Pakistani politics (catch all)

[tequila]

Amazed that no one has posted on Musharraf's declaration of a state of emergency in Pakistan.

The constitution has been suspended. Eight dissenting Supreme Court justices have been arrested, including Iftikhar Chaudhry, head Supreme Court justice and nominal leader of the "lawyers' movement" that really crystallized middle class opposition to military rule in the past few months.

Benazir Bhutto has landed in Karachi but apparently is sitting on the tarmac. She already came out against possible declaration of a SOE on Wednesday and swore that the PPP would resist it.

Condoleeza Rice has declared U.S. "disappointment" in the move. Admiral Mullen had declared previously that a SOE would cause the U.S. to review whether or not to continue aid to the military.

My reaction is that General Musharraf was afraid that the Supreme Court would not sign off on his recent election as president, and this spurred the move. The increasing Islamist attacks on the security forces gave him his pretext.

However, I think that by doing this he has shorn the Pakistani army of all its possible allies in the country. The political parties, the middle class, the civil service, the Islamists --- all are now lined up against him. Can the army stand alone when all these sectors of society are against it? Will the army stay loyal to the general?

Things are not looking good.

[davidbfpo]

The state of emergency in Pakistan is well covered in this link:

http://www.pakistanpolicy.com

No doubt there will be much comment in the UK papers tomorrow and beyond.

Meantime here's my initial reaction. Violence is spreading in Pakistan, mainly in NWFP and the willingness of the security forces to fight remains questionable. From my experience of Kashmiri Pakistanis they all too often prefer "sitting on the fence" and take a long time to become active.

Watch and wait on the dice Musharraf has thrown.

davidbfpo

[davidbfpo]

BBC-News website has this updated account of Pakistan:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077310.stm

How the Taliban and other violent groups opposed to Musharraf react is unclear. Let alone the impact on the situation in Afghanistan.

davidbfpo

[davidbfpo]

Within an editorial in The Daily Telegraph (London) an interesting paragraph, was this the "straw that broke" Musharraf's "back":

Gen Musharraf made up his mind to declare emergency law after hearing that the chief justice planned to summon the head of Pakistan's intelligence agencies this week to ask why hundreds of people were being held without charge.

The editorial: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...04/wpak104.xml

An interview or remarks by Benazir Bhutto: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...04/wpak304.xml

davidbfpo

[Rex Brynen]

Things are not looking good.

Agreed--in fact, I think they're looking very bad. Judging from some of the arrests that are now being reported (including Gen. Hameed Gull, the former head of ISI) there are already serious splits in the national security establishment.

The fact that martial law seems to have been imposed over an issue of Musharraf's personal power (the impending Supreme Court ruling on his reelection) rather than on an issue of policy or principle is likely to further fracture his military support base--and, for that matter, sap the willingness of individual soldiers to fight regime opponents, including pro-Taliban elements in the FATA.

[tequila]

I think the rubber will meet the road when the first massive public demo gets underway in Karachi or Islamabad - either from the PPP or the lawyers' movement.

How will it go? Will Musharraf order mass arrests? Will the security forces hold? If demos do go off, I cannot see how Musharraf can tolerate them if they continue --- they could paralyze the cities and really crystallize public opinion against him.

[Rex Brynen]

Much will depend on who is demonstrating, and how big the numbers are.

One can imagine a situation with big numbers, a broad coalition (including the PPP, some of the various Pakistan Muslim Leagues, the judges and lawyers, and--critically--ex-military types) that local security forces on the ground simply refuse to confront. If so, it then could go downhill rapidly for Musharraf.

I'm far from a Pakistan expert (at all), but I suspect we see 5 scenarios at this point:

1) Musharraf rides out the initial storm of opposition, consolidates, and filled with new purpose and a strengthened position goes after radical islamist opponents with new effectiveness. Odds: very low.

