After the count: what next?

TREPIDATION is slowly giving way to hope. The people have spoken. Defying threats of death and destruction, they went to the polling stations from the shores of the Arabian Sea to the snowy peaks of Central Asia to give one message to the world loud and clear: Pakistanis reject extremism of all kind and stand for democracy. Unequivocally. Dictatorship belongs to the past. It is never going to return. The results of Monday’s electoral exercise must serve to instil confidence in the people of Pakistan, for they have proved one point manifestly clear: they are quite capable of deciding who runs their country and how. The general election was also a referendum on President Pervez Musharraf’s policies: they stand rejected. The nation expects him to be a good loser. Let us, however, give him credit for an election that has been by and large fair on the day, for his sworn enemies have made a spectacular comeback through the ballot. And it is a huge relief that all the major political parties have accepted the result. There is no acrimony and no threat of breach of peace due to a disputed electoral exercise.

While the PPP and PML-N between them have captured a majority of the National Assembly’s 272 general seats, it is the rout of the PML-Q — ‘the king’s party’ — that has been stunning. The world knew that the president’s popularity graph had been declining steeply, but even his worst denigrators would not have believed that the PML-Q would receive the kind of drubbing it did. More-loyal-than-the-king titans of the King’s party tumbled like nine pins. While Chaudhry Parvaiz Elahi managed to get only one of the three seats he was contesting, party chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain suffered the ignominy of losing both his home ground to the PPP’s Ahmad Mukhtar, and a Sialkot seat he was fighting for. Also to be skittled out were such die-hard PML-Q men as the over-articulate Sheikh Rashid Ahmad, the far-from-neutral NA Speaker Chaudhry Amir Hussain and PPP turncoats Rao Sikandar Iqbal and Dr Sher Afgan. One can go on and on with the list for nearly two dozen members of the former PML-Q cabinet were rejected by the voters.

A fuller analysis of the voting pattern must take some time, but an interim comment on the basis of the results available can be made safely. Even in death Benazir Bhutto has lived up to her supporters’ slogan of charon soobon ki zanjeer (link between the four provinces). The PPP has won seats in all the provinces and proved that it is a truly national party. The PML-N’s landslide is confined to Punjab, and it has some seats in the NWFP. But it is clear that Nawaz Sharif’s stance on the restoration of the judiciary and the role of the military in politics found resonance among the electorate. In urban Sindh, the MQM has maintained its hold over its traditional seats, and in the NWFP the ANP has made a remarkable recovery after suffering so badly at the hands of the MMA in the 2002 election. The NWFP result demonstrated what the voters say to religious parties and extremism when their will is not subverted through a rigged election. Balochistan is a mixed bag, with a low turnout because of a boycott by nationalist parties. Experts are warning against reading too much into what appears like a PML-Q win. Most of those victorious on PML-Q tickets have been winning regardless of the platform they have run from as they are tribal leaders.

The sorriest of the boycott lot must be Qazi Hussain Ahmad. He has conceded a walkover to the secular ANP, Maulana Fazlur Rahman’s victory in one of the two constituencies being the only consolation for an MMA that is now in tatters. The PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif and ANP chief Asfandyar Wali have already stated their positions in order to set the parameters for any coalition-building discussion with, say, the PPP which itself has started a meeting of its Central Executive Committee to assess its option.

Experts will be working out the various permutations on calculators but one thing ought not to be pushed out of sight in the activity leading up to government formation. The voters have punished all those seen as being supportive of autocratic rule. But they haven’t gone ahead and given a huge majority to one single party. One can safely assume that Pakistanis want more self-governance, more provincial autonomy and a relatively weak centre that allows them to lead their lives the way they wish to. As the new parliament comes into existence and starts to discuss and debate the challenges confronting the country, let it not forget that more autonomy to the federating units will be a good antidote to many of the ills afflicting the country today. It will bring the Federation closer together.

Soldier of ideas

FEW leaders have taken on the US and lived to tell the tale. Fidel Castro did so till the very end of his memorable rule, which began in 1959 and ended with his resignation yesterday. Alarming his foes and winning admirers across the globe he became a legend in his own lifetime, an icon of revolution revered by generations from the fifties onwards. Aided in his efforts by the likes of Che Guevara, his brother Raul Castro and other comrades in the 26 July Movement, he succeeded on Jan 1, 1959 in overthrowing the government of General Fulgencio Batista, a US puppet under whom Cuba had become a playground for wealthy Americans and a stronghold of the American mafia. One of the longest-serving rulers in the world, he outlasted nine US presidents, although he was said to be the target of a number of assassination attempts allegedly sponsored by US governments. His stay at the helm saw his socialist programme change the face of Cuba with its land reforms and provision of quality education and health care to all citizens irrespective of social standing. The literacy rate in Cuba today is 98 per cent, top-notch medical care is free and the country’s infant mortality rate stands at par with that of western countries.

Fidel Castro was born into privilege but the gross economic disparity in his homeland prompted him to take up arms and embark on a search for permanent revolution. Of course he had his critics and was not averse to stifling dissent, prompting many Cubans to flee the country in the hope of political freedom or personal economic betterment. Yet to millions the world over, Mr Castro will be fondly remembered as the perennial underdog and people’s champion who never compromised on his ideals and refused to bow to US dictates. He memorably stated some years ago that “as the world increasingly moves to the right, I move that much more to the left by standing where I am.” After more than 47 years in the driver’s seat, Mr Castro temporarily handed over power to his brother Raul in July 2006 following intestinal surgery. On Tuesday, citing deteriorating physical health as the reason for his decision, he announced that “I neither will aspire to, nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander in chief.” He promised, however, that he would continue with his contribution to Cuba as a ‘soldier of ideas’. Cuba’s National Assembly meets on Sunday to choose a successor, quite possibly someone from a younger generation.

OTHER VOICES - European Press

A resounding defeat for Tassos

The Cyprus Mail

IN the end, the opinion polls did get one thing right – that it would be a very closely fought election.

However, only one of the 50-plus polls had found that Ioannis Kasoulides would finish top and none that President Papadopoulos would be eliminated from the first round – he had topped all the other polls….Yesterday’s result was an emphatic defeat of his sterile policy on the Cyprus problem, which, despite his protestations, was geared at maintaining the status quo….

It is these policies, which have brought us perilously close to permanent partition, which were resoundingly defeated by the Greek Cypriot public yesterday. Only 31.75 per cent of the people approved Papadopoulos’ hard-line approach to the national problem….

For far too long, the island’s two biggest parties have allowed the smaller parties to set the agenda, giving them much more power than their strength merited. It would be a step forward if the smaller parties had less of a say….

This could only be achieved if they reached some form of understanding on the handling of the national problem. — (Feb 18)

Know your enemy

The Times

The national security strategy to be published shortly will be the first vital attempt to define the threats — military, political and existential — to this country’s security, values and way of life…. It…will focus public attention on Britain’s defence, intelligence services, resources and preparedness and is intended not only to underline their continued importance but to convince an often complacent public that confronting these new challenges demands money, commitment and public support.

It is high time the challenges were spelt out. The most visible is terrorism…. Over the years, Britons have become familiar with the consequences: the airport queues, passes and identity checks, and ubiquitous surveillance….Almost all decisions now include a security dimension….

Britain has seen an unprecedented peacetime increase in military commitments. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as peacekeeping in the Balkans have stretched resources to breaking point, undermining morale and capabilities….A national security strategy must look at these demands and gauge the necessary response….

While a holistic approach to Britain’s future is sensible, our national security strategy needs to have a focus. It needs to be clear that defence is different from development…. — (Feb 19)