the centre, which is a more menacing threat than the militant one in the tribal areas.
The End
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
