In my opinion, neither. Ideally, Pakistan should find a golden mean between authoritarianism and democracy.
Democracy functions best when you have a large middle class and a population that is literate. That is what the Greeks(Aristotle, to be specific) and Stoic philosophers thought at least. Pakistan is neither a country with a large middle class nor does it have a largely literate population(around 40% of Pakistanis are illiterate).
Also, as Deng Xiaoping and Lee Kwan Yew realized, eastern cultures are more authoritarian and collective in comparison with the west, which is more individualistic. Likewise, Pakistanis prefer collectivism over individualism. In my opinion, Pakistan, like any other asian country will always be a flawed democracy no matter what because of our history, cultural values and outlook on life. After all, democracy is a western idea.
Still, I think Pakistan shouldn't be a dictatorship or an authoritarian state like China, but Pakistani institutions and the upper class have to maintain control and a large amount of power in the country, considering how politically instable and volatile Pakistan is. Currently, Pakistan is considered as a hybrid-state(flawed democracy with authoritarian tendencies) by most political analysts.
Even countries like South Korea turned to military dictatorships when it was weak and poor, only when they achieved economic growth and political stability did they transition into a democracy.
