There are many interesting, and important conclusions to be drawn from this complex argument. But the most significant is this: a modern nation needs democracy and so it needs its politicians, however clumsy, corrupt, effete and power-crazed they may be. Because a military dictator can also be all of these things. The difference is, the political leader draws his power from the democratic process, so he has a stake in preserving that system, howsoever cynical he may be. The general draws his power by throttling the democratic system and its institutions and you can see the results of that in Pakistan. So, in a democracy, howsoever powerful a Lalu or Mayawati, they have to shut up and listen when the Supreme Court speaks. The election commission can publicly upbraid both Sonia Gandhi and Narendra Modi. We, the media, can question and curse who we want. It happens because the political class has the biggest stake in the democratic process, howsoever much it may wish to manipulate it. In contrast, a military dictator owes his power to the absence of institutions, of checks and balances. That is exactly what Musharraf has done to his judiciary, the election commission and even the media. That is why he has to summon the Scotland Yard to investigate Benazir’s assassination.

sg@expressindia.com