Western scribes are perhaps overly enamored of the “Musharraf has his back against the wall and is being forced to make democratic concessions” narrative, which grows organically out of misrepresentation of Benazir Bhutto and the United States as the leader and sponsor, respectively, of an anti-Musharraf democratic vanguard.
Onthe contrary, events in recent days have shown that Bhutto is an ambitious, overly opportunistic, and by now perhaps fatally compromised American client, and the United States—as opposed to an apparent neo-con rump egging Bhutto and the Bush administration on—is an American patron committed to Musharraf but with a fatal and counterproductive desire to meddle in Pakistan’s internal politics.
The "democracy on the march" narrative has been applied to coverage of Musharraf’s trip to Saudi Arabia and Nawaz Sharif’s plans to return to Pakistan from Saudi Arabia.
The Western version is that Musharraf went to Saudi Arabia to try to convince the Saudis not to let Sharif return from exile and add to Musharraf’s electoral woes in Pakistan.
But, accustomed to the assumption that American plans and wishes direct Pakistan’s politics, it looks like we are missing the manifestation of Musharraf’s careful calculation and a guiding Saudi hand in Islamabad’s affairs.
And everything in the English language press in Pakistan and the Middle East indicates that the Anglo-American take on Pakistan’s politics is just plain wrong.
Typical is a Reuters report headlined Sharif due in Pakistan, Musharraf’s problems mount. It goes on to state:
Sharif's return, just in time to file nomination papers for a Jan. 8 parliamentary election, means the increasingly unpopular Musharraf will have to contend with two ex-premiers he has spent much of the last eight years trying to marginalise.
It makes a certain amount of sense on the surface, since Musharraf deposed Sharif in a coup and there is no love lost between them.
However, in contrast to the Reuters headline, the Pakistan Daily Times lede read:
* Insiders say Nawaz allowed to return in order to neutralise Benazir
Even before we turn to the regional coverage, the western coverage begged a fundamental question.
Why would Musharraf go to Saudi Arabia to try to convince the Saudis not to let Sharif come back?
A. Musharraf is in control of Pakistan’s borders. He doesn’t need to ask the Saudis to keep Sharif out. All he has to do is not let Sharif in.
B. Musharraf did just that on September 10. Sharif arrived on a plane from Saudi Arabia and Musharraf turned him around and sent him right back.
Another possible explanation—which I prefer—is that Musharraf has matters pretty well in hand, he went to Saudi Arabia to discuss Sharif’s return, and his trip represents a decline in Bhutto’s fortunes and a diminution of U.S. influence.
In fact, maybe the Saudis got impatient with America’s stumbling and destabilizing approach to the Pakistan problem, and stepped in to broker a deal between Musharraf and Sharif.
And the deal involves Sharif being allowed to return to Pakistan.
This aspect has received exhaustive coverage in the regional media.
Here’s a very interesting and circumstantial account, including hints of Islamic derring-do and secret meetings in Saudi mosques, from Asian News International:
Islamabad, Nov 22 : A top security official of the Musharraf regime has reached 'minimum understanding', who accompanied President Pervez Musharraf to Riyadh, stayed back and met former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in the presence of Saudi royal family members. "The Saudis succeeded in creating a minimum understanding for peaceful coexistence between the two sides," well placed sources said. ...
Saudi Arabia's envoy in Pakistan, Ali Saeed Awadh Assiri, who played an important role, is also staying back in Jeddah. He came to the airport to see off Musharraf. ...
The General arrived in Jeddah late in the evening on Tuesday from Riyadh and proceeded straight to Mecca to perform Umrah with his brief entourage, he said. According to reports when he came back to the port city, Sharif, who lives in a posh area of the city, left for offering his Isha (night prayers) in a mosque in the vicinity with his male family members and some newsmen of Jeddah.
Sharif spent more than two hours in the mosque and in the meantime officials kept on trying to contact him, but he was not available, sources said. Musharraf spent less than 16 hours in Riyadh and left for Jeddah after talks with King Abdullah and Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz.
Interestingly, Saudi Arabia's ambassadors to the United States Adel A. Al-Jubeir and to Pakistan Ali Saeed Awadh Assiri were present in the meetings with the King Abdullah. The presence of the Saudi envoy to the US was important since it indicated that the US would also be on board in the ongoing interaction between Sharif and the authorities in Pakistan, sources added.
Pakistan Daily Times added a few evocative and somewhat greasy details about the deal, while also including PML-N denials that any deal had happened:
Nawaz, following a meeting with Saudi King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz, met with senior Pakistani officials and close associates of President General Pervez Musharraf, and agreed that the Sharif family could return to Pakistan as long as the PML-N did not boycott the elections, PML-Q sources told Daily Times. They said the understanding also involves the restoration of some of Nawaz’s business interests in the country and his Model Town residence. ISI DG Gen Nadeem Taj and Brig (r) Niaz, a mutual “friend” of Gen Musharraf and Nawaz, mediated the negotiations in Jeddah. The sources said that Nawaz had also agreed not to destabilise Gen Musharraf’s “transition” to democracy or try to overthrow him.
In any case, Sharif is returning to Pakistan with more than a little Saudi political and material support:
The Saudi monarch is sending Sharif to Pakistan on a royal plane and has gifted him two bulletproof Mercedes cars and also lent him a helicopter for use during the elections.
According to early reports, Sharif wouldn’t personally run in the upcoming election but his party won’t boycott the January 8 parliamentary poll.
But Sharif is keeping Musharraf off-balance by returning hours before the deadline for filing election papers expires.
The Pakistan Daily Times stated:
“The Saudi king, Musharraf and Nawaz know what has been agreed to among them,” a PML-N leader said when asked about details of the “agreement” between President Musharraf and Nawaz. However, he said it would be clear in a few days. “November 26 is the last date for filing nomination papers. The cat will be out of the bag after the deadline for nomination papers ends,” he said.
We’ll see.
If Sharif’s party joins the elections the threat to the legitimacy of the elections and the vulnerability of Musharraf’s government by a boycott by Bhutto’s PPP is significantly diminished.
Bhutto’s insistence on a boycott has been weakening; if she faces the prospect of being supplanted by another opposition party that does participate in the elections, her principled resistance to joining the poll will probably evaporate.
Furthermore, with Sharif’s party competing, Musharraf will now have a convenient alternative to Bhutto when negotiating the post-election coalition between his PML-Q party and the two alternatives acceptable to the U.S. and Saudi Arabia—Bhutto’s PPP and Sharif’s PML-N.
There are even indications that it is not unthinkable for Musharraf to let Sharif personally stand for a seat and put himself in the running for the prime ministership, even if it means undercutting the electoral fortunes of Musharraf’s own party or even forcing a merger between the two.
An article entitled Panic in PML-Q, jubiliation in PML-N reported:
Alarm bells have started ringing in the PML-Q with its leadership fearing a major dent in the party as most ticket-holders might defect to the PML-N following former premier Nawaz Sharif’s return to the country today (Sunday) to participate in politics.
...
Insiders ... do not foresee any merger of the PML-Q and PML-N at this stage, they do predict a possible understanding between the two estranged leagues on the basis of seat adjustments to avoid split of the anti-Benazir vote.
Sharif, who has quite possibly noticed how Bhutto’s political standing has been compromised by her open embrace of a U.S. brokered deal with Musharraf, is ostentatiously declaring he has no deal with Musharraf.
Well, deal or no deal?
