|
"We
can topple the government any time," boasted a senior MMA leader
after a huge anti-war rally in Peshawar. Bold and daring words inspired
by what was, perhaps, the biggest of the "million man"
marches organised by the Islamic alliance across the country to
protest aagainst the American aggression in Iraq. In a sight rarely
seen in Pakistan, thousands of protestors thronged to the rally
venting their anger against Bush as well as General Musharraf. "Down
with Bush" and "Down with Musharraf" were the most
common slogans. The unprecedented public response to the MNA's protest
call has visibly boosted their confidence and brought a new stridency
to their supporters.
It is quite apparent that the Islamists have successfully
manipulated the popular revulsion against the American attack and
increased their credential as the country's main opposition force.
They may not be in a position, yet, to force the ouster of President
Musharraf, but they have certainly forced the government into a
tight corner and now seem to be dictating their own political agenda.
President Musharraf is tiptoeing a tight rope as mounting anti-American
sentiments, coupled with the fall-out of a prolonged and bloody
war in Iraq, threatens to destabilise his pro-Washington regime.
While trying to maintain its cooperation with the United States
in the war against terrorism, his administration is scrambling to
desperately identify itself with the feelings in the streets and
prevent public anger from boiling over into an anti-government uprising.
Massive anti-war protests and across the board anti-American sentiments
have forced the government to carry out a delicate balancing act
by distancing itself from the US operation, while at the same time
not alienating the US or allowing the Islamist alliance to stoke
anti-American fires to an explosive point.
Although short of an out-right condemnation of Washington, the government
has deplored the attack on Iraq indicating a tangible change in
its earlier position of holding the Saddam regime responsible for
the Iraq crisis. Just a few weeks ago, Prime Minister Jamali had
declared that his government could not support a country which had
never come to Pakistan's help at crucial moments. But last week
the ruling coalition joined the opposition in the Senate to condemn
the aggression against Iraq.
Earlier, Islamabad, which is one of the 10 non-permanent members
of the 15-nation UN Security Council, told Washington that it was
not possible for it to vote on any resolution backing the use of
military force against Iraq. President Musharraf informed President
Bush of his government's decision to abstain from voting in the
UN Security Council during a crucial period when Washington desperately
needed Islamabad's support to swing a majority vote in its favour.
Over several telephonic conversations with President Bush, the Pakistani
leader explained that it was virtually impossible for his government
to go against the overwhelming public sentiments against the war.
Pakistani officials maintain that Islamabad could not support the
United States for two reasons: firstly, they were not convinced
about the rationale for going to war when diplomacy still had a
chance, and also because of fears that supporting the war would
provide further ammunition for the Islamists, who were already on
the warpath, to stir up unrest against the government.
Islamabad's decision came as a serious blow to US efforts to mobilise
support from alternate members after three permanent members, France,
Russia and China, threatened to veto any move to rush to war. However,
on Washington's request Pakistan agreed not to make its decision
public. "The US has asked us not to go overboard on this issue,"
said an official. It was, perhaps, the main reason that Pakistan
kept its position ambiguous until the end.
Unwilling to give up on a valuable ally at a crucial time, Washington
continued lobbying hard for Pakistan's UN vote. Senior officials
said they faced intense pressure from the US to reverse their decision.
"The Americans have offered us all kinds of incentives,"
said one official. Some analysts believe the US held out the juicy
carrot of increased economic assistance and debt write-offs in addition
to those that Islamabad had already received since throwing its
weight behind the US-led war on terror. "The position of the
government and the position of the people appears be coming closer,"
said Tanveer Ahmed Khan, political analyst and former foreign secretary.
"Pakistan began by saying it is opposed to the war in Iraq
and now it says, at the highest level, that hostilities should be
stopped. There is a visible bridge between public opinion and government
policies."
Pakistan's shift in their stance on Iraq may have helped the government
to some extent in defusing public anger, but President Musharraf's
long-term political problems still simmer on the back burner. Most
political analysts agree that Islamabad's support for Washington
must be balanced against two powerful forces at home: the religious
conservative forces that have gained tremendous political support
and the military that does not seem to be happy with the war in
Iraq.
