In response to a mail of a friend in which he praised Musharraf, I wrote him back my views on what he terms to be the best government Pakistan has today. One of the argument that he had was that ‘had musharraf not been there, 9/11 wud have cost us our country’
My views were:
*Conditions of Pakistan at the time when 9/11 occurred were bad, in fact too bad, but there are some things to ponder over:
-
The world believes, Bin Laden and his Al- Qaeda were bred in Afghanistan. That country fought war with ex soviet union. US beat Soviets there by waging a proxy war through Mujahideen who were trained and supported by our army and remember the ruler was Mard e Momin, Zia-ul-Haq. Had Pakistan under army rule at that time decided not to help US and get involved into Afghan issue, 9/11 would have not affected its prestige. I had International Relations as a subject so I know what that issue is and it can not be defined in a paragraph but somehow I can safely conclude it that “precisely, that moment was a trial for us to decide. Had we had an elected PM, like that of Bhutto, we would have gained more prestige from that opportunity than had lost it so brazenly.” A usurper like Zia could only make deals to secure his own position else US knows how to kick such people out. In fact, what the real tragedy of this nation is that its leadership hasn’t grown or has not been allowed to grow. India today reaps the harvest of the fruit of continued democracy. We are at least 57 years behind India, if not more.
-
Armies, ever since their inception were supposed to be in the cantonments. Take muslim armies as a case which as an Institute evolved in the days of Hazrat Umar (RA). He created cantonments for them which were away from the living places of general populace in order to keep them in the continued state of preparedness to defend and attack as per necessities of the state. Military was never wanted to indulge with civilian matters which people are best suited to settle. History is evident that through the power of the gun, they have taken every available opportunity to take on the power not for the sake of boundaries but personal gains. Today, what we see in our country that most palatial buildings that we have in our country are in the cantonments and these cantonments are renamed like Defence Housing Authorities. If a soldier who lives in a comfortable villa can be trusted with the defence of the country, it’s a vain wish. No wonder they lost two wars and could not defend a part of the country in 1971.
-
As if these villas weren’t enough, Military today runs business concerns. They started letting out the services of NLC (meant for the wartime transportation of men and machines) for commercial purposes and it continues till this day. Later, gas stations, still to come were contracts to build roads and buildings (FWO), farmlands (Take Okara as a case example), prepaid cards (Salaam card) and the list is endless.
-
Not satisfied still, they took over WAPDA, PIA, Ports, etc. You have yet to learn what more are they planning to take over. Education? Is this spared? Now tell me, do you think that those elite military officers who take over the entire country can be trusted with all you have especially when you know that their basic education is “Intermediate or SSC Part-II, what ever u call it”?
I think I better stop highlighting what they are and tell you honestly that its them who are behind the failure of this state. Bureaucrats come next. Now to your question what did Nawaz and Benazir do when they were at the helm of affairs? They could not do it because they have to evolve in a system, a system to know what their role is to which they have never been acquainted because they worked under dictations. I would again relate this with the absence of continued democracy that lay behind their failure to deliver. Yes they were corrupt, despots and autocrats. They have to learn still that they have to rise above it if they were to be remembered in history with good words. I am not favouring these two but I firmly believe that it’s the elected leadership, which has to bring in change, none other can. Military being trained in destruction can never be wished upon to build. Bureaucrats being trained to learn the rules of business of the state and then ensure that the business is run as per peoples’ wishes can not be trusted to groom the national leaders (who come to offices after decades of military rule, totally ignorant of their role) as they have their interests involved in it. A knowing and knowledgeable Minister is a pain in the back of his Secretary of the Department. Why should not a bureaucrat keep him in dark of his powers? Its all understandable.
Often I weep when I see that the first institute of learning of every child, that is the lap of his/her mother, is devoid of such capacity building. Today’s mothers are caught in checking the transgresses of their spouses, stuck in running their homes with a meager sum of amount and are mostly not educated themselves.
In the end, I would say that your ideal Musharraf Sahab, doesn’t equal a dust particle of the feet of Plato who too in his “Republic” wished that the military should have their enclaves outside the cities. Why so? Just because their job is not to know what the people are doing but to defend their land inch by inch. I would like to end my comments here as I think I have spoken much and the so called intellectual in me when wakes up, I find it hard to sleep.
*