On November 23, the Pakistan media organization Dawn gave a run-down of the conflicting spin and indignant denials put on the rumored deal by the PML-N, the PML-Q, and the PPP entitled Deal shadow over Sharifs’ homecoming:
First, the PML-N:
[A spokesman for Sharif] denied that Gen Musharraf had allowed Nawaz to return home on the condition that he would not boycott the forthcoming elections.
On the contrary, Nadir said, President Musharraf tried to persuade King Abdullah against allowing Nawaz Sharif to go back home before the completion of the “10-year exile deal” he had signed with the Saudi authorities in 2000.
Then Musharraf’s PML-Q weighed in:
Although equally vague on the specifics, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, the head of the pro-Musharraf PML-Q, told DAWN NEWS TV that if Mr Sharif returns to Pakistan before the elections, it would be a result of a “deal” with the Saudi government, and that his party would welcome the development. He said the party was prepared to take on all such challenges. “We are not afraid of him.”
Last and perhaps least, Bhutto’s PPP:
The reports also brought worries to members of the PPP, but some of them pointed out that perhaps Benazir Bhutto, sensing such an eventuality, had already made direct contacts with Mr Sharif to offset the impact of his return.
As to the presumed endgame for all this maneuvering, Dawn concluded:
CONSENSUS GOVT: There have also been suggestions that with Benazir Bhutto already supporting the idea of a government of national consensus, and Nawaz Sharif now softening his tone to talk about reconciliation, there is a possibility that fresh attempt could be made to assemble all major players around a negotiating table, leading to the forming of a consensus government to ensure a smooth transition to democracy.
According to analysts, Benazir Bhutto’s return to Pakistan and pressure from the international community made the Saudi authorities review their decision to keep Nawaz Sharif in exile for another three years.
A plausible interpretation is that Benazir Bhutto relied excessively on U.S. support that didn’t materialize and overplayed her hand, alienating Musharraf and giving grounds for him to reject her as the democratic partner that the U.S. was clamoring for.
And America, by cynically acquiescing to Musharraf’s extra-judicial and unconstitutional second term as president, has effectively dealt itself out of whatever leverage it hoped to have in Pakistani politics.
A close reading of events implies that Musharraf has found in Sharif and Saudi Arabia a more more reliable partner and sympathetic patron than the combination of Bhutto and the United States.
Reporting on Sharif’s return, Pakistan’s Daily Times wrote:
“The understanding with Benazir was that she would return to Pakistan after the general elections but her early arrival and her brinkmanship made the president rethink his policy towards Nawaz,” a source close to the president said.
Now it’s up to Nawaz Sharif--and the Saudis.
It looks like Sharif is the Saudi’s—but not necessarily America’s--Plan B to keep Musharraf comfortably on top of Pakistan’s political heap.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Another Fine Mess
posted this on American Footprints on November 13
Maybe one reason the Bush administration is unable to develop a coherent foreign policy is because it’s stuck in reactive mode, flinching as fresh catastrophes come down the pipe and scrambling to come up with new excuses and rationales for initiatives that—had they worked out—would have been tucked away in the “case-closed” file of foreign policy successes.
Pakistan looks like it might turn into a colossal botch. Certainly, our stated objective for shoehorning Benazir Bhutto back into Pakistan—to broaden the popular base for Musharraf’s regime—isn’t working out. In fact, the exact opposite is occurring.
In the same week, Georgia—home of the Rose Revolution we helped foment—declared its own state of emergency.
And now Somalia.
McClatchy’s Shashank Bengali lays it out:
Last December, Ethiopian forces supported by the American military invaded neighboring Somalia to oust a hard-line Islamist regime that U.S. officials claimed was linked to al Qaida. Since then, the Ethiopians have faced stubborn resistance from fighters loyal to the Islamists, who've proved adept at ambushes and remote-controlled bombings.
Ethiopia's campaign has become an open-ended military intervention besieged by a stubborn insurgency, and Ethiopians recently responded by sending in a surge of reinforcement troops. Human rights groups charge that the Ethiopian forces are carelessly killing civilians.
...
Today’s word is probably not “Quagmire”; it’s “Meltdown”.
More than 114,000 people fled their homes over the past two weeks, according to United Nations estimates released on Friday. Humanitarian officials said that many more fled over the weekend after Islamists ambushed a convoy of Ethiopian troops and dragged the dead body of a soldier through the streets, triggering a spasm of Ethiopian reprisal attacks.
"Somalia's worst displacement ever took place in the last few days," said an official with a Western aid agency in Mogadishu who asked not to be identified for security reasons. "Nearly four districts of the city have been totally cleared out."
Some 850,000 Somalis — perhaps one in six — are displaced within their own country, the most in years. Fewer than 10 percent of them are receiving any humanitarian aid, and most live in desperate conditions in makeshift refugee encampments scattered around Mogadishu's outskirts.
The latest turmoil is producing a ghastly conclusion to an apocalyptic year, even for Somalia, which hasn't had a functioning government in 16 years.
...
What to do, what to do?
Well, we can certainly point fingers at our proxies the Ethiopians, the hapless African Union, and that ineffectual but convenient punching bag, the U.N.:
"The Ethiopians are becoming impatient, meaning that they now retaliate indiscriminately," said the Western aid official. "That, of course, leads to more resistance."
The African Union has deployed a vanguard force of 1,600 peacekeepers, but they've been confined to Mogadishu's airport and seaport. No reinforcements appear to be forthcoming, and last week U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said the situation was too chaotic to send in U.N. forces.
For those who have short memories and don’t recall the Somalia invasion as a particularly ham-fisted piece of American adventurism, see Democracy Now! and the WSWS website).
It would be a bit too much to expect the Bush administration to enforce some accountability on the U.S. dingbats who thought it was a good idea to orchestrate an invasion of Somalia by Ethiopia.
Maybe Jendayi Frazier of the State Department, point person for our Somalia policy--who is also blamed for our inept Sudan policy--should answer a question or two.
At least that’s what a highly indignant Sophia Tesfamariam thinks. In February 2007 she wrote in American Chronicle:
[UK Channel 4 News’ Jon] Snow told his listeners “the blueprint for a very American supported Ethiopian invasion of Somalia was hatched” at the US Embassy in Addis Ababa...[Snow] referred to a “UN record of a meeting” that took place sometime in June 2006 and was attended by a US Commander of the Fleet off Somalia, Rear Admiral Richard Hunt, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi E. Frazier and an unnamed UN official. According to the report, the attendees discussed possible scenarios in Somalia and how to deal with them:
•“…The worst case scenario would result from a total control by the UIC [United Islamic Courts of Somalia] over Somalia…the US would not allow it…”
•In the event of a rapid Ethiopian in and out intervention “…the US would rally with Ethiopia if the ‘Jihadists’ took over…”
•Jendayi Frazier is quoted as saying, “It would be a mistake for the international community to condemn such an invasion”
•An unnamed UN official is quoted as saying, “any Ethiopian action in Somalia would have Washington’s blessing”
Tesfamariam concludes:
[T]he UIC was never a threat to international peace and security, but rather, the threat we now face is the result of the crisis in Somalia that Meles Zenawi [of Ethiopia] and Jendayi E. Frazier have created and are advancing in the Horn of Africa.
Accountability shmacountability. That’s why we have proxies and cutouts.
Instead let’s assert our impotence (and lack of culpability) by engaging in some anguished handwringing from the sidelines (McClatchy again):
Bush administration envoys have called for Somalia's transitional government to make peace with its opponents, but the Pentagon, which has long worried about Somalia becoming a haven for terrorists, supports Ethiopia's presence in the country.
