I was deeply troubled by the news. This was another tragedy unfolding in the name of democracy. In my article in this column last month, I mentioned the tragedy in Pakistan, also in the name of democracy. What do all these events mean? Why are people killing and fighting each other in the name of democracy?
The victors will always claim that they were elected ‘democratically’. However, the vanquished also claim their democratic right to protest against election results preferring to succumb to undemocratic acts and violence in order that their rights be heard.
Is this the true face of democracy? For many, democracy means the power of the people to elect a leader. A Leader, elected democratically, garners the support from the majority of the population. The question is, does the elected leader really lead? Does he command the population? With the results almost equally divided, as was the case in Kenya, the opposition refused to accept the winner as their leader. As far as Kenya is concerned, democracy has failed to unite the country under a democratically elected leadership.
Things are a bit different in other countries, Thailand for example. In the 2006 election, Thaksin Shinawatra was returned to power with the overwhelming support of the population. Unfortunately his re-election was not well received by the military, another power-broker in the country. The conflict between the democratically elected leader and military erupted into a power struggle which ended in a ‘coup-de-tat’. It now appears that democracy is not always the best solution to elect a leader. We have to wait for the latest developments in Thailand, after the population has elected their new leader. Will the military honour their choice?
The two scenarios above teach us about the importance of educating the population with regard to their rights to choose a leader. With proper education, the population will able to make informed decision, not one merely based on propaganda and political campaigns, or a decision on the basis of emotion. The population should not allow themselves to be manipulated by ambitious leaders who are willing to sacrifice the lives of their supporters in order to achieve their greedy desires. Nor should the population allow their rights to be removed by force or any undemocratic acts.
The irony is, those who organise and hold protests do so under the banner of democracy. While the elected leader claims to be elected democratically, the dissidents also claim their protests are democratic. Are we seeing two faces of democracy? Why are they resorting to actions which may kill democracy?
Is the same happening in Palestine? Hamas was elected to power by the Palestinian people, but this has really irked Israel and the West. Now the West which preaches democracy are the ones who have refused to accept the peoples choice. With all the embargoes and restrictions of movement, no electricity and water supply to the Gaza Strip, Israel and the West are punishing the Muslim for exercising their democratic rights. Is this democracy? Why does the West fail to honour the democratically elected leadership in Palestine?
While democratic reforms are being emphasized in Myanmar, Thailand, Pakistan, Kenya and many other countries, why are they keeping quiet with regard to Palestine? Is there another face of democracy?