The News International
December 12, 2007
Law of the land
by M B Naqvi
Unending confusion grips the opposition parties over assessing the Musharraf regime Mark II, along with the scarcely neutral caretakers and the changes made under the emergency, the PCO and the new media ordinances. It is a continuation of the previous government; it is sure to do what Musharraf wants. Thus the country is basically polarised between Musharraf partisans and those who claim to be anti-Musharraf forces, while everybody knows that his regime now intends to rule through naked force, with a deceptive façade of democracy-seeming institutions.
This new Musharraf regime is a creature of the virtual martial law of Nov 3 – a logical reaction of his dictatorship when challenged – and is engaged in two major operations: first, to acquire ever more powers than before for the recently retired general to rule repressively for another five years while claiming to run a democracy. Secondly, he wants to keep all his foreign and domestic supporters happy – by his unchanged social, economic and foreign policies.
How strong is this regime? Musharraf's strength should not be underrated. He is supported formally by PML-Q grandees, the MQM, the PPP (S), the PPP (Patriots). Those who participate in the Jan 8 election – being organised and managed by him in conditions created by the emergency, the PCO and the muzzling of the media – should be counted as his supporters, their opposition-sounding noises notwithstanding. The JUIs of Maulanas Fazlur Rahman and Samiul Haq come under this category, as does Ms Benazir Bhutto's PPP. For all the ballyhoo about reserving the right to boycott, her party's dogged resistance to making the restoration of pre-Nov 3 conditions, especially the Supreme Court judges' restoration, a precondition for participating in the polls shows her anxiety to strengthen Musharraf in accordance with the putative deal the US had brokered, if Musharraf does not renege on it.
So, who remains in the boycott camp? Under the mean and opportunistic principle of not leaving the field to "others," the Jamaat-e-Islami will participate because the JUI is doing so, the PML(N) has also decided to play the game because the PPP is doing it. Maybe a few small parties might finally remain in the boycott camp, though even that is not certain.
A via media has emanated from the interned Aitzaz Ahsan of all people: let all opposition parties compel their candidates to sign a piece of paper pledging support for reinstating all PCOed judges in the new Parliament being elected by Musharraf-nominated caretakers. One was aghast at this: Aitzaz forgot the disconnect between the ongoing lawyers' and civil society's campaign to realise, as a precondition to participation, the reversion to pre-Nov 3 (2007) Pakistan, though later he returned to his original loyalty to the lawyers' movement.
What the parties have done risks the ending of the momentum of the lawyers' movement. The shape of politics and immediate issues will look vastly different in the post-election period. Politics will be all about government-making, deals and alliances under the smiling visage of the ex-general. Reviving the previous year's issues will be so much more difficult. To recall, the Aitzaz proposal was a testimony of his loyalty to Benazir Bhutto and his readiness to sacrifice personal ambition for her uncertain favours.
But all this is superficial. Look closely. All Pakistan's social and economic elites support Musharraf. A large number of bigger landlords simply love Musharraf – so long as he is in power. All big industrialists, bankers, big business magnates and conscienceless successful professionals have always been on the side of military dictators. This is an awesome array of forces.
Who else is a supporter of dictatorship? Well, why forget the only hyper power there is. Look at the crowded drawing rooms of political leaders in Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi and Peshawar, waiting to be graced by western ambassadors and CJs. The latter group is rooting for Musharraf: "Be responsible transitionists, take part in elections and jointly build democracy." What the west wants is obvious: "War on Islamic terrorists is on; horses cannot be changed midstream; let Musharraf lead the side but go and join him to prosecute the war more effectively; this election will lead Pakistan to democracy's goal; and that is where you and we want to be."
Finally, the strongest supporter of Musharraf was his military constituency. The Army is tightly united and it was the Army, qua Army (in the absence of Gen. Musharraf) that seized power on Oct 12, 1999. It has sound professional, economic and even political reasons not to desert Musharraf: the entire officers' corps stands to lose (some) perks and future opportunities if the people of Pakistan manage to overthrow Musharraf. Hence, the Army is likely to remain loyal to Musharraf – for some time anyway.
Those who want undiluted democracy, made by the people with independent judiciary, free media and the citizens' rights made enforceable, have to replace this regime by a more popular one without giving up their vigil. This is a challenge to a formidable foe. History shows that phenomenally powerful and cruel regimes can be overthrown by a people – provided they become aware of both their rights and are prepared to fight for them. Nothing is more powerful than an aware and united people.
This is a simple truth, but it is not the whole truth. A people's awareness needs leadership – not for hero-worshipping but for functional purposes. This role is normally played by a host of factors: political parties, intelligentsia, media, especially press, blogs and what is now the worldwide explosion of knowledge, creating the climate of the time. In Pakistan, one says with a heavy heart that political parties have been too venal, too opportunistic (misusing the term pragmatism) and have hardly ever risen to a situation. One is aware that all the military dictators have demonised political leaders as corrupt, inept and inefficient. Much of it was self-serving. But not all of it was false. Anyway, how are they behaving today? Do they show any awareness of where they are being used by foreign powers and misled by their own opportunism?
The year 2007 saw a new star rising and a new saga was written after March 9. The show of force was necessitated by Mr Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry having already proven to be a tough nut to crack. He stood his ground and demanded an open trial. Pakistanis were startled and saw in him a symbol of resistance to tyranny. The lawyers' community – led by men like Aitzaz Ahsan, Munir Malik, Ali Ahmad Kurd, Hamid Khan – rose to the occasion. The people were electrified and poured out of their humble homes to shower love and respect for the cause represented by the lawyers and the chief justice. Where does this authentic leadership stand vis-à-vis the people's struggle for what is their liberation? It is all about the latter. It must continue and gather strength.
Well, it is nowhere being acknowledged. Because no big party in the ARD and the APDM insists on returning to the pre-Nov 3 position or a really independent judiciary as a precondition to an election intended to renew Musharraf's presidency through an election that is meant to achieve a given result. Most of these parties will take the Musharraf-laid-down path to sanctify his Oct 6 "re-election" and to work under a Constitution that will emerge after he has made all the changes he wants.
This will be a clear regression. Instead of taking up the cause of the lawyers, judges and journalists and to accept the leadership of the new icons of the people, which would have enhanced their own, they have responded to Musharraf's cause and George Bush's message. They deserted their own people's cause, as if Musharraf Mark II can be any better. Why lawyers cannot form a party of a new kind to offer a new leadership for attaining democracy to save Pakistan, as Justice Wajihuddin has said.