Remind me. Who made this mess?
Maybe one reason the Bush administration is unable to develop a coherent foreign policy is because it’s stuck in reactive mode, flinching as fresh catastrophes come down the pipe and scrambling to come up with new excuses and rationales for initiatives that—had they worked out—would have been tucked away in the “case-closed” file of foreign policy successes.
Pakistan looks like it might turn into a colossal botch. Certainly, our stated objective for shoehorning Benazir Bhutto back into Pakistan—to broaden the popular base for Musharraf’s regime—isn’t working out. In fact, the exact opposite is occurring.
In the same week, Georgia—home of the Rose Revolution we helped foment—declared its own state of emergency.
And now Somalia.
McClatchy’s Shashank Bengali lays it out:
Last December, Ethiopian forces supported by the American military invaded neighboring Somalia to oust a hard-line Islamist regime that U.S. officials claimed was linked to al Qaida. Since then, the Ethiopians have faced stubborn resistance from fighters loyal to the Islamists, who've proved adept at ambushes and remote-controlled bombings.
Ethiopia's campaign has become an open-ended military intervention besieged by a stubborn insurgency, and Ethiopians recently responded by sending in a surge of reinforcement troops. Human rights groups charge that the Ethiopian forces are carelessly killing civilians.
...
Today’s word is probably not “Quagmire”; it’s “Meltdown”.
More than 114,000 people fled their homes over the past two weeks, according to United Nations estimates released on Friday. Humanitarian officials said that many more fled over the weekend after Islamists ambushed a convoy of Ethiopian troops and dragged the dead body of a soldier through the streets, triggering a spasm of Ethiopian reprisal attacks.
"Somalia's worst displacement ever took place in the last few days," said an official with a Western aid agency in Mogadishu who asked not to be identified for security reasons. "Nearly four districts of the city have been totally cleared out."
Some 850,000 Somalis — perhaps one in six — are displaced within their own country, the most in years. Fewer than 10 percent of them are receiving any humanitarian aid, and most live in desperate conditions in makeshift refugee encampments scattered around Mogadishu's outskirts.
The latest turmoil is producing a ghastly conclusion to an apocalyptic year, even for Somalia, which hasn't had a functioning government in 16 years.
...
What to do, what to do?
Well, we can certainly point fingers at our proxies the Ethiopians, the hapless African Union, and that ineffectual but convenient punching bag, the U.N.:
"The Ethiopians are becoming impatient, meaning that they now retaliate indiscriminately," said the Western aid official. "That, of course, leads to more resistance."
The African Union has deployed a vanguard force of 1,600 peacekeepers, but they've been confined to Mogadishu's airport and seaport. No reinforcements appear to be forthcoming, and last week U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said the situation was too chaotic to send in U.N. forces.
For those who have short memories and don’t recall the Somalia invasion as a particularly ham-fisted piece of American adventurism, see Democracy Now! and the WSWS website).
It would be a bit too much to expect the Bush administration to enforce some accountability on the U.S. dingbats who thought it was a good idea to orchestrate an invasion of Somalia by Ethiopia.
Maybe Jendayi Frazier of the State Department, point person for our Somalia policy--who is also blamed for our inept Sudan policy--should answer a question or two.
At least that’s what a highly indignant Sophia Tesfamariam thinks. In February 2007 she wrote in American Chronicle:
[UK Channel 4 News’ Jon] Snow told his listeners “the blueprint for a very American supported Ethiopian invasion of Somalia was hatched” at the US Embassy in Addis Ababa...[Snow] referred to a “UN record of a meeting” that took place sometime in June 2006 and was attended by a US Commander of the Fleet off Somalia, Rear Admiral Richard Hunt, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi E. Frazier and an unnamed UN official. According to the report, the attendees discussed possible scenarios in Somalia and how to deal with them:
•“…The worst case scenario would result from a total control by the UIC [United Islamic Courts of Somalia] over Somalia…the US would not allow it…”
•In the event of a rapid Ethiopian in and out intervention “…the US would rally with Ethiopia if the ‘Jihadists’ took over…”
•Jendayi Frazier is quoted as saying, “It would be a mistake for the international community to condemn such an invasion”
•An unnamed UN official is quoted as saying, “any Ethiopian action in Somalia would have Washington’s blessing”
Tesfamariam concludes:
[T]he UIC was never a threat to international peace and security, but rather, the threat we now face is the result of the crisis in Somalia that Meles Zenawi [of Ethiopia] and Jendayi E. Frazier have created and are advancing in the Horn of Africa.
Accountability shmacountability. That’s why we have proxies and cutouts.
Instead let’s assert our impotence (and lack of culpability) by engaging in some anguished handwringing from the sidelines (McClatchy again):
Bush administration envoys have called for Somalia's transitional government to make peace with its opponents, but the Pentagon, which has long worried about Somalia becoming a haven for terrorists, supports Ethiopia's presence in the country.
Remind me. Who made this mess?
A Moment of Clarity for Pakistan
For those of you keeping score, the United States has been pushing Bhutto-Musharraf power-sharing in order to broaden the base of Musharraf’s support.
Musharraf’s fan club has shrunk to the military core after a series of political mis-steps, so that vote-rigging any significant success for his PML-Q party in the upcoming parliamentary elections would have been greeted with disbelief, derision, and outrage.
Bhutto was supposed to come in, lead her PPP to contest the parliamentary elections, emerge with enough support to form a coalition with Musharraf’s party, lead the government as PM and provide a meaningful civilian endorsement of Musharraf’s rule as president.
And the coalition of Islamicist parties, the MMA, would be kept safely in minority opposition status and unable to play any significant power-broker role.
The objective has, as the term indicates, always been power-sharing—keeping Musharraf in power and giving Bhutto a piece of the pie in return for her support.
Not democracy.
Which is why the United States and Bhutto have essentially turned a blind eye toward Musharraf’s ham-fisted efforts to destroy the genuine constitutional and democratic opposition to his rule: Pakistan’s independent judiciary and its lawyers.
The narrative got confusing for a while. The power sharing arrangement hit a bump in the road when Musharraf declared a State of Emergency to prevent the Supreme Court from disallowing his second term as president.
Bhutto adopted the rhetoric and tactics of the democracy movement to improve her political standing inside Pakistan and increase her leverage on Musharraf.
But now clarity emerges. The deal is just about done.
Msuharraf’s new, improved, and hand-packed Supreme Court (still, I believe, one member short since his regime has been unable to find enough cooperative jurists to staff it) first threw out the petitions challenging the presidential elections.
(It wasn’t necessary to throw out the one filed by Bhutto’s PPP, since they declined to argue their case.)
Nary a peep from the United States or Benazir Bhutto.
Today, additional legerdemain:
via AFP:
Musharraf moved to give a solid legal footing to his November 3 declaration of a state of emergency, issuing an amendment to the constitution which says it cannot be over-ruled in court.
...
Musharraf has pledged to quit the army as soon as the Supreme Court -- now stuffed with selected judges -- dismisses all the challenges, and Wednesday's ordinance could accelerate the process by shoring up his legal position.
Qayyum said the presidential order "has ratified and validated the action taken on November 3."
Musharraf amended the constitution by fiat.
Solid legal footing, indeed.
The current state of affairs may be good enough for Benazir Bhutto.
