What prompts his call for the coup?
Truth be told, the MQM was the first political party to warn of Taliban penetration of urban centres, especially Karachi, long before the security establishment worried itself with such ideas. And right through the war, its support for military forces has been second to none in the political arena. Its doubts about the talks along with the PPP, in recent days, have also betrayed a more realistic understanding of the insurgency, and its dangers, than parties grounded in Punjab and KPK. But Altaf Hussain’s call for military takeover, implying the country is more important than democracy, is self-defeating and puts the proverbial cart before the horse for a number of reasons.
One, the first and foremost requirement of a successful national counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy is national unity, and how an army coup splits popular opinion should not be lost on a party proudly claiming representation among a growing percentage of the population. Two, the army is already stretched. It is balancing between the traditional threat across the eastern border, the FATA insurgency, Afghan border issues and intelligence penetration, and out-of-control sectarianism and turf wars in major cities. Inviting it to take over and run the country at the same time is, in fact, asking the army to lose focus on the fight and lose to the militants. Three, while there is no denying that the army is the country’s best hope in this existential fight, it should not be forgotten that it was long years of unchecked army rule that created this situation in the first place. The strategic depth doctrines and proxy wars that have long symbolised the military’s way of working will be repeated, and more overtly than before. And four, while there have been, on occasion, signs of strain between the N-League and the military, it is for good reason that the army has kept mum about them, and decided not to challenge the PM’s assertion that the two “are definitely on the same page”.
Again, truth be told, what Altab Hussain said seems to matter, and imply, less than when and where he said it, making it easier to understand why he might have said it. It is no secret that it is becoming difficult for the party to sustain his position as-is in London. And with the interior ministry now facilitating British inquiries that have been known to make him, and the party, very uncomfortable, coupled with findings that he might have offered allegiance to British authorities ahead of his citizenship debate, it might explain why he is more eager than before to gain the military’s favour. And the stronger the military, the more secure his position. If it is, indeed, such intrigues that prompt such calls, then the party, especially its efficient coordination committee, must be the first to squeeze a more rational explanation out of him. True, democracy will do little good if the country is allowed to go waste. But critics are reminded that, from this point on, the country itself will become impossible to salvage if representative government is not strengthened.