A long haul to March
Going by the prime minister’s somersaults in the last few days, one can only surmise that there “something is rotten in the state of Denmark”. The befuddling sequence of statements started with a tell-tale session with the COAS and the DG-ISI wherein resignation from the former ambassador to the US was secured. Next, in response to the heads of the military and the ISI depositing affidavits with the SC asking it to conduct a thorough probe of the memo scandal which was in conflict with the government’s stance that the apex court did not have the jurisdiction to probe the matter, he delivered a fiery speech on the floor of the house demanding of the military to provide information how Osama bin Laden had stayed in Pakistan and what visa had he travelled on to enter the country? He also spoke of conspiracies being hatched to topple the democratic government. When that was greeted by rumours that the government may be heading towards removing the COAS and the DG-ISI and when the military termed the government’s stance an attempt to divert attention from other important issues, the PM softened his tone saying that commanders are not changed during a state of war and that he had ‘begged’ (later changed to ‘requested’) the COAS and the DG-ISI to accept the extensions. All this happened within a short span of three to four days.
More than anything else, it speaks volumes of the extreme stress that the prime minister has been subjected to in the wake of the controversy surrounding the President’s ‘sickness’ and his dash to a relatively ‘safe’ Dubai. It was a crude attempt to browbeat the military and the principal intelligence agency of the country into submission and threaten the SC away from probing the memo affair. Faced with humiliating failure, the prime minister was left with no alternative but to back off and call for urgent ceasefire. On the surface, things seem to have settled down – for now at least. Is this going to last or will it prove to be a short interregnum before the war commences?
There is a problem concerning the opposing positions that the government on the one hand and the military and the premier intelligence agency on the other hand have taken before the apex court. In the event of a possible reconciliation, one of the parties – the government or the military-ISI combine – would have to alter its stated position. Inter alia, it means that either the government would have to withdraw its objection to the jurisdiction of the apex court or the military-ISI would have to ask the court to stay away from the probe paving the way for the innocuous parliamentary commission appointed by the government do the needful. While anything can be expected of the government as has been graphically demonstrated by the bewildering sequence of conflicting statements of the PM, the same cannot be said of either the military or the ISI. I believe that the opening salvos are going to lead to a pitched battle before the SC that may determine the government’s faltering credentials as also the prospects of its future.
This is further substantiated by the president’s speech marking the 4th death anniversary of Benazir Bhutto. While he spared throwing punches at the opposing political parties and the military-led establishment, he was not so generous with the SC and highlighted its ‘discrimination’ against the government and the People’s Party. He bemoaned that the courts were not under him.
Why does the president desire to put the judiciary under his direct control? It may not be difficult to untangle this knot at least. It has been a known secret that, of all the state institutions, it is the ‘restored’ judiciary that has posed the maximum trouble for the incumbent government. Umpteen mega scams have been unearthed leading to recovery of billions of the looted state funds. Ministers and officials have been suspended and reprimanded. The NRO, NICL, Hajj, Pakistan Steel, Railways and scores of other cases have brought indescribable shame to the government and dented its legitimacy to rule. The government has systematically defied the apex court’s injunctions including its verdict on the NRO: it refuses to write to the Swiss court as adjudicated by the SC. Can it continue to rule by defying the constitution and the courts? More importantly, should it be allowed to do so and, if not, what are the options available?
While the government may have lost its legitimacy, even its right to rule, the SC has stayed clear of ordering it out so far. It could be because the apex court and other powers that be do not want the most corrupt and inefficient government in Pakistan’s entire history to be booted out with the tag of a ‘martyr’. It would much rather that it completed its term in office and is voted out by the people on account of its loot spree and lack of delivery. That being the ‘democratic’ course should be the preferred option, but is it really? Can the country afford any more of these shenanigans which are increasingly at the cost of the state’s security interests, even its survival?
The obvious answer being in the negative, are we heading towards early elections or the prospect of securing a long hiatus from ‘democracy’ giving Pakistan an economic recovery-based agenda for implementation by a group of ‘clean’ people? Will the military and the judiciary become active players in this plan, or would they stay by the side overseeing Pakistan’s slow and painful recovery from the brutal haemorrhaging it has taken over the last few decades? The guessing game continues. The PM predicts that the conspiracies would be over after the Senate elections, but it is a long haul to March!
The writer is a political analyst and a member of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. He can be reached at raoofhasan@hotmail.com