As Pakistan confronts yet another military government on the eve of the millennium, one would expect most thinking Pakistanis to hang their heads in shame and anger. Particularly those persecuted during the 11-year tenure of Gen Zia-ul-Haq.
But it isn't so. Instead of condemning the military takeover, many Pakistani intellectuals and liberals have actually joined chief executive Gen Pervez Musharraf's team.
Perhaps Musharraf's attitude has something to do with it. The ease with which the chief executive faced the national and international press singlehandedly last week was any leader's dream scenario. Neither of the so-called democrats, Nawaz Sharif nor Benazir Bhutto, could have handled complicated issues ranging from democracy, economy or foreign relations with the aplomb shown by the general. And it has been a long time since women, minorities and the non-government organisations heard words of praise from the powers that be.
Most importantly, there was no pontification on how to be a true Muslim. Far from being a fundamentalist, the general proved to be a moderate, forward-looking Muslim. There was no need, he said, for a debate on the issue as it was a proven fact that "Pakistan was an Islamic state and we were all devout Muslims". Certainly no room for Sharif's 15th constitutional amendment that proposed to make Pakistanis better Muslims. "I hate to admit it, yaar, but the general was just too good," one hack said in an embarrassing tone to the other who remained silent. Add to that the fact that Sharif had used his immense mandate to rule like a dictator and it should come as no surprise that many liberal Pakistanis agreed to join the military set-up.
First was the low-profile and soft-spoken son of a war hero, Omer Asghar Khan. In the late '70s, Khan, along with Sharif crony Mushahid Hussain, had been dismissed by Zia-ul-Haq when they were teachers at Punjab University. Yet, Khan is now ready to work with the military. "I've thought about it for five days and in the end convinced myself that this was the last chance for us to save the crumbling institutions around us. So far, there's transparency in what Musharraf is doing. The measures outlined constitute a challenging agenda of change. The current situation presents challenges and opportunities for civil society in Pakistan."
One who took Zia-ul-Haq to court because he was interfering in the Quaid-e-Azam University is none other than Shirin Mazari, who fought tooth and nail against the military regime in the late '70s. Yet today she hosts a programme on ptv-monitored by the military-and has also heaved a sigh of relief upon the passing away of the so-called democracy. "When civilian leaders tend to become autocratic and dictatorial and rule by their personal whims, then the only difference you have now is the military clothing. At least some system is in place and not personal whims," she says.
Another woman who says she has always been vocal against military rule has now agreed to represent it in Washington. "I have put my career on the line and I do not feel uncomfortable representing my country. What happens internally is not the concern of outsiders. I've been a democrat all along. This dispensation will pave the way for enfranchising the people. Pakistan's abiding interests don't change," says Maleeha Lodhi, the new face of the military government in Washington. She will add a feather to her cap if she can pull off a visit to Pakistan by Bill Clinton when he tours the region. However, beyond the optimism that's presently displayed, there's room for apprehension. What kind of a set-up will the army finally hand over government to? Is it possible to hand-pick nominees and ask them to be candidates for the new assemblies?
Then there's cricket legend Imran Khan, whose appeal as a liberal democrat has never really faded even though he did not win a single seat in the last election. Yet, according to him, "democracy can survive under military rule and the nation will support him as long as he implements his agenda. The general has the same agenda that we in the Tehrik-e-Insaf also have".
Noted analyst Aziz Siddiqui says the last word must still belong to civil society. "Its exertions on behalf of democratic governance, rebuffed by the former regime, may have been rendered kaput by this abrupt change. Yet, it can't but carry on regardless. It has to remain committed to its own metier. It has to function by the concept of society being able to control the state, a concept which can best be enforced through democratic political institutions. Any departure, even if temporary, is bound to have lasting ramifications for itself," says Siddiqui.
Even the independent English press seems to have welcomed Gen Musharraf. Najam Sethi, mouthpiece of the oppressed and editor of the English weekly, The Friday Times, has words of praise for the military dispensation. "It's clear that the majority of the people of Pakistan had had enough of the Sharifs and their hangers-on. They were repressive, deceitful, corrupt, incompetent and dangerous. Not too many tears are going to be shed at the passing of their rogue regime. As for democracy, it died in Pakistan when the Supreme Court was stormed and the judiciary humiliated and undermined, when Parliament was gagged, when provincial governments were arbitrarily removed, when the press was attacked, when the bureaucracy was politicised, when all checks and balances on the power of the prime minister were systematically removed and the sword of the Shariat Bill was waved to scare away conscientious dissenters. If a formal burial of this long-decaying corpse was ordered on the day of the successful counter-coup, does it matter?" he asks.
But are the politicians, who are today pygmies in public life, all to blame? Benazir Bhutto, in a rejoinder to Gen Musharraf's "sham democracy", says politicians never had a level playing field as they were always under the watchful eyes of the military. Several politicians had either been groomed by the military or given that extra push to reach the top. That's why there's now a debate over giving the military a constitutional role so that it is prevented from taking over completely. There's a strong indication that the 8th amendment abrogated by Sharif could find its way back into the Constitution. This would empower the President to sack a government and prevent a coup. This clause was used by every President and it had paved the way for fresh elections.
When that will materialise and return Pakistan to the control of a popular sovereign is a prickly question to which the votaries of democracy have no answer. For the moment, though, they seem to approve of the fashion in which the general is blending the rigid text of the military manual with the systemic appeal of civil jurisprudence to lead his country out of a crisis.