2) Musharraf hangs on to power with badly damaged legitimacy. Elements of the army waver, are disloyal, or are simply poorly motivated. Radical recruitment and influence bolstered. Odds: moderate

3) Opposition grows and broadens at such a rate that elements in the military refuse to support Musharraf. Caretaker government pledges elections, in which elements of broad opposition coalition maintain cooperation, resulting in strengthened, redemocratized central government. Odds: very low.

4) Opposition grows and broadens at such a rate that elements in the military refuse to support Musharraf. Replaced by another military figure. No rapid transition to democracy; instead new military regime attempts bargains with PPP or others to broaden support base. Looks like the situation a year or two ago. Odds: low-medium

5) Opposition grows and broadens at such a rate that elements in the military refuse to support Musharraf. Caretaker government pledges elections. Opposition fragments, elections are controversial and the results indecisive. Political infighting abounds, sapping political and governmental capacity. Odds: moderate.

The odds of #4 increase if radical Islamist groups engage in spectacular violence in the next few weeks, alarming senior military leaders about the viability and effectiveness of a Musharraf government.

Anyone more knowledgeable than I able to highlight what I may have missed?

[davidbfpo]

Further to the commentary.

What will be the impact of greater instability in Pakistan on the supply lines for NATO forces in Afghanistan? Business is business yes and it is profitable for the locals. A more hostile Pakistan could reduce co-operation.

I would suggest the secular parties will not make any alliances with the religious parties - helped by their strength being in NWFP (smallest province by population?). It is quite possible the professional groups will take the lead in organising any street protests. A revolution led by lawyers and judges!

Who will the secular parties, professional groups and "moderates" fear the most - the religious / radical / Taliban groups or the unsteady state?

The longer an election is postponed the worse it will be. Yes, some form of election monitoring can be offered and better if not seen as "Western". I'd suggest the Commonwealth first. No-one else seems qualified, so I'd exclude ASEAN, OIslamic Conference and OSCE. Oh yes, the UN remains.

davidbfpo

[Brian Hanley]

I think Al Qaeda is going to get Pakistan. I've thought that for quite a while. If they don't it will be because they have a dictator. Unfortunately, our nation is pretty darn lacking in realpolitik thinking these days on both sides of the aisle.

Things are going to get pretty interesting for the next president. (And the American public.)

[tequila]

Some new info in the latest update from the NYTIMES.

In Karachi, Ms. Bhutto, who returned to Pakistan from Dubai hours after emergency rule was imposed, spent Sunday at her residence there. Leaders of her party, the Pakistan People’s Party, said she would fly to Islamabad on Sunday to hold talks with other opposition parties on how to proceed. But Ms. Bhutto did not show up here.

In interviews with foreign broadcast outlets, she called on the Musharraf government to lift what she called “martial law” and to hold elections.
Sympathizers of Ms. Bhutto, who came back to Pakistan with the backing of the United States and the specific mandate of bringing a democratic face to Pakistan, said her options for influencing the situation were limited.

Ms. Bhutto’s most potent weapon — the potential to rally large numbers of demonstrators — was now in severe trouble, said Najem Sethi, the editor in chief of The Daily Times.

Organizing large protests under emergency rule, and after the bomb attack on her arrival procession Oct. 18 that killed 140 people, would be very difficult for her, he said.

“She will be very critical,” Mr. Sethi said. “But she is not going to participate in protests. She’s going to make a token representation. Behind the scenes she will work with the government for election as soon as possible.” Enver Baig, a senior leader of her party, said that the group’s strategy in the immediate future would be announced Monday.

Benazir sitting at home and apparently unwilling to risk organizing of large street protests removes the PPP from play. Certainly some PPP leaders might be willing to go along with the lawyers in organizing street rallies, but the PPP or the PML have always been top dogs at getting massive numbers in the streets, and might be the only bodies able to do so in the face of a state of emergency. But if Benazir will not go along, then Musharraf can breathe much easier.