Via AP :
Bhutto said late Tuesday that it would be a "good sign" if Musharraf quits his army post, and avoided criticizing him directly. She said her party needed a few more days to decide whether to boycott the Jan. 8 parliamentary elections.
...though I’m sure a factor in her deliberations is how well her party is really going to do in the elections now that she has done a pretty good job of burning her bridges with Musharraf, whose political apparatus will probably have a say in how many votes she gets, and where.
But no place at the table, I think, for Nawaz Sharif. It seems Musharraf has been able to convince the United States that injecting one ambitious émigré—Bhutto—into the volatile mix of Pakistani politics is more than enough.
AP again:
Musharraf flew back [to Pakistan] early Wednesday after meeting with Saudi King Abdullah. Saudi officials said efforts had been made to arrange a meeting between Musharraf and Sharif, who was ousted as prime minister by the general's 1999 coup.
A Pakistani official said Musharraf's goal was to prevent Sharif from returning before the parliamentary elections. Sharif's party suggested he had snubbed the general.
Meanwhile, the kabuki theater of releasing detained politicians proceeds, and Musharraf gains the White House seal of approval.
AP again:
Authorities on Tuesday set general elections for January 8 and announced the release of more than 3,400 prisoners detained under emergency rule, with another 2,000 to be freed "soon."
That step was welcomed by US President George W. Bush who said Musharraf -- a key ally in the fight against Islamic extremism -- "hasn't crossed the line" where he would lose Washington's support.
"I think he truly is somebody who believes in democracy," Bush told the US television network ABC.
He voiced confidence that Musharraf would restore democracy, saying he had always found him to be "a man of his word."
In other news, Musharraf, that believer in democracy, continues nailing the genuinely democratic force within Pakistan—the judiciary and lawyers—that might interfere with the staged parliamentary elections meant to consecrate the power-sharing deal (AP again):
Meanwhile, there were fresh arrests Wednesday. Wajihuddin Ahmed, a former Supreme Court judge who was the only candidate against Musharraf in the October presidential election, was taken into custody in Islamabad along with Athar Minallah, an opposition lawyer.
"They were driving a car when men in plainclothes stopped them," said Minallah's wife, Ghazala. "We do not know where they have been taken."
It looks like the grand U.S. plan for Pakistan is not going to result in greater stability or democracy.
Turning a blind eye to the suppression of the judiciary and the shredding of the constitution is not going to enhance the popular stature of Musharraf, Bhutto, or the United States.
Using a rigged election to pack Parliament with Bhutto supporters may wean Musharraf away from the Islamic parties and encourage him to confront instead of conciliate them.
But the rickety and illegitimate power-sharing deal that will put them there may cause a popular backlash and exacerbate the problems it was meant to solve.
And, even if Musharraf no longer needs the Islamicist parties in parliament, the facts on the ground in the Northwest—and the understandable unwillingness of Pakistan’s armies to conduct the full-spectrum counterinsurgency that the U.S. is demanding—are unlikely to change.
At first, I thought l there might be a grander U.S. purpose at work: restructuring Pakistan’s politics to put civilians instead of the military at its center; goading the military into more enthusiastic prosecution of the counterinsurgency and anti-al Qaeda operations on the border; supplanting China as the great power at the center of Pakistan’s affections; or even a rapprochement between Pakistan and India.
Maybe there was.
But whatever the original plans, dreams, and theories; the fine-sounding pretexts we’re using to sell the idea; or the energetic spinning by Bhutto’s supporters, the end result looks like little more than a convoluted backroomdeal that gets Musharraf another term in office, albeit complemented with a pro-U.S. parliamentary coalition.
We'll have to see if that represents progress, either for Pakistan or the United States.
Ken Fireman at Bloomberg, in an otherwise befuddled article that illustrates the contradictions inherent in misconstruing a power-sharing deal imposed by the United States as a democratic movement supposedly led by Benazir Bhutto, delivered this money quote:
Kamran Shafi, a retired Pakistani army officer and Bhutto's former press secretary, said Musharraf is increasingly perceived as a ``Pakistani Tonto'' who has been ``riding shotgun for the policies of a very stupid U.S. administration.'’
Musharraf’s fan club has shrunk to the military core after a series of political mis-steps, so that vote-rigging any significant success for his PML-Q party in the upcoming parliamentary elections would have been greeted with disbelief, derision, and outrage.
Bhutto was supposed to come in, lead her PPP to contest the parliamentary elections, emerge with enough support to form a coalition with Musharraf’s party, lead the government as PM and provide a meaningful civilian endorsement of Musharraf’s rule as president.
And the coalition of Islamicist parties, the MMA, would be kept safely in minority opposition status and unable to play any significant power-broker role.
The objective has, as the term indicates, always been power-sharing—keeping Musharraf in power and giving Bhutto a piece of the pie in return for her support.
Not democracy.
Which is why the United States and Bhutto have essentially turned a blind eye toward Musharraf’s ham-fisted efforts to destroy the genuine constitutional and democratic opposition to his rule: Pakistan’s independent judiciary and its lawyers.
The narrative got confusing for a while. The power sharing arrangement hit a bump in the road when Musharraf declared a State of Emergency to prevent the Supreme Court from disallowing his second term as president.
Bhutto adopted the rhetoric and tactics of the democracy movement to improve her political standing inside Pakistan and increase her leverage on Musharraf.
But now clarity emerges. The deal is just about done.
Msuharraf’s new, improved, and hand-packed Supreme Court (still, I believe, one member short since his regime has been unable to find enough cooperative jurists to staff it) first threw out the petitions challenging the presidential elections.
(It wasn’t necessary to throw out the one filed by Bhutto’s PPP, since they declined to argue their case.)
Nary a peep from the United States or Benazir Bhutto.
Today, additional legerdemain:
via AFP:
Musharraf moved to give a solid legal footing to his November 3 declaration of a state of emergency, issuing an amendment to the constitution which says it cannot be over-ruled in court.
...
Musharraf has pledged to quit the army as soon as the Supreme Court -- now stuffed with selected judges -- dismisses all the challenges, and Wednesday's ordinance could accelerate the process by shoring up his legal position.
Qayyum said the presidential order "has ratified and validated the action taken on November 3."
Musharraf amended the constitution by fiat.
Solid legal footing, indeed.
The current state of affairs may be good enough for Benazir Bhutto.
Via AP :
Bhutto said late Tuesday that it would be a "good sign" if Musharraf quits his army post, and avoided criticizing him directly. She said her party needed a few more days to decide whether to boycott the Jan. 8 parliamentary elections.
...though I’m sure a factor in her deliberations is how well her party is really going to do in the elections now that she has done a pretty good job of burning her bridges with Musharraf, whose political apparatus will probably have a say in how many votes she gets, and where.
But no place at the table, I think, for Nawaz Sharif. It seems Musharraf has been able to convince the United States that injecting one ambitious émigré—Bhutto—into the volatile mix of Pakistani politics is more than enough.
AP again:
Musharraf flew back [to Pakistan] early Wednesday after meeting with Saudi King Abdullah. Saudi officials said efforts had been made to arrange a meeting between Musharraf and Sharif, who was ousted as prime minister by the general's 1999 coup.
A Pakistani official said Musharraf's goal was to prevent Sharif from returning before the parliamentary elections. Sharif's party suggested he had snubbed the general.
Meanwhile, the kabuki theater of releasing detained politicians proceeds, and Musharraf gains the White House seal of approval.
