God forbid that something like this should happen: “The president of Pakistan, who was also the army chief, met with a mysterious accident at 3.10 pm on Monday, July 3. Dressed in battle fatigues, he was on his way to address a public rally in Gujrat organized by the ruling Pakistan Muslim League which is canvassing votes for local polls scheduled later in the year.
“Within an hour, the vice chief of army staff, who was inspecting troops near the Indian border in Sindh at the time, was flying back to GHQ to preside over a hurriedly called meeting of his corps commanders, senior staff officers and top intelligence officials. He was confronted with several critical questions. Should he ‘take over’ via a coup d’etat and rule directly? Should he take over but hold fresh elections and hand over power to the elected representatives three months hence? Or should the army sit back and allow parliament to independently elect a new president who would then appoint a new army chief at his discretion? Should the army intelligence agencies be tasked with ‘guiding’ parliament to appoint a GHQ-sponsored president who would appoint the VCOAS as the new army chief? There were many secondary questions. Should the army stay directly involved in politics or should it retreat to string pulling behind the scenes? Was the international environment conducive to a coup d’etat?Should all the domestic and foreign policies of the ancien regime be sustained or was there a need to change course on some and calibrate others anew? With what set of political leaders should the army sit down to determine a future strategy for governing Pakistan?
“In Islamabad, the PML president and provincial leaders rushed to hold meetings attended by the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Chairman of the Senate who had constitutionally become the ‘acting president’ of Pakistan. Several questions were heatedly debated but none was quickly resolved. Should the acting president be ordered to nominate a new army chief or should that wait until a new elected president was in place? Who should be the PML nominee for the new president? Should the PML ally with the MMA to exploit this opportunity to reclaim civilian power from the army by stressing the supremacy of parliament and undoing elements of the 17th constitutional amendment, in exchange for conceding the MMA’s demand to Islamise Pakistan, halt the American-inspired campaign against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban and restart the jihad against India? Who should be the new prime minister since the current one had lost his locus standi in the absence of his mentor? How should the PML deal with the opposition parties while firming up its own ranks?
“Meanwhile, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif had promptly announced plans to immediately reach Lahore from Dubai and Jeddah respectively. Instead of a tragic hush, the city was abuzz with excitement at the prospect of welcoming its exiled leaders. Some turncoat politicians were already tripping over themselves issuing statements welcoming them back to the motherland, while others were biting their nails waiting for Islamabad and Rawalpindi to unfurl their response. In brief statements, both leaders confirmed they had jointly charted out their return path and insisted that they would not settle for anything less than fresh general elections under a neutral caretaker administration immediately. In interviews to the world media, various pundits predicted there would be tens of thousands of people to receive the two leaders at Lahore airport. They argued that the political momentum for overthrowing the status quo could not be stopped.
“Worried, the US State Department handed out a brief statement. It lauded the president/army chief as ‘a man of courage and commitment’. It hoped that the political transition in Pakistan would be ‘smooth, democratic and maintain continuity with the enlightened policies of the recent past’. However, in a statement extracted from the Secretary General of the Commonwealth it was said that any return to direct military rule would be unacceptable. A statement by India’s national security advisor said New Delhi would review its options carefully after the fog had cleared but hoped that a ‘democratic’ leadership in Pakistan would continue and institutionalize a constructive composite dialogue with it.
“One well known pundit summed up the situation succinctly. ‘As in 1988 when an army chief/president exited unexpectedly without institutionalizing a consensual system of political succession and transition, the situation is unstable and up for grabs. Nothing can be predicted about the direction that domestic, foreign and economic policies will take in the months to come. But in the short term the stock market will plunge, the dialogue with India will be frozen and the war against terror will be derailed.’”
A country’s well-being and stability, much more than that of individuals or even institutions, should not rest on the international goodwill, personal integrity and sincerity of one man. God forbid that something like this should happen. But nations and states cannot live by prayer alone.