As we observed in our pre-election survey, Security is not the only reason for the low voter turnout in this election. There is another more important reason: The poor choice of candidates to vote for. In some areas, the voter percentage is around 12% with overall voter percentage still due, it seems that the party which will form the government will not have more than 20% of total votes. What a farce of democracy in an environment which is still not prepared to accept its essence or ethics. This happens when transplant ideologies are imposed on a people whose mental and cultural baggage is too heavy for the concept. We conclude that the Elections were generally fair and, more importantly, violence levels have been rather low thanks to a very heavy deployment of security forces all over the country. The government has some reasons to pat itself on the back on this achievement both on managing a rather acceptable level of fairness and secondly on managing the security issue well. These recently concluded general elections manifested the popular commitment to democratic processes and represented the success of the democratic forces in the on-going confrontation between authoritarianism and democratic aspirations. The balance of power has shifted in favour of democratic and participatory forces. However, this confrontation is not over — yet. Three important developments have far-reaching implications for the future of politics in Pakistan. First, a highly centralized Musharraf-led and army-dominated political system has been rejected by the electorate. Pakistanis want the political system to be more responsive to their aspirations and concerns. This represents the typical dilemma of authoritarian military rulers in Pakistan who may hold on to power for many years but remain unable to create a self-sustaining political order. Ayub Khan and Zia-ul Haq failed in their efforts address this issue. Musharraf did not learn any lessons from the past and thought that he would be able to create viable political institutions and processes. His attempt has also faltered. Second, the elections mark a significant decline of the Islamist political parties, rectifying their artificial rise in the 2002 elections for a number of reasons. Their five-year rule in NWFP appears to have alienated the voters who also felt threatened by suicide attacks and bombings in civilian areas. These Islamic parties avoided a categorical condemnation of the groups involved in suicide attacks and often described these incidents as a consequence of Pakistan’s pro-America policy. Their diminished vote count and seats in these elections are close to what they used to secure in the past. Nevertheless, they will continue to be a player in the political process and will act as an important pressure group. Third, the civil society groups and the media have gained salience during 2007-08. This has given much confidence to the societal groups to take a firm position on social, economic and political issues and contest the government. Though this is an urban phenomenon, it has strengthened the demands for constitutionalism, civil and political rights and participatory governance on a national level. The private sector media has shown resilience in the face of pressures generated by the government to restrain them. The print and electronic media have contributed to political awareness in the society, especially when the Musharraf government tried to stifle them. These trends will strengthen democracy and challenge any government that does not respect democracy and the needs and aspirations of the common folks. Every political success has in-built challenges. The newly elected leadership is keen to demonstrate its efficacy by emphasizing the centrality of the parliament and prime minister in the political system. This brings them in conflict with President Pervez Musharraf who despite the electoral setback of his allies wants to hang on to power. A more serious problem arises from the impatience that the lawyers’ community is displaying in its demand of the restoration of the ousted judges by March 8. Nawaz Sharif’s periodic statements for an early restoration of the judges reinforce their resolve to pursue this demand. However, the lawyers do not realize that the new government may not be fully installed by their deadline. The lawyers and some political parties boycotted the elections, reducing the margin of victory for the democratic forces. Now, any confrontation with the newly elected leadership on the judges’ issue will adversely affect the shared agenda of constitutionalism, democracy and the independence of judiciary. The lawyers should have confidence in the newly elected leaders and give them time to do the necessary spade work for reversing the amendment in the constitution and restoring the judges. They need to show patience. The new government faces a number of serious internal and external challenges in addition to the lawyers’ demand for an immediate restoration of the judges. The most serious issues pertain to the need for realistic pricing of fuel, food items and electric-power which were not addressed by the pre-election interim and PMLQ governments. Their failure to address these issues and neglect of the distributive aspect of economic growth confronts the new government with a difficult economic situation at a time when people expect them to provide economic relief in the face of inflation, price hikes and shortages of some food items. The issues of internal security and fighting terrorism are no less significant. The gains of the political struggle in 2007 and the elections in 2008 can be sustained only by a comprehensive and long term strategy through a consensus-oriented approach. The political parties that have performed in the elections and the societal groups need to hold a dialogue with an accommodating disposition for evolving a shared approach. It is important for the political leaders and societal groups to recognize that they have won only one round in their confrontation with the forces of authoritarianism. They have to continue their struggle for constitutionalism, democracy and the independence of judiciary by working together rather than by scoring points against each other. Democracy is the art of working together in a spirit of mutual respect and accommodation within a constitutional and representative framework. Most failures of the politicians in the past can be attributed to their mutual jealousies. This enabled the military and bureaucratic elite to expand their domains of power and agency. If they cannot work together in the post-election period on a mutually agreed upon agenda they will not be able to consolidate their electoral triumph and, once again, will lose the political initiative to authoritarian forces.