October 20, 2002	Sunday	Sha'aban 13, 1423

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

ISLAMABAD, Oct 19: Western diplomats based here fear that Pakistan’s latest experiment with democracy may also fail and lead to yet another military takeover.

Talking to United Press International after parliamentary elections, some diplomats described the results as “a recipe for disaster.”

“A country returning to democracy does not need a hung parliament. And it definitely does not need Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal,” said a senior Western diplomat while explaining why the elections might fail to bring stability.

The elections brought three major political groups on the forefront: Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid-i-Azam), Pakistan People’s Party and the MMA.

The PML(Q) is a breakaway faction of the PML of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who was toppled by Gen Pervez Musharraf in October 1999.

The PPP is headed by another former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, who lives in exile.

The MMA is an alliance of six religious parties, some of whom had close ties with Taliban.

With 77 seats in the parliament, the PML(Q) is the largest group. Followed by the PPP, which has 63. The MMA is the third largest with more than 50 seats, including independents who won the elections with the alliance’s support.

In a 272-member house, neither the PML(Q) nor the PPP is in a position to form a government on its own. They need MMA’s support to do so.

But both have serious differences with the MMA and with each other, which makes it difficult for them to form a coalition government, as the situation requires.

The two mainstream parties, the PML(Q) and the PPP, favor a liberal democratic system while the MMA wants to introduce an Islamic system of governance.

The PML(Q) and the PPP favor close economic and strategic ties with the United States while the MMA wants “balanced economic and foreign policies,” and an option to quit the American camp, as its chief Maulana Shah Ahmad Noorani said.

The MMA and the PPP want the army to return to barracks and do not want Musharraf to continue as president.

The PML(Q) recognizes the April referendum which extended Musharraf’s presidential term for five years. The PPP and the MMA reject the referendum as sham.

The PPP has always been a party of Westernized liberals, left-wing socialists and religious minorities opposed to Islamic influence in politics.

Ms Bhutto has urged the MMA to shed some of its religious baggage if it wants to form a coalition government with her party.

The PML(Q) does not have problems with the MMA’s religious credentials but wants the alliance to accept Musharraf and the army, which has ruled Pakistan for more than half of its 56 years of existence. It also wants the MMA to soften its views about the West, particularly America.

The PML(Q) and the PPP also have serious differences with each other. The PML(Q) favours army, the PPP “whose founder and Ms Bhutto’s father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was hanged by former military ruler Gen Ziaul Haq” wants the army to stay out of politics.

Unlike the PPP, the PML(Q) is a party of right-wing politicians who have always had good relations with the army and the establishment. Ms Bhutto also blames some PML(Q) leaders for supporting the army’s decision to hang her father.

“Now, how can you form an alliance of parties with such divergent political views,” asked a senior Western diplomat. “Try any combination, and it will not work: PPP-PML(Q), PPP-MMA or MMA-PML(Q).”

Western diplomats see two possible scenarios: political forces reach an agreement and form a coalition government; they fail to reach an agreement and continue to fight with each other.

They say that even if such a government is formed, it will soon collapse because of inherent differences. “And then a new combination will be tried and a new government formed. It may go on for some time but ultimately, the army will have to intervene and wind up the entire setup,” said the diplomat.

Other diplomats say the army may have to move in earlier if the parties fail to set up a government.

But what will really pitch the army against the politicians is the question of US presence in Pakistan, the diplomats say. The army is an old US ally. This relationship came to an abrupt end in 1990 when Washington severed economic and military ties with Islamabad over its nuclear programme.

The bilateral relations were re-established last year when President Musharraf dumped Pakistan’s former Taliban allies and joined the US-led war on terror after the Sept 11 terrorist attacks.

Musharraf provided several military bases to US forces for operations inside Afghanistan and has allowed them to search for Al Qaeda and Taliban fugitives in the tribal areas.

In return, the US resumed economic and military aid and it is helping the army rebuild its conventional arsenal to reduce Islamabad’s dependence on nuclear weapons.

But the emergence of the MMA as a major political force is threatening this relationship. During the election campaign, the MMA pledged to evict US forces from Pakistan, end the ongoing operation against Al Qaeda and lessen the country’s dependence on the US.

After the elections, however, the MMA has reduced its anti-American rhetoric and is now talking about “maintaining friendly ties with all Western nations, including the US,” as its prime ministerial candidate Maulana Fazlur Rahman said on Thursday.

But Western diplomats are not willing to trust such statements. “From inside, the MMA remains a strong anti-American force. It has not forgotten its ties with the Taliban and wants to help the Taliban and Al Qaeda fugitives,” said a diplomat.

Western diplomats blame the intelligence agencies for creating a situation that allowed the the MMA to become a major political force.