General Pervez Musharraf made a number of candid remarks at a speech in Islamabad recently. These comments open a window into the mind of the most powerful man in Pakistan. Unfortunately, some are ominously off target.
“Pakistan”, explained General Musharraf, “is an imperfect society”. “I am also an idealist … but when I see the imperfect environment I realise that idealistic solutions will not work … (thus) when idealism and pragmatism clash, I believe in following pragmatism”. This is a theme to which General Musharraf constantly returns, as if not just to explain some of his more controversial policies and somersaults but also to justify them. His earlier arguments were couched in the discourse of “changing ground realities”. The ground reality has changed, so policy must be changed. Perish the thought that the policy in question might have been wrong in the first place because policy makers hadn’t done their homework or because they had clutched at false assumptions.
Of course, pragmatism is a wonderful thing. It is pragmatic to rub shoulders with crooked politicians who do your bidding blindly but idealistic to hobnob with them if they don’t, never mind how “unfair” or “unjust” or “discriminating” or even “immoral” such political behaviour may seem, regardless of whether politicians or generals indulge in it. It is also pragmatic to change the law or suspend the constitution when it suits you and idealistic to entrench the law and uphold the constitution when it doesn’t, never mind what harm such capricious notions of justice and fair play do to the social psychology of the state and its institutions. And if the end always justifies the means, or if the end is to be determined by one man in his finite wisdom, however good and sincere his intentions, what is all the fuss about institutions, checks and balances and accountability?
Then there is the big bad press. From Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif to General Musharraf, it remains every ruler’sfavourite whipping boy. Of course, Mr Sharif simply adored the press when he was in opposition and Ms Bhutto was in government and vice versa. And of course, General Musharraf just loved it when the press informed the world just how bad Mr Sharif was and how good General Musharraf might turn out to be. Alas. Has the “ground reality” changed, as it inevitably does, and is it time to become pragmatic and crack the whip again?
“We have given maximum freedom to the media but it always paints a bleak picture”, said the good general. Then, warming to his theme, he muttered, “Sometimes I ask myself whether I should have given freedom to such an extent because newspapers distort the facts.” Here is the threat to reveal the iron fist beneath the velvet glove. “The enemy lies within” and it apparently includes journalists “who are sitting abroad and working against the interests of the country”.
A graver charge-sheet against the press than “the enemy within” has not been assembled. However irresponsible, the press has fought for its freedom and paid the price for it time and again. Nor is freedom anyone’sto give or allot like a corner plot of land. Freedom is humankind’s inalienable fundamental right. Autocratic rulers come and go but the cry of freedom remains undiminished and unvanquished. Sometimes soldiers used to taking and giving orders cannot understand how civil society is supposed to function, but that doesn’t alter the ground reality. It is also worth asking just how much “press freedom” actually exists under the Musharraf regime.
To be sure, there was greater press freedom in the first two years of the Musharraf regime than in the last year of the Sharif regime. It is also true that General Musharraf has “allowed” a relatively freer regime in the public sector than ever before. But whatever his personal inclinations, the fact is that Mr Sharif began to lean on the press when the going got rough for him and the press began to reflect the ground reality in 1999. Equally, the “free” press was General Musharraf’s best friend when he was flogging his “idealism” and promising to break with the unholy past in 1999. But now that he is being as “pragmatic” as his predecessors, doesn’t the press have a right to lament his loss of innocence?
The fact is that more journalists have been secretly whisked away and beaten up or warned under the Musharraf regime than under the Sharif regime. The fact is that the recent amendments in press laws are a step back from the freedoms enjoyed under earlier regimes. The fact is that the new anti-defamation law threatens to be the blackest law in the history of the press in Pakistan, not least because the editor-in-chief, editor and chief reporter of a leading paper have been dragged before an anti-terrorist court under it. Is this a record that does General Musharraf proud?
We believe General Pervez Musharraf is a decent, good, liberal and well-meaning man who has Pakistan’s best interests at heart. But if some of us don’t always reflect this belief, we may be forgiven our idealistic trespasses in the face of changing ground realities.