The Asian Age
December 03, 2007
Musharraf’s time is up
Kuldip Nayar
Ultimately, the pressure of defiant civil society, and Washington, forced Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf to give up the uniform he has been wearing over his sherwani for eight years. He retained both as long as he could. But his eclipse began when the lawyers’ agitation succeeded in reinstating Chief Justice Iftikhar M. Chaudhry. Musharraf thought that he had assuaged the fears of the lawyers when he implemented the judgment. But he only steeled their resolve to have an independent judiciary.
Some 38 years ago, General Ayub too wanted to hold on to power despite the West Pakistan-wide agitation against him. But he knew — as his successor General Yahya Khan told him — that there would be a lot of bloodshed if he were to continue in office. Ayub had no choice. The moment he stepped down all rioting stopped suddenly, as if he was individually responsible for them. In the same way, Pakistan will regain equanimity once Musharraf quits. His presence is the root cause of the country’s problems.
But until he quits, the country may go through many legal and other upheavals.
The point General Mohammad Gul, once the ISI chief, has raised is valid. According to him, the martial law that Musharraf imposed was not authorised under the Constitution of Pakistan. The demand for his impeachment is gathering support. Lawyers and some top retired military officers have taken up this cause. In the field of politics as well, Musharraf’s troubles are unending. He has been isolated. But for the Muslim League (Q) and MQM with London as its headquarters, no other party is on his side. They have constituted the All Party Democratic Front (APDF) against him. Benazir Bhutto’s PPP is still hedging but she too wants him to step down.
The Opposition has put before him two demands. One, they want old judges, including Chief Justice Iftikhar M. Chaudhry, to be reinstated. Although Musharraf has rejected the demand, yet it looks as if the main battle will be over the judiciary, because Pakistan, after having attained an independent judiciary for the first time in its history, does not want to lose it. The second demand is the reconstitution of the Election Commission. The present one has Musharraf’s hand-picked men who cannot be trusted to deliver a "fair and free election."
The truth that Musharraf does not want to face is that his time is up. He imposed the emergency to pre-empt the Supreme Court judgment on his illegal election as President. He asked the judges to take a new oath so that he would have a pliable bench to endorse his election. He gagged the media and detained nearly 20,000 people without trial so that he could bring about the second coup without much commotion.
He managed his re-election, but has not gained acceptance because of it. He still does not understand that so many illegalities cannot give any legitimacy to his office of President. He has, in fact, united the opposition against him, the political parties, the media and civil society — nearly everyone. What it boils down to is that Pakistan faces a crisis of confidence, a choice between him and the Opposition. The writing on the wall is clear and he should know that he does not wear the uniform anymore.
It is not a question of months, but of weeks, before Musharraf has to step down. True, Pakistan’s new Army chief, Ashfaq Kayani is his protégé, but Kayani also heads the Army. He will not want people’s anger to turn against the fauj, as it would, if he were to persist in his efforts to save Musharraf. The demand for his removal will gather momentum with each passing day. The protest is already loud enough for a sensitive person to quit. He should know the harm he is causing to Pakistan, because as long as he is there, the country will remain divided and disturbed.
I think that the January 8 elections are taking place just too soon. Political parties have not yet settled down to new conditions. Both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif have been out of the country for years. They should get time to know how movements like the lawyers’ agitation have affected Pakistan.
One uniform complaint coming from Pakistan is that India has not given any support to its fight for democracy. This complaint is justified. People-to-people contact means little when we on this side of the border keep quiet even after seeing the brutal suppression of basic rights on the other side. Democracy means same all over the world. Its abrogation should automatically be condemned by free societies. Detaining people without trial, imposing censorship on the media or dismissing judges is no longer the internal matter of a country. It concerns people wherever they are because such steps debase human beings and snuff out freedom.
During the days of Jawaharlal Nehru, India would speak out against dictators and their rule. I was in the press gallery in 1969 when he interrupted the proceedings of the Lok Sabha to say that General Ayub Khan had taken over the administration in Pakistan. It was naked dictatorship, Nehru commented.
The mere expression of "regret" by New Delhi at what Musharraf has done is neither here nor there. India’s voice counts today and is listened to with attention in international gatherings. It becomes essential, therefore, that we should fashion our policy accordingly and speak out. Our response in the case of Pakistan has been mute. In contrast, the popular outrage over the hanging of Zufikar Ali Bhutto was vocal and wide despite discouragement by the Morarji Desai government at that time.
We have failed the people of Pakistan in their darkest hour. Indian civil society is too self-centred. It is engrossed in cornering the benefits of its economic growth. Its sights are set on careers, luxurious living and celebrities in the world of films or cricket. Society is not bothered even about 70 per cent of its own countrymen living in dismal poverty.
It is strange that top retired civil servants should issue a statement to urge India to support the nuclear deal which they feel is the best thing that has happened to the country. But none of them has even a word of remorse for the suppression of liberty in Pakistan. But then these bureaucrats were an integral part of the emergency which Mrs Indira Gandhi had imposed. They were the ones who ran the apparatus of tyranny. What else can one expect from them?
Indian civil society has lost the ethos of national struggle: A democratic and secular society. Pakistan, therefore, should not feel horrified over the lack of response. We are a hidebound country lost in consumerism. We may one day return to values and feel for the sufferings of neighbours. When that will happen is difficult to say, because at present our political parties are hell bent on destabilising the democratic system itself.
