Musharraf served as a unifying force--all the opposition to him, internal and external, was focused on him and his exit. Now that he is gone, well, the country is slipping into chaos, which is what I worried about a year ago in my opinion piece. The Taliban are behaving like Putin--sensing the weakness, the Taliban has stepped up its violence. The two political leaders--Sharif and Zardari--can't agree on how to move forward, particularly with the chief justice who was sacked by Musharraf; Sharif has threatened to pull out of the coalition.
Well, here is my opinion piece from a year ago.
Musharraf up against the wall in Pakistan
The Register Guard, August 12, 2007
I am worried about the hardening political rhetoric with respect to Pakistan because an unstable Pakistan has the potential to cause geopolitical crises, beyond our wildest imagination, which will have global implications for many years into the future.
August 14th marks the sixtieth anniversary of Pakistan’s existence as an independent country. In 1947, the country was carved out from the British Raj in India in order to meet the demands of the Muslim League, which incorrectly believed that a free India with a dominant Hindu majority would not accord equal status to Muslims. Since then, Pakistan has rarely been ruled by freely and democratically elected governments. With utmost regularity, military generals have ousted every elected government. The current president of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, also came to power through a bloodless coup in 1999.
A few days ago Musharraf faced one of the toughest problems ever when he had to deal with fundamentalist militants holed up with a few hostages in a mosque in the capital city of Islamabad, and not too far from the parliament itself. Eventually negotiations failed, and he ordered the army to storm the mosque; a few soldiers died along with almost a hundred hostages and militants, including their leader.
This was a pyrrhic victory for Musharraf because it earned him the wrath of fundamentalist and militant groups in the country. To make things worse, many of these groups are sympathizers of Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Further, it came close on the heels of the collapse of the “peace agreement” with leaders in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas—the region adjacent to Afghanistan, which is also where it is believed that bin Laden and his group have been regrouping themselves.
Meanwhile, there are a number of other political troubles that are making Musharraf’s life a tad too stressful. His illegal firing of the country’s chief justice rightfully unleashed protests across the country. Elections need to be held towards the end of the year, and Musharraf cannot constitutionally continue on with being the president and the military chief. Perhaps Musharraf knows all too well that those who live by the sword also die by the sword: Musharraf has lucked out with the assassination attempts thus far.
Unfortunately, it was when Musharraf was trapped in such a situation that our political leaders, from both the parties, decided to amp up the rhetoric and tighten the screws on Pakistan for its inability to deal with terrorism.
Given all these developments, it is, therefore, no surprise then that Musharraf decided against attending the peace council in Afghanistan, where the focus was to be on combating the notorious Taleban that appears to be growing in power, again.
Musharraf’s vulnerability is further evident in the following statement from Pakistan’s minister of information: “"There was pressure on the president to impose emergency due to the situation in the country, but he is committed to furthering democracy and will not take any such step.” A highly visible discussion of the possibility of emergency rule in Pakistan is a worrisome development indeed.
Imposing emergency in Pakistan, because of perceived external and internal threats, can spell even more trouble to its people. Emergency rule would further constrain the judicial system, and restrict people’s rights. If we in the US could end up in a horrible state of suspending habeas corpus and authorizing warrantless wiretaps despite all the checks and balances to protect individual rights, it is not impossible to visualize Pakistan moving into a highly militarized and authoritarian rule. This would then provide additional fodder for the militant groups and lead to an escalation of violence.
The world simply cannot afford to have more instability and violence, particularly in that part of the world, any more than what we are already witnessing in Iraq, Lebanon, West Bank and Gaza. Keep in mind that Pakistan is a nuclear power. At least with Musharraf in control, we can hope that the nuclear bombs are safely tucked away and will not fall into the hands of Al Qaeda sympathizers. If his government were to fail, and should governance become chaotic, well, we could get very close to realizing the hypothetical “ticking time bomb” scenario.
I am reminded of what my grandmothers used to say when I was growing up in India: it does not matter if a mad dog goes left or right, as long as it does not pounce on us. I fear that our careless rhetoric will only provoke the mad dog!
No comments:
Post a Comment