Pakistan's predicament

Published : Oct 27, 2001 00:00 IST

The world has changed not just for the United States but for Pakistan too. It appears that a return to democracy now will remain a distant dream.

IT is more than six weeks since the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington and over two weeks since the United States launched a military campaign against Afghanistan in search of Osama bin Laden and his aides. However, the target of the campaign remains as elusive as the U.S. objectives. Both look more blurred with every passing day, as do the gains that Pakistan anticipated for its volte-face on the Taliban.

The reverberations of September 11 and October 7, when the U.S. and its allies in the coalition against terrorism began their first bombardment of Afghan cities, continue to be felt in Pakistan. In fact as the military campaign gets prolonged, the repercussions for Pakistani society appear ominous.

Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf (he is not described as the military ruler ever since he pledged 'unstinted' cooperation to the U.S.) was absolutely right when he described the nature of the crisis confronted by his nation as the gravest since 1971 war.

It would be no exaggeration to suggest that no section of Pakistani society has been left untouched by September 11 and its aftermath. The world has changed not just for America but for Pakistan too. Islamabad was forced to abandon its two-decade-old foreign policy and join the U.S. in the quest for Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network, sheltered in Afghanistan and allegedly behind the attacks on the American cities.

Even the holiest of the holy institutions of Pakistan, the Army, could not escape the impact. To mitigate growing Western apprehensions after it became evident that he was facing some "internal resistance" from the armed forces in effectively pursuing his new Afghan policy, Musharraf reshuffled the senior hierarchy of the armed forces. It is no coincidence that the changes, including the appointment of a new chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), coincided with the first U.S. strikes against the Taliban.

Using the occasion of the extension of his tenure as Chief of Army Staff (COAS), Musharraf promoted Lt. Gen. Mohammed Aziz and Lt.Gen. Muhammed Yousuf to the rank of full general and appointed them Chairman Joint Chief of Staff Committee (JCSC) and Vice COAS respectively. He also forced Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmad, head of the ISI, and Lt. Gen. Muzaffer Usmani, Deputy COAS, to seek premature retirement.

By marginalising top military leaders such as Gen. Aziz, who was perceived to be "potentially fundamentalist", and by retiring 'overly ambitious' ones like Gen. Mahmood, Musharraf is seen to have imparted a liberal and moderate look to the Pakistani military high command.

Additionally, by making fresh appointments to five of the nine corps of the Pakistan Army, Musharraf consolidated his hold on power. Reports in the Western and the Pakistani media suggest the hand of Washington in the reshuffle in the Army. But Musharraf dismissed the reports as speculative and described the changes as 'routine'. However, the diplomatic and international press corps, present in a big way in Pakistan, is convinced about the linkage between the changed worldview of the U.S. after September 11 and the reshuffle.

The Pakistan Army is known for its discipline and so no one has come out openly against Musharraf. However, the rumblings could be a source of concern if Pakistan does not succeed in installing a friendly regime in Kabul. That is why Musharraf is keen on keeping out the Northern Alliance, and he has even sold the idea of a 'moderate Taliban' to the U.S. But it is anyone's guess how things would turn out in Kabul.

Political and religious parties (such as the Jamait-e-Islami, which fancies a chance) in Pakistan are desperate to see the Army return to the barracks. But with Pakistan once again courted by the U.S. and its Western allies as a frontline state in their battle against 'international terrorism,' they are worried. Remember the October 13 radio address of President Bush: "We give a second, last chance to the Taliban. Hand over Osama, we call off the campaign."

Musharraf is the man of the hour for the U.S. The West was shouting from the rooftop until the other day on the need for Pakistan to return to civilian rule. In the changed context it could not care less.

Just consider what former Prime Minister and chairperson of the Pakistan People's Party Benazir Bhutto has to say on the fast-changing situation in her country. No one can accuse her of being anti-U.S. In fact, the charge against Benazir is that she behaves as if her political constituency is in America. She says:

"My run-in with Osama bin Laden began before he achieved international infamy. He supported the pro-Taliban forces in Pakistan in their bid to control Islamabad....

"In 1989 bin Laden poured more than $10 million into an unsuccessful no-confidence move to bring down my government. Years later, after the attack on New York's World Trade Centre in 1993, the bin Laden-backed mastermind, Ramzi Yousef, fled to Pakistan.

"Working with the FBI, my government's law enforcers apprehended Yousef near Islamabad. Before we extradited him, we learned the bin Laden apparatus had made two unsuccessful assassination attempts against me in 1993. During the tenure of my democratic government, we closed an important paramilitary training university in Peshawar and disarmed other forces. We arrested militants; they were on the run. We extradited wanted terrorists."

That was Benazir writing in The Washington Post days after the September 11 attacks. Her assertions are indeed extraordinary if not sensational. But the crux of the write-up is not Osama or his organisation, Al Qaeda. There is an unmistakable 'I told you so but you never bothered' tone; the message is clearly aimed at the U.S. and its Western allies, which are doing everything to keep Musharraf in good humour.

The most interesting part of Benazir's article relates to her passionate appeal to the U.S. not to let Pakistani democracy be sacrificed at the altar of Afghanistan. "It is Pakistani democracy that earlier contained the kind of terror and tragedy we witnessed in New York and Washington on Black Tuesday. It is democracy that can help contain fanaticism and terror in the future," she argued.

Serious questions have been raised within Pakistan on the claims made by Benazir in taking on the extremist elements and on Pakistan's approach to the Taliban. Dennis Kux has pointed out in his latest book The United States and Pakistan 1947-2000: Disenchanted Allies that it was during Benazir's second tenure as Prime Minister that the Taliban consolidated its hold over much of Afghanistan thanks to the generous help from her Interior Minister.

