SINCE the founding of Pakistan 60 years ago, army chiefs have ruled over the country for 33 years, while for 11 years after the crash of the C-130, they remained the real power behind the throne.

They had a golden opportunity to modernise Pakistan and earn for it an enviable position in the world. Their names would then have been carved with pride in the hallowed earth of their country. Instead, they throttled democracy, mutilated the constitutions, destroyed the institutions of the state, blundered into two major wars and a minor one, destroyed the basis on which Pakistan was founded, and put the country back in time and space.

They are reviled by the people, for all the money invested in their institution has given the people nothing in return except tinpot dictators, a truncated country, national humiliation and wasted years.

Yet for all their transgressions against the state, the people would still have forgiven the first two dictators if they had won victories on the battlefield in the two major wars that they had provoked and lost. It is not that the opportunities did not come their way. It is that they were not seized.

In 1965, the field marshal set out to conquer Kashmir. His plan was to send 5,000 infiltrators into Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) to incite the Muslim population to rise in rebellion (Operation Gibraltar), and then deliver the knockout blow by cutting India’s road link with IHK at Akhnur on River Chenab (Operation Grand Slam). In the event, both failed.

That these two moves would precipitate a general war was naively ruled out by him. But when the Indians responded by atta-

cking across the international frontier to threaten Lahore and Sialkot, he panic-ked and hastily transferred most Grand

Slam forces to the Ravi-Chenab corridor (Sialkot sector).

The Ravi-Chenab corridor is of great strategic importance for India as it connects the Indian mainland to Jammu & Kashmir at the headworks on River Ravi over which pass the road and rail communications, not too far from the border. The field marshal and his planners thought that by cutting the road link at Akhnur, they would force India to surrender Kashmir. They overlooked the fact that the door would remain open for the Indians to induct forces into this corridor unless it was sealed off at the headworks. Another offensive, concurrent with Grand Slam, would have ensured this.

The odds were stacked heavily in the field marshal’s favour as this offensive would have achieved a complete surprise in the same way as Grand Slam had done. With control of the Ravi lost, the option of launching a counter-offensive across the river into the corridor would not be available to the Indians.

The 1965 war was characterised by the ineptitude of the two high commands. In spite of this failure, the field marshal stayed on until forced out in disgrace, but not before giving a parting kick to the nation in the form of another general.

When this general launched the army against its own people in East Pakistan, everyone, including junior officers, knew that this was the end of Quaid-i-Azam’s Pakistan as India would exploit the opportunity to the hilt.

Since East Pakistan could not be defended against the Indian army’s main offensive effort, more so when the people had risen in rebellion against the state, the only way to salvage the forces in the east and to recompense for the eventual loss of East Pakistan was to sever Kashmir from India. This could best be done by launching pre-emptive strikes in the Ravi-Chenab corridor, which from the geo-strategic, operational and logistics standpoint, was the most suitable area. The time for this was mid-September when the build-up of Indian forces in the east had commenced and defences in the west had not been fully energised. At this point in time, the Indian army’s strike formation 1 Corps (three infantry divisions and two armoured brigades), which was earmarked for operations in this corridor, was at least three weeks away.

In mid-Oct, Lt Gen K.K.Singh, Commander 1 Corps, commented, “Our weakest hour is now. Another four days and Yahya would have missed the opportunity.” He did precisely that, since he remained in a state of dither until Dec 3, by which time, events had already overtaken him. The result was that Pakistan army’s strategic reserves in the west remained unutilised, which in a war of short duration can be construed as a crime against the state.

The reign of the third army chief was characterised by religious bigotry and regressive thought. Twenty years on, the people of Pakistan are still paying a heavy price for these. His tyrannical regime was matched only by that of the fourth dictator.

The fourth dictator, prior to his coup, thought that he would be hailed as a hero if he took the Kargil heights and forced India to surrender Siachen and negotiate on Kashmir from a position of weakness. But his dreams were shattered when the Indians started recapturing height after height until the remaining Pakistani positions became untenable. Scores of Pakistani soldiers had been sacrificed for one man’s quest for glory.

Next he took on the people of Balochistan and the tribal areas. Instead of redressing their grievances, he dubbed them as terrorists and sent the army to crush them. The result was an insurgency. The people of the tribal areas and regions have been influenced by the narrow interpretation of Islam by religious pseuds, who continue to hold sway over millions of students in thousands of madressahs and mosques across the country.

More than anything else, it is this dimension of the problem that has to be addressed through an imaginatively constructed and conducted education programme, failing which, thousands of misinformed and brainwashed youth would keep getting churned out every year. But the dictator, instead of getting to the root of the problem, chose to fight ideas with guns, forgetting that in the end it is the gun that loses.

His predilection for the gun and obsequiousness to the White House was again displayed when he ordered the SSG assault on the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid complex, after an agreement was said to have been reached. The result was that all the inmates, mostly boys and girls, were killed. While the government claims there were 100 inmates, according to the grapevine, each coffin buried had four bodies in it. The sound of that gunfire has reverberated around the country.

