ANALYSTS like me who advocate continuation of civilian set-ups in Pakistan as key to the country’s success were worried when Imran Khan threatened the ‘system’.

Even though some saw merit in what the PTI was agitating for, ‘Thank God’, we said when the bid to bring down the government failed. We were quite happy to see parliament unite to keep the system in place and to see GHQ stay away. The system survived.

Usually, I would now go on to reiterate my position that continuation of Pakistani civilian set-ups will eventually lead to democratic consolidation, to better politicians, to better governance, and to a more prosperous Pakistan. Not today.

Let me make a confession instead, one that I hope will spur a new, more constructive debate about the ‘system’ we so cherish and ultimately lead to stronger democracy.

Ever since the Zardari government took over in 2008, I have struggled to place Pakistan among the established models of democratic consolidation. I have increasingly questioned my own defence for the current ‘system’. My unease has brought me to the recognition that Pakistan fits models that represent basket cases of political development. It has led me to an uncomfortable conclusion: survival of the current ‘system’ may be a net negative for our future.

The current political discourse is missing the point.

Nope, I haven’t gone crazy. Consider where I am going with this.

One of the analytical failings of the current pro-‘democracy’ discourse is that we equate civilian governments with democracy and the latter with good governance. But people like me seldom unpack these notions to explain how exactly this will come about.

This is because we don’t know if it will. And so, we skirt these substantive questions. We have been forced mostly to indulge in a self-congratulatory discourse focusing on democracy’s procedural aspects.

We absolve ourselves of our responsibility to listen to millions of common citizens questioning the system’s efficacy by declaring them as antithetical to the democratic spirit. In reality, they are not. They do not want the marching boots to take over; nor do they want any revolution, secular or religious. We have enough surveys and polls to prove this. All they are telling us is that the current political discourse is missing the point: that this system is supposed to deliver to these millions but it isn’t concerned about them.

We choose to focus on incompetence, corruption, political instability, resource constraints, regional environments, etc when we critique the system. But this is talking symptoms. We shy away from the inconvenient truth: we are working with a system whose incentive structure is geared to serving a praetorian, elitist state. So entrenched are these structures that they are not about to change organically. If anything, the system is likely to perpetuate itself till we go over the brink.

Inbuilt in the system is a strong bias towards dictatorial political outfits who must serve their patronage networks rather than the population. Even the PTI, for all its freshness, is dependent on a charismatic individual who adapted to entrenched ways of politics to become a serious contender for power.

The apologists argue that while the old guard has failed us, the youth will become the harbingers of positive change. Hardly. Survey after survey shows that the shining stars of the upcoming generation are either leaving Pakistan or remain dejected by the lack of openings for them in this system, PTI notwithstanding. The ones the system allows in are those willing to abide by the rules of a praetorian state.

As for those who inevitably look to the military, rest assured going there again will be nothing short of suicide. The military can’t be a true transformer in the Pakistani context for it depends, most of all, on this very ‘system’ to protect its institutional interests that have dented the country’s development prognosis.

No matter which way you come at it, every debate on politics in Pakistan boils down to a concern about protecting praetorian interests over the common man’s needs — even laws and rules are brought in with an eye to cement the elitist interests of the powers that be.

If we want to see a truly democratic Pakistan, we must begin to talk in specifics about what it will take to force this system to evolve in the right direction. We must have the stomach to stand for transformative changes. We must stand to undercut perverse elite interests even if these include our own. We must focus on the common man, on the substantive delivery of services and justice, as the centrepiece of our discourse.

The only alternative I can see is for us to stand by and see Pakistan implode sooner or later.

The writer is a foreign policy expert based in Washington, DC. He is editor of Insurgencies and Counterinsurgencies in South Asia: Through a Peacebuilding Lens.

Published in Dawn, January 13th, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play