中国城市综合发展2017排名出炉 北上深蝉联三甲

百度 郦道元在《水经注》中也曾描述过河北的地暖。

The signing of the Charter of Democracy between Shaheed Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif to counter the common threat to Democracy during the Martial Law regime of Pervez Musharraf marks a rare moment of political unity in Pakistan’s turbulent history. It threatened the non-democratic forces in Pakistan. These two parties, PPP and PMLN, had a complicated history and didn’t have a good relationship in the past. IJI was created against Benazir Bhutto’s government under the umbrella of a few political generals, with Nawaz Sharif at that time. PMLN had its initial roots during the Zia-ul-Haq dictatorship. Before the Zia regime, Nawaz Sharif was not a prominent political figure. His political career took off under Zia-ul Haq's dictatorship. Later, after the death of Zia, he made PML-N and declared himself the political successor of Zia ul Haq. Nawaz Sharif’s politics till 1999 is a separate debate. Nawaz Sharif did not become a threat to the undemocratic forces even after he signed the Charter of Democracy.

As I said earlier, the Charter of Democracy was regarded by undemocratic forces as a death knell. After Nawaz was outed by Musharraf in 1999, he changed his political ideology as well. Musharraf started sensing that his 8-year-long regime is crumbling. At the same time, Musharraf threatened Benazir Bhutto not to return to Pakistan, otherwise her life could be at stake.

It may be pointed out that when IJI was formed, it was not just Nawaz Sharif and a few generals. IJI had the support of the Taliban and Al-Qaida, who were against the rule of a Woman as Prime Minister. Their patriarchal roots were shaken as their interpretation of religious rules for Women was abrogated. Musharraf threatened Benazir Bhutto with these non-state actors who helped to topple her government with the IJI.

But Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan and received a historic welcome. Her return shook the Musharraf regime, and the Charter of Democracy made the military regime nervous. These nonpolitical forces felt the need for a 3rd political force which could serve them better. When Benazir Bhutto resumed her political activities, she was threatened to stop them, but she did not comply. As we discussed, Nawaz Sharif’s political roots, the Establishment never considered Nawaz Sharif a real threat. They knew he could be managed. But Benazir was a different sort. Her political growth during Zia’s Martial Law, MRD, assassination of her father, and so many things made her ‘BENAZIR’.  

These non-political forces decided to get rid of Benazir Bhutto to ensure their control over the system. Benazir Bhutto was assassinated, and her death remains a mystery. However, it is widely believed that non-political forces were involved. Musharraf also said in an interview that some military generals could be involved in it, but I had nothing to do with it. The PML-N could never be allowed to be the sole political force in the country. To uphold their dominance, nonpolitical forces worked on the third political force so that the governments could be toppled and the dominance of these forces could remain intact. Nonpolitical forces maligned Asif Zardari and tried to build a public perception that he was the beneficiary of Benazir Bhutto’s death and that he was behind her assassination.

As time passed, the real beneficiary chosen as the third force was introduced as a saviour of this country against the two major political forces, namely the PPP and the PML-N. The narrative-building war for him started using all the tools of information, specifically social media. All the electable politicians were gradually asked to join this third force, the Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaaf (PTI). Every common man who was serious about politics tried to turn to PTI using every means of information. He was introduced as the only one who cares about people’s problems. His fiery speeches were designed to attract the common masses as an alternative to existing political forces, and also for those few elderly people who had Zulfikar Bhutto’s people-friendly and engaging style with common men in mind. He attracted youth with inflammatory rhetoric. He was keen to be projected as ‘MASEEHA’, the only one who has solutions to all the problems of the common man.

Then 2018 controversial elections were held, and the ‘Maseeha’ was finally made to become the Prime Minister. Soon, “MASEEHA” proved himself to be the worst mistake of his selectors. He was, of course, a dummy, but at least he was the façade. He ruined foreign relations that led to Pakistan’s isolation in the comity of nations. He then became a liability, and political parties were given free rein to remove him. So, he became the first PM in the history of Pakistan to be removed through the only democratic way, through the vote of no-confidence.

After his removal, he declared that out of power, he would be more dangerous. But thankfully, this time, all the stakeholders in the country were sensible. No stakeholder tried to save this man who was behind almost every chaos in the country. He ruined social values by inventing vulgar language against his political opponents. Now, whenever the country faces any challenge from an enemy within or outside, his party and social media are seen working against the interests of the country. Now, he is jailed, and his PTI can be seen as an Orphan Child fighting each other without any direction. What else can be expected from the party, which was launched in a hurry just as an alternative force and a failed attempt to fill the political vacuum after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto?

PTI today stands in confusion, much like the confusion in which it was born. Political movements without ideological grounding rarely offer stability, and PTI’s rise amid engineered chaos was never rooted in public struggle or democratic values. In stark contrast, Benazir Bhutto emerged from the grassroots, shaped by resistance under a brutal dictatorship, and carried forward a legacy built on sacrifice and public service. A party designed as a substitute for such a leader, through artificial means, was always bound to remain chaotic. Its eventual decline is not surprising; it’s simply the destiny of political constructs built without purpose, ideology, or connection to the people.