Ashutosh Misra   

With the military having little to worry as long as there are leaders whose ambitions outweigh their principles, the future of Pakistan rests on two alternatives: Imran the compliant and Nawaz the defiant

Pakistan’s democracy is under severe battering, a sight not too uncommon for its people. This because the country was born clashed with democracy and, hence, the state of democracy today. While India got a Constitution in 1950, Pakistan had to wait for nine years to produce a presidential-style of governance in 1956 under the military-bureaucratic oligarchy.

The President possessed powers to appoint and dismiss Prime Ministers, and a serving General in Ayub Khan was appointed as the Defence Minister who not only abrogated the Constitution in 1958 in a coup, but also framed the Constitution in 1962, providing for an indirectly elected President on the ‘basic democrats’ idea.

But where were the democrats? They were around waiting for an opportunity that came in 1970 when General Yahya Khan rejected the election results in which East Pakistan (now Bangladesh)-based Awami Muslim League (AML) emerged as the largest party. In West Pakistan (now Pakistan), Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) emerged as the largest party and refused to accept AML chief Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the Prime Minister. A civil rebellion ensured East Pakistan seceded as Bangladesh and rest is history.

In West Pakistan, exploiting the military’s loss of credibility, Bhutto tailored the 1973 Constitution and laid the foundation of parliamentary democracy, and also a long-drawn-out civil-military contest. Ironically, Bhutto’s autocratic ways created civic disturbances that General Zia-ul Haq grabbed with both hands in 1977 staging the coup and hanging Bhutto to eliminate any potential challenge to military rule.

Cleverly, Zia only kept the Constitution in abeyance to escape treason charges and later created a façade of democracy under a protégé, Muhammad Khan Junejo. A Prime Minister was appointed after the eighth amendment inserted Article 58 2(b) in the Constitution, giving the President arbitrary powers to dismiss national and provincial Assemblies at will. During the decade of democracy (1988-1998), the President, at the military’s behest, dismissed democratically elected Governments of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif on charges of corruption, misrule, misgovernance, national security, law and order and meddling in military affairs.

The democrats struck back after Nawaz Sharif, secured a two-third majority in the National Assembly in 1997, scraped Article 58 2(b) from the Constitution. But like ZA Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif, emboldened by his rising political clout, went too far to dismiss Gen Musharraf, which led to an overthrew of his majority Government in yet another military coup in 1999, while the PPP and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) cadres celebrated with drums.

With common experience, PPP and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) realised that their mutual acrimony and political hostility was a contributing factor in their downfall. A new realisation dawned upon the two leaders, matured their democratic understanding as a consequence. The Charter of Democracy was signed between Benazir Bhutto and Sharif in London in 2006 which declared: “... the military dictatorship and the nation cannot co-exist — as military involvement adversely affects the economy, democratic institutions as well as the defence capabilities, and the integrity of the country — the nation needs a new direction different from a militaristic and regimental approach of the Bonapartist regimes, as the current one.”

The Charter also called for purging the Inter-Services Intelligence’s (ISI) and military’s political interference and abolishing the National Accountability Bureau (created by General Musharraf in 1999 to force compliance from political leaders and had arrested Nawaz and Marayam Sharif on July 13). Both leaders pledged: “We shall not join a military regime or any military-sponsored Government. No party shall solicit the support of military to come into power or to dislodge a democratic Government.”

PTI leader Imran Khan, tipped as the next Prime Minister and not a party to the Charter, fits the Bill in Rawalpindi — a supporter of 1999 coup, champion of anti-Americanism and acceptable to far right parties as well. But Imran Khan’s power obsession has blinded him to the ill-effects of playing ball with the military. He had first become a parliamentarian in the 2002, guided elections under Pervez Musharraf and was reportedly offered prime ministerial position too.

Hailing from Punjab, bastion of the PML-N, he is conscious of his inadequacies to overthrow PML’s dominance in the state. Plus, the PPP was another national party with a large political base and a hindrance in his political ascent. He needed allies and favourable constituencies to back his political rise, and so he shifted to the far right of politics and became a champion of anti-Americanism during the war on terror. He found support among the Islamist parties who were squeezed by the Pakistani and US military operations on the one hand and centrist parties like the PPP and the PML on the other.

In 2013, Khan became the leader of Opposition in Punjab and Sindh Assemblies and secured power in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly. Riding on anti-American wave and anti-corruption crusade against the PPP and the PML-N, Imran Khan had finally arrived having nemesis in common with the general headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi.

