If General Pervez Musharraf were to survey the political landscape of the year gone by, he would discern the dos and don’ts of dog-eared experience. Indeed, if he were a good leader, he would take some lessons to heart and mould them into the building blocks of political wisdom.
Shortly after he seized power, General Musharraf announced sweeping measures to satiate the thirst of the masses for “ruthless accountability”. A year later, the missionary zeal of the early months exemplified by General Mohammad Amjad has given way to the cheerful pragmatism of General Khalid Maqbool. But the damage to business confidence will not be easily repaired.
General Musharraf was equally hard on former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. Instead of initiating corruption cases against him in which conviction merited a few years in prison, the government went for the jugular by indicting him in the airplane hijacking case where the offence was liable to the death penalty. In the event, letting him off the hook at the altar of pragmatism has elicited a heavy toll of General Musharraf’s credibility.
Other examples of rigid positions buffeted by the cold gust of reality come to mind. We recall how General Musharraf once pursed his lips and declared that he wouldn’t talk to India unless it was prepared to negotiate the “core” issue of Kashmir above all else. But after listening attentively to the geo-strategic concerns raised by President Clinton during his five-hour stopover in Islamabad in April last year, the good general was ready to meet the Indian prime minister unconditionally for talks “anywhere, anytime”, in pursuit of regional peace. Indeed, his pragmatic flexibility in recent times has diminished his government’s international isolation significantly.
Much the same sort of diagnosis can be made about the government’s economic and financial claims. There is no question about devaluation, we were told last year. Now we know that there was no way out of a hefty devaluation this year. Similarly, the dispute with Hubco was supposed to have been settled even before Mr Shaukat Aziz was sworn in as finance minister. Yet the ink is still not dry on an agreement penned last month. Equally, the IMF was supposed to weigh in a year ago with billions of dollars in funds for poverty alleviation. Now we realize how lucky we are that a few hundred million dollars were granted last month on promise of exceptionally good behaviour.
Tall claims were also made about the scope and impact of local elections. Nothing less than a radical alteration of the political landscape of traditional heavyweights and perennially crooked politicians belonging to the mainstream parties was promised. But if the first phase of the six-month long ordeal is anything to go by, nothing could be further from the reality. The rural and urban elite that the self-righteous generals so love to hate has rebounded with a vengeance and thwarted their ambitious plans to create a middle-class constituency in their own image. The government will now review the extent of power that should rest with these councilors when it should have been the other way round in the first place. What possible legitimacy or longevity can such airy-fairy devolution plans realistically claim?
Clearly, the key words are pragmatism and reality. The key issues – whether relating to devolution of political power or economic well being or sustainable foreign relations – cry out for a heavy dose of both. Will the Musharraf government temper its various policies accordingly in the future?
The prospects seem better than before. There is an increasingly realistic appreciation among General Musharraf and his military colleagues of the manner in which the concerns of the domestic business community and the international political community impinge on the well being of Pakistan. We welcome this development. The strains of pragmatic flexibility are also evident in a review of national security policy in Islamabad currently underway. This too is good news. But certain critical areas now cry out for the same realistic approach.
The question of the restoration of parliament is hanging fire despite firm denials by General Musharraf that it might soon return to business as usual. We see no reason for such strong denouncements of the idea, especially since stranger somersaults have been witnessed in recent times. Indeed, a diplomatic silence would be preferable since it would enable General Musharraf to retain some realistic options in his clutch without having to eat humble pie later. Similarly, there is no point in constantly thundering about an unrealistic three-year mission-statement or agenda when the remains of bigger pundits than General Musharraf are littered all over the political graveyard that is Pakistan.
It has taken General Pervez Musharraf over a year to become pragmatic and realistic. It would be marvelous if he could take under a year to clinch a pragmatic restoration of civilian rule in 2001 rather than in 2002. More crucially, if he can bring himself to sponsor a realistic solution of the Kashmir dispute, Pakistanis will remember and thank him for generations to come.