AP again:
Authorities on Tuesday set general elections for January 8 and announced the release of more than 3,400 prisoners detained under emergency rule, with another 2,000 to be freed "soon."
That step was welcomed by US President George W. Bush who said Musharraf -- a key ally in the fight against Islamic extremism -- "hasn't crossed the line" where he would lose Washington's support.
"I think he truly is somebody who believes in democracy," Bush told the US television network ABC.
He voiced confidence that Musharraf would restore democracy, saying he had always found him to be "a man of his word."
In other news, Musharraf, that believer in democracy, continues nailing the genuinely democratic force within Pakistan—the judiciary and lawyers—that might interfere with the staged parliamentary elections meant to consecrate the power-sharing deal (AP again):
Meanwhile, there were fresh arrests Wednesday. Wajihuddin Ahmed, a former Supreme Court judge who was the only candidate against Musharraf in the October presidential election, was taken into custody in Islamabad along with Athar Minallah, an opposition lawyer.
"They were driving a car when men in plainclothes stopped them," said Minallah's wife, Ghazala. "We do not know where they have been taken."
It looks like the grand U.S. plan for Pakistan is not going to result in greater stability or democracy.
Turning a blind eye to the suppression of the judiciary and the shredding of the constitution is not going to enhance the popular stature of Musharraf, Bhutto, or the United States.
Using a rigged election to pack Parliament with Bhutto supporters may wean Musharraf away from the Islamic parties and encourage him to confront instead of conciliate them.
But the rickety and illegitimate power-sharing deal that will put them there may cause a popular backlash and exacerbate the problems it was meant to solve.
And, even if Musharraf no longer needs the Islamicist parties in parliament, the facts on the ground in the Northwest—and the understandable unwillingness of Pakistan’s armies to conduct the full-spectrum counterinsurgency that the U.S. is demanding—are unlikely to change.
At first, I thought l there might be a grander U.S. purpose at work: restructuring Pakistan’s politics to put civilians instead of the military at its center; goading the military into more enthusiastic prosecution of the counterinsurgency and anti-al Qaeda operations on the border; supplanting China as the great power at the center of Pakistan’s affections; or even a rapprochement between Pakistan and India.
Maybe there was.
But whatever the original plans, dreams, and theories; the fine-sounding pretexts we’re using to sell the idea; or the energetic spinning by Bhutto’s supporters, the end result looks like little more than a convoluted backroomdeal that gets Musharraf another term in office, albeit complemented with a pro-U.S. parliamentary coalition.
We'll have to see if that represents progress, either for Pakistan or the United States.
Ken Fireman at Bloomberg, in an otherwise befuddled article that illustrates the contradictions inherent in misconstruing a power-sharing deal imposed by the United States as a democratic movement supposedly led by Benazir Bhutto, delivered this money quote:
Kamran Shafi, a retired Pakistani army officer and Bhutto's former press secretary, said Musharraf is increasingly perceived as a ``Pakistani Tonto'' who has been ``riding shotgun for the policies of a very stupid U.S. administration.'’
Monday, November 19, 2007
Pakistan Newswire
First a news flash: Frederick Kagan and Michael O’Hanlon are idiots
via Antiwar.com, Pakistan Daily reports:
Frederick Kagan of the right-wing American Enterprise Institute and Michael O’Hanlon of the more liberal Brookings Institution argue in an article published in the New York Times on Sunday that the US simply cannot stand by as a nuclear-armed Pakistan descended into the abyss.
...
Possible plan: One possible plan would be a Special Forces operation with the limited goal of preventing Pakistan’s nuclear materials and warheads from getting into the wrong hands. Given the degree to which Pakistani nationalists cherish these assets, it is unlikely the United States would get permission to destroy them. Somehow, American forces would have to team with Pakistanis to secure critical sites and possibly to move the material to a safer place. For the United States, the safest bet would be shipping the material to someplace like New Mexico, but even pro-American Pakistanis would be unlikely to cooperate. It would be better for the US to settle for establishing a remote redoubt within Pakistan, with the nuclear technology guarded by elite Pakistani forces backed up and watched over by crack international troops.
That’s not just jumping the shark. That’s jumping on the shark, tap-dancing on its nose, and using a secret brain ray to force it to type the plays of Shakespeare on a vintage Underwood.
And that’s before they come up with the idea of abducting Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal to a secret location in New Mexico.
I actually had to check the New York Times website to make sure this wasn’t a spoof or some piece of anti-American psyops by the Pakistani media. And yes, they really said it .
Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezus
Second, via Antiwar.com, The Australian gets it...
with the headline Bhutto's backflip as poll is called
The lede:
PAKISTANI President Pervez Musharraf yesterday nailed down January 8 for elections while opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, in yet another political backflip, appeared to lay the groundwork for resuming power-sharing negotiations with the military ruler.
Recall that Bhutto’s attorney also chose not to argue the suit against Musharraf’s election as president; another sign that the PPP is party to a new U.S-brokered deal to let Musharraf have the presidency in return for “taking off the uniform” and governing as a civilian and smoothing the path to January parliamentary elections.
So everybody’s priority (except the hapless Pakistani lawyers’) for Pakistan is not democracy; it’s to prevent democracy from screwing up a power-sharing deal that the U.S., Bhutto, and Musharraf all want to see go ahead—even though they all hate and mistrust each other.
Finally, the great game continues...
Bhutto, in an effort to maintain her street cred and to keep the threat of a legal challenge to Musharraf’s presidency alive, had, while refusing to argue the election case, also refused to confirm the legality of Musharraf’s presidency.
Well, if Benazir wants to keep Mush in legal limbo, well, he'll return the favor.
In a tit-for-tat move, Musharraf’s attorney general announces that the amnesty that Musharraf granted Bhutto on graft charges as part of the original power-sharing deal maybe has a bit of a problem:
Former premier Benazir Bhutto may soon face the same corruption cases that forced her into exile for eight years as the amnesty [National Reconciliation Order] lifting the charges was likely to be overturned, said Attorney General (AG) Malik Qayyum.
Five writs have been issued against the amnesty in the Supreme Court and it would not survive the challenge, Qayyum told The Sunday Times.President Pervez Musharraf had granted the amnesty to Bhutto by promulgating the National Reconciliation Order (NRO) ahead of her return to the country on October 18.
NRO not ‘happily worded’: “I don’t think it [amnesty] will survive the challenge,” Qayyum said. “Whoever drafted it, it was not happily worded. Only the courts can decide to throw charges out, not governments.”
Take that!
And on with the games!
via Antiwar.com, Pakistan Daily reports:
Frederick Kagan of the right-wing American Enterprise Institute and Michael O’Hanlon of the more liberal Brookings Institution argue in an article published in the New York Times on Sunday that the US simply cannot stand by as a nuclear-armed Pakistan descended into the abyss.
...
Possible plan: One possible plan would be a Special Forces operation with the limited goal of preventing Pakistan’s nuclear materials and warheads from getting into the wrong hands. Given the degree to which Pakistani nationalists cherish these assets, it is unlikely the United States would get permission to destroy them. Somehow, American forces would have to team with Pakistanis to secure critical sites and possibly to move the material to a safer place. For the United States, the safest bet would be shipping the material to someplace like New Mexico, but even pro-American Pakistanis would be unlikely to cooperate. It would be better for the US to settle for establishing a remote redoubt within Pakistan, with the nuclear technology guarded by elite Pakistani forces backed up and watched over by crack international troops.
