THE understatement of the month: “Nawaz Sharif was an appalling prime minister of Pakistan. He ran the place so badly from 1990-1993 and 1997-1999 that when General Pervez Musharraf overthrew him in a military coup, many people both inside and outside the country were rather relieved to see him go.” (The Economist, Sept 13).

Indeed, we should cast our minds back to the maunds of mithai which were distributed and swallowed in celebration of the army jawans who were shown clambering over the walls of the PTV offices. But that was a long time ago, and memories tend to fade when bombarded almost on a daily basis with crisis after new crisis.

Appalling he was, bringing the country down to a failed state level — and not content with that, his plan was to establish a caliphate with himself as the amirul momineen.

This could easily have happened via his Fifteenth Amendment to the incomprehensible Constitution that can be interpreted in a multiple ways had he not, in his arrogance and stupidity, made his Oct 12, 1999, bloomer and handed the country back to the army. However, in retrospect, it may be that we had a lucky escape.

As for the judiciary of Pakistan, it was so badly mauled by him and his party that when he departed from the scene many wondered whether it would ever be able to right itself. That NAB has multiple cases against him and his brother is no wonder. As with all our rulers, leaders and power-seat occupiers the extent and magnitude of the plunder is never made public until they fall.

Last week, Nawaz Sharif made his bid to return to the country, which he had no alternative but to do after seeking and obtaining clearance from the highest court of the land. But then, a ‘deal’ came into play, he was outsmarted by President George Bush who used the intelligence chief of a friendly country and an Arab politician of no particular standing.

Nawaz must have known what his fate would be when he planned his arrival, he knew well that he was an undesirable as far as the Americans were concerned and that President General Musharraf would give him short shrift.

The general made his arrangements accordingly and as far as he is concerned the deportation went off smoothly — no trouble or strife, arrests and blockades saw to that. But, did he have to physically humiliate the man? Can the general not rein in his minions and curb their latent violence? Whatever be his faults, Nawaz should not have been manhandled.

Having made one monumental blunder in the case of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, one would have thought that Musharraf would have learnt a lesson. The manner in which Nawaz was treated by the lower echelons of this government and administration will have won him some sympathy.

This is the era of deals, and the biggest deal now being brokered in Washington is the return to power, to a place in the political scenario of Pakistan, of another disgraced politician who ran the country into the ground, and who has so far gotten away with it although uncountable cases of corruption have been filed against her.

Benazir had for days been announcing that she will announce the date of her return to the homeland and has finally done so. Her party people have ample time to round up the usual crowds of unemployed, they will not be impeded as it is all part of the deal (even the MQM is amenable) and if, in the coming four weeks or so, she is a ‘good girl’ and cuts down on her outlandish ‘demands’, she will be accorded another rousing welcome.

The problem with the deal is that we must ask ourselves if a deal can be made, and if it is kosher under the law to bargain away the nation’s money that has been robbed and plundered, all in the interests of one selfish individual making a semi-surrender in order to hang on to a rather tenuous power line?

Is it fair of the Americans to do this to Pakistan and to the people of this nation? The deal, involving killing corruption cases (including the substantial Swiss and Spanish), against Benazir has aroused much public ire, and rightly so. And it is good to see that the Pakistani in the street, both at home and abroad, the few literate readers of the press who think and cogitate, are finally awakening to the fact that wrong is being done and are voicing their anger.

Take one letter that was printed in the columns of this newspaper yesterday. The writer, Salman Dar from Toronto, has made his and our case perfectly, and for those who may have missed it, it bears repetition:

“Giving amnesty to someone with a past riddled with abuse of power and corruption, someone who has been convicted in absentia, doesn’t say much for due process of law or respect for the judiciary and trashes the work of hundreds of people who worked tirelessly to pursue cases against the first couple.

“Benazir Bhutto wants ‘free and fair’ elections; however the deal, if it goes through, will also provide her with the green light for business as usual. That, in my view, will be a sad day for Pakistan.”

To repeat again and again until somehow it is dinned into one head that gives the nod from the top: before the birth of the country, its founder and maker told those to whom he was handing over its governance, very firmly and very clearly, that “the first duty of a government is to maintain law and order, so that the life, property and religious beliefs of its subjects are fully protected by the state.”

His assumption, erroneously it proved, was that his future legislators agreed with him. As we know, they did not. And as the years have passed, each successive government has ensured that law and order is negated to the best of its ability. We have only to observe the Islamic Republic of Pakistan as it stands today.

Email: arfc@cyber.net.pk