Adios General Musharraf

Adios General Musharraf

General Musharraf has finally handed over the ‘coveted’ post of Chief of Army Staff to General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani in accordance with his pledge to the nation to do so. It is pertinent to mention here that he had promised to doff his uniform in the past as well but failed to uphold it so this time round when he decided yet again to retire from the army there were still some voices which questioned whether he would keep his word or not. It is true that the circumstances which led him to take the decision ultimately included a growing discontent in the country as well as international isolation, especially following the imposition of martial law in the garb of emergency in the country and the suspension of the Constitution by the former general earlier this month.

The office of Chief of Army Staff has been the real strength of support for the former general which allowed him to suspend the Constitution twice (illegally, which goes without saying) with the sole purpose of holding onto power. What he probably realized but ignored was that by doing so, he has allowed critics to once more label Pakistan as a failed state in which no supreme law of the land or the constitution existed. Due to the usurpation of his powers, he was able to control the legislative and executive process in this country yet insisted that democracy existed and the government was functioning in accordance with-- the then not suspended Constitution. The Parliament which was functioning under his command had nominal powers and the opportunity to debate on important legislation was never really made available to it through the hasty, yet numerous pieces of Ordinances issued by General Musharraf, using the Presidential office for this purpose.

Visibly filled with emotions, the former general conceded that this was a sad moment in his life after his long affiliation with the army for almost half a decade. He accepted the fact that everything must come to an end one day. If only he had realized and acted upon this fact much long ago, he would not have been as emotional on the day of retirement. Pakistan would have been much better off if, in accordance with the law and rules, he had retired from the armed forces many years ago upon reaching the requisite age, just like other functionaries of the State are bound to do. His continuation in office beyond the stipulated time, apart from all the other harms that were inflicted on Pakistan, also meant that many others who were eligible to become the Chief of Army Staff went home without having an opportunity to take up the top post, which is not the property of any one general but merely an office of trust to be held by the one who is eligible.

Musharraf has now taken another oath as ‘President’ for another 5 years. All 33 members of APDM, minus the JUI-F whose credibility has been in serious doubt over the past few years, have announced the boycott of elections if judges who refused to take oath under the PCO are not restored. Since it was only the new judiciary which allowed him to become the President, it is unlikely that this demand would be met without resistance, if at all, by Musharraf as the judges who refused to take the oath were more loyal to the Constitution and the law of the land than to his personal aspirations to become President. This principled stance of APDM is most welcome since any compromise by the people’s representatives on the derogation of constitution would mean that in effect it would help the regime claim that the illegal order is indeed a valid order. It is being asserted by the PPP, which has a substantial following in the country that it does not want to boycott the polls since it would enable the king’s party-PML (Q) a sweeping victory in the elections. This logic, although compelling in the light of what happened to the PPP during the 1985 boycott of elections, is not applicable to the present case because the political and constitutional scenario is totally different. In the present situation, what is being asserted is the restoration of the judges and the constitutional order prior to November 3, 2007 on which almost all major political parties minus PPP and JUI-F stand united. There was no similar manifesto or objective of PPP in 1985 when it boycotted the elections and therefore to apply the precedent to the present case would be misleading. The present case is one of constitutional supremacy and national interest rather than the holding of free and fair elections, which was the primary reason for the 1985 boycott by PPP.

The real purpose for participation by the PPP in the forthcoming elections is very different. It is clear that Benazir Bhutto, who has been spending fortunes for uplifting her image in the Western world, has come to Pakistan with a purpose and a guideline which has been given to her by her benefactors-primarily the US. If one goes through her statements over the past few months and even goes back to about a year, her one point which interestingly is present on all occasions is her assertion that she has the ability and the means to serve the US in supporting the war on terror in Pakistan. The US has been somewhat disappointed with the ability of the Pakistani Army to provide intelligence as well as carry out operations successfully which it perceives is mainly because of two reasons. Firstly, Musharraf’s affiliation with politics meant that he could not perform his task as the supreme commander of the armed forces in dealing with strategic operations as well as controlling the pro-Taliban elements within the army itself. Secondly, the increasing isolation of Musharraf in the eyes of the Pakistani public, including the moderates who initially supported him means that in effect one day or the other Musharraf’s downfall was inevitable in the eyes of U.S., especially post March 9, 2007 and the discontent against Musharraf’s action and rule by all segments of the society.

In this background, it is interesting to note that the new Chief of Army Staff who has been coined as a moderate, with whom the U.S. can work with in the ‘war on terror’, has also worked with the Benazir Bhutto government previously. It is no secret that the armed forces have despised Benazir Bhutto’s rule ever since Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was hanged. However, in order for a stable and ‘more democratic’ Pakistan under Benazir Bhutto, the U.S. needed an officer in command of the armed forces who had some kind of understanding with Benazir Bhutto so that no new challenge would be posed to her rule. General Ashafaq Kiani was the answer. It is not doubted that he must be an excellent soldier and officer as his credentials are clear on this, but it takes more than that to become the Chief of Army Staff of one of the most disciplined force of the world, which nevertheless has an inclination for the political field as well which can also be termed as the highest act of indiscipline. However, this has only been done at the instance of a few rogue generals who inadvertently also saw in themselves somewhat more than what they swore their oath of allegiance on and through a ‘divine revelation’ declare themselves as the saviors of the nation and destroy all institutions along with the sacred trust of the nation—the Constitution itself.

It would be no surprise if PPP holds onto its position for Benazir Bhutto owes something to the West for the favour it bestowed upon it by enabling her to return to Pakistan as well as making the promulgation of the National Reconciliation Ordinance possible. In addition, she cannot afford to go full out for the demand for restoration of judiciary since it had seemed likely that the very same judges of the apex court were bound to declare the NRO as an illegal piece of law which applied discriminately in her favour, something which rules of natural justice and law cannot accomodate. Furthermore, as the new judiciary installed by Musharraf is more likely to be dictated by him post-PCO oath, Benazir Bhutto would gain more personally if she does not press the demand for restoration of judiciary in return for the new ‘judiciary’ validating the NRO in her favour under another understanding or ‘deal’. Personally she has lots to gain. However, as a trustee of the people she represents, the people have a lot to loose if this were to happen which seems likely. In the words of Benjamin Franklin: “They that can give essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

One hopes nevertheless that the civil society, students and the lawyers would continue the struggle for the restoration of the pre November 3 situation, in partnership with all political parties who hold such condition as an essential pre requisite prior to their participation in any affair of the State, be they elections or otherwise which may provide legitimacy to the illegal ‘new order’ of Musharraf. If any of the political parties or group acquiesce with the illegal order, history would never forget such misdemeanor and only time would prove that the decision of APDM was right, although the success of its objectives largely depends upon how far the nation is willing to sacrifice to protect the sociological order which not only guarantees its freedom but affiliates it with the civilized world order in the form of the Constitution and distinguishes it from an uncivilized one where rule of men rather than rule of law prevails.