That’s not just jumping the shark. That’s jumping on the shark, tap-dancing on its nose, and using a secret brain ray to force it to type the plays of Shakespeare on a vintage Underwood.
And that’s before they come up with the idea of abducting Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal to a secret location in New Mexico.
I actually had to check the New York Times website to make sure this wasn’t a spoof or some piece of anti-American psyops by the Pakistani media. And yes, they really said it .
Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezus
Second, via Antiwar.com, The Australian gets it...
with the headline Bhutto's backflip as poll is called
The lede:
PAKISTANI President Pervez Musharraf yesterday nailed down January 8 for elections while opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, in yet another political backflip, appeared to lay the groundwork for resuming power-sharing negotiations with the military ruler.
Recall that Bhutto’s attorney also chose not to argue the suit against Musharraf’s election as president; another sign that the PPP is party to a new U.S-brokered deal to let Musharraf have the presidency in return for “taking off the uniform” and governing as a civilian and smoothing the path to January parliamentary elections.
So everybody’s priority (except the hapless Pakistani lawyers’) for Pakistan is not democracy; it’s to prevent democracy from screwing up a power-sharing deal that the U.S., Bhutto, and Musharraf all want to see go ahead—even though they all hate and mistrust each other.
Finally, the great game continues...
Bhutto, in an effort to maintain her street cred and to keep the threat of a legal challenge to Musharraf’s presidency alive, had, while refusing to argue the election case, also refused to confirm the legality of Musharraf’s presidency.
Well, if Benazir wants to keep Mush in legal limbo, well, he'll return the favor.
In a tit-for-tat move, Musharraf’s attorney general announces that the amnesty that Musharraf granted Bhutto on graft charges as part of the original power-sharing deal maybe has a bit of a problem:
Former premier Benazir Bhutto may soon face the same corruption cases that forced her into exile for eight years as the amnesty [National Reconciliation Order] lifting the charges was likely to be overturned, said Attorney General (AG) Malik Qayyum.
Five writs have been issued against the amnesty in the Supreme Court and it would not survive the challenge, Qayyum told The Sunday Times.President Pervez Musharraf had granted the amnesty to Bhutto by promulgating the National Reconciliation Order (NRO) ahead of her return to the country on October 18.
NRO not ‘happily worded’: “I don’t think it [amnesty] will survive the challenge,” Qayyum said. “Whoever drafted it, it was not happily worded. Only the courts can decide to throw charges out, not governments.”
Take that!
And on with the games!
The Deal Goes Down--For Now
The deal I speculated about here and here —that the U.S. would turn a blind eye to the unconstitutionality of Musharraf’s election as president in return for his promise to govern as a civilian and maybe lift the State of Emergency for the January parliamentary elections, and that the PPP would be inclined to sell out the lawyers and go along--looks like it’s going down.
From the AP :
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - A Supreme Court hand-picked by President Gen. Pervez Musharraf swiftly dismissed legal challenges to his continued rule on Monday, opening the way for him to serve another five-year term — this time solely as a civilian president.
...
Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar dismissed three opposition petitions challenging Musharraf's victory in a disputed presidential election last month, saying two had been "withdrawn" because opposition lawyers were not present in court.
The third was withdrawn by a lawyer for the party of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, who suggested the court was illegitimate.
"We asked for (the case) to be postponed because we said there is no constitution," she told reporters in Karachi after a meeting with the U.S. ambassador. She said she had no plans to revive power-sharing negotiations with Musharraf, broken off after the general's decision to declare emergency rule. [emph. added]
To me, it looks like Bhutto went along with the deal and isn’t challenging Musharraf’s gutting of the judiciary—for now.
But she didn't explicitly endorse the legality of Musharraf's presidency, so she retains some democratic-opposition cred.
More importantly, she’s keeping the extremely powerful weapon of a legal challenge in reserve in case Musharraf gets balky either on lifting the State of Emergency or simply giving Bhutto whatever she wants—legal or illegal institutional support or maybe just a free hand--in order to make sure the PPP emerges from the January elections with a powerful position in parliament that assures Bhutto the PM spot.
From the AP :
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - A Supreme Court hand-picked by President Gen. Pervez Musharraf swiftly dismissed legal challenges to his continued rule on Monday, opening the way for him to serve another five-year term — this time solely as a civilian president.
...
Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar dismissed three opposition petitions challenging Musharraf's victory in a disputed presidential election last month, saying two had been "withdrawn" because opposition lawyers were not present in court.
The third was withdrawn by a lawyer for the party of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, who suggested the court was illegitimate.
"We asked for (the case) to be postponed because we said there is no constitution," she told reporters in Karachi after a meeting with the U.S. ambassador. She said she had no plans to revive power-sharing negotiations with Musharraf, broken off after the general's decision to declare emergency rule. [emph. added]
To me, it looks like Bhutto went along with the deal and isn’t challenging Musharraf’s gutting of the judiciary—for now.
But she didn't explicitly endorse the legality of Musharraf's presidency, so she retains some democratic-opposition cred.
More importantly, she’s keeping the extremely powerful weapon of a legal challenge in reserve in case Musharraf gets balky either on lifting the State of Emergency or simply giving Bhutto whatever she wants—legal or illegal institutional support or maybe just a free hand--in order to make sure the PPP emerges from the January elections with a powerful position in parliament that assures Bhutto the PM spot.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
A Judicious Betrayal
United States Ignoring Pakistan’s Judiciary and Supporting Musharraf’s Bid for Second Term
In my previous post, I noted that the United States has been oddly silent on the central, precipitating factor in Pakistan’s crisis—Musharraf’s use of the State of Emergency to move against the Supreme Court that was poised to disallow his election to another term as president.
I speculated that the U.S. silence signaled a New Deal v.2: the U.S. would disregard the illegality of Musharraf’s bid for another term as president if he took office as a civilian and lifted the State of Emergency prior to parliamentary elections.
It looks like that’s what’s going on. And that probably means the judiciary gets hung out to dry.
In John Negroponte’s statement before leaving Pakistan there wasn't a word about restoring the Supreme Court, releasing the lawyers and judges from jail, or maintaining an independent judiciary.
But there was a reference to Musharraf's second term:
We welcome President Musharraf's announcement that elections will take place in January, a commitment he repeated to me yesterday in categorical terms. He also repeated his commitment to retire from his army post before commencing his second presidential term, and we urge him to do so as soon as possible. [emph. added]
The only people getting a leg up from the United States are the political parties, by extension Bhutto and her PPP:
Unfortunately, the recent police actions against protestors, suppression of the media, and the arrests of political and human rights leaders run directly counter to the reforms that have been undertaken in recent years. Their continuation undermines the progress Pakistan has made.
I urged the Government to stop such actions, lift the state of emergency, and release all political detainees.
With typical calculation, Bhutto’s PPP also appears willing to let the judiciary twist in the wind, according to Dawn.
[A PPP spokesman] did not give a clear reply when asked if the PPP would accept a judgment by the present Supreme Court upholding Gen Musharraf’s election. The real question was of the notification of the result which had been stayed by the ‘previous court’, he said.
The fact that the lawyers aren’t getting lip service either from the United States or the PPP indicates that the last thing we want is for a straightforward legal challenge to the constitutionality of Musharraf’s second term to upset the applecart.
I guess our vision of democracy does not accommodate the idea of an activist judiciary seeking to enforce constitutional limits on an executive that sees itself as above the law.
Snark aside, the back of the hand approach to Pakistan’s lawyers is significant, and not just in a Hey! Look who got shafted this time! perspective on great power and machine politics in Pakistan.
