Premium
This is an archive article published on November 23, 1999

Musharraf8217;s mousetrap

Military coups are ugly. But they look uglier when it comes to vindictiveness. After pushing out a democratic government, General Pervez ...

.

Military coups are ugly. But they look uglier when it comes to vindictiveness. After pushing out a democratic government, General Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistan Army chief, said that Pakistan needed to be cleansed. Had he confined himself to that task, very few eyebrows would have been raised, even though military rule has not gone down well with the world.

The trial of Nawaz Sharif on the charge of corruption or graft would have been understandable because even when he was the Prime Minister, a case on his assets, based on a report in The Observer, London, was awaiting hearing. In fact, the Pakistanis applauded Musharraf for having promised action against Sharif for his 8220;dishonest deeds8221;.

But the first case the military regime has filed against Sharif is that of 8220;treason8221;. It is a serious accusation against a popularly-elected Prime Minister. The military junta better have weighty evidence because everyone will be watching and looking for concrete proof. Treason is not what the military may not likein a set of rulers. It is the action of being false to one8217;s country. According to the United States constitution, 8220;treason against the US shall consist only in levying war against them or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort8221;. Is Sharif guilty of an act of this kind?

General Zia-ul-Haq did not try the elected Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto for treason. He picked up a case8217; in which Bhutto was involved8217; in the killing of a person by the name of Kasuri. Bhutto was hanged. Although the case went up to the Pakistan Supreme Court, which held him guilty by a majority judgment, yet not many believed that Bhutto was responsible for the killing. The impression that it was a case of Zia8217;s vendetta against Bhutto got strengthened as the days went by.

Musharraf has promised 8220;a fair and open trial8221; against Sharif and he has done well in entrusting the case to the judiciary instead of a Kangaroo court which he could have set up under the military law. Still it would have been morecredible if he had not gone to anti-terrorist courts, which Sharif constituted to cut short regular proceedings. However dangerous, terrorism does not in any way compare with treason. A regular court, even though slow, would have been more convincing because the accused would have had all legal avenues available to him.

There is already a feeling that Sharif would meet Bhutto8217;s fate. I recall a brief conversation with a top military brass in Pakistan. Long after the hanging of Bhutto, I asked him if he knew when Zia decided to execute Bhutto. He said, 8220;soon after taking over8221;. This is not to prejudge Musharraf. But he should know that the immediate reaction of the people to Sharif8217;s trial is that of doubt and suspicion.

However, executing Sharif will not be easy. The more Musharraf and his think-tank pursue him with a vengeance, the more alienated will become world opinion. The Commonwealth Summit has already demanded Sharif8217;s release. There is condemnation of the 8220;unconstitutional overthrow8221;. Evenpeople in Pakistan, pa-r ticularly in Punjab, may not like it if the trial against Sharif is contrived or stretched for a purpose.

Story continues below this ad

How far the courts can function independently in a threatening military environment is not difficult to see. The judges are affected by what happens in their country. We have the example of the emergency. Very few judges dared to go against the wishes of the Indira Gandhi government. The Supreme Court itself, with the exception of one judge, endorsed the emergency. To add insult to injury, the same judges ran down the emergency after it was lifted.

Times too have changed. When Zia tried and hanged Bhutto, the Cold War was at its height. The world was divided into two antagonistic blocs. Each viewed things from its point of view. Right or wrong did not matter. To-day a single instance of excess sends a wave of shock and horror practically throughout the world. The media sees to it that the violation of norms is highlighted. It is a closer world than that of Zia8217;s days. Whenthere are efforts to globalise the economy, the globalisation of cruelty is but natural.

The Sharif government was trying to take the Lahore process forward to normalise relations between India and Pakistan. This has won him many admirers in our country. When Musharraf says that Sharif8217;s connections with India 8220;will be looked into8221;, he is only playing to the anti-Indian gallery in Pakistan. Sharif tried to cover up the army8217;s adventure in Kargil. That cost him a bit of his image. Still he did not give up efforts to salvage the Lahore process.

It is not a secret any more. Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has confirmed in an interview that there were backdoor negotiations between India and Pakistan on Kashmir and that the talks had the official blessing. Editor R.K. Mishra and former Pakistan foreign secretary, Niaz A. Naik, were the messengers who carried the brief to the Prime Ministers in New Delhi and Islamabad and tried to broker an agreement. The general belief was that the two sides were coming8220;closer8221; to each other.

Story continues below this ad

It may be too much to expect Musharraf to pick up the thread from where Sharif left off. But his foreign minister, Abdul Sattar, has expressed support for the Lahore process. He has also said that it was in 8220;Pakistan8217;s national interest8221; to live in peace and have good neighbourly relations with India. An experienced man like him realises that there is no other way. No doubt, New Delhi is unhappy over the substitution of a democratic set-up by military rule. But it cannot run away from geography. As Vajpayee has said, 8220;you can choose your friends, but you cannot change your neighbours8221;.Even Musharraf, despite an array of anti-India statements, has admitted that Pakistan would benefit from good economic relations with India. If this is how he feels, he should take positive steps in that direction. He should know that the Pakistan bureaucracy is against it. When Sharif wanted to sell 35,000 KW of power to India, his foreign secretary stalled it and remarked: 8220;What about Kashmir,Mian Sahib?8221;

The Kargil intrusion has shaken India8217;s confidence in Islamabad. Public opinion created after Vajpayee8217;s courageous bus ride to Lahore feels betrayed. Musharraf will have to give a tangible proof of Pakistan8217;s desire to foster good relations with India. And there can be no better way than stopping the cross-border terrorism. How can New Delhi take Islamabad seriously when the interference in the Kashmir Valley from Pakistan continues unabated? Once Musharraf stops exporting terrorism, he will find from India the kind of response that probably no regime in Pakistan has got so far.

 

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement