Why do martial laws fail?
As a lucid and (generally) honest account of the Zia decade, the authenticity of “Working with Zia” is guaranteed by the extremely close working (and personal) relationship between the late dictator and the author, Gen (Retd) K.M.Arif. An exposition of the inner circle of a Martial Law cabal at Ground Zero, the document makes interesting reading even though it omits far more than it brings to print. According to Henry Wilson, telling the whole truth would be like blowing a police whistle on oneself, therefore Gen Arif’s need to take the Fifth Amendment (of the US Constitution), by delicately skirting sensitive issues. However, six country-wide Martial Laws in South Asia, four in Pakistan and two in Bangladesh, provide material enough to analyse why martial laws fail.
Martial Laws fail because the initiators of all extra-Constitutional rule ride into town on tanks with the lofty Aim (of saving the country), relying on that platonic national purpose to make themselves credible but they soon adjust the Aim to more material (and less patriotic) reasons of self-perpetuation. The original Aim which remains publicly the same, becomes an exercise in self-delusion. The primary principle of war (and peace) is the Selection and Maintenance of the Aim, this diversion of Aim means that one individual or group is simply replaced by another or others, instead of being a transition mechanism that provides for and facilitates the process of the democratic system being repaired and renovated to reflect the real genius and aspirations of the people. As the only civilian Martial Law Administrator, Bhutto was quick to recognize this and replaced ML within 8-9 months with an Interim Constitution in 1972 till the final draft of the Constitution was agreed to by all the political parties and came into effect in 1993. Those who impose Martial Law, whether rightly or wrongly, are supposed to be trustees of the people’s confidence and cannot become beneficiaries of the Martial Law they have imposed in the first place. Whether the time period is 90 days or three years, it must be clearly spelt out and adhered to. Gen Ziaul Haq could never live down his ill-fated failed promise to hold elections in 90 days. The predilection of the Martial Law leaders to see themselves as God-ordained leaders of their respective countries and their pathetic crude attempts to perpetuate their rule by force, fraud or rigged elections is self-contradictory and counter-productive, it therefore fails at the touchstone of credibility that must be the bedrock of any Martial rule. Ayub Khan turned to Basic Democracy for a legitimate transformation to civilian President but remained in uniform technically as Field Marshal and as President was the Supreme Military Commander. Ziaul Haq became President through a controversial referendum but never shed uniform as COAS, a contradiction in terms. Both Ziaur Rahman and Ershad symbolically left their posts as COAS after taking part in Presidential elections, but while both were popular leaders, particularly in the countryside, could they have won without the crutch of the uniform? Martial Law leaders who are sincere about their aims and objectives in coming to the succour of the nation must establish credibility by declaring themselves ineligible for subsequent democratic office, at least till one successor democratic administration has taken office and completed its term.
Martial Laws fail because a lot of lip-service is given to self-accountability but there is no real will to ensure that those who misuse their powers in any manner will be brought to similar summary justice as they are prescribing for others. It is no secret that many people have made millions due to Martial Law and its derivatives. The most recent example is that of the scions of late Gens Ziaul Haq and Akhtar Abdur Rahman. It should be interesting to publish the Income Tax and Wealth Tax returns of those two General officers through the years as they rose in rank and reconcile this with the fabulous wealth that their children possess. Rumours abound about diversion of clandestine funds meant for the Afghan war. While this can never be directly proven, unexplained wealth can (and should) be questioned for the sake of the credibility of the Armed Forces. While late Gen Ziaur Rahman was known as one of the most honest third world leaders in history, this particular reputation was beyond Gen Ershad whose friends (and relatives) took great advantage of his boundless largesse as a big-hearted chief executive of the country. Martial Laws fail because they become consumed by the same nepotism and corruption they have come to eradicate in the first place. Unless the integrity and fairness of those involved in the Martial Law Regime remains above question, the reason for imposition of draconian military rule collapses. Early in the Ziaul Haq regime, one well-known Corps Commander (and Zonal Martial Law Administrator), who as a Brigadier in early 1971 in former East Pakistan robbed millions from a government treasury and stopped a bullet in his backside later during the war, is rumoured to have taken millions to allow late Jam Sadiq Ali safe passage.