The nucleus of prosperous, bourgeois Pakistan’s drive for civilian rule, political and theological moderation, and democracy is not the corrupt political parties headed by Bhutto and Sharif.
It’s the lawyers and judges who have been fighting for law-abiding, civilian, secular, and democratic rule since the beginning of this year that have been taking it on the chin.
And they are probably so estranged from Musharraf by now that there’s no concession that can reconcile them to him, and allow him to claim a second presidential term with the genuine backing of the judiciary.
What to do?
Maybe a dose of internal exile is what the doctor ordered!
According to the University of Pittsburgh’s Jurist legal news site, the deposed head of the Supreme Court, Iftkhar Mohammed Chaudrhy, expects Musharraf to try and remove him from his official residence and send him to a city called Quetta.
And he doesn’t mean to go quietly:
Pakistan's Dawn newspaper quoted Chaudhry as saying:
I am not interested in going to Quetta or elsewhere and it will be an act of abduction and forcible detention for which the secretary for interior, Islamabad’s commissioner [of police], deputy commissioner and assistant commissioner on duty shall be responsible along with law-enforcement agencies...Presently, I am holding the post of Chief Justice of Pakistan under Constitution and I am occupying the official accommodation.
Chaudhry is not formally under house arrest but did say that he was not allowed to leave his house and his children were being prevented from attending school and university. Dawn has more.
In a separate statement to the Northwest Frontier Province Bar Association Wednesday Chaudhry said that he was one of over 60 superior court judges who had refused to take PCO oaths [JURIST report] and still legally held office.
I suppose Musharraf plans to pack the courts, grit his teeth at the rejection of the new legal system’s legitimacy by a significant number of Pakistan’s lawyers and judges, and expect that their discordant, principled voices will be drowned out by the babble of greedy, corrupt, and power-hungry politicos on the hustings come January.
But having a vocal, educated, prosperous, organized, and terminally alienated group with a legitimate sense of grievance at the heart of Pakistan’s bourgeoisie does not bode well for democracy American Style in Pakistan, for Musharraf, whatever military leader follows him...or for any opposition party that cuts a cynical deal with Musharraf for a share of power.
A barrister recently released from detention made the point eloquently and forcefully.
From Dawn:
PESHAWAR, Nov 18: Barrister Baachaa, a senior advocate of the Supreme Court, has said that all stakeholders should agree on the one-point agenda of ridding the country of the military dictator.
Barrister Baachaa was sent to the Haripur central prison under the Maintenance of Public Order and released on Friday night along with other lawyers after remaining in captivity for 13 days.In a statement issued here, he said that any politician or party supporting the present dictatorial regime would betray the struggle of lawyers who had made innumerable sacrifices during the last seven months.
...
Barrister Baachaa said that at a time when the political leadership of the country had failed the people of Pakistan, it was the lawyers who took the initiative and launched a movement in the country. He said people from every walk of life, the print and electronic media in particular, supported the lawyers and forced the once mighty General Musharraf to get off his ‘high horse’ and hold out an olive branch to the same person he himself had accused of looting the national wealth.
Barrister Baachaa highlighted the achievements of lawyers across the country and regretted that even at this crucial juncture when the survival of a democratic Pakistan was at stake, politicians were engaged in point scoring and were interested only in securing a place for themselves in the future set up. [emph. added]
It will be interesting to see if Bhutto, after weighing the lawyers in the balance against the army, the United States, and her own ambition, decides to ignore them, exploit them, or betray them.
In my previous post, I noted that the United States has been oddly silent on the central, precipitating factor in Pakistan’s crisis—Musharraf’s use of the State of Emergency to move against the Supreme Court that was poised to disallow his election to another term as president.
I speculated that the U.S. silence signaled a New Deal v.2: the U.S. would disregard the illegality of Musharraf’s bid for another term as president if he took office as a civilian and lifted the State of Emergency prior to parliamentary elections.
It looks like that’s what’s going on. And that probably means the judiciary gets hung out to dry.
In John Negroponte’s statement before leaving Pakistan there wasn't a word about restoring the Supreme Court, releasing the lawyers and judges from jail, or maintaining an independent judiciary.
But there was a reference to Musharraf's second term:
We welcome President Musharraf's announcement that elections will take place in January, a commitment he repeated to me yesterday in categorical terms. He also repeated his commitment to retire from his army post before commencing his second presidential term, and we urge him to do so as soon as possible. [emph. added]
The only people getting a leg up from the United States are the political parties, by extension Bhutto and her PPP:
Unfortunately, the recent police actions against protestors, suppression of the media, and the arrests of political and human rights leaders run directly counter to the reforms that have been undertaken in recent years. Their continuation undermines the progress Pakistan has made.
I urged the Government to stop such actions, lift the state of emergency, and release all political detainees.
With typical calculation, Bhutto’s PPP also appears willing to let the judiciary twist in the wind, according to Dawn.
[A PPP spokesman] did not give a clear reply when asked if the PPP would accept a judgment by the present Supreme Court upholding Gen Musharraf’s election. The real question was of the notification of the result which had been stayed by the ‘previous court’, he said.
The fact that the lawyers aren’t getting lip service either from the United States or the PPP indicates that the last thing we want is for a straightforward legal challenge to the constitutionality of Musharraf’s second term to upset the applecart.
I guess our vision of democracy does not accommodate the idea of an activist judiciary seeking to enforce constitutional limits on an executive that sees itself as above the law.
Snark aside, the back of the hand approach to Pakistan’s lawyers is significant, and not just in a Hey! Look who got shafted this time! perspective on great power and machine politics in Pakistan.
The nucleus of prosperous, bourgeois Pakistan’s drive for civilian rule, political and theological moderation, and democracy is not the corrupt political parties headed by Bhutto and Sharif.
It’s the lawyers and judges who have been fighting for law-abiding, civilian, secular, and democratic rule since the beginning of this year that have been taking it on the chin.
And they are probably so estranged from Musharraf by now that there’s no concession that can reconcile them to him, and allow him to claim a second presidential term with the genuine backing of the judiciary.
What to do?
Maybe a dose of internal exile is what the doctor ordered!
According to the University of Pittsburgh’s Jurist legal news site, the deposed head of the Supreme Court, Iftkhar Mohammed Chaudrhy, expects Musharraf to try and remove him from his official residence and send him to a city called Quetta.
And he doesn’t mean to go quietly:
Pakistan's Dawn newspaper quoted Chaudhry as saying:
I am not interested in going to Quetta or elsewhere and it will be an act of abduction and forcible detention for which the secretary for interior, Islamabad’s commissioner [of police], deputy commissioner and assistant commissioner on duty shall be responsible along with law-enforcement agencies...Presently, I am holding the post of Chief Justice of Pakistan under Constitution and I am occupying the official accommodation.
Chaudhry is not formally under house arrest but did say that he was not allowed to leave his house and his children were being prevented from attending school and university. Dawn has more.
In a separate statement to the Northwest Frontier Province Bar Association Wednesday Chaudhry said that he was one of over 60 superior court judges who had refused to take PCO oaths [JURIST report] and still legally held office.
I suppose Musharraf plans to pack the courts, grit his teeth at the rejection of the new legal system’s legitimacy by a significant number of Pakistan’s lawyers and judges, and expect that their discordant, principled voices will be drowned out by the babble of greedy, corrupt, and power-hungry politicos on the hustings come January.
