Normally, we would look upon this as good news. But not in Pakistan.
December 25, 2003
Pakistani President Agrees to Give Up Control of Military
By SALMAN MASOOD -New York Times
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Dec. 24 — President Pervez Musharraf announced Wednesday that he would step down as army chief by the end of next year but remain the country's president.
The announcement was part of a deal he had struck with hard-line Islamist opposition parties after months of deadlocked negotiations over military rule. Under the agreement, General Musharraf will have to seek a vote of confidence in Parliament to serve out the remainder of his term as president.
"I have thought about it deeply, objectively, and I also thought about the security of Pakistan and I also thought about the political harmony," he said in an address on national television. "I have decided that I will take off my uniform by December 2004 and leave the office of the chief of the army staff."
If the general, who seized power in a bloodless coup in 1999, keeps his promise, it will mark the end of military rule in Pakistan, at least formally, and it will bolster efforts to re-establish democracy in the country, Pakistani analysts said.
The agreement represents a sweeping political victory for the alliance of six hard-line Islamist parties that won record support in elections in October 2002, running on a vehemently anti-American platform. The alliance, known as the Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal, or United Action Front, advocates strict Islamic law, or Sharia, through democratic means. The group also opposes the presence of F.B.I. agents in Pakistan and American troops in Afghanistan.
In the year since the elections, the Islamist alliance, despite being only the third-largest bloc in Parliament, has managed to portray itself as the main opposition force in the country, as well as the true guardian of democracy in Pakistan.
In a series of protests led by the alliance, that included banging shoes on desks, chanting and walking out en masse, political opponents of the president managed to paralyze the deeply divided Parliament, sapping political support for efforts by General Musharraf to modernize the economy, the educational system and the government bureaucracy.
Pakistani analysts said the agreement, which was signed in Islamabad between a pro-Musharraf political party and the religious alliance, was a setback for the president.
In exchange for the vote of confidence on the presidency, scheduled for one month after General Musharraf resigns his army post, the religious parties promised to support the ratification of some of the 29 controversial constitutional amendments the president enacted unilaterally. Pro-democracy activists have said the amendments institutionalize the military's role in politics, give the president too much power and weaken Parliament.
In his 12-minute address on Wednesday, General Musharraf, wearing military fatigues, congratulated the nation over what he called the success of democracy in the country. "Today, I want to give you good news that an agreement has been reached," he said. "It is democracy that has won and it is Pakistan that has been the victor."
In the amendments enacted in August 2002, he granted himself a five-year term as president, citing a national referendum held in April of that year. He said the referendum showed overwhelming public support. Opposition political parties dismissed it as fraudulent.
Under the agreement, a constitutional amendment bill will be brought before Parliament on Dec. 26, 2004. It requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass. Together, the pro-Musharraf faction of the Pakistan Muslim League and the religious alliance control more than two-thirds of the seats.
But General Musharraf's constitutional amendments appear to have been watered down. The original amendments gave him the authority to dissolve the Parliament and dismiss the prime minister. They also called for the creation of a National Security Council, consisting of the chiefs of staff of the army, navy and air force in addition to crucial civilian leaders as a forum for consultation on a range of strategic matters.
Civilian politicians denounced it, calling it a supra-parliamentary body. On Wednesday, General Musharraf said "the National Security Council will be established through an act of the Parliament."
General Musharraf said that under the agreement between the parties, the Supreme Court's approval would be needed for the president to dismiss the government. The agreement also calls for the appointment of the chiefs of the branches of the military by the president in consultation with the prime minister.
Secular political parties criticized the agreement on Wednesday, saying it would still give the president too much power. For the last year, the secular parties, along with the religious alliance, waged the campaign against the president.
The agreement "will disfigure the Constitution and demolish the parliamentary system," Sadique al-Farooq, a spokesman for the anti-Musharraf faction of the Pakistan Muslim League, told The Associated Press.
In recent weeks, Western diplomats have said that the president's reform efforts appeared to have stalled in the last year. General Musharraf also narrowly escaped an assassination attempt on Dec. 14.
General Musharraf's supporters in Parliament have a slim majority. He retains significant popular support and is seen as far less corrupt than the two civilian prime ministers who governed in the 1990's, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto.
Diplomats said his problems stemmed from the parliamentary elections held in October 2002. Political commentators said General Musharraf's attempts to control the outcome of the elections ended in political disaster for him.
The general barred both of the civilian prime ministers from the elections. At the same time, he allowed the alliance of religious parties to campaign freely during the elections. The result, which appeared to surprise General Musharraf and Western observers, was record support for the religious alliance.
They received only 11 percent of the popular vote, but won control of one of the country's four provincial governments, earned a role in a coalition government in a second province and became the third-largest party in Parliament. In the end, the elections created an immobilized Parliament, demoralized the country's secular parties and strengthened the religious alliance, according to the general's critics. They now appear to have forced the president to compromise.
The developments in Pakistan represent one possible unintended outcome of the Bush administration's campaign to press for democracy in the Muslim world. Under current conditions in Pakistan, the prime beneficiaries of the reintroduction of democracy are likely to be the hard-line Islamic parties.
Some scholars said the agreement was a step forward. Dr. Rasul Bakhsh Rais, a political scientist at Lahore University of Management Sciences, called it "a positive development in the direction of constitutional and political development."
But others saw the agreement in different terms. Najam Sethi, a columnist and editor of The Daily Times, said the deal was a major setback for General Musharraf. "On the face of it, the deal is supposed to benefit both the parties," he said. "But I think eventually General Musharraf is going to be the loser."
He predicted that the religious parties would eventually force the general to back off his strong support for the American-led campaign against terrorism.
Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company |
