Musharraf decision prompted by domestic factors

By K.K. Katyal

NEW DELHI, JUNE 20. Gen. Pervez Musharraf's dramatic action in taking over as the President of Pakistan will not make much difference to India, especially to his summit with the Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee - if at all it may simplify matters. However, he may have to reckon with domestic complications and increased scepticism of the world community.

The fact of Mr. Vajpayee's invitation to Gen. Musharraf implied recognition that he had come to stay. Many in Pakistan, not perhaps, excluding the General himself, had ascribed the earlier Indian reluctance to deal with him as indicative of doubts about his durability. That may well have been a factor, though there were other reasons like the fear of adverse public reaction in India to any engagement with the architect of Kargil, the hesitation in doing business with a coup leader, whose action had been strongly disapproved by the Commonwealth and other international bodies.

Of late, however, New Delhi's assessment was clear that he enjoyed unchallenged supremacy - he was fully backed by the Army at all levels and dissenting elements were too feeble to pose even a semblance of a threat to him, political parties had been contained with the leaders of the two mainstream organisations, the Muslim League (N) and the Pakistan Peoples Party, Mr. Nawaz Sharif and Ms. Benazir Bhutto, in exile. This persuaded India to modify its earlier stand which was construed - or misconstrued - as negative even by friends abroad, including the U.S. and Russia.

India chose to engage with a person who calls all the shots in Pakistan now. Today's development does not change that position.

It came here as a surprise, though, in Pakistan, this possibility had been talked about for months, and had been the topic of political despatches, obviously based on calculated leaks. The General's decision was prompted by domestic factors, not by considerations related to the coming summit. But the timing of the move may be connected with the India visit. It may be linked with his keenness to deal with the democratically elected Prime Minister of India not as a coup leader but as the head of his country, both in constitutional and practical terms. He may be wanting to convey another point - that there would be no element of doubt about the credibility of the commitments, to be made by him, and that there would be no break in the matter of implementation. ``I am the boss. Take me seriously. I am the legitimate head of state. I can deliver'' - is the main unspoken message.

Whether this means a change - and if so, positive or negative - in his style and in his stand on substantive issues and whether he will be able to muster increased confidence in his resolve to ``change history'' would need to be watched. The saddest persons in Pakistan today will be the leaders of political parties. They had counted on an advance, even though slow, towards restoration of the democratic set-up, on preliminary steps towards a process, for which the Supreme Court had fixed October 2002 as the deadline. Today's move had a message for them too - that there would be no effective transfer of power to a civilian dispensation and that the armed forces would remain a major factor in the country's governance. The General will be the tenant of the Aiwan-e-Sadr (The President's palace) for the next five years, while continuing as the Chief Executive and the Chief of Army Staff.

Whatever constitutional mechanisms are to be devised they will have to fit in the framework, resting on his supremacy and the increased role of the armed forces. Could it be to the liking of the parties which planned to intensify their campaign for the restoration of democracy?

How will today's development be received by the world community? As the coup leader's bid to legitimise himself. As such, there will be increased concern over the future course of Pakistan. At the same time, considerations of real politk may lead them to deal with the present regime, for reasons connected with security, Pakistan's status as a nuclear power, for engagement to contain terrorism, fundamentalism and drug trafficking.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : National
Next     : It was a vote for Ram temple, claims VHP