Adil Najam
Our second blog poll seems to have thrown up some interesting, but also confusing, results.
Depending on how you cut the pie, you can make the argument that:
(a) a clear majority of ATP readers want Gen. Musharraf to give up both or one of his twin offices (Army Chief and President) before the 2007 elections,
and at the same time
(b) a clear (but differently configured) majority wants him to play some role – although a more constrained role – in Pakistan’s politics.
(Click image for larger picture)
A total of 114 ATP visitors cast their votes in the poll which was launched very early on Friday and closed very late on Monday. While this is obviously NOT a scientific survey, the results are rather intriguing, even if not representative.
The ATP Poll gave readers five options in response to the question:
The option that got the most votes (41 votes; 36%) calls on Gen. Musharraf to retire at the end of 2006 and fully hand over both offices to his successors. While this was not an absolute majority, it is well over a third of all the votes cast in the poll. By comparison, only 19 of the 114 respondents (16.7%) preferred the option of Gen. Musharraf continuing in both offices simultaneously.
Just over a quarter of the ATP respondents (30 votes; 26.3%) want Gen. Musharraf to continue in only one of the two offices. There seems relatively little enthusiasm for passing the decision on whetehr he shoudl keep both offices or not to the next Assembly (15 votes, 13.2%) or of holding a national referendum (9 votes, 7.9%).
Of course, this is simply a ‘pulse of the blog’ poll and is NOT a scientific or representative survey. However, the results are interesting nonetheless; at least to the extent that they say something about the cohort that is likely to visit a blog such as ATP and vote in such a poll (i.e., educated, mobile, technically savvy, and globally connected Pakistanis).
While one must caution against over-analyzing these results, at least three points are worth noting; if only to nudge a discussion:
- Given that the technocratic classes tend to support (and be highly represented in) military governments in Pakistan including this one, it is noteworthy that ATP’s (technocratic?) readership chose the ‘retirement option’ (36%) for Gen. Musharraf as often as it did.
- There seems to be a sense that Gen. Musharraf should NOT continue with twin-offices into the future. Only one-sixth of the respondents (16.7%) chose this option. While those who opted for a referendum option or having the next Assembly decide (total 21.2%) may be seen as sitting on the fence on this question, those calling for his retiring from at least one office (and possibly both) were in a clear majority (total 62.3%).
- Not withstanding the above, and in fairness, it should also be noted that a majority of the respondents do, in fact, see (want?) some continued role for Gen. Musharraf — if not in both offices, then in at least one. This finding does not contradict the earlier finding; it only adds nuance (and possibly confusion).
So, where does all of this leave us? Maybe I was onto something when I had responded to a questioner in Washington DC by suggesting that public opinion amongst Pakistanis remains divided and uncertain on the future of Gen. Musharraf.
Maybe what these numbers suggest is that those responding to our poll see a continued role for Gen. Musharraf in Pakistan politics; but they would like to see him having less of a role than he has had in the past (also see earlier ATP post on democracy in Pakistan).
What do you think?
Musharraf is #1 in popularity;(http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/sto ry/2006/12/061216_mush_survey_as.shtml).
Rabi dear,
See you don’t have to have 100% literacy rate to have democracy. There are countries were there is democracy even with a literacy rate lower then ours.
I’m afraid you are wrong again, It wasn’t the killing of Mullahs and Mullaism that brought democracy in Turkey and that will not be the case of any other Muslim democractic country. Iran is a very democratic country and it din’t kill mullahs to become one. As for Musharraf he will not kill the Mullahs because thats his B TEAM, he is the reason that they became so strong in Politics now. Again killing is not a solution to any problem anywhere.
Actually Z Bhutto’s term and nawaz’s last term has proved that democracy can work in Pakistan. Again you can’t bring down civilians by saying the Army is better at everything. Iqbal’s this line can be said for the ARMY GENERALS,
Yeah Shikayat Nahi, Hein In K Khazanay Maa’moor
Nahi Mehfil Mein Jinhein Baat Bhi Karnay Ka Sha’oor
(transaltaion)
This is not our complaint that such alone are blesse,
Who do not know the etiquette, nor even can converse
About the corruption rate, if you have an attitude like that about the truth then I assume you are not passionate about “the truth”. It was done by an independent group, not just for Pakistan but all the countries of the world. You don’t have to look for corruption in LANDA BAZAAR, BURNS ROAD AND SADDAR BAZAR. Karachi, my city, is just one city of PAkistan.
About wikipedia, it is not based on opnions and reasons, it has facts collected from different sources(mentioned in reference section). If you don’t believe with those thats fine. But calling it biased is an irrational statement.
“Of the many forms of patriotism, denial is one of the most powerful.â€
OK I’ll admit I was wrong about the literacy rate but even 50% is rubbish. As for Turkey being democratic how did they get it? Thanks to Attarturk who killed off all the Mullahs to end Mullahism, I wouldn’t mind Musharaf doing the same, at that point Pakistan would be in a much better state to accept Democracy. Once that, the Sharia laws and corruption (I’ll get back to this point) are put to rest.
As for the army not “letting the democratic government complete their term” they have not had the choice but to take over from the democratic government. It’s painfully obvious that it has failed historically so why would it be any different now? I am not saying that the army is the only choice Zia proved it wasn’t but both Bhuttos, Nawaz and the countless before Ayub have proved that Pakistan is not ready for democracy.
As for the army allocation being so large I can’t say I’m not suprised. Have you recently checked what the army does in the country? They do everything and anything that is on a large scale. That includes Civil Engineering, something that our private sectors sorely lack. So if that is the case then of course they would demand a large budget. Unfortunately a healthy part of that budget is spent into buying Generals etc off, so really the problem that we’re boiling down to is two things. Religion and Corruption.
As for the corruption rate increasing after the coup I don’t care what pile of crap you throw onto the table because statistics can be spun, thats why they employ Spin Doctors! From my recent extensive trips to Karachi I will say that corruption has not increased, nor has it decreased. Its still the same, just that the only difference is our liberated media has exposed corruption to the public more than it ever was before.
You mentioned Wikipedia, yes its good but then it has a lot of biased opinion in it, though you could say that my opinion is biased as well ;)
As for Zia he was an idiot anyway I never said he wasn’t.
As for Ayub losing the ’65 war WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU SMOKING???? We lost the ’71 war not the ’65 war, In ’65 we were smashed India and a cease-fire took place. Here’s a fact maybe you might want to google yourself, we bombed up to Delhi. I won’t say that Ayub was the reason because those that laid down their lives and those who fought were the ones that did everything. It’s good to know that they are remembered(!).
And you saying America would have bombed Pak army I guess you didn’t read the bit where they say American bombs aren’t entirely 100% accurate :)
RABI
the biggest lie and the twist of history historian have one in Zias era was to make Bhutto resposible for the tragedy of east pakistan!u know it never rains if there arent any clouds!the clouds cae after the “so called progressive era” of Ayub!1958 till 1969 they dint develop east pakistan an the growing consensus in EPak was right they were left behind!we had not a single match making factory there when we were takin all match makin wood from there!army ploughed the land badly and the poor Bhutto had to reap the poor crop!and he was made responsible as the historians made another prank like”islam spread by sword
if it wasnt army pakistan would have been the most progress nation!!! Mush i guess shud juss leave the country after he removes his uniform!imagine the top post of our country is run by a person not allowed to do so! wat will happpen to the country!he came like zia came to curb corruption an is sittin among the most corrupt politicians!he lost his worth!i guess he shud be hanged to teach upcomming cheifs!
PS: i aint a PML(n) PPP or any thing!!! {smiles}