Militaries and democracies
Mohammed Morsi, along with hundreds of his supporters, was sentenced to death last week by an Egyptian court for a jail break in 2011. This death sentence has sparked domestic and international outrage amongst leaders of other nations. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey has expressed his concern by saying, “Egypt is returning to old Egypt. You know what old Egypt is about don’t you?” Similarly, Imran Khan tweeted that the death sentence “bodes ill for the Egyptian people and for Egyptian democracy.” He further compared Morsi’s sentence to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s hanging by the military dictator Zia-ul-Haq.
The comparison that Imran Khan made is an obvious one but ideologically Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Zia-ul-Haq are polar opposites and the same goes for Bhutto and Morsi. Pakistan is still suffering from the after effects of Zia’s radical tenure, whereas Sisi is considered a liberal and progressive leader who has gathered popular support in recent months. Bhutto, in Pakistan’s case, was the liberal leader, unlike Morsi.
Morsi was Chairman of the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) when it was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood in the wake of the 2011 Egyptian revolution. He became the first elected Egyptian president in June 2012 and was ousted through a military coup in July 2013
Morsi was Chairman of the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) when it was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood in the wake of the 2011 Egyptian revolution. He became the first elected Egyptian president in June 2012 and was ousted through a military coup in July 2013. He was unseated because of his sheer unpopularity amongst the masses as Morsi awarded himself draconian powers to legislate without judicial review or consultation with the members of parliament. He also introduced an “Islamist” draft constitution which was criticised by the general public as the views of religious minorities and women were not taken into account.
The people of Egypt are suffering from an all-time high in unemployment, one of the driving forces of the uprisings in 2011, increased crime rate, rolling black outs, fuel shortages, etc. This all seems very familiar, as Pakistan is suffering from the same deep rooted issues.
The bigger question is that of democracy. Is Pakistan democratically more successful than Egypt? It depends on how you describe “more successful”. Keeping in mind the comparison above, Pakistan could claim to be in a better position as miraculously it is in the midst of its second democratic term. With this succession, have we as a nation progressed in any way? We are still suffering from the same problems Egypt is facing, let’s not forget terrorism?
Erdogan and Imran Khan referred to the undemocratic nature of the ousting of Morsi, a democratic leader, which was followed by a death sentence. Their comments stand in isolation as by-and-large Western proponents of democracy have remained silent. The sentencing of a democratically elected leader would theoretically be an international cause for concern, yet, apart from a few NGOs, little voice has been raised.
States like Egypt and Pakistan do realise the importance of democracy, but such states have spent far too much time under the rule of military dictators and the ghosts of military dictatorship will loom over their heads for quite some time. What both these countries need is a hybrid democracy where the general public is ready and willing to accept that their respective militaries will be involved in future governmental affairs.
Pakistan still depends a lot on its military. The majority want a democratic Pakistan with the army acting like “Big Brother”, keeping a watchful eye on each and every move the sitting government makes
Pakistan still depends a lot on its military. The majority want a democratic Pakistan with the army acting like “Big Brother”, keeping a watchful eye on each and every move the sitting government makes. Statements like this time they have finally chosen a good general or this general will certainly fix Pakistan are common place. Speculations of a coup are looming in the air at all times, like come this July, the army will take over, only then we will start to progress. The problem lies in these statements, as we are still dependent on the military fixing the state of affairs for us and not the democratically elected government.
The Arab Spring was by far one of the most promising and inspiring turn of events in recent history. It was started by the common man unaffiliated by a political party, representing the people at large. The hope generated by those revolutionaries shook the world and forced Mubarak to step down, ushering in a democratic election in Egypt.
The militaries in these nations will always play an important role in policy making and the sooner we realise this the better. If these two states really do share a parallel legacy, then their futures rely heavily on determining the appropriate, and perhaps necessary, role of military influence within the confines of democracy.