In a recent interview with Aaj TV, PTI Chairman Imran Khan touched a nerve with many people perturbed over military playing a role in political affairs as he recalled that during the 2014 PTI sit-in he had a meeting with the then army chief, General Raheel Sharif, who had asked him to end the sit-in. And that the general had offered to act as a mediator with the assurance that his demand for a fair probe into alleged electoral rigging would be accepted. This is not a startling disclosure. In fact, it was known at the time that the government had given the Army chief its nod to mediate and Imran and his co-protester PAT chief Tahir-ul-Qadri had happily and openly gone for the meeting. What causes unease is that all three disputants had no qualms about the army chief mediating a political dispute. That though did not help; the sit-in was called off because of the terrorist attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar. The government later accepted the demand for a judicial probe into the alleged electoral rigging. It would have looked better had it chosen to do that without seeking the intervention, in a political dispute, of those who are under oath not to indulge in politics.
No lessons seem to have been learnt from the chequered political history of this country. Squabbles among politicians were repeatedly exploited by Bonapartist adventurers to seize political power. Although this time no apparent harm was done to the democratic process, worries remain about an imbalance in civil-military relations with the latter perceived to be, if not actually, taking up more and more space that belongs to the former. There is no denying though that part of the problem lies with the political leadership. Since the restoration of democracy in 2008, the need to build democratic institutions has been subordinated to the rulers' personal interests, resulting in the ceding of civilian space to those whose business it is not to decide matters of war and peace or foreign policy. The 2013 was the first time political power was peacefully transferred from one democratically-elected government to another - a hallmark of democratic system - raising hopes things from thereon would function in a smooth fashion. But democratic process has had a rough ride all this while.
Elections are not the be-all and end-all of democracy, but a means to an end: good governance, rule of law, protection of the people's basic rights. Which is ensured by resilient institutions. Sadly, the ruling parties have failed to grasp that democracy is as strong as the state institutions. As head of the executive branch, the Prime Minister needs to lend strength to Parliament by regularly participating in its proceedings, and also allowing accountability bodies to act independently. The judiciary should not only do justice but should be seen doing justice. This democracy is not there yet, but the struggle is on. It is as much a responsibility of those in uniform as those in civvies to work in the greater interest of this country and its people by concentrating on exercising their constitutionally assigned functions.