Having remained the dominant element of national power for 44 years, the time has come for the army to redeem itself by apologising to the people of Pakistan and saying, never again.

The writer is a former brigadier of the Pakistan Army.

PAKISTANIS are mistaken if they believe that Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani will fix the country’s burgeoning problems overnight.

In his agenda for the first 100 days, Gilani announced initiatives in areas ranging from austerity to abolition of the FCR in the country’s restive tribal belt.

His announcement, though welcome, had some semblance of political rhetoric. His focus on issues was broad but he failed to formulate a strategy. Thus his plan to set the minimum wage at Rs6000 sounds realistic, but it is unclear how it will be implemented when job-creating industries are on their knees. Skyrocketing inflation is hampering economic growth while the ever-multiplying energy crisis is impeding further progress.

If Prime Minister Gilani wants to confront the challenges, he must ensure security in three key areas, besides reversing the dismal law and order situation. He has to ensure that Pakistan attains security in energy, food and water. Failure in these areas is not an option.

If new cars and expensive clothing are signs of progress, then Pakistan made huge strides in the past eight years. This boom, however, was powered by expensive bank credits and manipulation of stock and property markets. The ‘fruits of development’ thus had no trickle-down effect on the poor. Instead, social and economic disparities reached unparalleled heights.

Because of the peculiar international situation, the last government had little control over some of the emerging problems, but most woes of the people were due to poor governance, economic manipulation, and political expediency.

Shortages in food, electricity and fuel plagued the average Pakistani. State efforts were hardly visible to stop the price spiral. Global food prices soared 40 per cent in the past nine months, while food stocks reached 30-year lows. Wheat prices alone increased by 130 per cent during 2007. Increase demand, dwindling supplies and enhanced interest in biofuels in developed countries contributed to these shortages. Around 30 per cent of US corn production will be used to produce biofuels by 2010.

In Pakistan, the government failed to respond to the emerging food crisis by neglecting the four essentials for ensuring food security — guarantee of uninterrupted supplies, increase in subsidies, complete ban on food exports, and removal of barriers on imports. As a result, smuggling, hoarding and black-marketing not only increased food prices, but also made food scarce.

The new government has increased the wheat support price to Rs625 per 40 kg. However, Gilani should have completely banned food-grain exports until the nation’s stocks reach satisfactory levels. This would not only balance the supply and demand, but also stabilise prices. A firm clampdown on hoarders, smugglers and black marketeers should also be state policy that is actually implemented.

Owing to soaring international food prices, farming is becoming a lucrative profession. Pakistan needs innovative policies to streamline the agricultural sector. It needs land reforms to bring unutilised state lands under tillage. Without increasing the acreage under cultivation, significant increase in gross agricultural output will not be achieved.

Escalating oil prices have virtually grounded or are threatening to ground small- and medium-sized economies of the world. Pakistan’s heavy reliance on foreign oil is a reality. The last government’s policy of promoting CNG as an alternate fuel deserves not just continuity but also consolidation. The first step for doing so will be to ensure the uninterrupted supply of natural gas to domestic and industrial consumers, especially the CNG industry. Also, the new government should not waste time in finalising deals to import gas from Iran and Central Asia.

Pakistan’s economic recovery could be derailed in the long-term by the energy crisis. Outages and load-shedding are undercutting economic growth. Demand continues to outpace supply in the overburdened and outdated energy infrastructure. The biggest flaw in Pervez Musharraf’s governance was that, while it allowed the electrification of over 56,000 villages, it did little to cover the yawning gap in supply and demand. Consequently, a country which had 400MW of surplus electricity in July 2004 is facing over 5,500MW of deficiency four years later. Realising their folly, policymakers rushed to install thermal power plants, without considering their environmental impact or how far they would increase Pakistan’s dependence on foreign oil. The rulers never moved to utilise the 176 billion ton Thar coal deposits, despite these being the cheapest source of available energy.

Examples abound about the use of coal for energy security. The US generates more than 50 per cent of the 789,475MW energy it produces from coal. Interestingly, hydel power accounts for less than eight per cent of the total US electricity production. At a time when international spot prices of coal have gone up by over 50 per cent in the past five months, surpassing the escalation in oil prices, Pakistan’s indifference towards this abundantly available natural resource is nothing short of a national crime.

The government has failed to come up with a sensible policy for the optimum use of Thar’s coal since its discovery in 1992. Experts believe Pakistan can produce at least 20,000MW of electricity from coal alone. But the lack of political will and official neglect deprived the nation of the fruits of this immense resource. Development of Thar coal could bring Pakistan energy security in the short and long terms.

