Letter on no-confidence motion

Dear Editor,
There is much speculation about the outcome of the no-confidence motion against the foreign minister. As much as such a motion is unpalatable to the government, such things cannot be avoided in the democratic process. Even if the foreign minister survives the motion, his reputation is tarnished not least by his own actions. Dr Shaheed in his defense is trying to convince the Majlis memebers that even during the previous regime, the government was reaching out to the Israelis.
Didn’t the people vote in this government because they wanted change, not only a change of a few faces, but also a change in the way government is run? So why is Dr Shaheed trying to justify his actions saying it was done earlier. I think that the foreign ministry is one of the few places where you don’t see much change and this can be evident when you visit our missions abroad. Unlike other countries who change their mission staff with the change in government, we are still going on with the same lot as if there is nobody capable enough to replace them. Even if there is a regime change tomorrow, we will see the same faces since the present lot were sent there by the previous regime in the first place.
I think deep down what matters to certain “big shots” is not adherence to an ideology but the gut necessity to cling on to what one has at any cost and hence one sees this inter-hopping from one party to another regardless of what that party stands for.
Maybe in time this will change and Maldives will have a mature democracy with equally mature political actors.
Regards,
Anonymous