A vital test of a system is whether it can survive the depredations of a rogue ruler. Indian democracy survived Indira Gandhi's assault on it in the mid-1970s and has done reasonably well in the three decades since then. Iraq's institutions were not strong enough to survive either Saddam Hussein or hasty de-Baathification. Pakistan has so far continued to function as a viable state despite long spells of martial law; indeed, its people have shown a healthy appetite for democracy while its journalists have shown greater sustained courage than India's did during Mrs Gandhi's Emergency rule. For good measure, it should be noted that, despite the threat of growing jihadi influence, the Islamist parties have never won more than 11 per cent of the popular vote (which, as it happens, is less than half the size of the Hindutva vote in India), while the army has enjoyed public confidence as a stabilising element. When Prime Minister ZA Bhutto was widely believed to have rigged national elections in 1977 and when both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif had fallen in the public esteem because of malfeasance and misfeasance, the imposition of martial law had broad public support. In short, while Pakistan had many elements of a rogue state, it was still a functioning state. The worry point in today's context, therefore, is that the resilience that the country showed through all its ups and downs seems to be giving way. | |
| The significance of current events is that, for the first time in Pakistan's history, a military ruler has turned against his own people, so that the imposition of de facto martial law is not welcomed. Today's public mood stands in sharp contrast to the time when Gen. Musharraf seized power in October 1999. Even more worrying is the fact that, while acting in the name of curbing terrorism, President Musharraf has turned against the elements of civil society "" the courts, lawyers, the media, human rights activists and political parties. What Gen. Musharraf does from the top, others are doing on the frontlines of conflict, for the army (seen so far as the bedrock of national stability) is showing a strange inability or unwillingness to fight when attacked by jihadi elements. In episode after embarrassing episode, soldiers are surrendering to Islamist forces without a fight, raising questions about the ordinary soldier's willingness to take on the jihadi elements even if ordered to do so. Pakistan is therefore discovering that if you sow the wind, you may reap the whirlwind. |
| |
| The only happy outcome for the country will be if President Musharraf sheds his uniform, appoints someone else as the chief of army staff, sends the army back to the barracks, ushers in proper civilian government, and holds free elections for a new National Assembly. On the evidence so far, one of the main political parties will not be able to take part in the elections, since the Muslim League's Nawaz Sharif is still in forced exile in Saudi Arabia. But it is possible that free elections will once again see a rejection of the Islamist parties, and reassert the majoritarian middle ground. The only test after that would be one that Pakistan's politicians have to pass, in terms of turning their backs on the sponsorship of terror and delivering proper governance. It looks like a long shot. |
| |
|
| |
