LAHORE, Sept 29: The Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy has expressed reservations about the MMA’s representation in the PML-led coalition in Balochistan at a time when the religious alliance is eager to launch a movement against the rulers.

Without calling upon the MMA to part company with the PML, ARD Chairman Makhdoom Amin Fahim said here on Wednesday there was a need for talks between the two alliances on the subject.

Mr Fahim told Dawn in an interview that despite several points of agreement, the two coalitions had different points of view on procedural matters. In his opinion, the differences could be settled through bilateral talks.

About the MMA’s suggestion that a call should be given for the people to converge on Islamabad for a fortnight to bring the system to a halt and force the rulers to quit, the ARD chief said all aspects of the matter should be kept in mind before taking any decision.

The following are the excerpts:

Q: What do you mean when you say that the army should return to the barracks? The army is already in the barracks except for its chief who has become the president with the approval of parliament.

A: The very fact that Gen Musharraf had taken over depicted that he enjoyed the support of the army. Had there been no institutional support, he could not have taken the unconstitutional step which he took. And the day he is denied the support, he will not be in a position to retain himself in power. Thus, the entire institution of the army is involved in politics and we want it to return to its original duties, the defence of the country.

Q: Then, should it be construed that the opposition parties are fighting against the army?

A: No, we are struggling against dictatorship. We don’t have any dispute with the army. But the problem arises when the army supports dictatorship.

Q: Will you like to explain what does the ARD mean by its willingness to give the army an honourable exit?

A: We want the army to take a decision to return the country to democracy and a constitutional rule. Once they take such a decision, we’ll offer a mechanism for their ‘withdrawal’ from politics without bloodshed.

Q: One day you come up with a statement that your doors are open for talks with the military rulers and the next day you say the doors have been closed. These conflicting positions create confusion about your policy.

A: As a matter of fact, all disputes can be settled through talks. History bears testimony that very serious international crises were also resolved through negotiations. These days, wars, fights and violence are very dangerous. So, talks should be preferred as a means to settle disputes. In case a dialogue is refused, confrontation is the only option left to settle matters.

Q: Well aware of the significance of talks to settle differences, are you holding talks with the government to get your demands met?

A: Not to my knowledge. And I don’t know what will be the response from the other side. You must have noticed that Gen Musharraf, who claims to be the president, which he is not, has become partisan in his attitude. Contrary to the requirements of the office he claims to be holding, he has aligned himself with the PML. He is asking the PML leaders to settle their differences and get united.

The president is supposed to be the symbol of national unity. But this ‘president’ has involved himself in a foul play. Has he ever asked the PML-N or the ANP or any other party to get united? Certainly not. He has put all his weight behind the ruling PML.

Q: If no talks are going on between the opposition and the government, will you like to take an initiative to set the ball rolling?

A: No. In view of the decisions taken by the ARD and the PPP, I as an individual can’t take any such initiative.

Secondly, talks are possible only where there’s a room for talks or when there is flexibility in those who are in a position to give concessions. I don’t see any flexibility on the other side (the government). So, I don’t think the situation is conducive for talks.

Q: President Musharraf has declared in categorical terms that Ms Benazir Bhutto has played her political innings and now she stands no future. What is future of the PPP in the absence of Ms Bhutto and will the party choose a new leader?

A: No individual (Musharraf) has the right to issue such an edict. It’s the right of the people to decide who their leader should or should not be. People of Pakistan support the Bhuttos from the core of their heart. So we cannot even think of replacing Ms Bhutto. She is the leader and will remain in the driving seat.

Q: The Election Commission of Pakistan says that it has no records of the PPP of which Ms Bhutto is the chairperson. If so, which party Ms Bhutto is leading?

A: The original PPP. The PPP-Parliamentarians was carved out of the PPP and both are inseparable.

Gen Musharraf has consistently been trying to keep Ms Bhutto out of the political arena. But he’ll never succeed in his designs.

Q: Don’t you think time has come for Ms Bhutto to return to Pakistan even at the risk of being arrested?

A: Ms Bhutto has never been afraid of jails. She has been in prison several times. But the time for her return would be decided by the PPP. She is an asset to the party and the country. She should be valued and protected.

Q: The ARD has been struggling for democracy for the past five years. But so far it has failed to achieve its targets. Why?

A: Unlike the rulers, the ARD doesn’t have tanks, guns or fighting planes at its disposal. We have to achieve our targets through public support. The ARD comprises parties of different programmes. They say one thing on one occasion and quite a different thing on the other. This has slowed the progress of the movement. Still, we are trying to organize the ARD at all levels to take our message to the common man.

Q: The ARD had several reservations about the MMA. Do they still exist?

A: They still are there. We did not like the MMA’s role in the adoption of the 17th amendment. We agree on several points but differ on the methodology. The MMA is a coalition partner in Balochistan and at the same time its secretary-general Maulana Fazlur Rehman is the opposition leader. They talk of an anti-government campaign when they are also part of the government. Such things need to be sorted out.

Q: Do you want the MMA to quit the coalition?

A: Not immediately. But the matter should be discussed.

Q: You don’t recognize the president. You don’t accept the amendment passed by a parliament of which you are also a part. And you don’t trust judiciary. Does this mean all state institutions have ceased to exist?

A: The institutions you have named do exist —- but only on paper. Courts have always validated military interventions on the basis of the infamous “Doctrine of Necessity”. If institutions meant for dispensation of justice fail in their duties, chaos follows. And this is what we fear is going to happen.

Q: What’s the status of the legislation enacted by the parliament in the presence of the opposition’s lawmakers?

A: We have to come across this argument several times that if the institutions are powerless, why we are sitting there. But the ARD and other political forces are of the view that we should air our views from these platforms.

Q: So you talk of principles but follow expediency.

A: This is the decision taken by all democratic forces. For us parliament is an important forum. We use it to convey our views to the world.

Q: Is there any move to convert the ARD into an election alliance, as proposed by the PML-N?

A: The idea has been in the air for quite some time. But no decision has been taken on it.

Q: You want democracy for the country but there’s no democracy in your own party. All decisions are taken by the chairperson.

A: We discuss all issues at various levels and send our recommendations to the leadership. We have a system of our own. If the party thinks that something should not be done, the chairperson goes by the sense of the house.

Q: What are your party’s views on the recent contacts between Pakistan and Israel?

A: Our policy is very clear: no individual has the right to take decisions for parliament. And since the decision was taken by an individual, we don’t accept it. The people should be given the right to take such fundamental policy decisions.

Q: What in your opinion should the government do for the settlement of the Kashmir dispute?

A: This is a complicated issue which cannot be resolved overnight. If we have to go by the UN resolutions, which call for a plebiscite in Kashmir, there’s no room for other options being floated by the rulers. The dispute should be settled according to the aspirations of the Kashmiri people.

Q: Pakistan faces water shortages every year because of the lack of storage facilities. New dams are not being built because some provinces are opposing them for various reasons. What, in your opinion, should be done to evolve national consensus?

A: Kalabagh Dam has become a controversial project. Sindh and the NWFP have been expressing serious reservations about it. And so far these reservations have not been addressed by the government.

Now the government has to choose between Pakistan and the Kalabagh Dam. It is argued that technically the project is quite feasible. Maybe it is so. But any project launched without support from majority of the people would create several problems.