|
 Former president, Pervez Musharraf is in “the line of fire” as never before. The new barrage was triggered by his launch of a new political party recently. Flak has been falling over him ever since like monsoon showers. Nawaz Sharif has issued a formal “charge sheet” against him. Earlier his supporters took out an anti-Musharraf rally in Birmingham. Some newspaper columnists are having a field day in Musharraf-bashing with personal attacks with incendiary language to create a perception that Musharraf was the very incarnate of evil from whom nothing good ever came. Even those, who had applauded his crackdown on Lal Masjid and his general campaign against extremists, have fallen silent.
Such attitude does no good to anyone. It is axiomatic that nobody is an absolute Satan or a total Saint. Therefore, let us castigate him by all means for his faults which may be legion. But we should also give him marks for his good work howsoever minuscule. We may indict him but his defense should also be listened to. We must judge Musharraf justly.
Musharraf’s major faults include the Kargil expedition, the overthrow of Nawaz Sharif, the military campaign against Akbar Bugti, the removal of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, and the declaration of emergency. For good measure add his kowtowing to the U.S., -allowing air bases for their operation in Afghanistan, catching and delivering people the U.S. wanted, et al.
For some of his faults, such as the Emergency and the arbitrary removal of the judges, he is repentant. However, his defense of Kargil including his claim that Sharif was on board, the Lal Masjid operation, and his explanation that all the people who were handed over to the U.S. were foreign nationals, need to be examined in light of facts. Even as to Dr. Afia he is quoted saying that so far as he knew she was a U.S. citizen. If this is true, then Musharraf would come out better than Nawaz Sharif who delivered Aimal Kansi, a Pakistani national, to the FBI.
While lambasting Musharraf for the Kargil, it should also be noted that he was nevertheless invited by India on a state visit, -a courtesy never before extended to any other Pakistani head of state, elected or otherwise. And at the Agra summit he held his ground firmly on issues vital to Pakistan.
How can a just assessment overlook his deft move at Kathmandu SAARC summit that took India’s Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, by surprise and led to a thaw in the post-Kargil freeze? Or, his meeting with Vajpayee on the side of the SAARC summit at Islamabad that opened the door for composite dialogue including Kashmir?
Some blame Musharraf for ruining the economy. But a comparison between the situation in 1999 when he took over and in 2007 when he left, tells a different story as shown in the table.
In addition Industrial sector registered 26% growth. Pakistan IT industry now values around $2 billion, including $1 billion exports and employs around 90,000 professionals. CNG sector attracted over $70 billion investment during his term and created 45,000 jobs. Telecom sector attracted around $10 billion in investment and created above 1.3 million jobs. Large scale manufacturing was 30 year high, and Construction activity was 17 year high.
These figures speak out about the wholesome change that Musharraf’s rule brought. To these may be added the spectacular growth in the education sector with the launching of a number of universities both technical and non-technical. For example, in 1999 there were 31 Public Universities. In 2006 there were 49 such. Add the mega seaport of Gwadar and you would have a picture of Musharraf’s “Pakistan First” vision.
Some in the media are bitter that he sought to gag them under the emergency. But it must also be remembered that Musharraf was the first to give full freedom to the media. Amendments to the draconian ‘Hudood Ordinance’ were brought about under Musharraf’s stewardship.
Musharraf also had a dream about cleaning Pakistan of extremism through madrasa reform. His philosophy of “enlightened moderation” may be ridiculed by his detractors, but it was lauded by foreign intellectuals and finds respectable mention in Richard Bonney’s bestseller, Jihad: From Qur’an to bin Laden.”
Censure him, therefore in your wisdom and “awake your senses that you may the better judge.” But be also just and censure Talal Bugti for openly inciting people to murder Musharraf with the offer of 1,000 acres of land and one billion rupees and the civil society as well for their acquiescing to this rank encouragement of crime. It is one thing if the government put s a reward for the capture or killing of a wanted criminal, but, for a private individual to do so demands unequivocal condemnation at which the civil society has been too short.
As to his debut in politics, it only adds a third dimension to the political scenario. Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif were dismissed twice for bad governance and corruption. The situation today is far worse, with nepotism having touched new heights as favorites are appointed to head mega public sector corporations.
Musharraf, has had only one term. His second coming holds promise of change. If Bhuttos and Sharifs can aspire to rule for a lifetime, why not a second chance for Musharraf to fulfill his vision that includes a fair solution of the Kashmir dispute which, according to credible Indian sources, was within a whisker of achievement during his tenure.
If he comes to power again, that thread might be picked up again, particularly because in India, Manmohan Singh is still at the helm. With Kashmir resolved, Pakistan can hope to reduce its heavy defense budget and divert the funds to other sectors that are crying for development.
While bashing Musharraf let it not be forgotten that Taliban were nursed by Nasirullah Babar, interior minister, in Benazir Bhutto’s second stint as prime minister. Musharraf, on the other hand went all out against them so as to invite repeated attempts on his life.
Because Musharraf promises change, politicians with entrenched vested interests who have always opposed change are apprehensive. For example: he replaced the British administrative system with a revolutionary scheme that empowered elected people at the grass root level to head the local administration. As soon as the new government came into power they scrapped it and went back to the old system.
Those who have watched the performance of the Bhuttos and Sharifs and who do not approve of an army takeover once more, as a third option, are therefore, left with Musharraf as the only acceptable alternative. Besides, if Asif Ali Zardari with all his baggage, can become Pakistan’s president, why not Musharraf? 
The writer is the Founding Chairman, Moderates, a private sector think tank strengthening tolerance, interfaith, harmony and democracy.
Syed Jawaid Iqbal is the Editor-in-Chief of Southasia Magazine. He is also the Founding Chairman of Moderates - a private sector think tank committed to strengthening tolerance, interfaith, harmony and democracy.
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
