TOP NEWS
Babbar, two nominated MPs take oath | Being under pressure helps me: Kevin Jonas | One killed, 24 injured in road accident | ATTU to review new team format in Asian TT | Food inflation rises to 14.55 pc | Cashier chargesheeted for misappropriating money | Vaishnodevi pilgrim dies in J-K | Three labourers killed after being trapped in mine | Rajya Sabha adjourns after obituary reference | Misty morning greets Delhiites | Sugarcane farmers protest new sugarcane pricing |



:: Inder Malhotra

Pak dictators rise and fall the same way

By Inder Malhotra

Aug 05 : For a little over half its existence — 32 years out of 62 — military dictators have ruled Pakistan. There have been four of them and despite all the differences in their personalities, outlook and style, they all have had one thing in common: Each came to power amidst tremendous acclaim for overthrowing an incompetent and corrupt civilian government and each one went, involuntarily, in utter disgrace.

Nothing could have underscored this more vividly than the present plight of General Pervez Musharraf (Retd) who, according to most observers, had got away rather lightly. The Pakistan Supreme Court’s judgment declaring illegal his proclamation of Emergency and dismissal of 61 judges in 2007 has opened the floodgates of speculation that he is now liable to "trial for treason." This indeed is the position under the 1973 Pakistani Constitution. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had insisted on this provision though it did not save him from the gallows.

By a delicious quirk of irony, the 14-man bench of the apex court that gave the verdict against Mr Musharraf was headed by Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry, whose dismissal (even before the other 60 were shown the door) had triggered the mass upsurge that led to the former dictator’s downfall. Even so, it is most unlikely that he would be brought to trial. In the first place, the apex court itself has ruled that it is for Parliament to decide whether the former President should be tried and punished or not. The civilian government, headed by President Asif Ali Zardari, is in no position to offer any provocation to the all-powerful Army that, in behind-the-scene consultations, has made it clear that it would not want its former chief to be "humiliated". Nawaz Sharif, whom the former Army Chief first overthrew, then sentenced to death, and later still exiled to Saudi Arabia for 10 years, is not likely to be amused, but there is little he can do.

Secondly, Mr Musharraf is living in London in a comfortable flat he has bought and would not take the risk of returning to Pakistan. After all, when summoned by the Supreme Court he had not come. No wonder responsible London newspapers have reported that he might seek asylum in Britain. At present, he is on a "luxury cruise" and the joke doing the rounds is that this cruise could last very long.

While the Musharraf drama plays itself out, a look back on the fate of the military rulers preceding him would be instructive. The first of them, Ayub Khan, who allowed his sycophants to persuade him to promote himself to the rank of Field Marshal, was immeasurably popular at the time he took over in October 1958. The bunch of bickering, quarrelling and greedy politicians had made such a mess that he was seen as a redeemer. But this situation lasted only for a few years. Disillusionment with him began when his son and family members development the gift of the grab, and the Army became arrogant, corrupt and authoritarian. What did Ayub in was the 1965 war with India. Pushed into it by Bhutto and the latter’s hardline associates, Ayub opted for a ceasefire and the Tashkent truce against Bhutto’s advice. His most-favoured minister thus became his nemesis. Bhutto was to join and lead the virulent anti-Ayub agitation in West Pakistan at a time when in what was still East Pakistan, Sheikh Mujib’s autonomy movement was at its peak.

Driven to the wall, in February 1969, Ayub violated his own Constitution requiring that in the event of wanting to leave he must hand over power to the Speaker of the National Assembly who would be duty-bound to hold fresh elections within 90 days. Instead, Ayub transferred power to easy-going, hard-drinking General Yahya Khan, Ayub’s handpicked commander-in-chief of the Army. Yahya lost no time in declaring martial law. He tried to crush the autonomy movement in the eastern wing so ruthlessly and recklessly that historians now say that Yahya, not Sheikh Mujib, was the "father of Bangladesh".

Ninety-three thousand Pakistani troops surrendered in Dhaka on December 16, 1971. Four days later, Yahya’s peers in the three armed forces threw him out humiliatingly after forcing him to hand over power to Zulfiqar Bhutto who had won a majority of the western wing’s seats in the National Assembly in the December 1970 election. In this poll Mujib had an overall majority as he had captured almost all the seats in East Pakistan. Neither Yahya nor Bhutto was prepared to accept this verdict.

From 1972 onwards, thinking Pakistanis were confident that after the loss of half of Pakistan’s territory in the 1971 war, the discredited Army was in no position to stage another coup. Evidently, they had counted without the imperious "Zulfi" Bhutto. Despite his exceptional ability, in sheer cruelty, depravity and even bestiality, he left the military despots flat on the doormat. To cap it all, he needlessly rigged the election of March 1977. The dam of pent-up public anger burst and enabled the Army Chief, General Zia-ul-Haq — a Uriah Heep-like figure whom Bhutto had promoted over six generals senior to him — to stage a bloodless coup.

Zia, interestingly, has been the longest lasting military dictator of Pakistan. After a travesty of a trial, he hanged Bhutto but embraced his clandestine quest for nuclear capability. For this reason he was treated as an international pariah. But luck was on his side. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan made him almost overnight America’s most important ally in the Islamic jihad against the Russians. As leader of the "frontline state", he extracted from the US the promise that it would ask no questions about Pakistan’s form of government and nuclear programme.

He also embarked upon Islamisation of both Pakistani society and the Pakistani Army. This caused problems both at home and abroad. In any case, in the eyes of the Pakistani people his shelf life had come to an end. But he was still in saddle. And then on August 17, 1988 he — together with several generals and the US ambassador to Pakistan — perished in a plane crash. His son, Ejaz-ul Haq believes till today that his father was killed by the Americans with the help of some Shia officers of the Pakistan Air Force.



Other Columns

 

 

 





About Us | Contact us | Advertise with us | Careers | Site Map | Feedback
© Copyrights 2006 Asian Age. Privacy policy | Disclaimer | Terms & Conditions