PAKISTAN: IMPERATIVES FOR
UNITED STATES TO RECALIBRATE POLICIES
By Dr. Subhash Kapila
The following contextual papers by the
Author would provide the relevant backdrop:
Introductory Observations
In the sixty years of Pakistan’s
existence the United States in terms of foreign policy
formulations and attitudinal inclinations has not only
invested heavily in Pakistan but could be said to have
over-invested, albeit, with diminishing returns.
The distinguishing features of United
States foreign policy towards Pakistan were to let its
strategic imperatives over-ride the political imperatives to
facilitate the emergence of its South Asian ally as a stable
and democratic country. United States seemed to favor in
existence in Pakistan military regimes of the Pakistan
Army. This has continued unabated.
Post 9/11 this distinguishing trend was
further reinforced by the United States in over-investing in
Musharraf-centric policies rather than Pakistan-centric
policies in synchronization with Pakistani peoples
aspirations.
By a fortuitous combination of
political and media pressures within the United States and a
mass political upsurge within Pakistan against General
Musharraf and Pakistan Army rule since the defining moments
of March 09, 2007 the United States was left with no options
but to pressurize General Musharraf to conduct free and fair
General Elections which took place on February 18, 2008.
However, the United States was
permissive enough to allow General Musharraf to position
himself as President of Pakistan by an unconstitutional
election by the outgoing National Assembly and provincial
assemblies. He was also allowed to sack the entire Supreme
Court judiciary when in November 2007 it ruled against the
General’s illegal political manoenvres.
The General Elections of February 18,
2008 in terms of results have brought unintended
consequences both for General Musharraf and United States
strategic and political influence in Pakistan.
The Pakistani people through their
ballot on February 18, 2008 General Elections have virtually
rejected General Musharraf’s continuance in power outrightly
both at the national level and the provincial level.
The electoral verdict of the Pakistani
people is also a serious reverse for United States policies
in Pakistan. In a free and fair vote the Pakistani people
not only rejected General Musharraf but also rejected Untied
State's Pakistan policies.
Both General Musharraf and the United
States, (in terms of Musharraf-centric policies) had this
coming to them. Some excerpts from the Authors last
referred paper in March 2007, need to be reproduced:
- "Historically, in the case of
military regimes in Pakistan, this is the first time
that a Chief Justice of Pakistan has defied the dictates
of the Pakistani Army Chief who sought to confront him
in uniform and remove him unconstitutionally.”
- “What we are witnessing in
Pakistan today in an “Institutional confrontation”
between the Pakistan Army and the judiciary.”
- “It has touched a raw nerve in
Pakistan and is likely to snowball into a major
confrontation where the masses are in favor of the Chief
Justice and the legal fraternity.”
- “This spark has all the
potential to light up the tinderbox of suppressed public
outrage against the Army rule in Pakistan.”
The spate of developments and events in
Pakistan since March 2007 are now history.
But as inevitable in foreign policy
formulations and political affairs some seem always bent on
repeating history.
General Musharraf has not gracefully
accepted the electoral verdict and has embarked on divisive
political intrigues to prevent the two major victorious
parties to form a coalition government.
The United States Administration at all
levels in their post-electoral verdict statements on
Pakistan continue to hammer in the theme that election
results notwithstanding General (Retd.) Musharraf continues
to be the President of Pakistan and they will continue to
deal with him.
Such statements either betray a lack of
knowledge of the unfolding legal status of Musharraf
vis-à-vis the coalition government that should be in power
shortly or indicates a United States policy obsession that
come what may America would perpetuate Musharraf in power.
In both cases such attitudinal
fixations could be dangerous for General Musharraf and the
Untied States too. Post-electoral verdict United States
pronouncements have led some observers in Pakistan to the
conclusion that the General Elections were a United States
ploy to reduce the heat on Musharraf and to defuse the
explosive political mix that could have ignited violently on
the streets of Pakistan.
The United States has reached a dead
end in Pakistan and the time seems to have come when it is a
strategic and political imperative to re-calibrate its
policies on Pakistan.
This is examined under the following
heads:
- Pakistan: A United States-Specific
Reality Check
- United States Continuance of
Musharraf-centric policies: The Dangers
- United States: The Way Ahead in
Pakistan
Pakistan: A United States-Specific
Reality Check
United States policy formulations on
Pakistan are bound to go drastically wrong if it fails to do
a strategic and political reality-check on the situation
that has emerged in Pakistan or it chooses to remain
oblivious to it.
The United States must seriously ponder
on the following harsh realities, however perceptively
different they may from its prevailing policy precepts:
- General Musharraf stands
resoundingly rejected as President by the people of
Pakistan, even though his name was not on the ballot.
The parties endorsed by him and all the ministers
in the Musharraf Government stand voted out.
- General Musharraf’s exit has not
been brought about by the Taliban or Al Qaeda, but by
the growing civil society in Pakistan and Pakistani
masses.
- The image of the Pakistan Army as
the glue which holds Pakistan together has been severely
dented in eight years of military rule.
- Political opposition to
continuance of General Musharraf as President has not
only emerged from a vast cross-section of Pakistan’s
public but from General Musharraf’s own constituency.
- Unprecedented in Pakistan’s
history, for the fist time retired Pakistan Generals
were demonstrating in front of the General Headquarters
and in Islamabad demanding that for the integrity of
Pakistan and in the interests of the Pakistan Army,
General Musharraf must quit.
- Pakistan has emerged as the most
anti USA nation as a result of America’s
Musharraf-centric policies
- Musharraf’s strategic
indispensability to prosecute America’s global war on
terror is questionable. Civilian democratic governments
would be better placed to explore political solutions to
the terror threat.
