Even one of Mushys closest friends is coming out and openly saying Mush’s rigging machine is going all out and in the process ruining the image of the Army.
Double or quits?
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Ikram Sehgal
According to Ms Bhutto, the PPP will win 150 National Assembly seats in the Jan 8 elections. This magic “150” figure has also been confidently claimed by both Mian Nawaz Sharif for the PML-N and Shujaat Hussain for the PML-Q. The grand total of 450 National Assembly seats claimed by the three leaders exceeds by a cool 178 the 272 NA seats being contested. Given that the MQM, the MMA (represented by the JUI-F and three other religious parties), the ANP, the eight or nine political parties in Balochistan which usually win one or two seats each and independents all over the country will manage 50-55 seats between them, leaving a maximum of about 220 seats between the three major parties, that makes less than half being claimed by them.
These leaders tend to exaggerate by more than double the seats they would normally win. Do they do this in everything? One would be prudent to reduce by half whatever they say about themselves, and by that analogy for others. Given that their own projections can hardly be met, both the PPP and the PML-N have laid the basis for yelling “rigging and manipulation” to high heaven after the Jan 8 election. It’s double or quits! If the PML-Q tally does not reach the 150 magic figure, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain will probably write it off as inefficiency of the Pervez Elahi-rigging machine (PERM).
Coincidentally they have one thing in common: in their party manifestos there is deafening silence about accountability, the major priority of the Pakistani populace. Given their track record, one understands their reticence! The vastly inflated claims of the party leaders notwithstanding, by being blatantly partial in the make-up of the caretaker set-up and the government has only added to the general perception among the masses that major election chicanery is in the offing. Even though the caretaker government can hardly influence the elections in the short time available, with the officials of the election commission, public officials as well as the police on duty at the polling stations and the local bodies infrastructure personnel in place, the perception of partiality very much exists. Supporting them will be the various intelligence agencies, interference of their personnel directly proportional to the priority given to each candidate.
All parties claim to be “holier-than-thou”, wherever they can get away with ballot stuffing or intimidation they will do so. Local electoral skulduggery in every constituency is not only at the behest of the government, in many cases the influence of the candidate in his constituency, whatever his party affiliation, will be the measure of fraud being perpetrated. Technically, nazims, naib nazims etc supposedly do not belong to any party but this is a patent farce, nearly all of them have party affiliation and are capable of influencing the elections for their favourites at the polling booth. There is a strong case for suspending the local bodies for the duration of the elections, or even dissolve them.
Approximately 220-230 seats will be shared between the PPP, the PML-N and the PML-Q. More than half (about 130) of these will be won by the candidates irrespective of their party affiliation or rigging and manipulation. As such there are actually about 80-90 constituencies where official or unofficial manipulation can overturn the people’s choice. An overwhelming number of these (around 70) are in Punjab, here the PERM is poised to commit electoral fraud (mostly to the detriment of the PML-N (40 seats) and the PPP (25 seats) to paraphrase President Musharraf’s words about Jan 8 (admittedly in a different context), “come hell or high water!”. The best effort of the PERM may not succeed everywhere; the PML-N may lose 20 and the PPP about 10 seats. Rigging notwithstanding (given that it cannot be eliminated altogether) the PPP should get 80-85 seats, the PML-N 75-80 and the PML-Q 70-75.
Independent observers and the media should focus on those constituencies where electoral fraud is most likely. Ballot stuffing etc will not be widespread at all polling stations but will happen in selected ones; with the help of candidates “target” stations can be earmarked. Those who commit irregularities know this and will attempt to avoid (or deflect) any focus. The independent observers and the media should therefore maximize their presence in the 80-90 constituencies where electoral manipulation is most likely, coordinating deployment of mobile teams (kept in reserve) to those polling stations where electoral fraud is reported. This may not totally prevent misdemeanours but will certainly act as a deterrent to widespread rigging.
Those inimical to Pakistan have spent tons of money and effort in a well-coordinated, multi-directional and multi-disciplinary effort. The 70 districts in India (nearly 12 per cent of the total districts, 18 per cent of the population) where the 100,000 or so Naxalities (who call themselves terrorists) collect revenues instead of the government do not seem to count! Despite the fact that the army contingents (less the intelligence personnel on duty with various agencies) remain quite some distance from the polling booth and have nothing to do with ballot stuffing etc, their presence in the vicinity means the stage is set for them to be set upon internationally and domestically for the misdoings of others. What steps are the military hierarchy taking to ensure that this perception is not reinforced after the Jan 8 elections? Instead of being “fall guys” and remaining a recurring part of the problem, for the sake of the uniform it is time to look for permanent solutions.
Whether there is a fair election or a rigged one only the numbers will change. There will be a hung parliament and whatever Ms Bhutto may profess at the moment her party is poised to come into an alliance with the PML-Q at the federal level and in Punjab, this will leave the PML-N, which will be the majority party (if not outright) in Punjab, out in the cold. This leaves Pervez Musharraf very much in place ruling the roost as a “civilian” president; does he really need to go in for overkill? The bad news is that in a straw poll conducted among those who know him well for over four decades concluded that he is incapable of letting go; it is not in his personality profile to stay above the fray.
Loyalty is a two-way street, for having him elected as a “civilian” president, Musharraf owes the army loyalty in return. What better way for him to express this loyalty than to ensure free and fair elections so that the army’s image and reputation is not sullied anymore.
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: [email protected]