In an interesting development, the MQM has decided to support the PPP-led coalition’s candidate for prime minister. Could it be a pointer to some compromise formula which brings the judges back but precludes them from hounding Mr Musharraf out
The new parliament is in. Pakistan has a female speaker of the National Assembly, a first; arch-rivals PPP and PMLN are in the kip having solemnised the marriage in Murree on March 9; the erstwhile king’s party has conceded defeat; and everyone, including Bertie Wooster, is calling the slain Benazir Bhutto a martyr. Is this the Garden of Eden?
Utopias have a way of going to hell and in this garden slither many a serpent, each with the potential to do mischief. Consider.
The prosaic question is: can the new government, now that it almost has its prime minister, deliver?
Here is the list in no particular order and comprising only some broad points: terrorism; straightening the kinks in the Constitution; centre-province relations and power-sharing (with specific reference to Balochistan); the economy; price hike; power shortages; foreign policy, especially relations with the United States in the context of the war on terror; and last but not least, the army’s role in the polity.
None of this can be taken care of simply by having a parliament. Democracy is a necessary but not sufficient condition for tackling issues that have hung fire for long. But that’s not the popular sentiment right now. There’s much zest and it is good; on the flipside, when expectations go sour, and in this democracies are like love affairs transitioning to the boredom of a marriage, reactions can be disproportionate.
Let us consider the concrete steps the new government can take, or will have to. First on the agenda is the restoration of judges. The PPP wasn’t very keen on it but now that it has embraced the PMLN and accepted the 30-day deadline for a parliamentary resolution to that end, with the lawyers’ movement refusing to subside, the issue cannot be cold-storaged.
One way is to get the judges back and let them throw out Mr Musharraf, there being a symbiotic relationship between their restoration and Mr Musharraf’s ouster from the Presidency. But are all political actors agreed on this course of action and this symbiosis?
Perhaps not. In an interesting development, the MQM has decided to support the PPP-led coalition’s candidate for prime minister. Could it be a pointer to some compromise formula which brings the judges back but precludes them from hounding Mr Musharraf out?
It is too early to predict such a possibility, though it should be clear that if the MQM is invited by the PPP to formally become a part of the coalition at the Centre, it would change the dynamics of politics in Islamabad.
Small wonder that the PMLN chief Mian Nawaz Sharif, who leads the second largest component of the coalition, has signalled his party’s reservation over the inclusion in the coalition of the MQM — despite the fact that the move is a masterstroke by the PPP and deprives the Q League of whatever hope it might have had of support from the MQM.
Could it be that the PMLN has picked up the signal? There is an additional factor: if the MQM’s decision does indicate some kind of understanding between the PPP and the Presidency, then it is safe to surmise that the PMLN either is not part of that arrangement or is in opposition to it.
Of course in such a case it would have the option of walking out of the coalition and it could exercise that choice. But such a course would not be of much help apart from earning it moral points for remaining steadfast to the judges’ cause.
Chances are that it would not take such a drastic course if a formula can be worked out which gets the judges back but de-links their return from Mr Musharraf’s future. While Mr Sharif has been vocal about his opposition, other PMLN leaders like Kh Asif and Ahsan Iqbal have been more circumspect in expressing the party’s view on the issue.
However, for something like this to happen and for the PMLN to fall in line, the army will have to play its back-channel role. The ANP — which suffered the most at the hands of the MQM on May 12 — has remained silent over MQM’s support to the coalition and the possibility of the MQM being pulled into the conglomerate at the Centre also.
Furthermore, as political actors — including the MQM — have indicated, the Damocles’ sword of article 58 2 b will have to go. The formula would then, if one such is being worked out, envisage the staying on of Mr Musharraf but without the teeth to bite.
This said, there are other problems on the list, with or without Mr Musharraf.
Terrorism shan’t go away just because Pakistan has democracy. Recent attacks signal that. The issue is not just linked to internal security but also to two other crucial factors: the state’s writ and Pakistan’s relations with the US. A third factor is civil-military relations.
Will the secular ANP-PPP combine in the NWFP manage the threat more credibly? In theory, yes. There is much talk about the people’s will and introducing democracy in the troubled region. These are nice sentiments; unfortunately they are not shared by the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
The degree of difficulty can be determined by the clear breakdown in the tribal traditions and ethos. New centres of power have emerged and old hierarchies have crumbled. Never before were jirgas or funeral processions attacked. The government will be dealing with a situation that may not lend itself to solutions based on old recipes and expectations. In this war, the adversary plays by only one rule: break all rules and norms to retain the element of surprise and operational effectiveness and prevent the other side from developing standard operating procedures to avoid loss and regain the upper hand.
What makes fighting it more difficult is the thought that this is not Pakistan’s war. If the Americans go away from Afghanistan this would stop; also Pakistan should pull the troops out of the tribal belt. Perhaps. But what would stop the Taliban from crossing over and attacking Afghan and international interests in Afghanistan; and how would the world react to that?
Popular sentiment brings to the fore the problem of state obligations on this issue since they are not regime-specific. How the government will square them with the people’s will remains to be seen.
The policy will also need to keep the army in the loop. And the role the army would like to play in terms both of formulating and implementing policy will determine the extent of effective civilian control of the military.
As if this is not enough: there are less sexy but more imminent issues of general price hike (including petroleum price) and power shortage. At the existential level, these are more troublesome than foreign policy. This is where the people’s will manifests itself through expectations that turn economic logic over its head and are the nightmare of economists and planners.
The coming weeks and months offer interesting possibilities.
Ejaz Haider is Op-Ed Editor of Daily Times and Consulting Editor of The Friday Times. He can be reached at sapper@dailytimes.com.pk
Courtesy: Daily times, 24/3/2008
Loading ...
Recent Comments