Military intervention

Published February 27, 2014

SINCE the 2008 elections, parliamentary democracy in the country has been strengthened by politicians who have stood united against any hint of extra-constitutional intervention. Though the political class can be accused of indecisiveness when it comes to taking hard decisions, years of military dictatorship and army interference in civilian affairs have taught it why democratic values need to be cherished. It is saddening then that MQM chief Altaf Hussain should call for army intervention in the event of the government not backing the military’s fight against the Pakistani Taliban. True, the outlawed group has committed horrendous acts of terror across the country. Thousands, including soldiers and ordinary civilians, have died in the bloodbath. Schools, mosques, markets and security installations have all been targeted, and there can be no divergence from the view that militancy in the country must be uprooted, and its perpetrators brought to justice. But surely, it is the elected representatives of the people who should lead the way and make decisions which the army must obey. It is a fact that no strategy against the militants would be complete without input from the military, but in any democracy worth its salt, the final decision rests with those in parliament.

Mr Hussain’s own party has, more than once, been at the receiving end of operations conducted by both the military and civilian law enforcers. So it is ironical that he should call for military intervention. The argument he has used, that the country is more important than democracy, cannot be sustained in the light of history. Military regimes have weakened rather than strengthened the country. One dictator abrogated an earlier constitution. Two others mauled the current one beyond recognition, and it took approximately a decade in each case before the elected assemblies were able to recast the basic law in its original mould. Mr Hussain’s party has sizeable representation in the national and provincial assemblies, and such utterances send out the wrong message to anti-constitutional forces lurking in the wings. It is the Taliban who want to see the Constitution jettisoned; mature political parties should not be seen to even imply this, even if their argument is different.

Opinion

Who bears the cost?

Who bears the cost?

This small window of low inflation should compel a rethink of how the authorities and employers understand the average household’s

Editorial

Internet restrictions
Updated 23 Dec, 2024

Internet restrictions

Notion that Pakistan enjoys unprecedented freedom of expression difficult to reconcile with the reality of restrictions.
Bangladesh reset
23 Dec, 2024

Bangladesh reset

THE vibes were positive during Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent meeting with Bangladesh interim leader Dr...
Leaving home
23 Dec, 2024

Leaving home

FROM asylum seekers to economic migrants, the continuing exodus from Pakistan shows mass disillusionment with the...
Military convictions
Updated 22 Dec, 2024

Military convictions

Pakistan’s democracy, still finding its feet, cannot afford such compromises on core democratic values.
Need for talks
22 Dec, 2024

Need for talks

FOR a long time now, the country has been in the grip of relentless political uncertainty, featuring the...
Vulnerable vaccinators
22 Dec, 2024

Vulnerable vaccinators

THE campaign to eradicate polio from Pakistan cannot succeed unless the safety of vaccinators and security personnel...