Could Musharraf not learn from President Putin?  

General Musharraf got the same eight years in power as Colonel Putin.  Pakistanis are of the view that he has been less corrupt and arrogant than Benazir. But what good is that if after all this time he is imposing Benazir on Pakistan yet again

Usman Khalid

            Benazir Bhutto came face to face with her 'eal opposition' for the first time. They came calling to "˜condole' with her over the deaths and injuries suffered by her workers who were protecting her motorcade during her triumphant arrival in Karachi on 18 October. The first to come was a delegation of the MQM - with no beards but big moustaches- followed the next day by those with big beards and no moustaches. Geo TV showed it all on TV. The sullen faces and artificial smiles on both occasions revealed more than the words that were spoken. The TV debate over whether her motorcade was attacked by suicide bombers or a jumping mine did not only create doubts; it also exacerbated fears. The debate is yet inconclusive but it is agreed that if it was the work of suicide bombers, it was done by the "˜bearded' ones; if it was a planted bomb or a jumping mine it was the work of those with big "˜moustache'. The experience must have been very unsettling for Benazir. The secular terrorists of Karachi and the religious terrorist of Waziristan , who I call the "free opposition", have a lot in common. Like the free press of Pakistan , they cannot be intimidated but they can be bribed. That fits well with the political culture of Pakistan .

The wedlock of President Musharraf with PML (Q) is well nigh ended; he is seriously courting Benazir. The Chaudhries (who lead the PML-Q ) find that very unsettling. While the "˜free opposition' was condoling with Benazir, the Chaudhries indulged in no such hypocrisy and were attacking Benazir for being an "˜unscrupulous liar' who looted without relent and advanced the agenda of the enemy (India) when she was the Prime Minister. The charges of loot and being an enemy agent are not new but they stick. What is more, she has not been able to shake off the accusation that she or her husband was behind the murder of her brother "“ Mir Murtaza Bhutto - by the Karachi Police. The charge has been made again through an article in the press by her niece "“ Fatima Bhutto "“ who is just as elegant and articulate as her aunt. But she is younger; she is dignified; and she is determined to get a proper inquiry into the murder of her father. Of the three sets of opposition "“ free opposition, familial opposition, and political opposition "“ Benazir would feel more comfortable if she had to deal only with the third.

The Chaudhries are doing her a favour. Without realising it, they are also doing a favour to the country. The country benefits if the PML and the PPP fight the elections on the basis of their record in office. Dealing with looters is important but exposing criminals and traitors is more important. Benazir has to explain how and why she "˜helped' Rajiv Gandhi to suppress the freedom movement in Kashmir and Khalistan. Who did she work for then, whose interest is she is looking after now. Why are America , India and Israel so keen for her political marriage with Pervaiz Musharraf? Whose interest does she serve by demonising all the legitimate freedom movements of Muslims "“ in Iraq , Afghanistan Palestine and Kashmir ? She does understand the implication of her 'easonableness' in letting the IAEA interview the Dr. A.Q. Khan. India , who she admires, is refusing to sign the nuclear deal with America (even though it gives India access to advanced nuclear technology) because it undermines India 's sovereignty. Why did say what she said? Would she protect Pakistan 's nuclear deterrent? How would she advance the freedom struggle in Kashmir ? By acquiescence to America on both counts? The majority in Pakistan believe that Benazir is the Trojan Horse of India and America . She is seen as a security risk, more now than when she was first so accused. The Chaudhries may not be as articulate as her but they are patriotic. They can defend their record of five years. It was Pervez Musharraf who walked out of political parleys with Akbar Bugti, with Waziris, and over Lal Masjid. Chaudhry Shujaat had negotiated a solution in each case.  

It is the fee press that was instrumental in raising public awareness of the danger of President Musharraf getting away with dismissing the Chief Justice. After that, direct and continuous telecasting of major events was stopped by the Government. TV cameras were not allowed to witness the carnage at "˜Lal Masjid'. But Geo TV did telecast the "˜arrival in state' of Benazir Bhutto and raised heckles. It did serve public interest as the bomb blasts and instant reactions were recorded. Free press is indeed a public service and it should be constrained only by public interest. The sinister objectives and violent methods of the "˜free opposition' are of vital public interest.  But the free press has not directed its attention towards this; it has too often missed the point. It can do better by persevering in getting answers. It should refuse to print or telecast utterances without logic or evidence. If Benazir cannot say how she will create more jobs, she is not making a promise; she is indulging in deception. It is less important whether bombing of the motorcade on 18 October was the work of a suicide bomber or not. It is more important why no one was tried and hanged for the murder of the brother of the Prime Minister who was shot and killed by the police in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

Rule of Law is the foundation of good governance, of political stability and steady improvement of the society. Whether it is ensured by a strong Emir or a monarch, or by strong institutions "“ the parliament and the free press "“ it matters little to the people. When the Chief Executive is oppressive, corrupt and disdainful of law, the country declines in every sphere of life. After the death of General Zia ul Haq, Benazir and Nawaz Sharif alternated as Prime Minister twice each and were found wanting on all counts. They were found to be corrupt, oppressive and disdainful of law.  When General Musharraf took over, most Pakistanis were happy. He lasted much longer because he was not corrupt, oppressive or disdainful of law. General Musharraf got the same eight years in power as Colonel Putin got in Russia . The people of Pakistan can now make a judgement. They are of the view that he has been less corrupt and arrogant than Benazir. But what good is that if after eight years of his rule he is imposing Benazir on Pakistan yet again. Pakistan did not make as much progress as Russia but it did make considerable economic advance. But President Putin is leaving office after eight years and wants to leave a working system as his prime legacy. Musharraf wants to be president for another five years making sure that the system he built is corroded by his machinations and would collapse with his exit from power.

 I am still optimistic. I hope that either General Musharraf will himself see the writing on the wall (like more illustrious President Ayub Khan did "“ reluctantly - after his two terms in office) or the Supreme Court will make it easier for him by declaring him "˜ineligible' to contest the election while in uniform. Now that Benazir has seen the face of the "˜free opposition' she must have been chastened and learnt that it is a very different Pakistan . Untied from the apron strings of Musharraf, she will swim or sink because of her politics rather than her patrons. Nawaz Sharif should also be allowed to return and discover that his politics is also out of date. Musharraf deserves credit for having shaken up things by encouraging a free press. If the Supreme Court declares him ineligible to contest election for President and he responds by leaving the political scene, he would strengthen the institution of the judiciary. That was not his intent (he wanted to make the Supreme Court submit to his will) but that would be the effect. Equipped with a vibrant and free press and independent judiciary enjoying the respect of the people, Pakistan would have what every Third World country desires but fails to obtain. In the end, Pakistan may well do just as well as Russia (both have nearly the same population) even though our General was no match for the Russian Colonel.