Is Pakistan sliding to chaos?

By Dr. K.N. Pandita

At first, implications of Pakistan Supreme Court verdict of 18 December quashing the corruption amnesty did not seem alarming. But as the debate on the issue intensified in political and legal circles, it started unraveling the gravity of situation.

Even leading commentators have begun to express unease that political and administrative situation in Pakistan is becoming rather chaotic.

US official reaction to the quashing of NRO that it is Pakistan’s internal matter and that Washington has nothing to do with it sounds bizarre. Who does not know that the NRO of July 2007 was the brainchild of US and UK handlers who wanted a reconciliation formula brokered between Pervez Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto. Washington and London both wanted Pakistan to have some semblance of democratic dispensation because of growing unpopularity of Pervez Musharraf.

.Pro-Zardari groups assert that the enemies of the President like the Army, ISI and PML (N) want to use the Supreme Court to remove President Zardari. They feel convinced that Zardari’s detractors influence the judiciary, which inducted the element of politics into the realm of law?

However, this argument does not seem tenable. One important condition put forth by Mian Nawaz Sharif at the time of forming the PPP-led coalition government was that of reinstating the illegally ousted Chief Justice and other judges of the High courts in Pervez Musharraf regime.

But Zardari as president went on dilly-dallying on the commitment that ultimately led Mian Nawaz Sharif to break association with the coalition. Only after great public pressure mounted and the lawyers threatened to bring out a massive demonstration, did he agree to the reinstatement of the ousted CJ and other judges.

To adduce political motivation to the verdict of nullification of NRO seems a farfetched idea.

Moreover, reinstatement order of ousted chief justice and some judges of high courts actually meant undoing illegal ordinances of Pervez Musharraf. By the same analogy, rejection of NRO can be safely interpreted a pure legal decision with no apparent political motivation.

In normal course of things, quashing of NRO has its fallout of some serious nature. For example, 248 persons implicated in various charges are brought on exit control list. Arrest warrants will be revived in some cases, and court proceedings in others can also be taken up. Accounts of the accused in foreign banks can be frozen, and the Swiss authorities can be asked to resume the process of accounting for the bank deposits.

Under existing law, the President of Pakistan is immune to the verdict of the court. But observers think that his position has become tenuous on moral grounds. There is the allegation of him having amassed 1.5 billion dollars wealth in foreign banks.

The US and UK, both are closely watching the developments in Pakistan and are assessing its impact on regional strategy especially in the context of war against terror in NWFP and Afghanistan.

Though the rumours of President Zardari’s exit have been discounted by the spokesman of Presidential office, yet strong opinions are expressed by important circles that his tenure cannot hold too long.

On-going internal situation of Pakistan is definitely a matter of great concern for Washington and London. If Zardari quits under the pressure of circumstances, Washington has to look for a president who understands and sympathizes with American interests in current regional strategy.

The nagging question is: will Pakistan relapse into another long spell of military rule? Will all the efforts of the policy planners in Washington and London of helping democratic dispensation take roots in Pakistan come to naught? What would be the new regional strategy if that is going to happen?

Zardari is being accused by the Army and its affiliates that he is too close to the Americans. His ouster could add to the strength of the Army for not allowing his successor to be outright pro-American. In that case, the US might have to re-think her anti-Taliban and anti-Al Qaeda strategy because the new regime in Pakistan might not be too willing to go a further mile with the American Army in the region.

At the same time the verdict of the Supreme C0ourt has many bizarre aspects to it. Interior Minister Rahman Malik, figuring in the list of accused persons. has been directed to issue himself with a warrant of arrest.

Quashing of corruption amnesty by the Supreme Court has given a rude shock to the Federal administrative structure in Pakistan. Senior bureaucrats with political clout and moles in the Army are defying the authority of the ministers. One senior secretary, when asked how dare he defy the orders of the Minister said the minister had no authority to direct him on state affairs because the one under whom he was supposed to work was legally out of office and he would not carry out his orders or instructions. The worst effect is observable in the important Interior Ministry because the country is involved in fighting the insurgents in North Waziristan and terrorists activists blasting bombs and unleashing mayhem in the cities and towns of Pakistan.

It appears that the ruling authorities in Pakistan had premonitions of a bizarre court verdict that would seal the fate of many a political leader. Apprehensive of a sharp turn in the situation, Pakistan foreign office had as early as the closing days of November last asked Wajid Shamsul Hasan, its High Commissioner in London to rush to Switzerland and get hold of the Swiss Case Documents from John J Brunt, the lawyer. 12 cartons of documentary proofs against Zardari were then handed over to the special team of Pakistani officials. Obviously, the sole motive of such a pre-emptive measure is to secure the otherwise vulnerable position of President Zardari.

Pakistan has to survive the serious situation prevailing in the country on domestic as well as foreign relations level. If Pakistan remains geographically and politically intact, it will help stabilization of peace in the region. Unfortunately, by and large, the crisis in Pakistan is home grown. Had not Ziau’l- Huq rejected the “peanuts aid” and asked for mountains of arms and ammunition from Washington, and had he settled for nationalization instead of radicalization of Pakistan, and refused to let religious organizations and seminaries become the arbiters of the destiny of people, Pakistan would have been in a much better condition today.

Comments are closed.