Resolving Pakistan's grave
political crisis
By
Jonathan
Power
TFF
Associate since 1991
Comments directly to
JonatPower@aol.com
September 7, 2007
LONDON - Pakistan’s jockeying leaders are quite capable of bringing the economic house down around their ears. In their quest for personal power they have also taken their eyes off the Indian ball, yet an agreement with India over Kashmir is also a vital imperative. Without this the economy will never realize its full potential and the militants who wag Pakistan’s tail will always have too much influence over the dog.
At the moment, under the relatively benign rule of a military dictatorship, Pakistan’s economy is doing better than ever before. Foreign investment has been pouring in, and Pakistan possesses one of the more equitable distributions of income in Asia. If Pakistan could keep this going for another decade it would have the resources to get on top of its major problems- education first and foremost but also the poverty and backwardness of the tribal areas that border Pakistan, which are the breeding ground for the Taliban and, these days, Al Qaeda.
But present events suggest that a prolonged period of political turbulence is getting under way. The rivals for power, the incumbent president, Pervez Musharraf, and Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, the previous prime ministers and leaders of the two main political parties, who when in power ruled as quasi dictators themselves, seem intent on a bruising battle that is bound to slow an economy that is now, more than any other single thing, making Pakistanis feel they have a better future.
Pakistan certainly needs democracy, for although Musharraf allows a quite vigorous debate to take place in both parliament and the press and has a good record on women’s issues despite the intransigence of the Islamic establishment, he has accreted an unacceptable amount of power in a country where the army even in the best of times too often goes its own way. Two facts in particular condemn army rule- all Pakistan’s major wars have happened when military dictators have been in power and the military has a long tradition of cosying up to militant Islamists, whereas the democratic politicians, for all their flaws, have tended to be peacemakers and, by outgunning the religious parties at the polls, have been able to put the mullahs in their place.
Musharraf’s supporters argue back on these points. Musharraf has come closer than any leader before to striking a deal with India over Kashmir. In the days of Bhutto and Sharif the army made it impossible for the two leaders to contemplate the kind of concessions to India that Musharraf has freely made. Indeed, if it weren’t for Indian foot dragging, a deal should be signed and sealed by now, a state of affairs that New Delhi may come to rue if Musharraf loses his grip on both the army and pubic opinion.
Anyone who cares about the role of the militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan should worry about this. In his moves to make peace Musharraf has severely clamped down on the militants, once supported by the military, who stalk Indian troops in Kashmir and who set off bombs in Bombay and Delhi. And it is these militants who have done much to build up the military prowess of their brethren who fight the Americans, Nato and the Pakistan army in the border areas. If Musharraf has to give way to another army commander or is swept away altogether it may be very difficult to keep the Indian negotiations on track.
Musharraf is a man who is prepared to consider on their merits new facts when they are brought to his attention. Consider his U turn after September 11th when he ended Pakistan’s long standing support for the Taliban because they sided with Pakistan against India and how, in a long conversation I had with him at the beginning of this year, he seemed open to the idea of buying up on a free market Afghanistan’s massive output of opium poppies as an alternative to the present but failed policy of suppression.
The only way to head off a showdown that will rock the country to its foundations is to allow free elections. However, Musharraf’s dilemna is that he knows he cannot win an election unless he can form an alliance with either Bhutto or Sharif. And if he forms an alliance with one the other will cry “foul” and will attempt to mobilize confrontational street protests. Given the feudal line up behind Bhutto and Sharif this will split the country on geographical lines, which is hardly the way to improve political stability or to attract foreign investors. It will also boost the fortunes of the religious militants.
All three of them have a responsibility to the wider good. However events play out they all have a duty to keep the temperature down and to avoid taking the country to the brink.Resolving Pakistan’s grave political crisis.
Date: Sept. 6th 2007.
Pakistan’s jockeying leaders are quite capable of bringing the economic house down around their ears. In their quest for personal power they have also taken their eyes off the Indian ball, yet an agreement with India over Kashmir is also a vital imperative. Without this the economy will never realize its full potential and the militants who wag Pakistan’s tail will always have too much influence over the dog.
