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?
Democracy or no democracy, its the good governance which matters. There is no democracy in china, UAE , Brunai, etc..
Well! I am in favour of Mushi to stay with his danda. I hope after the 2007 election he can be a bit more strict. If he stays alive, this is what he will do, so lets chill and enjoy ;-)
yes..His policies are pro-america, but soon there will be no need of that, as US is fast loosing its infulence in the world.
One thing to me is very clear…in order for us to evolve as a nation we really must be able to sustain a democracy without the constant break in between of the martial law…fine,we have always complained about our democratically elected rulers but we have to let a process and a system evolve for it to get to a point where it willeventually be perfect…we are a country whose constitution was changed more frequently than the salary for its government employees in the past 59 years. Every time an army general thinks he knows how to run the country better the only thing he does is put a halt to the evolution of our democracy. Let the people decide. Even if the elections are not fair and we don’t see a lot of new faces, let the people decide. The armed forces are there to protect our borders, not to sit inside the parliament. Let the democracy run the country and the General do what he was trained for. Pakistan is not a country at war, it is a country needing freedom from its own people.
Rabi,
It was really nice reading your opinions and I don’t completely disagree with you.
Our problem has always been this class that wants to control all the resources of the country. The fight has always been on the resources, be it East Pakistan or Balochistan. They even looted the funds that were suppose to be used for Kashmiri victims of the earthquake.
We never learn’t from our history. And I believe you know what happens to such people.
It is lamentable, that to be a good patriot one must become the enemy of the rest of mankind.
(Voltaire)
Jo Mushi ka ghaddar hai
woh maut ka haqdaar hai
Hey Baber, I’m not going to bother arguing with you anymore. It’s pointless. It’s so obvious that democracy has never worked in Pakistan. It can’t, not in the current state of the country and its people. It’s a shame really since the country is fantastic but its really, REALLY let down by the people in it.
The only thing that leaves me to think is we have our views crossed over the definition of “what is democracy?”.
In any case I will make my final thoughts on this which are there are no established western countries that have heavy religious influence in its governence. Those countries also seem to have a good literacy rate as well as a army that doesn’t interfere in things. Now you will point out that they are first world and we are third world and its not a fair comparison. that is true but then they all have one thing that Pakistan has not. A revolution to kill off the religious holds on the country, religion has never worked. The biggest proof is Iran, they were going places with the Shah, only for Khomeni to turn them back 50 years, fortunately for them they have come through those dark years. Attarturk pulled Turkey out of its third world roots as I mentioned earlier, now they are trying to break down Europe’s door.
It all boils down to one thing for me, remove religion. Every leader has been guilty for letting religion become the force with a single exception during which the country thrived. No it’s not Musharraf but I’ll give you the pleasure of looking it up.
The real killer to this country has been religion and people’s attitude they are standing in democracy’s way. This country needs a revolution. It doesn’t matter if it’s Civil or Military since they are both as corrupt and useless as one another. The change has to come from the people but not in the current state that the people are in, they are hopeless. A movement has to be born and hopefully with Musharraf freeing the Media. They, the media, has the power to make the difference and it will take several generations to turn this country around.