Looking for the CSS 2025 essay “Rich in Politicians, We Desperately Need Statesmen”? Cssprepforum is Pakistan’s largest community with all CSS past paper essays and CSS solved essays. Continue reading!
Miss Bushra (Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies and CSS, PMS PA Coach), a student of Sir Syed Kazim Ali, has attempted the CSS 2025 essay “Rich in Politicians, We Desperately Need Statesmen” using Sir Kazim’s proven essay writing pattern and strategy. As Pakistan’s leading CSS and PMS English Essay and Precis coach, Sir Syed Kazim Ali has been the only English mentor with the highest success rate of his students in Essays and Precis for over a decade. The essay is uploaded to help other competitive aspirants learn and practice essay writing techniques and patterns to qualify for the essay paper.
Outline
Introduction
While Pakistan’s political landscape is abundant with politicians focused on personal power, party loyalty, and short-term electoral gains, what the nation truly needs is statesmen, leaders who prioritize national stability, institutional integrity, and long-term development because the country’s is marked by political instability, corruption, and governance failures, proving that without visionary leadership, the country cannot achieve sustainable progress.
Understanding the Difference Between Politicians and Statesmen
A Reflection of Weak Statesmanship in Pakistan
- Political Polarization and Lack of National Unity
- Weak Institutions and Political Interference
- Economic Mismanagement and Lack of Reform
Statesmanship vs. Political Opportunism in Pakistan’s History
- Muhammad Ali Jinnah: The Only True Statesman
- The Lost Vision After Jinnah
- 1971: The Tragedy of Political Selfishness
- The Era of Political Confrontation (1980s–Present)
Counterarguments: Are Politicians Necessary for Democracy?
- Counterargument-1: Elected representatives reflect public opinion and ensure democratic governance
- Refutation: In Pakistan, political leaders often serve personal and party interests rather than the electorate’s welfare, leading to governance failures
- Counterargument-2: Politicians must navigate power structures to maintain government stability
- Refutation: Statesmen, unlike career politicians, prioritize the nation over temporary political alliances, ensuring stable governance through effective policymaking
- Counterargument-3: Given Pakistan’s history of civil-military tensions, bureaucracy, and external influences, pure statesmanship is unrealistic
- Refutation: While challenges exist, leaders with vision and integrity, such as those in other nations, have successfully navigated similar complexities for long-term stability
Why Pakistan Needs Statesmen, Not Just Politicians
- Statesmen Prioritize National Interest Over Political Rivalries
- Evidence: Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s leadership focused on unity and nation-building rather than party dominance
- Statesmen Make Long-Term Decisions for Economic Stability
- Evidence: Dr. Mahbub ul Haq’s development of the Human Development Index (HDI) as a measure of economic progress rather than just GDP growth
- Statesmen Strengthen Democratic Institutions
- Evidence: Liaquat Ali Khan’s efforts to establish Pakistan’s first democratic framework
- Statesmen Promote National Unity Over Ethnic and Sectarian Divisions
- Evidence: Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s initial efforts to unify the nation through political and economic reforms before political miscalculations weakened his leadership
- Statesmen Resist Populism and Implement Difficult but Necessary Reforms
- Evidence: Pervez Musharraf’s economic and telecom sector reforms, which brought growth despite political controversies
- Statesmen Foster Diplomatic Relations for Global Standing
- Evidence: Benazir Bhutto’s role in improving Pakistan’s international image and foreign diplomacy
- Statesmen Work Towards Sustainable National Development
- Evidence: Abdul Sattar Edhi, though not a politician, demonstrated statesmanship through his lifelong commitment to public welfare
- Statesmen Ensure Rule of Law and Justice
- Evidence: Judges like Justice Cornelius upheld constitutional values despite political pressures
How Pakistan Can Cultivate Statesmanship
- Educational Reforms for Leadership Development
- Strengthening Democratic Institutions to Reduce Political Manipulation
- Encouraging Policy-Based Politics Over Personality-Based Campaigns
- Enhancing Voter Awareness to Demand Statesmanship
Conclusion
Pakistan’s political landscape is crowded with politicians, yet the nation remains devoid of true statesmen. Politicians have always prioritized personal power, party loyalty, and electoral victories, while the real challenges of governance, such as economic instability, institutional failure, and national unity, continue to worsen. In fact, the political leadership in Pakistan has long been defined by short-term opportunism rather than long-term vision, resulting in an endless cycle of political turmoil, corruption, and weak governance. Although elections and political negotiations are essential for democracy, they become meaningless when leaders lack the foresight and integrity required to serve the nation above their personal ambitions. History proves that great nations are built by statesmen and visionary leaders who rise above party politics to establish institutions, promote national stability, and make difficult yet necessary reforms for the greater good. Pakistan’s failure to cultivate such leaders has left it in a perpetual state of crisis. From the political polarization that fueled the 1971 tragedy to the economic mismanagement that continues today, the country’s trajectory demonstrates that politicians alone cannot ensure progress. This essay argues that Pakistan must move beyond mere politics and actively seek statesmen: leaders who possess the wisdom, courage, and ethical responsibility to secure a stable, prosperous, and united future for the nation.
