Date:10/11/2007 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/11/10/stories/2007111055531202.htm

Opinion - Letters to the Editor

Pakistan crisis

Unlike as on earlier occasions, the people of Pakistan have strongly opposed the Emergency imposed by Pervez Musharraf. The army in Pakistan should understand that its place is in the barracks and not in the seat of power.

The U.S. policy of encouraging military rule in Pakistan because it suited its interests is largely responsible for the state of affairs.

C.N. Parthasarathy,

Hyderabad

* * *

Both India and Pakistan obtained freedom from the British rule together six decades ago. But while democracy thrives in India, Pakistan has been under military rule during most part of its existence. Democracy could not take root there because of the huge clout enjoyed by the army over civilian rulers, who could be easily thrown out by generals in coups. The small size of Pakistan, and the U.S.’ tolerance of military regimes are also reasons for the survival of military regimes in the country.

Thanks to the vast size of India, it is not easy to establish a military rule. Besides, the Indians’ love for democracy, which they demonstrated by voting out the Congress in 1977, is unquestioned. Despite many coalition governments, democracy still survives in India because of the people’s love for and faith in democracy and civilian rule.

T. Ramaswamy,

Chennai

* * *

One reason why democracy has not taken deeper root in Pakistan is that the basic nature of civil society has not changed there. It is still feudal in nature with clan and family loyalties playing an important role. The myriad political parties have no real interest or commitment to democratise social interactions, including politics. Is India very different from Pakistan in this respect? Both the so-called pan-Indian parties, the BJP and the Congress, have followed democratic principles more in breach than in practice. This has resulted in parochial, casteist parties becoming major players politically, determining the political and social agenda in this country.

As the first step, we should teach our children to humanise personalities who are lionised now. Next, we should teach our people the importance of fostering institutions rather than individuals. Lastly, we should teach them to respect differences in civil society and appreciate that discourse and discussion are the way forward, not muscle, money or decibels.

S. Sudarsan,

Nellore