Ten years ago, shortly after the Western forces invaded Iraq, President Bush, on May 1, 2003, spoke with a banner behind him proudly proclaiming "Mission Accomplished."  When the Zardari regime completed its 5-year term, TIME hailed it with the banner headline, "A Giant Leap for Pakistani Democracy."  But is it? 
When the Zardari setup was installed, a top US policy expert gushed, calling it "possibly the best government Pakistan has ever had." Was it?
Policy prescriptions often ignore accompanying pitfalls. The glut of information, easy media access, and instant communication has not necessarily expedited a journey into enlightenment.  In some respects, it has been a dark passage, with disproportionate emphasis on image-building of those at the helm. 
Perception is outranking substance.  It may be true, too, for the conventional notion of democracy when equated only with voting and elections.  In practice, it becomes a pre-rigged inequity.  And it ends up validating the monopoly of a tiny over-privileged slice of society.
The manipulation of imagery was one of the points stressed by this scribe when he addressed a forum at American University in Washington recently.  The example given in this connection was of General Petraeus, lionized by the media for his role in Iraq and then in Afghanistan.  A heroic Presidential aura began to be fostered around him.  Now, pursuant to a 15-month investigation carried out by Britain's Guardian newspaper along with BBC, it has emerged that a network of torture cells were being operated in Iraq under US aegis and a key person overseeing it reported directly to General Petraeus.  This has been attributed as one of the key factors escalating sectarian strife and inflaming civil war in Iraq. 
Also, Burmese Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi has kept an indefensible silence over the Buddhist butchery of the Burmese Rohingya Muslim community.
The point made by this scribe was that civil society pressure applied by the youth, and spearheaded by it, can have a major impact on politics and policies. 
44 years ago, the apartheid regime of South African Prime Minister Vorster refused to accept an MCC touring cricket side, which included Basil D'Oliveira, a non-white.  Then, Peter Hain, a young anti-apartheid activist, became a catalyst.  The ensuing outrage led to South African isolation on the global stage.  Two decades later, President de Klerk grasped the untenable status quo and conceded to Nelson Mandela.
Another youth-sparked revolt has been the Arab upheaval.
Recent precedent suggests that there is no such thing as a final solution through force.  The more pertinent remedy is upright leadership that can engineer an equitable rule of law.  But it can't be done by mere chair-occupiers and the hoarding of riches.
The December 14 school massacre by a sole shootist, armed with easily accessible lethal weaponry, exposes the haplessness of America to set its own house in order.
The Muslim community has failed to stamp its voice and vision on the big stage.  Because of it, it gets a regular dose from the West.  But, perhaps, now is the time when America needs a sharp dose of its own advice.