The Miliary or the Civilians?

Recently, there has been a great upsurge in the popularity of our military men, and a sudden realisation(this nation has too many) that Musharraf wasn’t a traitor but in fact a saviour. The much resented army boys now proudly flash their guns sitting in their jeeps as little kids salute them with awe. 

The trust in democracy is gradually diminishing. People see little hope in the endeavours that our political leadership makes to combat terrorism or any other issue for that matter. The National Action Plan seems pathetic in the hands of our ministers as they try to give credibility to this result of a hasty brainstorming session. 

Why is it that whenever democracy is given a chance to stand up on its feet, it falls back harder? Any or little credibility it has diminishes as every effort of our civilian leadership goes in vain. 

Is it because our politicians crumble under the pressure of absolute power and autonomy? Or does the thought of it corrupts them and their intentions? After all, ‘absolute power corrupts absolutely’. Or are they simply incapable of the job of steering the country in the right direction? Or maybe they just aren’t interested?

All the answers to these questions may hold legitimacy. 

But maybe also, all these questions may be unnecessarily too soon to ask before a more important one is addressed. That is, has the democracy ever, in the truest sense, been allowed to work? Has the army, the ultimate holder of power, felt okay sharing any of it with our politicians? The last year may hold some answers. Well, see. 

The government made it clear that economic progress was on top of its agenda. So it contacted our dearest Modi to open up trade. The army shunned the idea. 

Back then, talks with the Taliban didn’t seem too bad an option, after all, we could all cherish some peace. But no, said the army, no way Jose. 

Then we had the untouchable Mr. Musharraf. How dare anyone try to serve justice..I mean, put a stain on the army! 

The architect of this 100 day long campaign against the government, many also claim, had good con acts with the generals up on top.

The point is, with so many conflicting interests colliding, and a standstill occurring, the powerful man stands out strong eventually. That powerful man is the army. Agree or not, it has always had absolute authority over all decisions relating to all matters, foreign or domestic. It is my view, that with too much power and relevance attributed to the army, its decisions align with the interests of itself as an institution first, then of the nation. 

In that guarding of its interests, it has made sure that power does not wander out of its domain and has created stumbling blocks for many democratic governments in the past.

However anyway, our civilian leadership can also be wholly credited for always hitting its head right where it shouldn’t have.