Dragging Pakistan down

Contributing Editor Air Marshal (Retd) AYAZ AHMED KHAN takes issue with the pessimist among Pakistanis.

It is sad to see educated Pakistanis criticising Pakistan as if it is not their country. Many of us generalize and reach hasty conclusions about our present and future. Many of our writers are unnecessarily pessimistic, and this causes despondency. On the other hand millions of Pakistanis residing abroad read reports and articles about Pakistan with a sense of patriotism and passion not realized in Pakistan. Pakistan’s image abroad matters to them, they become distraught when reading reports and comments in our dailies on the internet. Pulling and dragging Pakistan down has become a norm with our writers and intellectuals. The Western media is critical of continued Army rule and absence of democracy, primarily of what they decipher from our media. Of course they are correct when our writers and foreigners write about continuing economic crisis, massive tax evasion, absence of tax culture, drought and riots in Karachi. Such write-ups are unsettling for Pakistanis living outside. They await news of a democratic, economically stable, politically united and a strong Pakistan. But unfortunately even the local bodies elections and the Army regimes devolution plan for “real democracy”, has been adversely commented upon. This disturbs them.

General Pervez Musharraf has moved on several fronts and is trying his best to correct the rot, but the regime’s media projection in Europe, America and Canada is poor, and even the Pakistanis outside are not aware of what all is being done to improve Pakistani economy and polity. Incisive articles quoting known Pakistani writers continue to create a negative image of Pakistan. The Karachi water riots were televised by big TV networks in the US and Canada, in a manner as if these were man-made. Toronto Star (daily circulation about half million) published an incisive article by Martin Regg Cohen its Asia Bureau Chief on Thursday April 19, 2001, which come down harshly on the regime. The mindset of foreign writers is conditioned by their own democratic environment, which upholds rule by elected governments and rejects military dictatorships. Such articles do influence official and public opinion in the west.

In the article titled, “Pakistan’s Military Flexes its Muscles”, Mr Cohn states that, “With the Generals in power, nobody rains on their parade. So, when the opposition politicians planned a protest on Pakistan Day- March 23, security forces swung into action. Police rounded up 2000 activists, and threw dozens of their top leaders into jails, allowing the Army to celebrate in peace. Behind a protective cordon, Pakistan’s military rulers presided over a flypast of jet fighters, a procession of missile launchers, and salutes from loyal soldiers. All this to mark the 61’st anniversary of the day when Islamic politicians called for a separate and democratic homeland for Muslims on the sub-continent.

No shots were fired, no blood spilled. But it was another bad day for freedom in this nuclear armed country of 135 million people, which has languished under Army rule for nearly half of its 53 years. The military is making no apologies. “Political rallies and large gatherings that disturb public life and gather momentum are not necessary”, explains Army’s pointman, retired Lt General Moinuddin Haider. “It is of little interest to the Canadian writer that he is an able Minister of Interior, who has done a lot to improve law and order.” Cohn says, “As interior minister in the military regime his job is to rule with an iron fist — and remonstrates with a silver tongue.” The fact is that Haider neither rules nor remonstrates. He is a professional and competent official, who is engaged in police reforms, and elimination of sectarianism, bigotry, and drugs. Cohn quotes Haider, “You can’t call this a military dictatorship, because the courts are functioning, the constitution is intact, the press is totally free, more than it was during the last few democratic governments, and it is business as usual”. But foreign writers cannot be swayed by homilies. Cohn adds, “that the constitution is suspended, the press is practising self-censorship, and business has shipped its hard currency out of the country — with no foreign investment in sight-seems besides the point for Haider. Most days, it must be said, the jackboots are nowhere to be seen”. Haider’s stress that it is a “civilized Army government, and the muscle of the military as you see is being used very sparingly” is unlikely to sway public opinion abroad in favour of the Army government, because the Western democracies are against military dictatorships. Cohn has assessed that, “Pakistanis are wondering how much longer they must wait before soldiers leave the corridors of power for the military barracks. They also wonder how much lower the country’s relentless economic and social decline will drag them down.”

“A wild card was introduced into Pakistan’s political equation this month when the Supreme Court ordered a retrial for convicted prime minister Benazir Bhutto, who was ousted twice for corruption. But she faces fresh legal challenges, and it is uncertain whether she will return from self-imposed exile to a country where her husband still languishes in prison for taking kickbacks. Bhutto’s successor prime minister Nawaz Sharif is also in exile as part of a deal with the military government that threw him into prison after ousting him from power. Though there are many Bhutto worshippers in Europe, America and Canada, few Pakistanis believe either of these discredited former leaders can mount a comeback. According to Cohn with few leadership alternatives, the political horizon looks bleak. He quotes A.B.S Jafri extensively. “Every military rule has left the country drained out of its political vitality, social morality, political will, and self-respect”, wrote Pakistan’s best known columnist, A.B.S Jafri, after the latest show of Army force. A.B.S Jafri adds that, “The current regime has been less severe but hardly more wise. It has been treading the same line but with less of a swagger”.

“General Pervez Musharraf who led a bloodless coup late 1999, has promised to restore democratic government before an October 2002 deadline set by the Supreme Court. But the latest tactical manoeuvres by the Army Chief suggest that he is planning to rule for some time yet. Musharraf recently extended his own term as Army Chief and is laying the groundwork for his reincarnation as President. The General speculates openly about amending the Constitution to institutionalize the army’s role, presumably lessening the temptation for perennial coups.” These one sided statements should be rebutted. Musharraf did not lead any coup. Had Nawaz Sharif’s devilish plan to deport General Musharraf by denying landing to the PIA aircraft returning from Colombo succeeded, Musharraf would have been eliminated, but the country would have plunged in total chaos. Western writers are ignorant or deliberately miss the truth, that Nawaz Sharif’s criminal action has brought in the Army.

Cohn rightly says that, “When the Army took over power in the corrupt country in 1999, Pakistan was bordering on bankruptcy. It has pledged to change the way politics is practiced here. But while the military tinkers with tactics and recalibrates the balance of power, its ambitious reform agenda is being cut down to size. The Army regime announced a crackdown on tax dodgers, in an economy where barely one percent pay taxes. The soldiers targeted corruption, promised to privatize inefficient state enterprises, began downsizing a bloated bureaucracy, and have authorized local elections in a bid to decentralize power. But much of the military reform agenda has faltered. As ungovernable as Pakistan seems to plotting politicians, it is unfathomable to plodding military men. Analysts give the government credit for stopping the slide so far. Corruption has become a dirty word, smuggling has been reduced and public security — law and order has improved. Musharraf’s patriotism and eloquence have won admiration, but his political savvy remains unproven. He has appealed for donations of $ 300,000 from rich Pakistanis, but in a nation of tax cheats, donations don’t amount to much of a battle plan”. His conclusion that, “After half a century of statehood, Pakistan is being left behind by the rest of the sub-continent: while India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka focus on fundamentals of education and economic growth, Pakistan is mired in military adventures in Kashmir, pre-occupied by religious extremism at home, and crippled by corruption”, is harsh and incorrect. It is astonishing that the million Pakistan’s resident in America and Canada while deeply involved with what is going on in Pakistan, fail to take note of motivated articles against their country. They need to rebut false propaganda against Pakistan, but should appreciate the truth even when it hurts.