Deal, Dheel, Pig and the Sugarcane Field

Late Mian Saleem Jahangir happened to be amongst the eminent lawyers of Lahore's judicial circles. A notable voice of PPP, on Zia Ul Haq's assumption of power, he made a speech in which he said that the pig has entered the sugarcane field and now we have to think how to take it out? - Soar kamad de khetan wich aa gaya aae hun sochna aae ve ke ainoon kadna kinj aae? (Subsequently he had to spend 3-4 years under ground and probably some time in detention for the speech)

The question that Mian Sahab raised in late 70s has become most relevant in mid 00s. For Pakistan, for all the internal and external factors has reached a deciding point in its national history. The question becomes all the more relevant in context of the rumours/news of a deal between PPP and General Musharaf. What constitutes a deal? Will it be a damaging blow to the rule of law in this country or will it serve as an opening into the restoration of civilian rule in the country? and more importantly is there any probability of a deal or can a deal ever take place or not?

But before I actually touch on the issues relevant and related to deal, let me state why I believe this is the defining moment for Pakistan.

1. The present resentment in the ranks of the people is not against Musharaf the person but against the institute of Army and its naked interference in political, administrative and corporate spheres. Unlike Zia and Ayub, slogans here are not of Ayub Kutta or Zia Kutta but of NaPak Fauj Murdabad and Ae watan ke sajelae Jarnelo - Sare rakbae tumharae liyae hain

2. In the past, every time a military take over took place; the existing political class was completely wiped out. So when the military rule ended, a whole new lot of political leaders was at the fore and its inexperience and the impression of its inexperience was exploited to pave way for another military take over. This time around, the rules of game have changed. After the take over, the military has failed to eliminate the political leadership it took over from both physically and politically and there is no ambiguity or unknown about the political class that is poised to take over in case the czars and their order falls. The choices are time tested and anyone who votes for Nawaz or BB will be voting fully knowing their past two governments and their roles as opposition leaders.

3. Emerging global scenario is making military take over more and more difficult. This is eminent from the differences between Musharaf's and Zia's style of dictatorship.

All these reasons indicate that in case Army fails to secure its control post Musharaf, it will be very difficult for it to regain it ever. However, on the other hand, the continuous deterioration of the political process and parties as a result of a systematic campaign for last 3 decades has made political forces very fragile and so it is a deciding moment for them as well - a make or break moment.

Only political force in Pakistan that has so far survived with strength is Pakistan Peoples Party. Even PPP is facing the biggest test of its political history. Its ranks and cadres are aging fast and in case it does not initiate a drive to mobilize masses and expand its base to youth, it will become marginalized. Also, a political landscape that has been made filthy by plot-mafia and stock-mafia in Musharaf's regime (this culture of money based polity was introduced by Zia Ul Haq and Mian Sahab has a lot to expose in this regard), it is becoming more and more difficult for political forces to hold to national and ideological agendas and the politics is becoming perk-based and individualistic.

Now this is the backdrop in which Musharaf, Army, Peoples Party and the people of Pakistan have to make a make or break decision for themselves and for the state called Pakistan.

Musharaf seems to have reached a level of narcissism (I thank Omar Mahmood Khan for suggesting this term for the mindset of czar) and psychological illness where he believes that the country cannot survive without him. This psychological illness seems incurable and any solution for the land of pure will have to be carved out keeping this state of mind in perspective.

Now let us consider three questions that I raised about deal in the beginning.
What constitutes a deal?
Will it be a damaging blow to the rule of law in this country or will it serve as an opening into the restoration of civilian rule in the country?
and more importantly is there any probability of a deal or can a deal ever take place or not?

What Constitutes a deal?
PPP should be charged with allegations of deal if it compromises on fundamental principles. They being
a) accepting Musharaf in uniform
b) assuring/ helping in his election from the present assemblies
c) compromising on a national security council led by the president
d) accepting turn-coats back in its ranks as a result of some arrangement with Musharaf
e) there is one more point that could or could not be termed as deal and that is accepting Musharaf as president with or without uniform and allowing him to contest the presidential election without fulfilling the constitutional requirement of waiting for 2 years after retirement.

About the last point, I say that this could be or could not be termed as a deal because this could be the bargaining chip to take the pig out of the sugarcane field. If he is allowed to be a president san uniform or allowed to contest presidential election without fulfilling the retirement condition, it might be taken as an indication of encouraging an unconstitutional man and his unconstitutional act. However, in return, if he guarantees to remain as a figure head president and gives concrete assurances through words and deeds that he will ensure the supremacy of civilian rule in the country, in my humble opinion bargain will be worth it.

