Extremism and its manifestations
In an interview to a private TV channel May 27, General Pervez Musharraf has spoken clearly about the Al Qaeda threat to his life and the organisation’s involvement in the two attempts on his life in Rawalpindi within a span of two weeks a few months ago. In revealing some of the facts behind those abortive attempts General Musharraf also corroborated, for the first time, that some petty armed forces personnel were part of the attempts to kill him. We had suspected an inside track even at the time these attempts were made. General Musharraf has now confirmed the suspicion beyond doubt.
However, his assertion that he is absolutely sure that everyone directly involved has been picked up and that everyone indirectly involved is known and under surveillance and would be picked up in due course may be too optimistic. Indeed, the fact that some suspects are still under observation means that not every detail is known. This is further endorsed by General Musharraf’s statement that the mastermind behind the attempts is a Pakistani and he (Musharraf) knows who he is. Still, if this person has not been picked up then it is clear that those who know about his involvement want to give him a long rope to see how far and up this thing might be going. Therefore it is somewhat intriguing, given these obvious facts, that General Musharraf should vehemently deny the involvement of any senior military officers.
Even more intriguing is the fact that General Musharraf should choose, at this stage of the investigations, to reveal two vital facts, namely that some people who are indirectly involved are being kept at large and under surveillance and, second, that he knows who the mastermind is. Won’t this alert these people and induce them to either cut off any communication with other conspirators or cover their tracks more efficiently?
But let’s look at it another way. General Musharraf is a soldier and knows the intelligence business well. Does that mean he chose to say what he did deliberately and the information he parted with was meant to be a red herring? Could it be designed through dissimulation to allow the real suspects to lower their guard?
However, this also shows that religious extremists have definitely penetrated some sections of the military and the police. Some policemen have already been found involved in terrorists attacks in Balochistan and Karachi. This had to happen given past policies of the state which have significantly helped transform society. The military has its acculturation process but clearly that process has come under tremendous stress from other tendencies that run contrary to the values and internal organisational integrity of the military. Many independent experts have, for years, been trying to warn of this danger but the state chose to sideline them. Now that the state is inclined to reform itself, it faces a backlash from the civil society that has come to believe in a millenarian creed.
The challenge for General Musharraf, therefore, is not just to put down the extremists but to try and reverse the process that was put in place by his military predecessor General Ziaul Haq. That is where he should be investing his energies. But a very important aspect of such an enterprise, should he choose to undertake it, is to allow a viable political process to evolve. This is where we have constantly run into problems. General Musharraf, like other military rulers, is not ready to concede civilian primacy. In fact, he has shown utter disregard for constitutionalism and continues to pander to the narrow political and corporate interests of his constituency rather than work towards the larger goal of turning the country into a viable and functioning state. He may genuinely think that he can deliver better with help from the army, and he may be right in the short term, but extraordinary measures cannot be institutionalised. Further, the inability of political actors — if this argument is indeed accepted — to configure a workable political process is largely owed to intermittent military interventions. Hence it is important for the military to get out of the process to allow political evolution to take place along its natural curve. * |
