Although im not the biggest fan of Kuldip Nayar, his analysis of Pak politics is generaly pretty sharp…
Good read…
http://www.dawn.com/2007/12/21/op.htm
Unimportance of polls
By Kuldip Nayar
POLITICAL parties in Pakistan began with the demand for restoration of democracy but ended up accepting elections which they know will not be free or fair. In fact, a US source has said that the polls have been already rigged. Electoral rolls are said to have been fudged. Candidates have been reportedly sieved through a mechanism supervised by the army.
The Election Commission, presiding over all arrangements, is considered partisan. Ballot-box security and the counting are still in the realm of conjecture. In the face of such charges, the election has a question mark against it.
Benazir Bhutto, chairperson of the PPP, may be more to blame than Nawaz Sharif for not agreeing to a common charter. But after his initial reservations Mr Sharif, leader of the PML-N, too came along.
Ms Bhutto wanted to be the prime minister. Nawaz Sharif’s reasoning was that he could not persuade his party, which was rearing to go into action after having remained in the wilderness for some eight years.
The Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam chief, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, who was out of tune was at least honest. He said from day one that he would never boycott the polls.
His reasoning was that “elections in Pakistan have never been held in a free and fair manner and there have been allegations of rigging in every election. We should accept the ground realities”.
This reasoning may have influenced the main parties. If the end is power, whatever one can get is good enough. The question would have arisen only if the parties had decided to fight for principles.
“I shall never accept the army and, like [in] India, it should be back in the barracks,” Nawaz Sharif told me at Jeddah some time back. Benazir did not mind working with President General Pervez Musharraf when I met her in Dubai. Ultimately, one accepted the army after saying ‘no’ and the other had in any case initiated talks with Musharraf long before her return. Still there was hope this time.
No democracy knows of the military having the levers of power although Pakistan has been governed in this way for more than four decades. Musharraf has openly said “that kind of democracy” is not yet possible in Pakistan.
The reason why I was optimistic was the serious discussions I heard in the camps of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif on how to bring back democracy. The two leaders even signed a Charter of Democracy in London, “calling upon the people of Pakistan to join hands to save our motherland from the clutches of military dictatorship”.
I pin my hopes on the lawyers who were successful in having Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry reinstated. They are the ones who are continuing their agitation for “a tolerant, liberal democratic and pluralistic Pakistan”.
This class, not normally associated with braving police excesses and confinement to jail, is holding the standard of defiance aloft. The lawyers may ultimately put the political parties to shame and force them not to pick up a few loaves of power thrown at them. The lawyers have redeemed the country’s honour.
It is sad to see Musharraf getting away with the imposition of emergency and the dismissal of judges, including Chief Justice Chaudhry. This is because the people did not come out in the streets.
They were probably awaiting the call by the party leaders who were busy counting what they would gain personally. Hats off to Aitzaz Ahsan who has led the lawyers’ agitation and who has withdrawn his nomination papers from the Election Commission.
Pakistan has found in him a leader whose integrity is above board and whose acceptability is all over Pakistan. I have no doubt that he would be able to find space — probably a new party — for himself and persons like him if they do not compromise with the feudal elements which still dominate Pakistani society.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was hanged, is popular even today because he raised the slogan of roti, kapra aur makan. Aitzaz will have to plug that line. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto did another thing: he gave the country its 1973 Constitution.
I recall how hard he worked to forge a consensus. He brought round tall leaders like Ghous Bakhsh Bizenjo from Balochistan, Wali Khan from the NWFP and Mohammad Kasuri from Punjab.
Unfortunately, the Constitution has been amended and re-amended by martial law administrators. But the manner in which Musharraf has defiled it beats all. He has amended it and has also laid down that he cannot be touched for doing so.
The next parliament is expected to restore the dignity of the Constitution.
How can the judges whom Musharraf did not like for their independence stay ‘sacked’? He destroyed the judiciary at a time when its independence was looked at with envy in democratic countries, including India. Apart from the judiciary, Musharraf has damaged the media.
The restoration of the judiciary and the media to their old glory is dependent on the outcome of elections. My fear is that the parties opposed to Musharraf will not be able to muster a two-thirds majority to amend the Constitution.
The ratification of his office as president is also dependent on a two-thirds majority. The PPP should not help him this time as it did in his election as president; the party abstained from voting.
However, Musharraf remains undaunted. His observation during an interview with The Washington Post gives an insight into his future plans. When asked whether there would be a difference after he had shed the uniform, Musharraf said: “The army is being managed by a chief of staff dedicated to the job and I will be the president of Pakistan.
If the two are totally in harmony, the situation is better.” And then he added in reply to another question: “I will appoint the chief.” Where does the prime minister, the elected representative of the people, come in?
Even after the managed polls, Musharraf will remain at the top with all the powers, including the charge of nuclear weapons. This is why the exercise of elections makes little sense. The parties will only lend credibility to the polls.
They may come to repent for having done so. True, Benazir Bhutto has warned that rigged elections may lead to a civil war and the balkanisation of the country. But her warning may not be heeded.
The lawyers’ agitation looks lonely at present. But it is fighting for principles, one of which is that the military is there to defend the country, not rule over it. Musharraf’s stand is known. Army Chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani instils hope when in his maiden speech he says that the army depends on the support of the people. And he knows that people want to rule themselves.
The writer is a leading columnist based in New Delhi.