September
14, 2007
Changing Political Dynamic in Pakistan
Never since the army took control of the state
in October 1958 under Gen. Ayub, has the military’s
grip on the reins of the state grown as week as
one sees them now. No such situation was witnessed
even when Pakistan’s second military dictator,
Yahya Khan, stepped down in 1971 following the military
defeat in East Pakistan and the surrender of some
90,000 troops to Indian forces. Nor, did it happen
when Gen. Zia and several of his top Generals died
in a plane crash ending his 11-year autocratic rule.
In both cases the military withdrew into the background
for a few years when the politicians set records
of corruption, mismanagement of the state and internecine
political conflicts and strife providing the army
the excuse to step in to “clear the mess”.
Gen. Musharraf grabbed power from Nawaz Sharif in
a dramatic episode. Till then Benazir and Nawaz
Sharif had ruled the country, as elected leaders,
for a decade of self-aggrandizement taking the country
to the verge of bankruptcy and of being branded
a failed state.
Over the past 8 years of Musharraf rule, economic
growth has been constant and quite remarkable registering
a 7 to 8 % annual increment. World credit rating
of the country’s economy reflected this. In
the fiscal year ended June 30, the country received
a record $6.5 billion in foreign direct investment.
There is no allegation of personal corruption against
Musharraf; Pakistan’s international stature
is quite high; the country’s media never enjoyed
as much freedom and influence as it does now; the
monopoly of official TV is gone and 38 new and private
channels are in operation; a new tradition of open
debate and discussion has dawned. Most of these
attainments can be attributed to the liberal policies
of Gen. Musharraf.
There have, no doubt, been palpable, material gains
but the intellectual growth of the society has hardly
kept pace. For the system remains tied to the apron
strings of feudalism, merit counting far below descent
and dynasty. The educational system remains outmoded
and goalless. The 13,000 religious seminaries (Madrassas)
have widened the gap between modernity and backwardness.
These institutions stand against the wind of change,
against the tide of globalization. The youthful
graduates of these seminaries have no skill to earn
a decent living. The Lal Masjid incident in Islamabad
showed the negative role of these young men in society.
Last March, when Musharraf enjoyed 60% approval
rating in public pools, he committed his first major
folly by sacking the Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad
Chaudhry for being a man of his own mind. This backfired,
lawyers all over the country poured into the streets
calling for Chaudhry’s reinstatement and for
the independence of the judiciary. The use of force
by Musharraf’s supporters in Karachi created
a further backlash. The Supreme Court’s verdict
reinstating the CJ isolated Musharraf. Instead of
taking out his guns to impose his writ, he gracefully
accepted the court ruling. The civil society started
pulling itself up and looking towards the judiciary
for the mitigation of its grievances.
At one stage in this drama, he did mull over the
possibility of imposing an Emergency in the country.
The US high command advised him against such a step
since it would have diverted the attention of Pak
troops from the country’s tribal belt that
is virtually in a state of war on both sides of
the border between the Taliban and Al Qaeda and
the US-sponsored coalition forces. Musharraf gave
up the idea.
In the past only the army and the politicians constituted
the two chief players in the polity. Now a vibrant
civil society and an increasing independent judiciary
have emerged as equally important players. The emergence
of these two new components was catalyzed by Musharraf’s
ill-conceived decision to sack the Chief Justice.
Asserting its new found power and confidence, the
Supreme Court has reinstated the Chief Justice,
released from jail Javed Hashmi, a top opponent
of Musharraf, and gave a clear verdict for the right
of return of Nawaz and family. The Court has also
released several persons in the custody of Intelligence
Agencies.
The media, the popular TV channels in particular,
have emerged as powerful drivers of events. Some
aides of Musharraf tried on June 4 to impose restrictions
on the electronic media through the Electronic Media
Regulatory Authority (OEMRA) but within 5 days the
restrictions had to be withdrawn under intense domestic
and international pressure.
To counter the perception that he was a military
dictator, Musharraf created a hybrid political system
with a significant civilian component. Despite having
manipulated the constitution on a number of occasions,
he has relied heavily on it to strengthen his grip
on authority. In the process, he has inadvertently
strengthened the country’s constitutional
roots.
Now that he is facing challenges from Pakistan’s
civilian sectors, his top Generals are perhaps unable
or unwilling to support him. The law of unintended
consequences is clearly working against him.
The military is no longer in a position to dominate
the state.
The Judiciary might sooner or later empower the
Legislature to open up the accounts of the military
and its infamous Intelligence services to parliamentary
scrutiny. The system of one-line defense budgets
need must go. Similarly, the military hold on substantial
sectors of the country’s economy will also
have to be subjected to examination. The civil society,
like in most countries of the world, will have to
resume its role as the watchdog of the military.
The logical lineup in this scenario should have
been for Nawaz and Benazir to get along with each
other and cooperate to check the military power.
But, Benazir, whose main objective is to maneuver
herself into the seat of power, is trying to capitalize
to the maximum the eroding popular support for Musharraf.
She has almost finalized a deal for sharing power
with Musharraf, no matter what an odd couple she
and Musharraf make.
People are unhappy that serious corruption charges
against her will be brushed aside in the projected
deal. During her first 20-month long premiership,
she failed to pass a single piece of legislation
and was accused of having committed massive human
rights abuses - custodial deaths, extra-judicial
killings and tortures. Her corruptions were of epic
level; $1.5 billion is the amount generally quoted.
In 1955, Pakistan was named one of the three most
corrupt countries of the world by Transparency International.
The changing political scenario, the emergence of
the civilian sector in particular, augurs well for
the future of the country.
- ArifHussaini@hotmail.com