Now moving on to the probability of the deal - in my assessment, PPP striking a deal with Musharaf will be highly unlikely and that is because Musharaf, the narcissist, will not be willing to shed his uniform (though everyone knows that uniform or no uniform emperor is naked) and PPP cannot compromise to the extent Musharaf wants it to. For a compromise on the principles mentioned above will mean party losing the support of its ideological cadres- something that has ensured its survival through 4 military regimes and 2 hostile regimes of Nawaz Sharif. And a PPP without its cadre will very soon lose its utility to the establishment and will be thrown in the bin. Being a visionary and wise politician that she is, Benazir must have a realization of it better than I or anyone else do.

On the logical and political ground there remains no justification for a deal with Musharaf. The only issue left then is the corruption cases against Benazir Bhutto. There has been a lot of hue and cry over closing down of NAB cell headed by Hasan Wasim Afzal and people more importantly Geo linked it with deal (the biggest refutation of the claims of deal could be that the Jang Group and Geo is at the forefront of alleging a deal - be it Kamran Khan and Hamid Mir desperately trying to create such impression or be it out-of-context publishing of Sunday Times interview in The News and Jang - thy repute is the biggest proof of my innocence). My biggest problem with that hue and cry is that a corrupt and arrogant bureaucrat has been portrayed as some sort of crusader against corruption who was wrongly transferred to give relief to a crook. Just when I think his son-in-law is a thorough gentleman, Mr. Afzal has a lot to answer for. He has to answer for the fact that how and why he abused his authority as Home Secretary Punjab to arrange the wedding of his daughter at Badshahi Mosque with the historical monument being dug to erect polls and decorations. In case there was nothing unusual, will an ordinary citizen of Pakistan be allowed to have a similar wedding there? Then he has to answer about his support for his brother in his capacity as Health Secretary Punjab, who was dismissed being administrator of Services Hospital Lahore, and in the process even Mr. Afzal being removed from his post by Khalid Maqbool. And more recently, he has to answer for tens of millions of tax payer rupees that were spent on his visits across the globe in pursuit of BB, just when in the last hearing he was actually thrown out of the court room being labeled irrelevant.

More importantly, the court was to give a verdict last year but it was Govt. of Pakistan that requested it to delay a verdict for they want to submit more evidence, something they have not done so far and something they need to be answerable for. Couldn't it be that Govt. of Pakistan knows that the decision of Swiss courts will be in favor of Benazir and so to avoid embarrassment first they wanted to delay the decision and now they want to create the doubts about it through rumors of deal? Logically, more than PPP be asked to justify these actions to erase the impression of a deal, it is Musharaf regime that be asked why has it not given any results in last 7 years and some journalists in Pakistan should do an honest investigative reporting on Swiss Judicial System and this entire Swiss case saga.

And the final question is, are the political parties justified in talking to Musharaf? and should they? and the answer is hell YES. Not only for the sake of talking to Musharaf and see if the narcisism be cured but also to make the powers (external and internal) that are interested in a united, liberal and democratic Pakistan realize that they have explored all the avenues before going all out against a Narcissist, his tyranny and his crumbling system. We need our foreign friends and our armed forces even in post Musharaf era - more so in the geo-strategic scenario that we are in. Problem is not the Army or US, but the system of regression that they have supported and if at some point they come to a realization for the need of an unhindered civilian rule, they must be welcomed. All avenues need to be explored to take the pig out of the sugarcane field from dialogue to agitation.

P.S. Post Zia Ul Haq (even Ayub regime) no government has been free of massive corruption. But that is a problem that has been in military regimes more than it has been in their preceding or subsequent civilian regimes. Corruption is a social issue. Just when our Military, bureaucracy, Press and Civil Society have more corrupt people than the honest ones, how can we expect the political class to be angels? They all come from the same society and the issue of corruption needs to be dealt at the social level. Are we ready to boycott our friends, relatives or associates who are corrupt even at a small scale? Answer this before pointing any finger to anyone else. For this answer has the only solution to the problem of corruption.

P.P.S. With Musharaf experience, we as a nation must realize that one man rule and military rule is a cancer at many layers and a representative civilian rule is the only political system that can ensure stability. In democratic rules, we had corruption only but in military rule we have corruption and then direct threats to the fabric of federation in the form of Balochistan, Waziristan, Militancy, and crumbling of institutions.