Water insecurity is another area that the new government can tackle without trying its political genius in resolving differences over big water reservoirs. At a time when environmentalists are opposing big water reservoirs, Pakistan’s focus on fulfilling its water needs through divisive means would be counterproductive. Reason: even if a national consensus is developed on big reservoirs like Kalabagh Dam in May 2008, its benefits would not be available before 2017. How will the country cater to its ballooning water needs in the intervening years?

Prudence dictates that while the government may strive to create consensus on big reservoirs, it could promote retail water conservation by encouraging communities across the country to build small dams and reservoirs. These dams may not produce electricity, but will certainly make water available to farmers the year round. This will also increase the underground water table and regularly recharge the aquifers in areas where water remains scarce.

Mr Gilani faces monumental challenges requiring leadership and genius. His agenda for change must take into account the famous Chinese proverb: “If you want one year of prosperity, grow grain. If you want 10 years of prosperity, grow trees. If you want 100 years of prosperity, grow people.” Will the prime minister take the first step to rally Pakistanis around a national cause by empowering the people to enable them to attain security in the three key areas?

The writer is a US-based journalist.

mjehangir@aol.com

JUBILANT supporters of Nepal’s former rebel Maoists took to the streets on Saturday to celebrate what they are already claiming as an election victory in the troubled Himalayan kingdom.

Preliminary results indicate the Maoists are well on the way to becoming the largest party in the country’s first elected constituent assembly, in elections aimed at cementing a peace deal that ended a decade of civil conflict. Several prominent Maoists who won seats included their leader ‘Prachanda.’ ‘This is the people’s victory,’ hundreds chanted outside a counting centre in Katmandu.

Indications that the Maoists were on their way to a surprise electoral success will send shockwaves around the region. But whatever the final outcome, Nepal is heading for a period of change. If the Maoists go on to form the largest party in the constituent assembly, with the power to rewrite the country’s constitution, it will mean an end to the 240-year-old monarchy.

The scale of the Maoists’ apparent successes will have already set alarm bells ringing both in Washington, which regards the Maoists as terrorists, and New Delhi, which is grappling with its own Maoist insurgency.

Election observers from the EU gave a cautious thumbs-up that Thursday’s poll was strong enough to stand. That many analysts predicted a different result is not surprising. The polling system is a complex mix of first-past-the-post and proportional representation. Much of the media has been more sympathetic to the Maoists’ more moderate left-wing challengers. The questions now are how an organisation dedicated to its brutal ‘People’s War’ could so quickly convert to a winning election machine –– and what will happen next?

The Maoists have been the only party to attempt to get to grips with the kind of social reform many Nepalese are desperate to see. They have nominated more candidates from traditionally ignored groups of society –– women, dalits, ethnic minorities and the Madhesis of southern Nepal. They also have plans to change Nepal into a federalist state.

The other two main parties –– the Nepali Congress and the left-of-centre UML –– are not nearly so representative and have offered little in the way of a manifesto beyond removing the king. Their candidates are the same old faces the Nepalese have been looking at since they first went to the polls in 1991. For almost two decades, voters have watched their representatives become mired in corruption while the country was plunged into conflict.

Handed three key ministries, covering the media, environment and planning in the interim government in 2006, the Maoists have faced the same accusations of corruption as their adversaries. Conservation bodies working in Nepal are frustrated by the arrival of unqualified Maoist cadres in specialist posts. Maoist information minister Krishna Bahadur Mahara alarmed many when he tried to limit press freedoms last summer.

Nowhere is the rule of law more strongly felt than in a country in the aftermath of its civil war. Around 14,000 Nepalese died, 8,200 of them at the hands of the security forces. The UN estimates that between 1,000 and 4,000 people ‘disappeared’, many of them victims of the army. Almost no one has been charged.

Kunda Dixit, editor of the Nepali Times, recently took an exhibition of photographs from the war to 32 locations around Nepal. The photos have now been published as a book, A People War. Some of them are shocking, such as that of journalist Gyanendra Khadka hanging from a post, his head partially severed by the Maoists.

The bright spot is that ordinary Nepalese feel a growing sense of entitlement to a decent civil society. The Nepalese media in particular have put the complacent political elite under real pressure. Radio stations that did not exist the last time Nepal went to the polls in 1999 have given young people a voice they were previously denied. The king, too, has suffered from the fading culture of deference.

And the joke in Katmandu is that the king has proved Nepal’s most successful republican. All the major political parties are committed to getting rid of him, but Gyanendra is unlikely to go quietly. ‘He’ll stick it out to the end,’ says Kunda Dixit.

Paradoxically, if the early Maoist successes in polls develop into a majority in the constituent assembly, support for the monarchy may recover. No one in Nepal expects the coming months to be easy. There has been no progress in combining the Nepal army and the Maoist People’s Liberation Army, currently living in cantonments under UN supervision. Their weapons remain under their own control.

A time limit of two-and-a-half years has been set to draw up the new constitution. Most voters who queued up to vote last week know they will have to wait a lot longer for a lasting peace.

— The Guardian, London