Interesting times ahead
Shafqat Mahmood
The author is a former Senator and a
former federal and provincial minister
August 17, 2001
The plan of General Musharraf and his team unfolds, bit by bit. The good news is that general elections will be held next year in October. This appears to be a firm commitment and not another clever ploy to gain time a la Zia. The bad news is that there are going to be far reaching constitutional amendments. Once again, our consensus constitution of 1973 will be tampered with to create 'a better balance' between the establishment and civil society. Once again the basic law of the land would undergo a metamorphosis.
No one knows, besides General Musharraf and his close confidants, the exact nature of these constitutional amendments. Other than of course, the Jadoogar of Jeddah, to use Ardeshir Cowasjee's apt description of Mr Sharifuddin Pirzada. It is not difficult to guess though that the fulcrum of power in the new set up would remain the office of the President. Anything that furthers this basic objective would be incorporated. Anything that dilutes or weakens it, would be removed. On this basis would the fate of general elections and other issues be decided. Assisted by deft conjurers, General Musharraf still retains many cards up his sleeve.
The main stumbling block in this rather neat scheme are the elections. They are difficult to predict and sometimes lead to unforeseen consequences. The army surely remembers the elections of 1970 and its horrendous aftermath. No such fundamental danger is on the horizon, and thank God for it. Yet, what if the wrong party wins and starts to challenge the basics of the new arrangement. What if the new parliament decides to stand on its feet and take on the establishment. This would surely put the President and his team in a predicament.
The constitutional instruments designed to take care of such a situation would not be so easy to use. It would be hard to dismiss an assembly or a government soon after its inception. This would make a mockery of the entire democratisation experiment and would not be acceptable either at home or abroad. On the other hand, it would be equally difficult to tolerate a quarrelsome and potentially dangerous bunch. They may start to repeal the constitutional amendments and demand a new election for the President. What a terrible conundrum this may turn out to be for the establishment. Damned if you do and damned if you don't, so to speak. Clearly, the horns of this dilemma would not be easy to sit on.
It is because of these calculations that the President has not announced party based elections. This issue is too important to be dealt with summarily. Between now and next June, a detailed exercise - the sort that the army is very good at - will be undertaken. The intelligence agencies and the corps would be asked to assess the likely winners in the general elections. The names of these potential winners would be sent up and down. Their party affiliations will be carefully checked. Long 'appreciations' would be written and staff solutions proposed. Based on these the President would take a decision.
This task would have been easier for the army if it had a civilian team or a political ally who could have won the elections. The chosen party, PML (QA), has not fared too well in the recent local body polls even though a great deal of effort was put in by the government and the ubiquitous agencies. This is a pleasant surprise considering that in an indirect election it is easy to pressurise a few elected councillors. How this lot, the PML (QA), would fare in a general election is not too difficult to guess. Getting die hard PPP Nazims to accept the like minded label would not do the trick. An election in which everyone votes is a totally different ball game.
PML(QA) also has very little presence in Sindh and Baluchistan, and a few odd pockets in the NWFP. Even if it manages to split the vote in Punjab, which is unlikely, the possibility of it winning a majority in the National Assembly and the Senate is negligible. In any case, General Musharraf is not going to risk his future on an election that cannot be predicted. This would be a role of a dice for him and I do not think he is gambling man. The weak shoulders of PML(QA) is too fragile a foundation to build an edifice of power on. He would try to seek something more solid.
There are two options that he may consider. One, to go for non party polls. This does not ensure success but it at least gives a greater room for manoeuvre to the President and his team. People elected on non party basis are more inclined to independent decision making. Even though they may owe their success to political party support, they still like to imagine that they have come on their own steam. Party discipline in these situations is less strong. Collective party decisions more difficult to implement.
This would lead to horse trading on a grand scale but it would be justified on the basis of greater national interest. Some would succumb to the lure of office, others would get their pound of flesh in different ways. This is exactly what happened during Zia's time. The eighth constitutional amendment was obtained from a recalcitrant parliament through out and out horse trading. Money did not exchange hands, as far as I know, but favours did. It may happen again. History will repeat itself as a bigger farce than before.
The other option and perhaps a more difficult one is to cut a deal with PPP. PPP has clearly emerged as a major party in the recently concluded local polls. It has swept Sindh, done well in Punjab and very well in the NWFP. It has clearly emerged as the premier national party. Agreed that PML(N) was divided and MQM not participating, but in the given circumstances its ascendancy on the national horizon cannot be questioned.
For those in the establishment who have a clearer insight this may not be such a bad thing. It is good for the country to have national parties who believe in the federation. Had the Awami League or the PPP won in both the wings of the country in 1970, Pakistan would not have split apart. National parties are the glue that holds a country together. PPP must be seen as a national asset and not an enemy by the establishment.
Unfortunately it is easier said than done. For too long now, the army has been nurtured in anti PPP milieu. Many of the people in top positions now were middle ranking officers during the Zia regime. Whether they liked it or not, purely through a process of osmosis (absorption) they must have soaked up a great deal of anti PPP venom floating around. This situation has not changed over the years.
A complicating factor in this entire situation is that General Musharraf has a visceral hatred for Benazir Bhutto and her husband. In this he is not alone but reflects a commonly held view within the civil and military establishment. Benazir's two tenures are generally seen to be a unique combination of corruption and incompetence. Benazir may protest her innocence but this is the general perception. The problem this throws up is that even if people are willing to deal with PPP, they are not willing to deal with Benazir.
This presents an insurmountable problem because all roads to the PPP lead through the door of Benazir. If there is no deal with Benazir, there is no deal with PPP. What General Musharraf will have to weigh in the next few months is the relative merits of horse trading or dealing with Benazir. He may feel that he is caught between a rock and a hard place, but then this comes with the territory. Was it Zia who said in one of his last speeches that Presidency is not a bed of roses but a garland of thorns, or some such words. They may seem very real to General Musharraf now.
Whatever else happens, the next year or so would be politically very interesting. What I am waiting for is to see how General Musharraf justifies whatever course he takes. Of late his rhetoric has become even more self righteous and high minded. What the cut and thrust of politics and a dose of reality would do to these Olympian heights would be a sight worth seeing.