However, that is beside the point. The concerns expressed by Benazir reflect the sentiments of the majority of the political and religious parties in Pakistan about the fate of democracy in the country. Categorical assertions by Musharraf that he would stick to the timetable for the restoration of democracy have not helped allay the widespread apprehensions.

The experience of military dictator Zia-ul-Haq is still fresh in the minds of the people; the General promised to hold elections within months after he staged a coup and stayed on for 11 years. The U.S. and its Western allies played no small role in the continuation of Zia-ul-Haq at the helm as he was only too willing to do their bidding in Afghanistan and take on the erstwhile Soviet Union.

The 'historic and courageous' decisions of Musharraf have not gone unnoticed in Washington. During his October 16 visit to Pakistan, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell characterised Islamabad's continuing cooperation with the U.S. as "excellent". All layers of U.S. sanctions against Pakistan have been lifted. Besides voting for new IMF loans for Pakistan, Washington has rescheduled $379 million in Pakistan's bilateral debt and Powell has promised more economic debt relief for Pakistan as have other key U.S. allies such as the European Union, Japan and the United Kingdom. During his October 16-17 visit to India and Pakistan, Powell, while walking a fine line on the divisive issue of Kashmir, was judged by Pakistani analysts to be veering toward the Pakistani position by maintaining that resolution of the Kashmir question was "central" to enduring peace between the two countries.

Ironically, it is once again Afghanistan that is compelling the U.S. to court another military ruler in Pakistan. There are ample indications that restoration of democracy in Pakistan is last on the list of priorities of the U.S. Just see the speed at which the U.S. and its allies moved to lift all sanctions and offer Pakistan millions of dollars of assistance. So the political parties and civil society of Pakistan have every reason to be worried about the future of democracy as the big game in Afghanistan begins to unfold. By all accounts it is expected to be a long-drawn-out affair.

There is one major difference between 1979-89 (The Afghan war period) and now. Bitter over the manner in which the U.S. and its friends left Pakistan in the lurch after the last Soviet soldier left Afghanistan, the people of Pakistan are sceptical of the generous promises and doles offered by the U.S. "Pakistan is a friend indeed, always available in need," read a letter in the English daily The News. The letter writer, Ms. Tabassum Mairaj, was undoubtedly voicing the anti-U.S. sentiments of the overwhelming majority in the country.

It is not just the political parties that are worried about the likely fallout of the intensification of the Afghan conflict. It would be no exaggeration to suggest that since 1971 there has not been such unease among so many sections of Pakistani society.

The militant groups based in Pakistan have their own worries. They relate to Kashmir, and the Musharraf establishment partly shares their perceptions on the subject. Their argument is that the 'struggle' in Kashmir should not be bracketed with terrorism and that the international community should not get into the 'trap of the Indian propaganda'.

The concern of the militant outfits vis-a-vis the current crisis was evident when the United Jehadi Council (UJC), an umbrella organisation of 14 Pakistan-based militant outfits, denounced the reported remarks of Colin Powell that Washington's war on terrorism would eventually extend to the type of extremist violence India faced in Kashmir.

A special meeting of the UJC under the chairmanship of Hizbul Mujahideen chief Syed Salahuddin in Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir, took note of Powell's remarks and adopted a strongly worded statement decrying the U.S. for bracketing the 'legitimate struggle' of the people of Kashmir with terrorism. It characterised the remarks of the U.S. Secretary of State in the presence of Indian External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh as "ridiculous, unrealistic and (one that) ignored the historical facts".

The UJC appeared to be clearly concerned about the spate of statements emanating from Washington. Powell had said that the U.S. war on terrorism was "comprehensive" and went beyond the hunt for bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network. He also specifically labelled the suicide bomb attack outside the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly, which killed 38 people, as a "terrible terrorist" and "heinous act". The UJC statement alleged that Indian intelligence forces engineered the incident in an attempt to undermine support for the separatist movement in Kashmir. "Islam does not permit the killing of innocent people. Is it not a coincidence that the blast took place immediately after all the Ministers and other important functionaries of the J&K government had left the Assembly? In the past also the Indian agencies had resorted to such methods to malign the freedom struggle," the UJC statement said.

Interestingly, the UJC statement coincided with a denial from the Jaish-e-Mohammad, the Pakistan-based militant outfit that had reportedly claimed responsibility for the blast, that its activists were behind the incident.

It was no surprise that Powell tried to mollify the Pakistani establishment and the jehadi outfits by his remarks on Kashmir. "I praised Musharraf's recent phone call to Prime Minister Vajpayee and we, too, believe that the Kashmir issue is central to the relationship and can be resolved if all parties engaged with a willingness to address their concerns in mutually acceptable ways," he said standing next to the Pakistan President in Islamabad.

The initial fierce reaction from the activists of the pro-Taliban parties and the violent street protests have subsided. Partly because they lacked popular support and partly because of the stern measures taken by the government. However, it is difficult to guess how long the government can hold on, particularly if the military campaign drags on and U.S. ground forces get into guerilla warfare with the Taliban. It was a close shave for the Musharraf government when it discovered the briefcase timebomb in the international airport lounge in Islamabad.

And the debate in Pakistani society goes on. At the moment everyone seems to be groping in the dark and hoping that the country emerges unscathed from the latest crisis.

Sign in to Unlock member-only benefits!
  • Bookmark stories to read later.
  • Comment on stories to start conversations.
  • Subscribe to our newsletters.
  • Get notified about discounts and offers to our products.
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide to our community guidelines for posting your comment