Ahsan Waheed
President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan has resigned. Civil society, or rather the urban intelligentsia, celebrates victory. The media, of course, has had as much to do with the former chief throwing in the towel as the lawyers’ movement as it has been instrumental in raising awareness on the issue of the restoration of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and the 60 Chaudhry- supportive judges dismissed by the Musharraf regime to retain its grip on governance. The former chief justice threatened to upset the apple cart by undertaking suo moto actions against establishment figures and policies relating to “disappeared persons”, while questioning privatization procedures. The lawyers took up his cause as a crusade for the independence of the judiciary, while the political leadership, an opportunity to cut the establishment down to size.
The establishment saw the politicians as corrupt and inept, with evidence of their corruption presented in the form of personal investments made outside Pakistan; their ineptness in their failure to deliver on the economic front whenever provided the opportunity. The West worried. Pakistan is a nuclear state and nuclear proliferation is the West’s major cause of its concern. Comes 9/11 and enters General Pervez Musharraf as the ultimate establishment authority in Pakistan. Both the West and Pakistan heave a sigh of relief as he promises to clean the Augean stables. The US, invades Iraq, purportedly on a witch-hunt for Al-Qaeda allegedly responsible for the toppling of the Twin Towers -- and incidentally, to rid the world of a tyrant armed with weapons of mass destruction.
No such weapons are unearthed, but the tyrant is duly dispatched. Al-Qaeda then conveniently moves to the greener pastures of Afghanistan to ally with the Taliban. The Taliban is the progeny of the Mujahedeen, the proxy force used to drive out the Soviets from Afghanistan. With the Soviets expelled, and nature abhorring a vacuum, the US and its NATO allies invade Afghanistan. The Taliban resent this. The intervention indicates they are no longer worthy of trust -- or needed. They resist. The US-NATO-ISAF alliance face reverses. A grave problem is posed for Pakistan: complicit in the expulsion of the Soviet forces from Afghanistan, it is now required to confront the offspring of the very force that made the NATO intervention possible.
This falls short of expectations. Democracy becomes the buzz-word. Ms Benazir Bhutto is allowed back from exile – along with Musharraf’s nemesis, Nawaz Sharif (as the Damocles sword?). But there are powers inimical to both Pakistan and the US presence in Afghanistan at work. Benazir is assassinated; restiveness in Balochistan rises; and the problems in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which house the Taliban, take a turn for the worse. A spate of bombings follows across the country, with Pakistan’s security forces the main targets. Violence and crime escalate, the economy comes close to collapse, and President Musharraf finds himself under very close US scrutiny.
On February 18 2008, the people deliver their verdict. They vote in the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) managed by her widower husband, Asif Ali Zardari, with the sympathy vote over Benazir’s assassination ensuring a Sindh sweep and national ascendency. But the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), led by the Sharif brothers, secures the majority in Pakistan’s largest province in terms of population, Punjab. In the North West Frontier Province (NWFP), the Pashtun nationalist Awami National Party (ANP) secures a convincing victory over Islamist groupings. The president’s support group, Pakistan Muslim League- Quaid (PML-Q), manages a majority in Balochistan.
Struggle ensues, but Pakistan overcomes at least the internal trust deficit, with the coalition government somehow holding intact. But there is still need of the “fall-guy”. And, one readily available: the President -- who has reached a new low on the popularity graph. The idea of impeachment, rather than executive order removal, is then mooted and the establishment is hard put to decide what position to take. President Musharraf, after initial resistance, resolves this in the national interest. He delivers a parting speech highlighting his government’s accomplishments in truly testing circumstances, and then tenders his resignation.
The ball is now wholly in parliament’s court, but the plays more complicated than ever before. Where it could go all wrong is if Pakistan’s political forces fall prey to hostile propaganda and fail to draw on the services country’s sensitive agencies’ regarding the repeated threats to the state. The military’s actions against militants seeking territorial gain both in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP), as well as in Balochistan, would then be seriously jeopardized. Secondly, it would be an inexcusable mistake for parliament to unilaterally embark on policy concerning security. It is simply unequipped. There is thus need of an advisory council, backed by a functioning secretariat to assist parliament in addressing the thornier issues -- as in advanced countries.
Last, but undeniably first in importance, if parliament is to acquire any real credibility, it must once and for all resolve the constitutional amendments’ crisis (albeit after the election of a new president) and then, without delay, address the judicial imbroglio. Mulling over the mechanism of how this is to transpire is will only lead to more fissures. As the world watches closely and impatiently, time is of the absolute essence.
