WASHINGTON, Nov 16: The US administration fears that Pakistan is heading towards a “very, very flawed” election, which could bring chaos and instability to the country. According to diplomatic sources, the Americans fear that if the situation worsens, Pakistan may end up having yet another military regime. The US policy towards Pakistan has two basic objectives: fighting terrorism and to promote democracy. The second objective stems from a realisation that the military alone cannot defeat terrorism and therefore it is important to take political forces along.
When this policy is implemented, it translates into a desire to continue to work with President Pervez Musharraf who should be partnered with a strong civilian politician to give the much-needed political clout to the government in Islamabad.
This led to the US involvement in negotiating a power-sharing deal between Gen Musharraf and former prime minister Benazir Bhutto. Although this arrangement has run into trouble after the imposition of emergency on Nov 3, the Americans still want it to succeed.
The realisation that the military alone cannot deliver comes from recent experiences in the NWFP and tribal areas but Washington’s reluctance to trust a purely civilian set-up in Islamabad is rooted in Pakistan’s history.
The Americans believe that to fight terrorists, any civilian set-up in Pakistan must need a strong military support and the country’s history shows that the military does not provide such support to a civilian administration.
They recall that during her two tenures as prime minister, Ms Bhutto was not invited to visit Pakistan’s nuclear installations because the military did not trust her.
The Americans also feel that the military is even less likely to provide such a support to another former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, because he tried to bring the military under his control during his second term.
The Americans, however, know that a government led by a military president will never be accepted as legitimate, either in Pakistan or abroad. That’s why they insist that Gen Musharraf should retire from the army before beginning his second term as president.
Policy-makers in Washington also favour an equitable distribution of power between the president and the prime minister in this new set-up so that one does not feel suffocated by the other.
But before this new set-up is put in place, it will need to be seen as legitimate by a majority of Pakistanis. And the Americans advise authorities in Pakistan to achieve this legitimacy by ensuring that the forthcoming parliamentary elections are “credible and reasonably free and fair”, as a senior diplomatic source said. They, however, do not see this happening, at least not under an emergency rule. Their fear is that the elections will be “very, very flawed”, leading to widespread violent protests.
The resulting instability can lead to yet another military takeover. “And at least this time, the Americans do not want a military government in Pakistan because they know that the military alone cannot fight terrorism effectively,” the diplomatic source said. “So they want to help put together a credible civilian set-up with a strong military backing.”
The Americans feel that the first step the government in Islamabad needs to take to make this set-up acceptable is to lift emergency, followed by Gen Musharraf taking off his uniform and then the elections.
The sources say that the Americans understand why Gen Musharraf had to impose emergency. Initially, the Americans had heard from their sources that the Supreme Court was looking for a formula that could resolve the dispute over Mr Musharraf’s eligibility without rocking the boat.
A few days before the emergency, however, the Americans learned from their sources (as did Mr Musharraf) that the verdict might go against the general who panicked and imposed emergency.
The Americans agree with Pakistani political commentators who say that a national government will be the most suitable to deal with the situation ensuing from the emergency but they fear that even if formed such a government will be short-lived.
“May not last even two weeks,” as a diplomatic source said. The second best option is the Musharraf-Bhutto coalition “but since the emergency the Americans worry that it is getting less and less likely to have such a coalition”.
This brings them to the possibility that the Ayub-Yahya scenario can be repeated, which is one general asking the other general to step in. “This is something the Americans want very strongly to avoid but fear that it may happen if immediate steps are not taken to avoid a head-on collision between political parties and the army,” the diplomatic source said.
The Americans also believe that other generals are still ‘solidly behind’ Gen Musharraf. “So far, according to their knowledge, there has been no discussion among the generals about the need to step in but it may start soon,” the source said.
The sources say that the Americans reject the suggestion that Gen Musharraf wants to allow the situation to deteriorate to create an excuse for yet another military takeover rather than transferring power to the civilians.
“They find this suggestion ridiculous and believe that Musharraf does not want another general to replace him. The situation, however, is gradually leading towards this possibility,” the diplomatic source warned.
To avoid this, the Americans are trying to broaden the proposed coalition of moderate forces, which can include other politicians as well, besides Ms Bhutto.
They believe that even Nawaz Sharif can play a positive role if he returns and “agrees to play by the rules”, the source said.
The Americans, however, only have had indirect contacts with Mr Sharif and have not tried to convince either the Pakistanis or the Saudis to let him return to Pakistan, the source said.