A clear distinction must be made between politicians and statesmen, as understanding this difference is crucial to analyzing Pakistan’s leadership crisis. A politician is primarily concerned with winning elections, securing party dominance, and leveraging public sentiment for personal or party gain. Such leaders prioritize short-term political victories over long-term national progress. In contrast, a statesman is a visionary who focuses on sustainable development, ethical governance, and national unity, often making decisions that serve future generations rather than immediate electoral gains. The key differences between the two are stark: while politicians seek power for personal ambition, statesmen work for the welfare of the people; politicians exploit divisions to secure authority, whereas statesmen foster national cohesion. Given Pakistan’s ongoing political instability, the absence of true statesmanship continues to hinder its progress.
Coming towards the political crisis of Pakistan, the country’s political crisis is a direct consequence of weak statesmanship, where personal ambition and political rivalry have taken precedence over national interest. The country remains deeply polarized, with political parties prioritizing electoral victories and party survival over long-term governance. Instead of building on previous administrations’ policies, every new government dismantles its predecessor’s initiatives, leading to inconsistent economic and governance strategies. This lack of continuity has prevented the formation of a stable policy framework essential for national progress. Furthermore, deep-seated political vendettas fuel instability as leaders focus on undermining opponents rather than fostering national unity.
In addition to political polarization, institutional erosion remains a major concern. Instead of reinforcing democratic institutions, politicians exploit them for personal and political gains. The judiciary, bureaucracy, and media have frequently been manipulated to serve political agendas, weakening their credibility and effectiveness. Moreover, economic mismanagement persists as short-term populist measures take precedence over sustainable economic planning. Rather than investing in long-term industrial growth and human capital development, successive governments opt for temporary financial relief, leaving the economy vulnerable to recurring crises. True statesmanship, which focuses on institutional integrity and strategic reforms, remains absent, further exacerbating Pakistan’s governance challenges.
To understand the stark contrast between statesmanship and political opportunism in Pakistan’s history, it is essential to examine key leadership moments that shaped the nation’s trajectory. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the sole true statesman of Pakistan, envisioned a country built on constitutionalism, religious harmony, and economic prosperity. His leadership was driven by principles, prioritizing long-term institutional development over immediate political gains. However, after his passing, Pakistan entered an era of instability marked by leadership crises, frequent government changes, and military interventions. Instead of continuing Jinnah’s vision, successive leaders engaged in political opportunism, prioritizing party dominance over national unity. This resulted in constitutional disruptions, economic mismanagement, and weakened democratic institutions. Hence, the absence of true statesmanship allowed short-term political interests to prevail, leading to stagnation rather than progress. Had Pakistan’s post-independence leaders upheld Jinnah’s legacy, the country could have established a stable governance framework essential for long-term development.
Besides, the absence of statesmanship in Pakistan’s political history reached its most devastating point in 1971, when political selfishness and rivalry led to the division of East and West Pakistan. The failure to accommodate democratic demands, coupled with political arrogance and an unwillingness to engage in meaningful reconciliation, resulted in one of the gravest national tragedies. Instead of prioritizing unity, leaders engaged in power struggles, ultimately leading to the disintegration of the country. This trend of political confrontation has continued from the 1980s to the present, with cycles of victimization, disqualifications, and the dissolution of assemblies becoming hallmarks of Pakistan’s governance. Leaders have remained focused on consolidating personal and party power rather than establishing a stable and long-term national vision. As a result, Pakistan’s political landscape remains volatile, with institutions weakened by constant political interference. The nation desperately needs statesmen who can rise above party politics and prioritize national stability.
However, some argue that politicians are essential for democracy as they represent the people’s voice. The fundamental principle of democracy rests on elected officials reflecting public opinion and ensuring governance based on the majority’s will. In theory, politicians act as intermediaries between the state and citizens, advocating for policies that align with societal needs. Nevertheless, in Pakistan, this ideal is rarely realized. Rather than serving the electorate, political leaders frequently prioritize personal and party interests, leading to governance failures and instability. For instance, Pakistan’s political landscape has witnessed frequent instances of political parties engaging in power struggles instead of addressing pressing national issues such as economic reform and institutional development. This demonstrates that mere political representation does not guarantee effective governance. Therefore, while politicians are necessary for democratic structures, true progress requires statesmen who prioritize national interests over partisan agendas.
Another common argument in favour of politicians is that political negotiations are essential for maintaining government stability. In a complex political system like Pakistan’s, where power structures are deeply entrenched, politicians must form alliances and navigate party dynamics to prevent instability. It is argued that without these negotiations, governments would collapse, leading to chaos. However, while political manoeuvring may offer short-term stability, it often comes at the cost of national progress. For example, repeated political compromises in Pakistan have led to weak governance, where policies are shaped more by political survival than by national interest. In contrast, statesmen prioritize long-term stability through effective policymaking rather than short-lived political deals. By focusing on institutional strengthening and transparent governance, statesmen foster sustainable development that does not rely on constant political bargaining. Therefore, while negotiations are inevitable in politics, they should serve national stability rather than individual or party interests.
Additionally, some argue that Pakistan’s political system is too complex for idealistic statesmanship. The country’s history of civil-military tensions, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and external geopolitical influences makes it difficult for leaders to focus solely on national development. Critics contend that statesmanship is an impractical ideal in a system where leaders must constantly navigate crises and power struggles. However, history has shown that true statesmanship can thrive even in challenging political environments. For instance, leaders such as Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew successfully transformed their nations despite political and external pressures, demonstrating that visionary leadership is not an unattainable ideal. In Pakistan, while political challenges persist, statesmen with integrity and a long-term vision can implement meaningful reforms that address systemic issues rather than merely reacting to crises. Thus, the argument that Pakistan’s political system is too complex for statesmanship underestimates the transformative power of strong, principled leadership.
While some argue that politicians are essential for democratic governance, history demonstrates that true progress requires statesmen to prioritize national interests over political rivalries. Unlike politicians, who often engage in power struggles, statesmen work for the collective good of the country. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah serves as the prime example of statesmanship, as his leadership was centred on unity, constitutionalism, and nation-building rather than party dominance. His vision for Pakistan was rooted in inclusivity and long-term development, ensuring stability in the nation’s early years. In contrast, contemporary political leaders frequently engage in partisan conflicts, prioritizing electoral victories over governance. This approach weakens national institutions and hampers progress. Jinnah’s example proves that statesmen who transcend political divisions can lay the foundation for sustainable development. Therefore, Pakistan’s leadership must shift from self-serving politics to statesmanship, ensuring stability and unity over personal and party interests.
Building on the necessity of prioritizing national interest, statesmen also play a crucial role in ensuring long-term economic stability. Unlike politicians who focus on short-term economic relief for electoral gains, statesmen develop sustainable strategies for national growth. Dr. Mahbub ul Haq exemplifies this approach by introducing the Human Development Index (HDI), which shifted the focus from mere GDP growth to overall human welfare. His model emphasized education, healthcare, and living standards, laying the groundwork for a more equitable economic system. In contrast, Pakistan’s leadership has frequently resorted to short-term fixes such as foreign aid and unsustainable subsidies rather than structural reforms. The failure to adopt a long-term economic vision has led to repeated financial crises. Therefore, Pakistan requires statesmen who implement policies that prioritize lasting economic stability over temporary political gains.
Beyond economic stability, statesmen are also vital in strengthening democratic institutions, which serve as the backbone of good governance. Unlike politicians who manipulate institutions for personal gain, statesmen work to establish independent and functional democratic frameworks. Liaquat Ali Khan, Pakistan’s first Prime Minister, laid the foundation for democratic governance by emphasizing constitutional development and institutional integrity. His leadership sought to create a political system based on accountability and the rule of law. However, subsequent political leaders have often weakened institutions by interfering in the judiciary, bureaucracy, and election processes for short-term political advantage. This persistent erosion of democratic structures has resulted in governance failures and political instability. A strong democracy requires leaders committed to reinforcing institutions rather than exploiting them. Thus, Pakistan’s progress depends on statesmen prioritizing democratic integrity over personal or party interests.
Continuing from the role of statesmen in strengthening democratic institutions, their ability to promote national unity is another defining characteristic that sets them apart from politicians. Since many political leaders exploit ethnic and sectarian divisions for electoral gains, statesmen work toward bridging these divides. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto initially pursued national integration through economic and political reforms, such as the nationalization of industries and efforts to strengthen the federal structure. His leadership, despite later political miscalculations, aimed at uniting various segments of society under a common national vision. However, in the absence of sustained statesmanship, Pakistan has witnessed growing ethnic and sectarian tensions, leading to instability. True progress demands leaders who transcend divisive politics and focus on national cohesion. Thus, Pakistan’s need for statesmen is paramount to ensure long-term unity and stability.
Beyond national unity, statesmen also resist the allure of populism and implement reforms that, while difficult, ensure national progress. Populist politicians often resort to short-term promises and unsustainable policies to gain public approval. In contrast, statesmen take bold steps that may be initially unpopular but prove beneficial in the long run. Pervez Musharraf’s economic and telecom sector reforms provide a strong example of statesmanship. Under his leadership, Pakistan saw significant growth in foreign investment, economic liberalization, and the expansion of the telecommunications industry. While his rule was controversial, these reforms contributed to Pakistan’s economic modernization. Unfortunately, successive political leaders have reversed or neglected long-term economic planning in favor of populist measures. This trend highlights the urgent need for leaders who prioritize difficult yet essential reforms over temporary political gain.
Expanding beyond economic and governance reforms, statesmen also play a critical role in fostering diplomatic relations to enhance a nation’s global standing. Unlike politicians who often prioritize domestic political gains over international credibility, statesmen focus on strengthening foreign ties for long-term benefits. Benazir Bhutto exemplified this approach by actively working to improve Pakistan’s international image through diplomatic engagement. She played a crucial role in strengthening Pakistan’s relations with Western nations and advocated for regional peace. Her efforts contributed to economic aid, strategic partnerships, and a more favorable global perception of Pakistan. In contrast, political instability and inconsistent foreign policies have often damaged Pakistan’s international standing. Therefore, statesmen who prioritize diplomatic stability over political rhetoric are essential for securing Pakistan’s place in the global arena.
Beyond diplomacy, statesmen also work toward sustainable national development by prioritizing long-term social welfare over short-term political gains. Unlike politicians who often use public service projects for electoral advantage, true statesmen dedicate themselves to nation-building. Although not a politician, Abdul Sattar Edhi embodied statesmanship through his unwavering commitment to humanitarian causes. His extensive network of hospitals, orphanages, and ambulance services transformed social welfare in Pakistan. His vision of a just and equitable society continues to inspire future generations. This highlights the difference between self-serving political figures and leaders devoted to sustainable national progress. To truly prosper, Pakistan needs more figures like Edhi—those who work for the nation without seeking personal gain.
Equally important, statesmen uphold the rule of law and ensure justice, resisting political pressures that often undermine democratic institutions. A strong legal system fosters trust, stability, and national integrity, but politicians frequently manipulate judicial processes for their own benefit. Justice A.R. Cornelius serves as a notable example of statesmanship in the judiciary. He upheld constitutional values and fought for judicial independence despite immense political pressure. His tenure reinforced the principle that justice must be impartial and free from political interference. However, Pakistan’s history is marred by cases where political leaders have attempted to weaken judicial institutions for personal and party interests. This underscores the urgent need for leaders who defend the rule of law, ensuring that justice remains a pillar of democracy rather than a tool of political manipulation.
