Most Dangerous Country on Earth

 

 

As largely a military-led country, where elections have been held far and few between and practising and popular politicians put to the sword by either death or exile during the last six decades of its existence, Pakistan’s dictatorship is a dictatorship with difference – people take to wild popular protests on the streets, their language colourful and raucous, and a military dictator can be brought down by popular rebellion and forced to superannuate.

So the countrywide protests over Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s decision to clamp Emergency in the light of growing civil unrest led by lawyers - the battle now being joined by other civil groups like journalists and students - the scenario is not much different from the days of Gen. Ayub Khan’s ouster and downfall in the late-1960s, when scenes of popular protest continued to rise until mass scale civil disobedience rose to a crescendo, forcing Ayub to quit.

Imposing the Emergency, which former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has likened to martial law, Musharraf made it sound as if he was doing Pakistan a favour. “Militants have a free run of the country and the judiciary is obstructing Pakistan’s fight against terrorism,” the General said in two televised national addresses, one in English and the other in Urdu.

If the US believed in 1999 that Kashmir was the most dangerous place on earth, the focus would now certainly have to shift to Pakistan. Home to most of the terrorists and their training camps, a nuclear arsenal in the hands of an army whose sections are radically Islamised and reportedly close to al Qaeda and influenced by the jihadi brotherhood, Pakistan represents a test case for the international comity of nations.

According to French writer and philosopher, Bernard Henri Levy, who investigated the death of journalist Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, the US was wrong in attacking Iraq. “If the US ever has to discover Islamic terrorists and their bombs, they should have attacked Pakistan instead,” is his conclusion.

Drawing upon his vast access in Pakistan, Levy paints a picture of a mysterious country, where assault rifles are carried inside mosques, lethal arms are available in the open market, where inaccessible, hostile tribal areas hide a million untold tales and the word ISI treated with trepidation and fear.

In capital Islamabad, scenes of riot police and plain clothes policemen manhandling lawyers and other protestors, preventive arrests, clamp down on media, and the menacing sight of armed forces patrolling the streets from Islamabad to Karachi, have become the norm since Emergency was imposed last week. There were wildly varying accounts, but according to authoritative sources, close to 1500 people, including political activists, have been so far rounded up throughout Pakistan. Why did Musharraf, under attack by the legal community for superseding the chief justice and then ordering arrests, decide to act when he did? According to sources, the Emergency order came hours before the Supreme Court in Pakistan was about to declare Musharraf’s regime null and void. With Emergency came the sacking of the chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chowdhary and virtual arrest of all senior judges perceived as hostile to the military rule.

Experts in Pakistan say the Emergency move is ill-conceived and is largely prompted by a section of the army which is against conducting operations against Islamic militants in the Frontier and Swat areas of tribal Pakistan, inaccessible through most of the centuries, and now a possible hideout of Osama bin Laden. “Imposition of Emergency rule will further divide the country and is unlikely to help the military guarantee the security of its citizens. Neither the Supreme Court nor the judiciary had sought to prevent the military from conducting operations in the Tribal Areas and the Swat Valley. Establishing Emergency rule, which involves curbs on the media and dismissal of the judiciary, will heighten public anger against Musharraf and decrease overall support for the military,” points out Sheikh Mutahir Ahmed, political scientist at Karachi’s Centre for International Studies.

Even more importantly, Pakistan is US’s critical ally in the war against terror. So what does the future bode for Musharraf and Pakistan? Morton H. Halperin, former US diplomat, explains it well: “Musharraf has been an important ally for the United States in the war on terrorism, but his steps toward increasing authoritarianism have put him at odds with the moderate political forces of the country and thereby strengthened the extremists. Washington must consider carefully how to leverage its influence with Pakistani leaders to encourage this pivotal country of 165 million to transition to civilian-led government,." Pakistan has certainly put its American friends in a jam. The million dollar question for Washington is: what would the US do next? According to Teresita Schaffer, former US diplomat and South Asia expert at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, opines that the Americans may have no choice in the matter. “The US certainly will have to continue working with Pervez Musharraf on the key issues that have driven US policy over the past several years; issues touching Afghanistan and terrorist violence. But I think some of the warmth will have gone out of the relationship. General Musharraf’s action is a big embarrassment for the administration. But there was not much the United States could do.”

Even though Islamabad briefed international diplomatic corps telling them the Emergency was temporary, it has few takers with activists demanding strong action against its military rulers. “It is important for the US to maintain its strong stance against the draconian measures and in favour of an early general election so that Washington is not viewed as backing Musharraf against the public’s will. The Pakistani public in recent years has grown increasingly resentful of US policy toward Pakistan, which it perceives as placing US counterterrorism interests ahead of Pakistani popular objectives like return to civilian democratic rule, says Lisa Curtis, a Pakistan expert at the Asian Studies Centre at The Heritage Foundation.

Clearly, the country is on the boil. With the main accused in most terrorist attacks in the world being traced to Pakistan, US certainly has its sight on India’s neighbour. At the moment, Pakistan is US’s strongest ally, but in the days to come, there is no knowing what Washington may do. Certainly, installing democracy in Pakistan is one step towards that final redemption. “God knows what is best”

For visitors like Zainab Khatoon, it is like missing an opportunity of a lifetime. Slated to go to Pakistan on November 14 to meet with her long lost brother of 50 years, everything was set for the D-day - visa, air ticket and all that, until news of the Emergency and the subsequent developments in Pakistan forced her to change plans. She has now dropped the idea of going there, given the uncertain political future and tense standoff. Zainab Khatoon is bitterly disappointed, as she talked to TSI.

For the first time in my life, I decided to go to Pakistan to meet my near and dear ones, to meet my brother who lived in Pakistan for the last 50 years. I had always desired to spend time with him, but alas, it is not to be. With great hope, I was looking forward to visiting Pakistan , but the whole effort has now come to nothing. I do not know what to say. If I am not destined to visit Pakistan , if God has not willed it, what can I do? One can only say that whatever he wills is for my own good. A human being is helpless in such matters and in such a phase.

Now there is Emergency in Pakistan , so how does a person get there? If it becomes important or urgent for anyone to go to Pakistan, how on the earth can he or she reach there? There is no one interested in ordinary people in any case. Who will listen to them? I will end off with these few lines: “ye aur baat kisi se gila nahi karte, malal kyon nahi hota malal hota hai” ( It is different matter altogether that I don't complain, but who says I don't lament? I do lament); "Pak army will not attack its citizens"

Kuldip Nayar, veteran journalist, writer and diplomat, is one Indian who has more friends in Pakistan than anyone else. Nayar, who has met or interviewed all of Pakistan’s Prime Ministers, tells TSI that the army is keen to share power in Islamabad.

What is your reading of the scene in Pakistan?

Things are hotting up there. My information is that a section of the Pakistani army is keen to share power with the civilians, probably with Benazir Bhutto as Prime minister. It is a very likely at the moment. The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) cadres are getting active and the vibe is positive.

There are reports that Pervez Musharraf was under house arrest? Will he go?

These are mere rumours, but Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, who is slated to replace Musharraf as the next Army Chief , apparently did pay a visit to Musharraf. It looks very difficult for Musharraf at the moment.

What about American pressure?

Undoubtedly there is US pressure. But I would hail the people of Pakistan, who have stood up to military dictatorship.

What about the army? Would they be agreeable to an arrangement with Benazir?

There are influential sections within the Pakistan army that is resentful of attacking its own civilians, be it in Baluchistan or the Frontier regions.

Musharraf’s policy so far has been geared towards asking the military to carry out such attacks.