- The US myth that Musharraf stands
as a bulwark against Islamist fundamentalism in Pakistan
has been exploded by the electoral verdict. The
Islamist Alliance Governments in the explosive Pakistani
Western frontier provinces stand voted out in the
elections.
- In the volatile NWFP the scene of
the most potent Taliban and Al Qaeda threats, the people
have voted in the ANP which is a secular party to
replace the Islamic fundamentalist alliance.
In terms of a reality check the
overwhelming message that has emerged from the ballot box
and which the United States should respect is that:
- The Pakistani people have rejected
General Musharraf and military regimes including any
follow-up that anybody would have in mind.
- The Pakistani people want
unadulterated democracy and liberal institutions of a
modern state.
- The Pakistani people have rejected
Islamic fundamentalism as a political weapon endorsed by
Pakistan Army
The United States would therefore be
negating the verdict of the Pakistani people, should it
choose to indulge in policies of perpetuating General
Musharraf in power.
United States Continuance of
Musharraf-centric policies: The Dangers
The United States if it wishes to
continue as the power with strong strategic and political
influence in Pakistan needs to re-calibrate American
policies to be in harmonius synchronization with the
national aspirations of the Pakistani people.
Post-electoral verdict pronouncements
by US Administration officials are not inducing the
confidence that the United States would be turning a new
leaf in its approaches to Pakistan. The flurry of meetings
by US diplomats with political leaders after the electoral
verdict has created a further negative reaction amongst the
Pakistani public that the United States is bent on
perpetuating Musharraf in power at any cost.
Continuance of Musharraf-centric and
Pakistan Army-centric policies by the United States carries
the following serious implications:
- Democracy’s time has come in
Pakistan and increasingly the Pakistani public would not
be a mute spectator to repeat of military takeovers in
Pakistan with external permissiveness.
- United States foreign policy
formulations negating the present electoral verdict and
dis-respecting Pakistanis national sentiments carry the
dangers of the United States being rendered “irrelevant”
in the future Pakistani scheme of things.
- As it is, it is difficult for
Pakistanis to forgive the Untied States for being an
active party in perpetuating General Musharraf in power.
- United States-brokered political
solutions could lead to a total disillusionment amongst
Pakistanis that peaceful political upsurges which
brought about the present electoral verdict will not be
respected and therefore violence as a political weapon
can only bring about the political transformation of
Pakistan.
- United States-brokered political
solutions are likely to generate further divisiveness
and confrontation in the body-politic of Pakistan. It
could generate widespread violence and lawlessness which
neither the Pakistan Army has been able to control so
far and nor would the United States have the resources
to intervene to restore stability in Pakistan.
The United States has very limited
options in Pakistan as it is and the perpetuation of General
Musharraf in power does not figure at all in the limited
options that America has.
United States: The Way Ahead in
Pakistan
In very brief terms, the way ahead for
the United States in Pakistan lies in embarking on the
following initiatives.
- Force General Musharraf to quit as
President even before the new National Assembly meets
- Policy precepts in declaratory
terms be made that the United States would not favor any
future military takeovers in Pakistan and that Pakistan
Army should revert itself to civilian control.
- No military aid in any form be
given to Pakistan Army. Pakistan today is not
externally threatened. It is threatened from within and
for that F-16s, Attack Helicopters and PGMs are not the
answer.
- With whatever limited influence
that still remains in residue in Pakistan in favor of
United States should be used for national reconciliation
and nation building in Pakistan. This residual US
influence should not be frittered in cobbling political
combinations which may not be able to sustain Musharraf
in power.
- Pakistan direty needs economic
assistance for economic and social development. The
United States should put an international consortium
together to pump in specific project-related aid for
transforming the Pakistan Army- created garrison state
to an economically vibrant and socially democratic
Pakistan
A significant point that the United
States must respect while looking ahead is that it must
recognize that political power and political control of
Pakistan resides in Punjab as the following percentages of
Pakistan provincial representation in the 342 seats Pakistan
National Assembly indicates:
- Punjab – 55%
- Sind – 25%
- NWFP – 15%
- Baluchistan – 5%
In the past, United States
Administrations have favored non-Punjabis as Prime Ministers
of Pakistan. Former Nawaz Sharif as Prime Minister twice
was hardly tolerated.
But the inescapable reality is that
whosoever controls Punjab politically also controls Pakistan
politically. Nawaz Sharif’s party has won in Punjab and he
cannot be politically marginalized in any US policy
formulations because he is implacably opposed to General
Musharraf.
Concluding Observations
Strong strategic and political
imperatives exist for the United States to recalibrate its
policies towards Pakistan. No longer can the United States
expect that the Pakistani public and especially its younger
generation to remain as mute spectators to Musharraf's
continuance in power over-riding the electoral verdict or
any future emergence of military regimes with external
permissiveness.
United States perceived threats
focusing on Pakistan in terms of Islamic Jehad, terrorism
and WMD proliferation can be more effectively tackled in
cooperation with Pakistani democratic civilian governments.
Civilian governments would be better positioned politically
to reach out to Pakistan's fringe elements embittered by
Musharraf's security, political and domestic policies.
Finally, in the last referred paper of
the Author, John Norris of International Crisis Group was
quoted as follows:
“The world community should approach
Pakistan and its problems with open eyes. Offering tacit
support for quasi-military rule into the indefinite future
may make it more difficult, not less to tackle the
foundations of Pakistan’s insecurity.”
The above is once again a timely
reminder for the United States to recalibrate its policies
towards Pakistan.
(The
author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs
analyst. He is the Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South
Asia Analysis Group. Email:drsubhashkapila@yahoo.com)