Malta declaration & Pakistan!

IN the only reported one-to-one meeting between Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Shaukat Aziz, on the sidelines of the Commonwealth summit at Valetta, Malta, Pakistan’s link with the July 7 terror bombings in the London underground dominated their discussion. Pakistan was also singled out for its positive contribution to the anti-terror war as well as for harsh criticism for President Pervez Musharraf for retaining his role as the leader of the army.

The Malta declaration reiterated that “until the two offices are separated, the process of democratization in Pakistan will not be irreversible.” The word ‘irreversible’, if correctly quoted, would be quite a grim reminder of the recurrent cycles of military rule and the resulting loss of the world community’s trust in the sustainability of civilian rule in Pakistan.

It was stated that Pakistan remained “in danger of sliding into repression despite its recent progress”. However, in a press briefing on board the special plane flying him and his entourage back to Pakistan at the end of the Commonwealth summit, Prime Minister Aziz said that the Commonwealth members had been appreciative of “all” the measures Pakistan had taken towards “restoring and rebuilding democratic institutions”. Much as one would want to share the prime minister’s version of the Commonwealth leaders’ view of the democratic resurgence in Pakistan, it is hardly borne out by the declaration.

The declaration bluntly questioned the very essence of a democratic dispensation under a serving army chief functioning simultaneously as head of state. The tone and substance of the declaration had little to support the prime minister’s stand on Pakistan’s democratic order — least of all his view about a ‘vibrant opposition’, especially after their boycott of the donors’ conference.

An angry president Musharraf even rebuked the opposition for trying to ‘sabotage’ the conference and make it a ‘flop show’. Thus the opposition could be called ‘vibrant’ only in a subversive role.

The declaration on the whole hurt Pakistan by making such a major issue out of the military uniform of the president while making just a cursory mention of “sympathy with the government and the people of Pakistan for the massive loss of life and devastation” caused by the earthquake.

It’s one thing to point out the incompatibility between a uniformed head of state and the democratic credentials of the government under him, quite another reflecting on the very legitimacy and sovereignty of the government.

Shouldn’t we blame ourselves for inviting such rude outside interference in national affairs and accept it, too? Be it the Commonwealth club or a foreign government, neither should be allowed to mistaken the right to criticize for the right to challenge the sovereignty of the state and the legitimacy of the government of the day “as by law established”.

In an interview with the Washington Post dated Sept 13, the president, when questioned about his decision to retain the post of the army chief, said: “Let me assure you that President Bush never talks about ‘when are you taking off your uniform’?”

Who is President Bush any way to have any say at all for or against the decision of the President of Pakistan to wear two hats — the bowler and the gold-braided general’s peaked cap at the same time? As the heads of two sovereign states both have the absolute right to govern without any interference or gratuitous advice from outside.

The Malta declaration added insult to injury by putting Pakistan on hold for the next two years to see if it would be able to resolve the issue of Musharraf’s dual role.

Pending the resolution of the issue, Pakistan would remain on the agenda of today’s democracy watchdog, the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG). This is nothing short of a challenge and a snub to Pakistan’s sovereign right to rule according to its own national constraints and compulsions.

Now a word about the honour and the dignity of the military uniform as the symbol of national security and sovereignty. Never before has the Pakistan army chief’s uniform come in for such caustic international comment. In his person, the army chief embodies the dignity of the service under his command. Therefore, the sooner the issue is resolved at our own initiative and without such distasteful outside debate about it, the better for us.

TAIL PIECE:# I happened to attend the 1995 Commonwealth summit as a journalist in Auckland. The Queen of England, the informal head of the Commonwealth, came to Auckland by a commercial British Airways flight. Our President, Mr. Farooq Ahmad Leghari, however, used the special refurbished Boeing 707. The plane developed serious trouble on our way back. After a refuelling stop at Darwin, it had to make a forced landing within minutes of the take-off due to trouble caused by a ‘flame-out’ in the airlines jargon.

—The writer is a retired Brigadier