Round The World
New
Delhi, 6 November 2007
Musharraf
Vulnerable
NORMALCY IN PAK A
FAR CRY
By Dr. Chintamani
Mahapatra
School of International Studies, JNU
The way the international community has responded to the
imposition of emergency in Pakistan
by President Pervez Musharraf is as though it is a surprise move by the
Pakistani strongman.
But, President Musharraf’s multiple failures were all
indicative that emergency was imminent. His failures include the inability to
come to terms with the developments in the North West Frontier Province either
by diplomacy or military means, to anticipate and prevent a terrorist attack
that could have killed former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, defeat at the
hands of the lawyers who restored suspended Chief Justice Iftikar Chaudhary to
office and the rising trend of militant violence in the major cities.
Musharraf knew very well that he was increasingly becoming a
target of Western criticism for his powerlessness to check cross-border
terrorism in Afghanistan, quite in contrast to years’ of praise he received for
his cooperation in the war against terrorism. He realized that his policy of
selective openness and controlled democracy made him an easy target of the
media, the opposition political parties and even the judiciary.
Well aware of the fate of departing dictators, Musharraf clamped
emergency in the country before it was too late. He didn’t give the judiciary
the time to decide the legitimacy of his recent election by the National
Assembly. The Supreme Court, headed by a Chief Justice he had unsuccessfully
tried to overthrow and who had become extremely popular at home and well-known abroad,
could not have been expected to deliver a verdict to his liking. Musharraf feared
that in case the court verdict went against his election, it would have been
almost impossible for him to control events in his own favour.
Thus, he had enough reasons to justify his action. He put
the blame on the judiciary for being overactive and infringing the jurisdiction
of the executive. He criticized the media for being irresponsible. He warned
the country of rising militant violence and suicide bombings. He wanted to save
the country and thus imposed the emergency rule.
But to his surprise there aren’t many takers of his so-called
justifications either within Pakistan
or outside of it. He was already blamed for his failing policies in the West
before imposing the emergency. Recently, the Newsweek International depicted Pakistan as the world’s “most
dangerous” place, where everything was available that could have been asked by
Osama bin Laden: “political instability, radical Islamists, abundance of young
anti-Western recruits, secluded training areas along the northern border with
Afghanistan, and access to state-of-the-art electronic technology.” And, the
blame was put on the Pakistani Government for all this.
The Financial Times, London,
pointed out that Pakistan
was fast sliding into a condition of a failed State with Islamic militants
extending their activities to major cities from the jungles of the NWFP. A New York Times story said that Pakistan was
one country “where Al Qaeda, the Taliban and nuclear weapons are all in play.”
For months, American foreign policy analysts and some
legislators have been questioning the wisdom of the Bush Administration’s
policy of putting all American anti-terrorism eggs in Musharraf’s basket. The
White House had little alternative and kept its faith in President Musharraf.
Less than two weeks before the imposition of emergency, White House officials
in media interviews persisted in their assessment that Musharraf would maintain
enough influence to maintain stability and order in Pakistan. The Bush Administration
also spent enormous diplomatic energy into roping in Benazir Bhutto and her Pakistan
People’s Party to a power-sharing arrangement with President Musharraf.
However, once the suicide bomb exploded, killing and
injuring scores of people during the welcome procession of Benazir, Bush
Administration officials saw the writing on the wall. The political meltdown
came to be viewed as “the nightmare scenario” for President George Bush’s last
15 months in office.
No one knows whether the attack was aimed at Benazir or was
a warning to President Musharraf or was a demonstration of hatred against the
US-sponsored compromise deal. It could have as well been all in one. But
speculation on that has receded to the background with the clamping down of
emergency, interpreted by some as a sort of martial law.
Now, Pakistani lawyers are on the streets once again
protesting the dismissal of judges and the unconstitutional imposition of
emergency. The militants and religious extremists may go into hiding for
sometime, but would sooner rather than later strike their next target.
Significantly, Pakistan’s
aid donors have expressed their reservations against the emergency and have
urged Musharraf to return to civilian rule soon.
After investing more than $ 10 billion in Pakistan since September 11 terrorist attacks on
the US,
the Bush Administration has come under severe criticism for failing to achieve
the objectives of the aid. President Musharraf lacks ability to control the
Taliban and Al Qaeda infested NWFP. Afghanistan
continues to be in turmoil, partly because of Pakistani failure or lackluster
support to the US
efforts. Militancy and extremism within Pakistan has been on the rise.
It is thus no wonder that US Secretary of State has urged
Musharraf to lift the emergency and hold elections. The American response has
been carefully calculated not to distance itself from President Musharraf
completely, since there is no viable alternative yet. The mild pressure on him
is aimed at public diplomacy to explain the US stand against authoritarian
measures of Musharraf.
Frankly, no one knows whether an election conducted by
Musharraf with a judiciary under his influence and a media under his control can
at all restore normalcy to Pakistan?
Quick lifting of emergency will prove
Musharraf to be a vulnerable General and expose his weaknesses. Holding of
elections under his stewardship may not be acceptable to the Pakistan
people. Embracing a stronger and more authoritarian Musharraf will be difficult
for the Bush Administration and that too in an election year.
This is one of the situations where rational calculations by
foreign policy realists can go completely wrong. While a country with nuclear
weapons, terrorists and aid dependent economy is a frightening development for India, so is it
for the most powerful country in the world. The continuing insurgency in Iraq,
uncertainty over Iran’s directions in nuclear diplomacy, re-emergence of the
Taliban as a force in Afghanistan and a political meltdown in Pakistan pose
enormous challenges to India and the international community.--- INFA
(Copyright,
India News & Feature Alliance)
|