With Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif making common cause in opposing Pervez Musharraf, democracy is back in reckoning in Pakistan. Will democracy return to Pakistan? This is the question which is being raised both within Pakistan and outside, especially after two former Prime Ministers, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, decided to bury their hatchets, sit across a table in a London hotel and agree on a Charter of Democracy last month. <br /> <br /> Now, there are more sceptics than supporters for the charter, given the background of the signatories. Both Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif are leaders of rival political parties and have been using the Army to pull each other down. Both, incidentally, have, on various occasions, relied heavily on the Army to keep the chair in times of crises. <br /> <br /> Things are a bit different today. The General is in no mood to budge from Islamabad. The maulanas are on his side; so are the generals. The public, so far, has remained indifferent to the possibility of a revival of democracy. The past experience with democratically elected governments has been bitter. The Army, on the other hand, has given occasional relief by ousting corrupt and inept politicians. <br /> <br /> The General has capitalised on this wide-spread cynicism. But he has also remained glued to the seat for more than seven years and has exhibited all the characteristics of a politician mesmerised by his own seeming invincibility. <br /> <br /> The 2007 election should be keenly watched for two reasons. One, it will be the first public assessment of the General's rule over Pakistan since he dethroned Mr Nawaz Sharif in a bloodless coup on October 12, 1999. <br /> <br /> Even if held under the supervision of the Pakistan Army, the election is likely to reveal what the people of Pakistan think about President Musharraf's policies. Under scrutiny would be his claims to tame the jihadi groups, secessionism brewing in Balochistan and an open civil war in Waziristan, besides the economic health of the country. At the external level, his policies on Kashmir, India, US and war on terrorism is likely to shape the outcome of the public opinion. <br /> <br /> The second reason would be to know whether election would really pave the way for the return of democracy in Pakistan. It is in the second context that the Charter of Democracy, an eight-page document, signed by the former Prime Ministers on May 14, assumes added significance. <br /> <br /> The charter, being referred to (sceptically) as the Magna Carta of Pakistan, is drafted as a guide map for the return of democracy. The central theme of the charter is to replace military supremacy with civilian authority. For instance, the constitutional amendments section, the document says the 1973 Constitution should be restored in its pre-October 1999 with the Prime Minister wielding the power to appoint governors, Services chiefs and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee. <br /> <br /> The creation of a "charter of democracy" in a military-dominated polity is itself a cause for celebration. With President Musharraf determined to craft another political victory for himself and his surrogate party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid-e-Azam, people had abandoned all hopes of democracy. <br /> <br /> The charter keeps that hope alive. The coming together of the most bitter political rivals on a common platform, despite their historical duel and rank opportunism, is undoubtedly a political development which cannot be ignored. The reaction to the charter, both positive and negative, betrays in large measure the democratic aspirations of the people. This is what has provoked President Musharraf to dismiss the document as an attempt to "grab power". <br /> <br /> The trouble with the charter is that it seeks to challenge the supremacy of military and, thus, attempts to redefine the present civil-military relations. Since October 1999, the most powerful political party in Pakistan has been the Army, negotiating with various political parties, creating new ones and suppressing the ones refusing to kowtow martial dictates. <br /> <br /> In the last five years, the Chief of Army Staff, who also happens to be the President, changed two Prime Ministers and appointed a politically novice banker as the third Prime Minister. He has selected retired and serving Brigadiers and Generals to head a large number of civilian establishment, including the critical ones handling water and power, postal services, railways, infrastructure development, etc. Besides appointing his confidantes as governors, Mr Musharraf has recently decided to appoint military officers to govern the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. <br /> <br /> The document aims to change all these to tilt the balance in favour of the civilian head of the Government, the Prime Minister. <br /> <br /> There is no way the military will even consider such a thought for discussion. With Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif out of the country and hence not really in a position to steer their respective parties to challenge the king's party and his coalition partners, the only way the charter could turn out to be more than a long wish list is by bringing people to the streets against the General. <br /> <br /> This can only be achieved if all political and religious parties come together on a single platform to face General Musharraf in the next 17 months. The General, for the moment, has all the cards up his sleeve. <br /> <br /> <br /> </font> <font size="2" class="greytext1"> <em>The author is Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi. <br /> <br /> Source: The Pioneer, New Delhi, June 22, 2006. <br /> </em> <br /> <br /> <em>* Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Observer Research Foundation.</em> <br />
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
