[DAWN] PAKISTAN has spent 34 out of its 68 years, or half its life, in internal political instability defined as regime instability, political emergencies and constitutional deadlocks. Long-term instability in Pakistain has been significantly higher than in East Asia and post-Partition India. The difference between Pakistain and India is large enough to make one wonder whether long-term instability may provide a significant part of the explanation for the recent divergence in growth.The politics of the high state has played out as a zero-sum game where the acquisition of power by one actor or a set of actors has not resulted in a 'stable acquisition of power'. Contrary to resulting in revolutionary 'change,' episodes of instability have typified persistent institutional and elite conflicts. Evidence shows that the years of political instability have been marginally higher under authoritarian rule, suggesting that reversion to this form of rule is not a panacea. However,
ars longa, vita brevis...
a significant portion of the life of democratic regimes has also been spent managing instability. The pressing question today is what are the elements of a political compact that can catalyse the transition to a 'stable' democratic state?