WHAT is the western world saying? Whatever it is, there is little that is vaguely positive towards the floundering Islamic Republic of Pakistan. From a random few excerpts we can easily see how it is we are regarded and what advice it is we should heed.
The Times (London) on Monday Nov 5 carried a column by its former editor, William Rees-Mogg, under the title ‘Pakistan, the heart of a global crisis’. It opens up with an analogy — “General Musharraf has declared martial law in Pakistan. Chuck Prince is being pressed to resign as chief executive of Citigroup...”
Rees-Mogg goes on to say: “On Saturday, as well as watching Arsenal’s enthralling match against Manchester United, I listened with care to General Musharraf’s justification of his decision to impose a state of emergency. In the past, I have always been impressed by his soldierly calm in a crisis. On this occasion he obviously wanted to scare his audience, particularly his English-speaking audience. He certainly scared me, because I thought that he had scared himself.” And as an ending, “General Musharraf would not have instituted the state of emergency if there had been no Islamic militants. Chuck Prince would not contemplate resignation unless the bank had lost a great deal of money...”
Sticking with The Times and its editorial of Nov 7, under its realistic title — ‘There is no immediate alternative to Musharraf’, we are told, “Britain and America have been embarrassed by a step that looks all too like an anti-democratic coup. Neither country is ready to break with a leader who has played a vital role in the struggle against extremists, in ending Pakistan’s pointless feud with India and in cracking down on jihadist schools and centres exporting terrorism. In truth also, there is no immediate alternative to President Musharraf...” but then, “...he must swiftly start outlining a return to the rule of democracy and law”.
And my friend Shuja Nawaz (brother of the sadly departed General Asif Nawaz) writing in the Boston Globe on that same date, has a harsh recommendation for the Americans: “An aid cut-off that would affect the army directly is most likely to spur the general and his military colleagues to respond in a positive manner. If not, Pakistan risks a headlong slide to autocracy and political chaos.” Shuja’s latest book, Crossed Swords : Pakistan, Its Army, and the Wars Within is soon to be published by OUP.
Moving over to the International Herald Tribune of Nov 8 and an excellent down-to-earth column, its views well reflected in its heading ‘Western myths and Pakistani realities’, written by Anatol Lieven of the War Studies Department of King’s College, London, we read “As coups go, this has been a pretty genteel kind”, that “Musharraf’s intentions to date have been relatively limited”, that “his offer for a deal still seems to be on the table”, and that “As for the leading civilian politicians who hope to take over from Musharraf, every one of them when in office proved corrupt, autocratic and incompetent. If Musharraf’s actions are illegal in terms of the Pakistani Constitution, according to that same Constitution many (read all) of his opponents ought to be in jail”.
Yes, indeed. And also too true, “Pakistani-style ‘democracy’, as presently constituted, may mitigate some of the dilemmas, though even that is doubtful. It cannot possibly solve them.”
This week’s Economist carries an article and a leader. The article opens up in relatively light vein : “Within 48 hours of launching his second coup on Nov 3, General Pervez Musharraf had compared himself to Abraham Lincoln and Napoleon Bonaparte. Like America’s president — he told Pakistanis in a televised address, shortly after he had suspended the Constitution — that he had been forced to intervene to prevent his country falling apart. “I will not let this country commit suicide,” he said.
“General Musharraf’s identification with the little French corporal seemed more apposite. Pakistan is certainly unstable. In the past month alone, hundreds have been killed in political violence, Islamist insurgency and terrorism, including at least five suicide-bombs. Yet the general, an unpopular and now clearly illegitimate dictator, is one cause of this strife. Unlike Lincoln, he intervened to save not his country but his skin.”
The leader ends by exhorting our general to ‘go’.
Sticking to the home of the parliament upon which this country has tried to model its own form of parliament which so far has not worked and which in its present form is destined never to work, we move to an editorial in The Daily Telegraph of Nov 9, entitled ‘Bankrupt relationship’, which needs to be almost wholly reproduced in its kick-in-the-butt entirety.
“Despite George W. Bush’s rhetoric about freedom, the struggle against terrorism is provoking a reaction familiar from the Cold War and nowhere is that clearer than over in Pakistan. In the old parlance, General Pervez Musharraf is ‘our …’ He has failed to stamp out extremist groups and close the madressahs that inspire them. He has allowed tribal areas bordering Afghanistan to fall into the hands of assorted jihadis. And he has sacked independent-minded judges for fear that the Supreme Court declare illegal his re-election as president last month.
“Yet, despite this combination of incompetence and brutality, America and Britain continue to back him as head of what has a strong claim to be the most dangerous country in the world. In order to broaden the government’s political base, their plan is for the general to doff his army uniform later this month and enter into a power-sharing arrangement with Benazir Bhutto... If that ever comes to pass, it will bring together a soldier whose popularity has plummeted and a politician whose standing has been undermined by her willingness to cut a deal with him. And the prospects for it lasting are dim. Miss Bhutto and the military are like oil and water.
“In short, the relationship between Gen Musharraf and the West is bankrupt...
Under his dictatorship, Pakistan has become an increasingly ungovernable country in which moderate, secular forces have been sidelined to the advantage of the Islamists.
“An alternative — an alliance between General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, the army chief designate, and Miss Bhutto’s secular rival, Nawaz Sharif — seems neither imminent nor especially enticing. But that should not blind Britain and America to the fact that their ‘…’ in Pakistan is a spent force.”
To end, we can only beseech “Our Father, which art in heaven … Amen.”
arfc@cyber.net.pk