But having a vocal, educated, prosperous, organized, and terminally alienated group with a legitimate sense of grievance at the heart of Pakistan’s bourgeoisie does not bode well for democracy American Style in Pakistan, for Musharraf, whatever military leader follows him...or for any opposition party that cuts a cynical deal with Musharraf for a share of power.
A barrister recently released from detention made the point eloquently and forcefully.
From Dawn:
PESHAWAR, Nov 18: Barrister Baachaa, a senior advocate of the Supreme Court, has said that all stakeholders should agree on the one-point agenda of ridding the country of the military dictator.
Barrister Baachaa was sent to the Haripur central prison under the Maintenance of Public Order and released on Friday night along with other lawyers after remaining in captivity for 13 days.In a statement issued here, he said that any politician or party supporting the present dictatorial regime would betray the struggle of lawyers who had made innumerable sacrifices during the last seven months.
...
Barrister Baachaa said that at a time when the political leadership of the country had failed the people of Pakistan, it was the lawyers who took the initiative and launched a movement in the country. He said people from every walk of life, the print and electronic media in particular, supported the lawyers and forced the once mighty General Musharraf to get off his ‘high horse’ and hold out an olive branch to the same person he himself had accused of looting the national wealth.
Barrister Baachaa highlighted the achievements of lawyers across the country and regretted that even at this crucial juncture when the survival of a democratic Pakistan was at stake, politicians were engaged in point scoring and were interested only in securing a place for themselves in the future set up. [emph. added]
It will be interesting to see if Bhutto, after weighing the lawyers in the balance against the army, the United States, and her own ambition, decides to ignore them, exploit them, or betray them.
Friday, November 16, 2007
The Dog That Didn’t Bark
Musharraf, America, and Pakistan's Supreme Court
One thing we don’t hear about from the United States concerning the crisis in Pakistan is the sticky situation with Pakistan’s Supreme Court that provoked Musharraf’s declaration of the State of Emergency in the first place.
But no demands from Washington yet that Musharraf reinstate the by now presumably terminally intractable Supreme Court, which had signaled a couple weeks ago that it would decline to certify Musharraf for another term as president because he had run while still in uniform.
That’s the big dog that didn’t bark.
So I’d speculate that the Washington’s Big Deal v. 2 is that Musharraf “take off the uniform”, keep the presidency, lift the state of emergency, and hold the elections. And we'll avert our eyes while he packs the Supreme Court with his cronies and gets his election certified.
Then the Bush administration can kick the can down the road and further distance itself from the mess by watching Musharraf’s party slug it out with Bhutto in the parliamentary elections early next year.
In other words, now that our power-hungry client has slipped the leash and we’ve totally alienated our purported ally, it’s time to sit back and watch the magic of democracy Pakistani-style, complete with bribery and vote-rigging, transform the crisis into something we have nothing to do with.
Good times!
The stumbling block is, of course, Bhutto. She has added a call for Musharraf to step down as one of her demands and, even if she recants, Musharraf is unlikely to trust her.
So Musharraf’s getting ready to roll the dice in his contest with Bhutto.
Dawn, a major Pakistani English-language paper, reports that Musharraf has transferred the power to lift the state of emergency from the army to the presidency, an indication that he’s planning to rule as a civilian to placate world and local opinion, but wants to keep the ultimate bargaining chip--lifting the SofE--close at hand:
President Gen Pervez Musharraf who as Chief of Army Staff promulgated the state of emergency and Provisional Constitution Order on November 3 has transferred the power of lifting the emergency to the office of president. He amended the PCO with the Provisional Constitution (Amendment) Order 2007, issued on Wednesday night....
Mr Qayyum claimed that Gen Musharraf would quit his army post before December 1....
To most people, the amendment only means that Gen Musharraf has transferred the power from himself to himself, as he currently holds both offices of the president and the army chief. However, legal experts say it is not so simple.The attorney general said that since President Musharraf had imposed the emergency as the Chief of the Army Staff, he wanted to lift it himself as and when required after relinquishing the post of the army chief. [emph. added]
Maybe this is an indication of lack of trust in Musharraf’s successor as army head, purported Western darling and anointed army of chief of staff Kayani, and the corrosive acid of paranoia will start eating away at Musharraf’s support within the military.
But on balance, I think it’s intended as a demonstration to Negroponte that Musharraf has the reins of power in hand, is prepared to govern as a civilian and lift the state of emergency when he feels like it, and that Washington should think twice about its disastrous marriage of convenience with Bhutto and its futile, wide-stance flirtation with Kayani and back off.
Washington, relieved that Musharraf has the will and a way to get out of this mess, may very well let him have his way.
One thing we don’t hear about from the United States concerning the crisis in Pakistan is the sticky situation with Pakistan’s Supreme Court that provoked Musharraf’s declaration of the State of Emergency in the first place.
But no demands from Washington yet that Musharraf reinstate the by now presumably terminally intractable Supreme Court, which had signaled a couple weeks ago that it would decline to certify Musharraf for another term as president because he had run while still in uniform.
That’s the big dog that didn’t bark.
So I’d speculate that the Washington’s Big Deal v. 2 is that Musharraf “take off the uniform”, keep the presidency, lift the state of emergency, and hold the elections. And we'll avert our eyes while he packs the Supreme Court with his cronies and gets his election certified.
Then the Bush administration can kick the can down the road and further distance itself from the mess by watching Musharraf’s party slug it out with Bhutto in the parliamentary elections early next year.
In other words, now that our power-hungry client has slipped the leash and we’ve totally alienated our purported ally, it’s time to sit back and watch the magic of democracy Pakistani-style, complete with bribery and vote-rigging, transform the crisis into something we have nothing to do with.
Good times!
The stumbling block is, of course, Bhutto. She has added a call for Musharraf to step down as one of her demands and, even if she recants, Musharraf is unlikely to trust her.
So Musharraf’s getting ready to roll the dice in his contest with Bhutto.
Dawn, a major Pakistani English-language paper, reports that Musharraf has transferred the power to lift the state of emergency from the army to the presidency, an indication that he’s planning to rule as a civilian to placate world and local opinion, but wants to keep the ultimate bargaining chip--lifting the SofE--close at hand:
President Gen Pervez Musharraf who as Chief of Army Staff promulgated the state of emergency and Provisional Constitution Order on November 3 has transferred the power of lifting the emergency to the office of president. He amended the PCO with the Provisional Constitution (Amendment) Order 2007, issued on Wednesday night....
Mr Qayyum claimed that Gen Musharraf would quit his army post before December 1....
To most people, the amendment only means that Gen Musharraf has transferred the power from himself to himself, as he currently holds both offices of the president and the army chief. However, legal experts say it is not so simple.The attorney general said that since President Musharraf had imposed the emergency as the Chief of the Army Staff, he wanted to lift it himself as and when required after relinquishing the post of the army chief. [emph. added]
Maybe this is an indication of lack of trust in Musharraf’s successor as army head, purported Western darling and anointed army of chief of staff Kayani, and the corrosive acid of paranoia will start eating away at Musharraf’s support within the military.
But on balance, I think it’s intended as a demonstration to Negroponte that Musharraf has the reins of power in hand, is prepared to govern as a civilian and lift the state of emergency when he feels like it, and that Washington should think twice about its disastrous marriage of convenience with Bhutto and its futile, wide-stance flirtation with Kayani and back off.
Washington, relieved that Musharraf has the will and a way to get out of this mess, may very well let him have his way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)