Inevitable power play
To quote a saying emblazoned in the Ingall Hall in the Pakistan Military Academy (PMA), “it is not what happens to you that matters but how you behave while it is happening” (paraphrasing of it would be “it is not the exit that matters but the manner of it”). That Mian Nawaz Sharif was on a sinking ship was quite apparent for some time, he simply hastened the process by trying something that had been anticipated by the military hierarchy, an attempt to sack the incumbent Chief and put his original favourite in place. Having, got away with it on Sept 29, 1998 with JK, fostering Ziauddin as the new Chief of the Army on the afternoon of Oct 12, 1999 not only amateurish, it was simply mind-boggling, particularly in the face of clear warnings in the print media from friend and foe alike that GHQ was braced for it as far back as Oct 98. Gen Musharraf, then the new COAS, had completed the deterrence by his round of postings of hand-picked officers into critical three-star slots, particularly Chief of General Staff (CGS), and Commanders 10 Corps (Pindi), 4 Corps (Lahore) and 5 Corps (Karachi) (my article “Power Play” in THE NATION, Oct 17, 1998).
Mian Nawaz Sharif is a very nice man personally but politically his personality seems to change from Dr. Jekyll to that of Mr. Hyde. The last 3 years have shown he learnt no lessons from the previous 3 years out in the cold beginning 1993. Ms Abida Hussain MNA, and former Minister in his cabinet, in a recent interview on BBC has used the words “potentate” and “imperial”, even though she is speaking as a woman politically scorned her description of him is uncomfortably close on both counts, adjectives one can hardly use for a “democrat”. The former PM had closed himself to advice except for an inner circle, a bunch of mindless sycophants that usually travelled with him far and wide. Survival seemed to be the primary mission, to the exclusion of everything else, in particular good governance. For the past year many had repeatedly tried to point this out to him, some bluntly, some obliquely, in the face of the flattery that surrounded him, none effectively. The tendency was to “shoot” the messenger of bad tidings. On the other hand, unlike his elder brother, Mian Shahbaz Sharif may be more abrasive, he was “hands-on” in the matter of governance and Punjab flourished (relatively speaking) in comparison to other Provinces. Frankly PML (N) would be better off in the future as PML (S). At least the man is credible about whatever he promises and he delivers.
Technically speaking the Army threw out a “democratic government”, given that anyone can justify that whatever was in existence in the country was a “democratic process”. In reality the Army delivered us, for its own reasons, from the sham that was being perpetrated in the name of “democracy”. And it was not confined to Mian Nawaz Sharif alone but to all that has been called “democratic” since the early demise of the Quaid in 1948. Both Mian Nawaz Sharif and Ms. Benazir Bhutto got about 8 million votes representing a bore 6% in a population of 130 million. Barring exceptions, when have the real representatives of the people ever been elected? Anyone who does not have more than 50% of the votes cast in a constituency cannot be said to represent that constituency. In Pakistan, except for a few seats, anyone who gets 20-25% wins the election. The minority thus gets to rule over the majority. And if the elected representative cannot be allowed to manage that constituency on a day to day basis at the grassroots level, where is the democracy we keep talking about? And if those in that constituency who did not vote for him have no voice till the next elections, what democracy are they subscribing to?
The Chief Executive, as the new military ruler is called, has to address several macro-issues having relevance to overhauling the system besides running the day-to-day affairs of government. Before any elections are held the electoral system has to be reformed by bringing in “run-off” elections to ensure a majority vote and also “proportional representation” to ensure that both “women” and “minorities” can have a say in governance. Similarly we keep talking about accountability, only an independent body free of personal prejudice and motivation will be able carry out a thorough process without fear or favour to anyone, politician, bureaucrat or military person. There will be temptation to settle personal scores, those who rise above such selfish vendettas will be the “right stuff” leaders this nation needs.
One of the major problems facing this country besides sectarianism is ethnicity. Fully fifty years into our existence our integrity as a nation has been compromised by problems relating to polarization of society not only on these two counts but also much worse on the basis of haves and have-nots, the bad economic situation having further compounded this crisis. To foster national integration we must introduce “national service” for all high school (intermediate) leaving children (excepting those in the highest 25% to continue their studies). Putting them into one big melting pot will not only build unity and cohesiveness but also be of vast intrinsic value to the individual, both individually and as a member of a team.
Before addressing the last macro-issue we must immediately carry out verifiable and meaningful land reforms. These are already on the statute books. Unless we break the hold of the feudals, there is no hope for democracy in Pakistan, thereafter local management at the grassroots level must be transferred to the elected representatives of the people. Whatever the period of the interim process there is no bar to having Local Bodies elections so as to empower the people and make them participate in the managing of their affairs of government at the local bodies level. Unless we have people’s participation, the concept of nationhood as we perceive it will be lost. Without that participation, the basis of democracy becomes a farce. Look at Mian Nawaz Sharif’s PML(N), for 48 hours not a single person protested his unceremonious departure, barely a few hours earlier they were singing his praises in droves. That hypocrisy sums up our political culture, out of sight out of mind.
Unlike the previous Chief Martial Law Administrator (CMLA) whose many changes of decision (the first one, “elections in 90 days”) caused the CMLA to be known as “Cancel My Last Announcement”, Gen Musharraf began his new life with a short brief statement to the nation to set at rest rumours. He chose not to announce any course of events till he had consulted with his colleagues and others about the entire ramifications of governing Pakistan, whether outright as Martial Law or monitoring a caretaker government. A few days do not make a difference when the entire existence of the nation is at stake, also there was a constitutional lacuna here that he has to live with. The declaration of the state of emergency though delayed, was almost a relief. While Martial Law is not mentioned, the country is effectively under military rule.
Anybody who supports a takeover by the Army is not in his (or her) right mind. Pakistan has many external and internal threats that the Armed Forces have to confront, involvement in the governance mode will have debilitating effect on their efficiency and in the performance of their primary mission of defending the integrity and sovereignty of the nation. A small coterie will always believe in total management a la uniform, but the country’s (and the Army’s) good is always best served by the Armed Forces staying away from running the country on a day to day basis. However, circumstances beyond their control were forced onto the Army, the inevitable power play being triggered by the attempted civilian coup by the former PM (formulated by his incredible “Think Tank” on board the aircraft en route to Abu Dhabi). When the die was cast, there were no options left except to either act or sit back and see a split in the Army lead to possible civil war. While democracy is always preferable to the most benign military rule, it is better to have military rule than to have no country at all. Ultimate sovereignty lies in the people and the people registered their support of the actions of the Army on the afternoon of October 12 by not protesting the demise of an elected government. That deafening silence spoke volumes about the perception of the “great silent majority” as to who they supported in the inevitable power play. Now they will look forward to the righting of wrongs during a half-century of bad governance, only then will the Jury come back on the Army’s counter-coup.
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