To cultivate statesmanship in Pakistan, educational reforms must emphasize governance, ethics, and public service. Currently, political leadership often lacks a foundational understanding of statecraft, resulting in short-term policies driven by personal gain rather than national progress. Integrating leadership studies, civic education, and ethical training into school and university curricula can help instil a sense of responsibility among future leaders. For instance, Finland’s education model incorporates political awareness, fostering informed decision-making among young citizens. By developing programs encouraging analytical thinking and public service, Pakistan can produce leaders committed to national welfare rather than personal ambitions.
Another crucial step is reinforcing democratic institutions to ensure transparency and accountability. Pakistan’s judiciary, media, and election commission have often been subjected to political influence, undermining democratic governance. A strong judiciary with constitutional independence, a media free from state control, and robust electoral reforms can prevent power concentration in a few hands. Countries like Germany have independent constitutional courts that safeguard democracy from political manipulation. Implementing such models in Pakistan will help curb corruption, protect fundamental rights, and promote a culture where statesmen, rather than opportunistic politicians, drive the nation’s progress.
Pakistan’s political landscape is often dominated by personality cults rather than policy-driven discourse. Political campaigns focus on charisma, party loyalty, and rhetoric rather than substantial policy proposals. Shifting the focus from individual popularity to well-defined policy debates will help voters make informed choices. Countries with structured political debates, like the United States and the United Kingdom, ensure that leaders are elected based on their vision rather than personal appeal. By institutionalizing policy-based debates and requiring candidates to present clear national strategies, Pakistan can nurture a political culture that prioritizes governance over mere populism.
Voter education is essential to shifting Pakistan’s political dynamics toward statesmanship. Many citizens vote based on familial or ethnic affiliations rather than evaluating candidates’ policies or leadership abilities. Public awareness campaigns, grassroots education programs, and media-driven political literacy initiatives can help citizens make informed choices. Countries like Sweden and Canada promote civic engagement by educating citizens on their electoral rights and responsibilities. By fostering a politically aware electorate, Pakistan can create a demand for leaders who demonstrate integrity, vision, and a commitment to national progress rather than personal or party gains.
In a nutshell, Pakistan’s political landscape is not deprived of politicians but of true statesmen—leaders who prioritize the nation over personal ambitions and work toward long-term stability rather than short-term gains. The country’s persistent political turmoil, weak institutions, and economic instability are direct consequences of leadership prioritising party loyalty and self-preservation over national progress. History has shown that when statesmanship is absent, governance failures multiply, leading to division, inefficiency, and stagnation. From Jinnah’s vision of constitutionalism to the governance crises that followed his passing, Pakistan’s trajectory has been shaped by the absence of principled leadership. Pakistan must foster statesmanship through educational reforms, institutional strengthening, and public awareness to break this cycle. Only by demanding leaders who are ethical, visionary, and committed to national development can Pakistan achieve sustainable progress. Institutions and the electorate are responsible for ensuring that the future belongs not to politicians but to true statesmen.
CSS 2025 Solved Essays!
Interested in learning all the CSS 2025 Solved Essays? Click on any to continue reading. Each essay is meticulously attempted by Sir Syed Kazim Ali’s students, who have either qualified for CSS or PMS or secured the highest marks in the essay paper.
| Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it |
| Brains, like hearts, go where they are appreciated |
| Reforestation as a Global Urgency |
| Hamas-Israel Conflict: A Test Case for World Conscience |
| Rich in politicians, we desperately need statesmen |
| True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice (Sir Ammar Hashmi) |
| True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice (Miss Ayesha Irfan) |
| To reign is worth ambition though in Hell |
| Frailty is no more the name of Woman |
| Dynastic politics is the worst mockery of democracy |
| An investment in knowledge pays the best interest |
CSS Solved Past Papers’ Essays
Looking for the last ten years of CSS and PMS Solved Essays and want to know how Sir Kazim’s students write and score the highest marks in the essays’ papers? Then, click on the CSS Solved Essays to start reading them.
CSS Solved Essays
CSS Solved General Science & Ability Past Papers
Want to read the last ten years’ General Science & Ability Solved Past Papers to learn how to attempt them and to score high? Let’s click on the link below to read them all freely. All past papers have been solved by Miss Iqra Ali & Sir Ammar Hashmi, Pakistan’s top CSS GSA coach having the highest score of their students.
