Musharraf
Should Remain in Power
By Samier Saeed
Garden Grove, CA
As
the elections draw ever closer, it is startling
to see that nobody seems to be asking important
questions about the necessity of changing rulers,
or about why anyone would even care to vote when
it is obvious that the next ruler will come to
power as a result of a behind-the-scenes deal.
The fact of the matter is that there isn’t
any reason for Musharraf to step down from power
and that Benazir Bhutto is not a good choice for
a replacement. The notion that a behind-the-scene
deal between a politician and a general will promote
democracy is, frankly, silly and self-contradictory.
Those intellectuals, journalists, lawyers, and
other educated followers of Pakistani politics,
both Pakistani and non-Pakistani, who feel it’s
time for Musharraf to step down from power should
at least take some time to consider the positive
developments of the past nine years before voicing
their strong opposition to his continued rule.
Not everyone who says that Musharraf’s administration
is not the best for Pakistan is wrong, but it
is unfair to simply cast Musharraf out into the
political gutter and label him a failure and an
oppressive military ruler. Besides, Musharraf’s
replacement is unlikely to stray from the path
Musharraf has already chosen. Why, then, should
anyone aside from the man whose administration
has delivered the best results for Pakistan in
recent times, maybe even in history, occupy the
driver’s seat?
Much of the anger and dissatisfaction directed
at President Musharraf is misguided. Musharraf
has been one of Pakistan’s best rulers,
especially given the situation into which he has
been placed. As Fareed Zakaria said in a short
article in the June 25, 2007 issue of Newsweek,
“Musharraf has, on the whole, been a modernizing
force in Pakistan. When he took power in 1999,
the country was racing toward ruin with economic
stagnation, corruption, religious extremism and
political chaos… Musharraf restored order,
broke with the Islamists and put in place the
most modern and secular regime in three decades.
Under him the economy has boomed, with growth
last year at 8 percent. Despite the grumblings
of many coffeehouse intellectuals, Musharraf's
approval ratings were consistently high—around
60 percent.”
Musharraf’s government has also introduced
tax reform, revision of the Pakistan Studies course
(which used to be filled with anti-Hindu vitriol),
and has made progress on Gwadar, which was identified
as a potential port long before Musharraf ever
had a chance at running the country. In addition,
the Karachi Stock Exchange secured the spot of
best bourse in 2002, after recording a 119% increase
for the year. Although it might not seem like
the consistent growth has been worth very much,
as Pakistan remains in a state of disrepair (to
put it lightly), the country would be in an even
more horrible and chaotic state without the reforms
of Musharraf’s government.
Musharraf’s regime not only kept the country
afloat financially, but the image he presented
to the world, that of a hardened military man
who believed in secularism, didn’t mince
words like a politician, and who would strong
arm terrorism into submission was also important,
even if he didn’t do everything it seemed
he would. He’s an affable man, and, for
a time, politicians and journalists in the West
were happy to give Pakistan the benefit of the
doubt and help it to regain its image. Musharraf’s
recent trip to the United States to promote his
book, despite being expensive, was important in
that it increased Pakistan’s soft power,
albeit slightly. Not only is Musharraf’s
best selling book a good way to present a better
image of Pakistan to the world at large, his appearance
on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart was both entertaining
and historic. Musharraf was the first acting head
of state to appear on the show.
Musharraf’s rule, although successful according
to Pakistani standards, has obviously not been
perfect. Pakistan faces the same problem that
many developing countries are facing in the globalised
world; the wealth gained by the country’s
economic growth is not reaching the bottom, resulting
in even more inequality. Terrorism has not been
effectively checked and the concept of Enlightened
Moderation has apparently been thrown out of the
window. Despite the capture of key terrorists,
such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, terrorism remains
very strong in Pakistan. Musharraf himself admitted
during the recent Pak-Afghan Peace Jirga that
terrorists were being harbored by tribes along
the Durand Line. An admirer of secularism and
reformists such as Atatürk, Musharraf has
been unsuccessful in curbing some of the abuses
inherent in Pakistan’s current legal system
and code, such as the Blasphemy Law. extremists
harassing civilians and setting up their own governments
in the North Western Frontier Province. And although
slight educational reforms have been made, no
real changes have taken place and madrassas still
actively produce militants. Furthermore, Musharraf
has acted more like a typical Pakistani ruler
during the past year. The Supreme Court issue
aside, the recent restrictions the government
put on the media are uncharacteristic of the Musharraf
administration. If Musharraf does get another
chance of ruling the country, he has to go back
and try to be the same Musharraf who took over
in 1999 and must focus on combating three key
ills: inequality, militancy, and lack of education.
The breakdown of the Bhutto-Musharraf deal is
of little consequence. She is clearly an opportunist
who would probably serve in an extremist government,
if they were to, for some strange reason, give
her the opportunity to be Prime Minister. She
has not laid out a framework for what her party
would do differently and if the Army Chief cannot
fight terrorism then neither can she. It is reasonable
to assume that Pakistan aspires to become a developed
country. In developed countries, leaders whose
two terms in office produced weak results are
not asked to serve a third one. Most Pakistanis
probably like economic growth and stability. Musharraf
has provided both, and there’s no reason
to deny him another term and another chance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