To maintain political visibility and relevance, he resorted to street activism staging ‘million marches’ and protest rallies against the Nawaz Sharif Government, alleging electoral fraud in the 2013 elections. In September 2014, he joined hands with the Canadian cleric Muhammad Tahir Ul Qadri, laying siege to Islamabad and demanding inquiry into the alleged electoral fraud. A smirking GHQ saw a suitable protégé in Imran Khan to undermine Nawaz Sharif’s clout, and the military-jihadi industrial complex sprung in action to destabilise the democratic dispensation.

In 2017, when Islamists led by Tahir Ul Qadri again lay siege to Islamabad in protest of the alleged blasphemous legislation in the National Assembly, the military backed the protestors, and a Major was reportedly spotted distributing money to the jihadis.

GHQ had long been uncomfortable with Sharif’s overtures towards India. Alarm bells were set off in 2014 when Nawaz Sharif accepted Narendra Modi’s invitation to attend his swearing-in ceremony in New Delhi and later hosted his counterpart during an impromptu visit to Pakistan, first by an Indian Prime Minister since Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2004. The growing thaw proved quite disconcerting for the GHQ. The February 1999 bus trip to Lahore by Vajpayee had led to the Kargil War and subsequent military coup in October toppling Sharif. This time again following Modi’s visit to Pakistan, Sharif’s clock began ticking. Sharif not only had once clipped the presidential powers but brazenly dismissed a serving general, and came to be seen as a doyen of peace with India. This was blasphemous for Rawalpindi. He had to go.

GHQ’s core strategy remained unchanged — derail peace with India by delegitimising the entire democratic system as corrupt and anti-Pakistan and project military as the credible alternative — or if direct rule seemed unconducive due to international and domestic circumstances, promote a civilian protégé to rule indirectly.

Between 1985-1988, it was Muhammad Khan Junejo and between 2002-2007 there were Zafarullah Khan Jamali, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and Shaukat Aziz.

During the 2002 elections, Pervez Musharraf had created the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid-e-Azam (PML-Q) referred to as the ‘King’s party’ to induce desertion from PML-N through intimidation and offering a choice between portfolio or prison. Musharraf also marginalised the PPP and the PML-N by disqualifying many candidates questioning their degrees, but approving the madrassa degrees of Muttahida-Majlis-e-Amal candidates.

The same holds true now as leaders take flight from the PML-N to the PTI. Had corruption eradication been the sole objective of initiating proceeding against the Sharifs, then Generals and judges would also have been booked on corruption charges. But the GHQ’s sole purpose was to weaken the PML-N through forced desertion and intimidation and press terrorism charges on its leaders for staging a protest (a democratic right) against the arrests of Sharifs. It is also reported that while the Civil Aviation Authority allowed Imran Khan’s plane to fly from Lahore, PPP leader Bilawal Bhutto was denied permission. Both Bilawal Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari have slammed terrorism charges against the PML-N, which augurs well for democracy under the Charter of Democracy spirit.

Imran Khan on the other hand, not being a signatory to the Charter, is focussed on wresting the apex political chair, ignoring lessons of history. The PML-N learned harsh lessons after being dismissed at the centre repeatedly; found its leader first, then banished and now land in jail. The PPP too has learnt the hard way being toppled twice in the 1990s; seeing Benazir banished from Pakistan and then assassinated in 2007. Imran Khan must realise that rejoicing and keeping silence on the fate of Sharifs means tomorrow would be his turn, as for the military he is only a protégé until the next coup. For Pakistan’s democracy, it is a déjà vu. After a brief period of defiance under Chaudhry Iftikhar against General Musharraf despotism, the courts have again aligned with the military establishment to target the civilian leaders. This renewed compliance of the judiciary with GHQ’s diktats will only undermine the democracy further.

there are good signs too. A discernible transformation can be noted in the civilian leaders’ resolve and courage to resist the influence of the man on the horseback. In 2007, Benazir Bhutto had made a defiant and courageous return despite threats to her life, to demonstrate her commitment to Pakistan and democracy, ultimately paying with her life. Similarly, the Sharifs also returned to Pakistan fully aware of the fate that awaited them to send a strong message to the establishment that democrats are up for a fight. Unfortunately, the military has little to worry as long as there are compliant leaders whose ambitions outweigh their principles. On July 25, Pakistan’s future rests on two alternatives: Imran, the compliant and Nawaz, the defiant.

(Ashutosh Misra is CEO and Executive Director, Institute for Australia India Engagement, Brisbane)

DISCLAIMER:

The views expressed in the Article above are Author’s personal views and kashmiribhatta.in is not responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article.

Courtesy: Pioneer: Tuesday, 24 July 2018