democracy shemocracy

I can't make up my mind about one issue that is extremely crucial - Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf! Is he good or is he bad? Is he right or is he wrong? Should he stay or should he be removed?

Now I have too many pieces of information pushing me to think in favor of Musharraf. But the problem arises with the recent events in Pakistan wherein the people who had been supporting Musharraf till now took a U-turn.

Musharraf had now for eight years been proclaimed to be the most liberal of all military dictators that have ruled Pakistan. I understand that he was trying very hard, from day one, to please everyone. Coming from the highly heterogeneous society that is India, I understand his predicament.

The problem I have with the liberal citizens of Pakistan is that I think they are talking in the superficial language of President Bush. They are demanding democracy at the cost of anything. To me the idea of forcefully enforcing democracy just for the sake of having a "legitimate" government is absurd. Considering the political history of Pakistan, it seems like the long-existing pattern - a military dictator followed by a democratically elected government followed by a military dictator - is well on it's way once again.

I have some guilt about favoring a military dictator - but what one needs to remember is the context of Pakistan. Thanks to Bush and his missionary antics, we are creating rules which are disconnected from grassroot realities. The idea of spreading democracy as if that is the sole criteria of being civilized reminds me of the white man's burden! I refuse to think of democracy as an elixir to the world's problems just because someone tells me it is.

Though I have a lot more to say about this matter but seems like it is clear what I think about Musharraf. I think he is the best thing that happened to Pakistan since it's creation and in the absence of anyone better to take his place, I think he should stay.