In My View

Significant triumph for Pakistan

The less-than 40 per cent Pakistanis who braved their political exhaustion and came out on polling day on Monday (18 February) sent a strong message to many capitals around the world. That message was one of a desire to shirk off the terrorist tag; to gain respect and dignity in the world stage; and to give democracy another of the many chances they have given periodically, only to be betrayed by their political class.

From an Indian viewpoint, this election held across the border has two significant features. One, it has been the freest general election the country has witnessed since 1970. And two, this is for the first time in many decades that a Pakistan poll has been bereft of customary India-bashing and fulminations about Kashmir.

In 1970, the Awami League (AL) of then East Pakistan had won an absolute majority. But that mandate was not translated into political terms by then Pakistan president, Gen Yahya Khan; thus disallowing Mujibur Rehman’s AL from forming a government in Islamabad. The progression of history from that point on does not require recapitulation here. But it needs to be told that from those days a belief had gained ground that if free elections were to be held in Pakistan, no supreme authority would be in a position to give effect to the mandate the people deliver.

Nevertheless, the year 2008 promises to be different. This was an election about the country surviving with a viable State. Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, midway through the poll campaign, had ensured that the only poll issue was terrorism. Plus, political parties like the Pakistan Peoples’ Party and Mian Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League had sought to put on the dock all that the country’s president, Parvez Musharraf symbolised.

If the voters have sent one unequivocal message by the power of their ballot; that is about their rejection of terrorism. On the issue of Musharraf they seemed to have suspended their judgment. For they seem to have told the Asif Ali Zardaris and Sharifs that they do not trust them enough to give either of them a clear mandate.

None of these messages of the electorate are difficult for Musharraf to translate into reality. In fact, by doing what the people of Pakistan have bidden him to do, Musharraf would gain in stature and be able to create some insulation to ward of the heat of withering criticism he was taking for the past few months.

During the last days the poll campaign he had tried to inject some elements of unfamiliar democratic discourse in the politics of Pakistan. On one occasion, he had lamented that the country’s politics was not throwing up new leaders. And on another, he had exhorted the contestants that they should be gracious in their victory and defeat.

For the first phenomenon, he, or what he stands for as a part of the Pakistan armed forces establishment, has to take most of the blame. The armed forces never allowed the political processes to function in the country with enough autonomy, ever since the country’s leaders of the independence struggle passed away. They have loomed so large on the horizon that every other political functionary has been dwarfed in the process. Also, global political players like the USA entered the country holding the hands of the armed forces, catering to their needs, and played havoc with Pakistan’s core interests.

In the past year or so, Musharraf had shown that he could give as much as he could take. If he played the role as a frontline State in the ‘global war on terror,’ he made sure it was not all out war that could suck in significant sections of Pakistan’s society. He showed steely nerves while looking American leaders in the eye and telling them that there were limits to which Pentagon could run amok in Pakistan’s territory. He even made tactical peace with the tribal warlords in North West Frontier Province (NWFP), so that the territorial integrity of Pakistan was maintained. In short, he took the bull by the horns, and made it stall.

The bull fretted and fumed. If Condoleezza Rice sounded conciliatory and supportive, her public diplomacy section under neo-con Karen Hughes went on an overdrive to stoke the predatory instincts of the American media, who bayed for Musharraf’s blood. They sought to discredit him so much in the public eye that he became ineffective to the point of paralysis on the face of Washington’s onslaught. They wanted regime change by the media.

Musharraf has weathered that strategy. Now is the time for him to play the statesman. He has to let the political forces to play the field. Once they cobble together the government, he has to divide powers with them and rule.

For India’s Pakistan policy, the time ahead would also be a test for the acerbic wit who heads the desk as a joint secretary. South Block would need to devise a policy that gives proportional weightage to the dual repositories of power in Islamabad. India would have to decide who it deals with in terms of Kashmir.

Pinaki Bhattacharya, currently located in Kolkata, is a Special Correspondent with the Mathrubhumi, Kerala. He writes on Strategic Security issues. He can be contacted at pinaki63@dataone.in