At the moment, under the relatively benign rule of a military dictatorship, Pakistan’s economy is doing better than ever before. Foreign investment has been pouring in, and Pakistan possesses one of the more equitable distributions of income in Asia. If Pakistan could keep this going for another decade it would have the resources to get on top of its major problems- education first and foremost but also the poverty and backwardness of the tribal areas that border Pakistan, which are the breeding ground for the Taliban and, these days, Al Qaeda.
But present events suggest that a prolonged period of political turbulence is getting under way. The rivals for power, the incumbent president, Pervez Musharraf, and Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, the previous prime ministers and leaders of the two main political parties, who when in power ruled as quasi dictators themselves, seem intent on a bruising battle that is bound to slow an economy that is now, more than any other single thing, making Pakistanis feel they have a better future.
Pakistan certainly needs democracy, for although Musharraf allows a quite vigorous debate to take place in both parliament and the press and has a good record on women’s issues despite the intransigence of the Islamic establishment, he has accreted an unacceptable amount of power in a country where the army even in the best of times too often goes its own way. Two facts in particular condemn army rule- all Pakistan’s major wars have happened when military dictators have been in power and the military has a long tradition of cosying up to militant Islamists, whereas the democratic politicians, for all their flaws, have tended to be peacemakers and, by outgunning the religious parties at the polls, have been able to put the mullahs in their place.
Musharraf’s supporters argue back on these points. Musharraf has come closer than any leader before to striking a deal with India over Kashmir. In the days of Bhutto and Sharif the army made it impossible for the two leaders to contemplate the kind of concessions to India that Musharraf has freely made. Indeed, if it weren’t for Indian foot dragging, a deal should be signed and sealed by now, a state of affairs that New Delhi may come to rue if Musharraf loses his grip on both the army and pubic opinion.
Anyone who cares about the role of the militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan should worry about this. In his moves to make peace Musharraf has severely clamped down on the militants, once supported by the military, who stalk Indian troops in Kashmir and who set off bombs in Bombay and Delhi. And it is these militants who have done much to build up the military prowess of their brethren who fight the Americans, Nato and the Pakistan army in the border areas. If Musharraf has to give way to another army commander or is swept away altogether it may be very difficult to keep the Indian negotiations on track.
Musharraf is a man who is prepared to consider on their merits new facts when they are brought to his attention. Consider his U turn after September 11th when he ended Pakistan’s long standing support for the Taliban because they sided with Pakistan against India and how, in a long conversation I had with him at the beginning of this year, he seemed open to the idea of buying up on a free market Afghanistan’s massive output of opium poppies as an alternative to the present but failed policy of suppression.
The only way to head off a showdown that will rock the country to its foundations is to allow free elections. However, Musharraf’s dilemna is that he knows he cannot win an election unless he can form an alliance with either Bhutto or Sharif. And if he forms an alliance with one the other will cry “foul” and will attempt to mobilize confrontational street protests. Given the feudal line up behind Bhutto and Sharif this will split the country on geographical lines, which is hardly the way to improve political stability or to attract foreign investors. It will also boost the fortunes of the religious militants.
All three of them have a responsibility to the wider good. However events play out they all have a duty to keep the temperature down and to avoid taking the country to the brink.
Copyright © 2007 Jonathan
Power
Last 
Next
Jonathan Power can be
reached by phone +44 7785 351172
and e-mail: JonatPower@aol.com
Jonathan
Power
2007 Book
Conundrums
of Humanity
The Quest for Global Justice
“Conundrums
of Humanity” poses eleven questions for our future progress, ranging
from “Can we diminish War?” to “How far and fast can
we push forward the frontiers of Human Rights?” to “Will
China dominate the century?”
The answers to these questions, the author believes, growing out of
his long experience as a foreign correspondent and columnist for the
International Herald Tribune, are largely positive ones, despite the
hurdles yet to be overcome. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, London, 2007.
Tell a friend about this column by Jonathan Power
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
Get
free articles & updates
|