Islamic leaders, meanwhile have rejected the government's gesture
insisting that it should actively support Iraq and end all military
cooperation with Washington in the hunt for Al-Qaeda fugitives.
Riding on the wave of popular anti-war sentiments and emboldened
by their newly found public support, Islamic groups have intensified
their attack on the establishment, particularly targetting President
Musharraf and calling him an "American stooge." The MMA
leaders have tried to use anti-American sentiments to vent their
anger against the government's pro-west policies and to gain maximum
political mileage from a potentially volatile situation. "People
will force General Musharraf to step down if he continues to support
America which is the biggest enemy of Islam," warned MMA leaders
who govern the strategically important North West Frontier Province
and share power in western Balochistan which borders Afghanistan.
The alliance, which has emerged as the most powerful and vocal opposition
group in Parliament and politically controls the strategically important
North West Frontier and Balochistan provinces, has grabbed the opportunity
to expand its support base in Punjab and Sindh. Encouraged by the
massive show of street power, the MMA has visibly toughened its
position on the Legal Framework Order. It has rejected any compromise
on its demand that General Musharraf should take off his uniform
and appoint a new "full time" Chief of Army Staff. "We
cannot accept a president in uniform," said Khurshid Ahmed,
deputy chief of the Jamaat-i-Islami. The MMA's position has been
strengthened further in the wake of support by the PPPP and the
PML(N) on the LFO issue.
The stand-off on the LFO has paralysed the newly elected Parliament
creating a serious political crisis. According to the Constitution
the National Assembly starts functioning as a legislative body only
after the joint session of Parliament, which is addressed by the
President. However, the constitutional deadlock has prevented General
Musharraf from inaugurating Parliament even though the new National
Assembly was elected almost five months ago. And with the MMA refusing
to move back from its hard-line position, there seems to be no chance
for a breakthrough in the near future.
In a situation, where only the government and the military are seen
to be allies of the United States, its brazen use of military might
against a Muslim country is bound to fuel an anti-establishment
backlash. The MMA leaders believe that by targeting Musharraf they
can break his support within the military. Most military observers,
however, rule out any possibility of a division within the top military
brass. Though Musharraf currently appears to have the full backing
of his generals, that support could erode if the present political
deadlock with the Islamic forces is exacerbated.
There has been a visible rise in the activities of the outlawed
Islamic extremist groups which are now back in the field exploiting
anti-American sentiments. Those militant leaders, who were recently
freed from house arrest, have reportedly returned to the mosques
to rally the Muslims against the United States and recruit volunteers
for a new "holy war." According to some reports, hundreds
of Pakistani volunteers have enrolled to fight in Iraq after an
Islamic cleric issued a 'fatwa' that it was obligatory for all Muslims
to join "the jihad" against the invasion of a Muslim country
by American forces.
Rising anti-American sentiments, coupled with a surge in support
for conservative Islamic groups, have also had a significant fall-out
in neighbouring Afghanistan where the US-led coalition forces are
locked in battle with the remnants of Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces.
There has been an alarming rise in the attacks by Afghan rebel forces,
which are now united against the coalition. The recent ambush in
southern Afghanistan which left two American soldiers dead and another
critically wounded, and the increasing number of rocket attacks
targeting coalition bases is seen as testimony to the support for
the Afghan resistance from the pro-Taliban administration in NWFP
and Balochistan. In the tribal region bordering Afghanistan, there
is also growing resistance against the hunt for Al-Qaeda fugitives
by Pakistani forces and the FBI. For the first time since the ouster
of Taliban regime by the US-led coalition forces, some key former
Taliban leaders have resurfaced warning that the attacks on the
American forces would be intensified.
Political analysts feel that President Musharraf's choices are severely
limited. "So far he has managed the balancing act quite well,
but the situation may become much more complex and difficult for
the military leader if the war in Iraq is prolonged," said
an analyst.
Tightly wedged between the mullahs and a hard place, it remains
to be seen whether President Musharraf will emerge unscathed.
|