Pakistan's prime minister asks parliament to choose between democracy or dictatorship I hope there will now be a calmer period in Pakistan. While clearly there is tension, a lot of risks, we must not talk up those risks from outside the country. In a televised address on Friday, Mr Gilani used a fiery speech in an attempt to unite parliamentarians against the threat. We have to decide whether we should have democracy or dictatorship in this country. If we have committed any mistakes, it does not mean that democracy or parliament should be punished," he said. However, he added that the resolution was not directed against the military, in a sign that the two sides are trying to defuse tensions. No civilian government has ever survived a full term since Pakistan achieved independence in 1947, but the current administration now faces its toughest period in office. President Asif Ali Zardari, who took power in 2008, has been written off many times but has somehow managed to keep a fractious coalition in place. He flew to Dubai on Thursday for a private visit, raising fresh questions about his future, but returned early yesterday. On Wednesday, the generals gave Mr Gilani a public dressing down for his allegations that they had acted illegally in submitting evidence to a Supreme Court investigation without passing it through the Ministry of Defence. They denied the charge and warned of "potentially grievous consequences." Analysts believe the army - which controls many of the levers of power - is prepared now to sit back and let an unpopular government stumble on to elections due by March 2013. At the same time, it faces two potentially fatal court challenges. The Supreme Court is investigating whether the government was involved in an unsigned memo delivered to US officials asking for help reining in the army. Meanwhile the same court is heading for a showdown with ministers over its demand for the government to reopen an investigation into corruption allegations against Mr Zardari dating back years. Cyril Almeida, a columnist with The Dawn, said the resolution would only buy time, neutralising the threat from the political opposition. It's temporary damage limitation. Something else will happen. The Supreme Court will do something or the military will put out another statement," he said. It's death by a thousand cuts.