Professor Haqqani rebuts claims in WSJ article about Musharraf

Islamabad June 18, 2007: Professor Hussain Haqqani has said that General Musharraf is disliked for being an authoritarian ruler who took power in a military coup and has since refused to fulfil his promises of a transition to democracy. "The current protests against him were triggered by his arbitrary firing of Pakistan's Chief Justice".

He said this in a rejoinder article to the Wall Street Journals rebutting the contention of a correspondent Arthur Herman on June 14 that Musharraf was good for Pakistan but was hated only by Mohtarma Bhutto and the elite because Musharraf belonged to the immigrant community whose family migrated from India in the wake of partition in 1947.

"If Musharraf had been good for Pakistan, as Mr. Herman claims, the people in all provinces would not have been marching in the streets against him", Prof Haqqani said.

"General Musharraf is not hated for being from the immigrant Muhajir community, to which I also belong", he said adding, "The very fact that Musharraf rose within the army's officers corps to become its chief, before becoming President through a coup, belies the assertion that other ethnic groups cannot stand the sight of a Muhajir wielding power. Pakistan has had a Muhajir President and at least two Muhajir prime ministers in its short history of six decades".

Haqqani also rejected Herman's contention that if the US withdrew support from Musharraf it could lead to a take over by the Taliban like elements. He said, "The Taliban have made greater inroads in Pakistan under Musharraf and military rule. A democratic government, backed by the US and fully supported in counter-terrorism operations by the Pakistan military, would most likely reverse the rise of the Taliban".

Rejecting the allegations of corruption against her Haqqani said, Ms Bhutto was removed from power through soft coups and charges of incompetence and mismanagement are routinely leveled by coup-makers against elected governments they topple. "The allegations of corruption against her, though repeated often, have not been proven in any court of law. In any case, her alleged flaws do not justify continued military rule and the consequent rise of Islamist extremism in Pakistan".

Professor Haqqani is Director of Centre for International Relations, Boston University

Following is the text of Prof Haqqani's article.
 

Arthur Herman's letter attacking Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto (Why Bhutto and the Elites Hate Musharraf, June 14) reflects the willingness to take a position without detailed knowledge of Pakistani history and politics. Expertise in Anglo-American history or even on Gandhi and Churchill does not make Mr. Herman an expert on Pakistan

Benazir Bhutto's support base in Pakistan is the rural and urban poor, not the country's elites, even if Ms Bhutto comes from an elite family herself. Her Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) has won two general elections under her leadership. Even in the 2002 election organized by General Musharraf, the PPP secured the largest number of votes notwithstanding Ms Bhutto's absence from the country and Musharraf's allegations of corruption against her.

Ms Bhutto was removed from power through soft coups and charges of incompetence and mismanagement are routinely leveled by coup-makers against elected governments they topple. The allegations of corruption against her, though repeated often, have not been proven in any court of law. In any case, her alleged flaws do not justify continued military rule and the consequent rise of Islamist extremism in Pakistan.

General Musharraf is not hated for being from the immigrant Muhajir community, to which I also belong. The Muhajirs played a critical role in Pakistan's creation and remain a powerful community, and we are not an endangered minority or "third-class citizens" as Mr. Herman portrays us. The very fact that Musharraf rose within the army's officers corps to become its chief, before becoming President through a coup, belies Mr. Herman's assertion that other ethnic groups cannot stand the sight of a Muhajir wielding power. Pakistan has had a Muhajir President and at least two Muhajir prime ministers in its short history of six decades.

The reason why Musharraf faces popular opposition has little to do with his foreign policy or ethnic origin. He is disliked for being an authoritarian ruler who took power in a military coup and has since refused to fulfil his promises of a transition to democracy. The current protests against him were triggered by his arbitrary firing of Pakistan's Chief Justice. If Musharraf had been good for Pakistan, as Mr. Herman claims, the people in all provinces would not have been marching in the streets against him.

Pakistan's economy has indeed grown under Musharraf but it also grew under his civilian predecessors, albeit at a slower rate. The success of the capitalist spirit in Pakistan reflects the nation's entrepreneurship and hard work and should not be invoked as an argument against democratic rule.

Ms Bhutto's call for an orderly transition to democracy is unlikely to pave the way for a Taliban-like takeover of Pakistan. The Taliban have made greater inroads in Pakistan under Musharraf and military rule. A democratic government, backed by the US and fully supported in counter-terrorism operations by the Pakistan military, would most likely reverse the rise of the Taliban.

Mr. Herman is also wrong in his account of the fall of Iran's Shah. The Shah of Iran did not fall from power simply because the United States withdrew its support. He fell because he was a despot who failed to allow fundamental freedoms and antagonized his own people. The reason Ayatollah Khomeini succeeded him rather than a democratic politician was that the Shah had eliminated all viable pro-western democratic politicians. The US had put all its eggs in the Shah's basket, like Mr. Herman would have the US do in Musharraf's case.

Wherever the US has supported a viable democratic opposition against a despot (e.g. at the end of the Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines and in the transition after Augusto Pinochet in Chile) U.S. interests have remained protected even after the pro-US dictator lost power. The successors to both Mr. Marcos and Gen. Pinochet may have been flawed in the eyes of scholars such as Mr. Herman but they managed effective transitions from authoritarianism to democracy. Ms Bhutto, too, is expected by many in Pakistan and abroad to do the same.