Martial Laws fail because the Armed Forces get themselves involved in mundane, routine duties that they are not supposed to be involved in. Martial Law Complaint Centres start handling individual petty complaints about property, water disputes, etc. This also leads to nepotism and corruption. Armed Forces personnel are not equipped to and should not deal with these except in rare civil or criminal cases exceptional circumstances where they may have to. Martial Laws have to set up Committees to act as monitors to ensure is that those whose duty it is to carry out civil administration are going about their duties honestly and expeditiously, i.e. they must run those who run the government. Those Committees or Tribunals should also take action against those who do not come upto the standards expected of them. In this respect one fails to understand why Summary Martial Law Courts were headed or comprised of serving Armed Forces Officers when retired Judges and magistrates, retired civil or military officers could have been inducted to make up the composition of these Courts, invariably headed by a former Judge instead of the practice of using serving armed forces officers. Great care could have been given to the selection of these retired personnel lest justice becomes compromised, preference being given to persons already resident in the area and region where they have to carry out their duties. Their working in turn must be monitored by higher tribunals of senior retired civil and military officers with all the concerned individuals accountable for their actions.
Martial Laws fail because the officers who form the core of the regime are at the bottom of the rung as far as professionalism or personal integrity is concerned. There is a marked tendency for units which are asked to send officers and men for Martial Law duties, to earmark those whom they feel are dispensable to their own needs. Unit commanders usually keep their best and brightest away from ML duties, while this may be good for the professional army, it is counter-productive to the stated Aim of imposing Martial Law as it gives a wrong impression to the civilians who come in touch with such officers. It is the duty of unit commanders to ensure that contingents that are sent out to go and serve on ML duties must be well balanced in composition.
Martial Laws fail because of the lack of understanding of economies. Does anyone remember any military officer involved in the Ministries of Finance, Commerce and the CBR? With Armed Forces and civilian officers nowadays much better briefed in economics through education at various institutions, they along with men of proven integrity from private sector must be made part of oversight committees that look at the working of financial developments and institutions on a day to day basis. While nationalisation by Bhutto set the economy back many years it was not till Ghulam Ishaq Khan made the nationalised sector a fiefdom for bureaucrats to live off the fat of the land that the economy was well and truly destroyed. A man of limited economic intelligence, he was the Economic Czar of this country from 1977 to 1985, it is during this period that millions were milked from productive manufacturing units by inefficiency and corruption from the nationalised units. Like “war is too serious a subject to be left to generals”, to quote, the economy is too fragile a discipline to be left to bureaucrats in the guise of so-called “technocrats”. To keep the military happy, the Finance Ministry kept increasing the Defence Budget through all MLs, taking care in making funds available for TA/DA for Internal Security (IS) Duties. In return for this “bribe” the state of the economy and its direction, which should be a primary area of concern for any ruler, was left at the mercy of civilian bureaucrats and never questioned by the Martial Law Regime. It may be amazing but it is true that military rule in all cases in Pakistan and Bangladesh did nothing to monitor the economy. In contrast Martial Laws in Indonesia, Taiwan and South Korea transformed the countries into economic tigers because in each case the military fully inter-acted with bureaucrats and business executives in managing the economy.
In the end, Martial Laws fail because those who impose Martial Laws never do their homework properly. They do not have correct knowledge about the working of the State or the individuals who run it. As such Martial Law Regimes are soon surrounded by sycophants who are usually holdovers from previous governments. Taking any dissent to be something to be stamped out and as such closing a door to possible accountability, those imposing Martial Law become easily susceptible to flattery and manipulation. In power, they attract such adventurers and adventuresses like bees to honey. The worst case scenario was that of Yahya Khan but everyone of ML leaders could not shake off leeches in one form or the other who undercut the integrity of the Martial Law Regimes, making them worse than the political and/or civil rule they had come to save the people from.
One should remember that the worst democracy is still better than the best martial law, however, when a democracy becomes a farce, there is sometimes no alternative to Martial Law.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment