Thanks for the candid response. I submit here my humble request to look into the matter little deeper than what our ordinary vision can penetrate into. We need not to reinvent the wheel by mentioning and listing our problems in the fashion of a weeping suppliant. The problems are written on the wall which we see day in and day out. The military and civil bureaucracy that we have inherited from the British, was tailored-cut to serve the vested interest of the colonial master, and the legacy still lingering is aggravating our problems to the point of no return. The mimickery of the British parliamentary system that we keep on replicating, under the hallucination, that the same would prove as panacea to all our maladies is one thing which we would start repenting in the due course of our political development. The system which Britain has been practising since the early thirteen century, through its various phases of evolution, is no doubt, turned out to be one of the most greatest success stories. There was no harm that a nation after becoming independent, opted for the same system, but its failure poses many questions as to where it went wrong. The political parties are the bread and butter of every kind of republican constitution. In our case, instead of cherishing the democratic traditions within themselves, they were hijacked by the few blue eyed scions of the privileged. The military dictators who time and again attempted with great success to derail the democratic process, and the bureaucracy whose primary duty was to serve the people threw in its lot with them, and became the instrument of exploitation at a much larger scale. Thus the element of accountability which is the king-pin of good governance was nipped in the bud. Who can ask today as to where had they gone who while enjoying the numerous perks and benefits by virtue of their positions were brazenly negligent of the future energy needs of this country, and the Frankenstein of load-shedding is pushing us back to the stone-age. Who can fix the responsibility upon those demagogues whose erroneous policies opened up the safe heavens for the religious extremism and the innocent people are losing their lives and properties by the hand of a brainless terror? The answers to these questions lie simply in the system which guarantees the infallible process of accountability, strengthened with the genuine rule of law, whatever is its shape or form, doesn’t matter. Once the ruled enjoy the confidence of the ruling, and it is ensured that the sacred contract between the governed and the governing is established, the most vital objective of the national cohesion will imperceptibly be achieved.


Being a regular reader of Ayaz Amir, it would be quite unfair on my part not to acknowledge his excellence in dissecting the national politics with great precision and perspicuity. His article published on 14 April, 2006, under the caption "Problems of Pakistani horsemanship" deserves great applause indeed. The opening with Oliver's address to the Rump was interesting but not relevant to our part of the world. It is true that the struggle between the Cavaliers and the Roundheads gave birth to the ascendancy of the Puritans and the ouster of the Stuarts from the scene with the execution of Charles the first, but the law of diminishing was never applicable to the mindset of the British populace as far as monarchy and republicanism are concerned. The Long Parliament many a time convened and prorogued persisted and ultimately it was the army which terminated the civil war, restored democracy, and brought the Stuarts back to the throne. The lesson was so well learned that never again in the history of English people monarchy and the parliament confronted each other, and a peaceful coexistence of both till this time furnishes an excellent example of a political system that rules out even the necessity of a written constitution. The British Parliament aptly called as mother of all parliaments passed through numerous stages of evolution to reach at the present stage. Both the great political parties, Whig and the Tory, in the eighteenth century were not democratic the way democracy is defined and understood these days. Neither was prepared, according to G.W. Southgate, to undertake great social reforms, and both would have been appalled at the very suggestion of giving every man the right to vote. Promiscuous politicians and monarchs profligate, have created difficult situations, and instances such as selling the country to a foreign power and asking her military support to suppress the rebellion at home are still fresh on the pages of history. The infamous treaty of Dover by which Charles the second had not only cast his country headlong into the French vassalage but also promised to profess as Roman Catholic and all out efforts to reverse the entire process of Reformation. Among the courtiers that constituted the most notorious cabal, Charles had persons like Sir William Temple, the first diplomatist of the West, architect of the Tripple Alliance and restorer of the national glory. The most powerful ministers who supported the ignominious rule of Charles the second and then of James the second, could not prevent the nation to speak out its will and the Tripple alliance prevailed upon the treaty of Dover. The coalition which brought England, Holland, and Sweden together against the French ascendancy was an occasion of great national joy and the Dutch connection was further cemented by Temple when he succeeded in marrying the daughter of the late Duchess of York to the prince William, the great stedtholder of the United Provinces. When James the second abdicated the throne and went to France never to set foot on the English soil, the nation exerted its strength through its Parliament by choosing Mary and prince William as legal heirs to the throne and their combined rule made England the most powerful nation of the world. So the law of diminishing never worked on the systems emanating from the general will of the nation, Of course, it does when the people themselves get oblivious of their own will.