The imposition of Governor’s Rule in the NWFP reflects the poverty of political philosophy in Pakistan. It proves that Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif have learnt precious little from their turbulent experience in politics or from their dismal performances in the past. It also lends credibility to the argument that we lack a culture of democracy to make a parliamentary system work.
The crisis of government in the NWFP was not unexpected. It has been bubbling ever since Mr Sabir Shah hastily assembled a coalition government on the wings of a group of unscrupulous independent MPAs. When Mr Shah bought their loyalties by giving them ministerial slots, he did so at the expense of another partner, the ANP. Mr Wali Khan was accordingly obliged to take a deep breath and swallow his ambitions. When Khan Sahib’s patience ran out, he was within his rights to demand his pound of flesh. Poor Mr Shah. When he tried to accommodate Mr Khan at the expense of the grasping independents, his coalition ran headlong into quicksand. Sensing greener pastures in Ms Bhutto’s political fiefdom, the independents promptly sprinted to Islamabad.
Shorn of a majority, Mr Shah should have done the proper thing by stepping down and letting Mr Aftab Sherpao try his luck. That is the way the constitution envisages the situation. In due course, if Mr Sherpao’s rickety coalition had also floundered on the rock of the treacherous independents, the President would have been justified in asking the Governor to order fresh elections. That would have taught both voters and politicians to act differently. But, of course, things don’t work out quite so neatly in Pakistan. Majority or no majority, Mr Shah was damned if he would vacate the CM’s chair. “We’ll resist the vote of no-confidence with force”, he thundered. “If they try to bring their supporters to Peshawar in helicopters, we’ll shoot them down”, roared Mr Wali Khan. Alas, the crumbling constitution was all but forgotten in the din that followed.
If Mr Sharif and his cronies were deliberately knocking the system, Ms Bhutto and her lackeys were hardly more responsible.ÿIn fact, Islamabad played smack into the hands of Mr Sharif when it decided to push ahead with the no-confidence move and call “his bluff”. Only Mr Sharif wasn’t bluffing. He wanted to precipitate a crisis and he did so unabashedly. From Day One, his intentions have been clear: provoke one crisis after another, put Ms Bhutto on the back-foot, make sure she is unable to govern or legislate. In short, prove that she cannot provide stability or good government to the country.
At the end of the day, Ms Bhutto may turn out to be the bigger loser. She is the one who made a spectacle of airlifting her MPs to Peshawar. She is the one who called out para-military troops to escort them to the assembly. She is the one who prompted two Muslim Leaguers to cross the floor. She is the one who hit nasty headlines all over the world. And what does she hope to get in exchange? A moth-eaten government in which Mr Sherpao will be blackmailed, much as Mr Shah was, by the blighted independents.
Meanwhile, no one will care two hoots about Mr Shah’s illegal actions or President Leghari’s constitutional response. Certainly, no one will recall Mr Iftikhar Gillani’s insolence before a division bench of the Peshawar High Court. In the end, people will only remember Changa Manga and Swat in 1989 or the Marriott lotas and the midnight Rangers in the Punjab in 1993. And they will be so overwhelmed by the offensive taste of those memories that they will quite unconsciously forget about who perpetrated what and why in the first place. Instead, as in 1990 and 1993, they will lay the entire blame for the crisis at the door of the government in Islamabad.
Most people seem to think that this is a sum-zero game in which neither the elected government nor the elected opposition can be credited with a win. In one sense, of course, they are right: Mr Shah’s loss can only turn out to be an illusory gain for Mr Sherpao. But in another, more crucial sense, they are wrong. The democratic paradigm has again suffered harm. The Westminster-type parliamentary system has again been proven incompatible with the reckless genius of our politicians. And the impulse for paternalistic authoritarianism under the garb of some sort of Presidential system is again stirring in the bowels of the country.
It is unfortunate that President Farooq Leghari was quoted in the press, a day or two before he imposed Governor’s rule in the NWFP, as saying that he had no intention of suspending the provincial assembly. Now we hear that he may order a session of the assembly in the near future to determine which side has a majority to form a government. We would advise him against a quick move. Tempers are running high, it is better to let the dust settle. Meanwhile, if Mr Sharif should insist on huffing and puffing, he may be allowed to blow away his energy.