General Pervez Musharraf was dressed for the occasion.  Casting off his military uniform, he had donned a black sherwani as he took oath to his new office amidst much pomp and show at Islamabad’s grand, white marble presidential palace.  The atmosphere in the Darbar hall was visibly sullen.  The cabinet ministers and the senior government officials present at the ceremony had received the information regarding Musharraf’s imminent oathtaking through the morning newspaper.  Ambassadors from the US and European countries were conspicuous by their absence.  “It is almost a second coup,” commented a senior official.

            For many Pakistanis who have spent the major part of their lives  under the shadow of military rule, it was deja vu all over again.   Following in the footsteps of previous military rulers, General Pervez Musharraf appointed himself the country’s president replacing Rafiq Tarrar, the last vestige of the ousted elected government.  The fate of the parliament, which had remained under suspension for almost two years, was also sealed through an administrative order.

            The General, who often described himself as a “reluctant coup maker,” now wears three hats, strengthening his control over all the levers of power.  Despite seizing the presidency, he has made it clear that he will not relinquish his position as chief of army staff, which is his main power base, after his tenure expires in October this year and will continue to remain the country’s chief executive.  He justified the move, maintaining it was necessary to ensure political stability and harmony.  However, his contention has not convinced  most political observers who agree that it will lead the country into an indefinite arbitrary rule and a consolidation of military dictatorship.

            General Musharraf’s ascension to the presidency is no surprise.  He had indicated on several occasions that he intended to “shed his ambiguous role of chief executive.”  Nevertheless, the announcement was a bolt from the blue.  The general kept the decision secret until the last day.  According to highly placed official sources, only three generals, ISI chief Lt.General Mahmood Ahmed, Chief of General Staff, Lt. General Yousuf and  Lt. General Ghulam Ahmed, were involved in the decision.  The corps commanders were informed of the decision only a day before his swearing-in.  “The timing was a highly guarded secret and even the cabinet was not taken into confidence,“  said a senior official.  Meanwhile, Pakistan’s foreign minister, Abdul Sattar was visibly embarrassed when he heard about the development back home as he came out of a meeting with US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, in Washington.

            The unprecedented secrecy leading up to the oath-taking has fuelled speculation about differences among the senior military officers.  Some recent changes at the senior command level indicate that General Musharraf is not having a smooth ride.  A couple of months ago, Lt. General Imtiaz Shaheen, one of the most outspoken officers who strongly advocates the military’s early return to the barracks, was removed from the important post of corps commander Peshawar after serving there for just a few months and sent to the headquarters.

            Similarly, some hard-line generals do not seem very happy with General Musharraf’s liberal and pragmatic views on both domestic and foreign policy issues.  Military officials, however, deny any division within the top ranks.

            With a series of changes in the army high command, General Musharraf now appears to have emerged as a sole strongman.  The junta that has ruled the country since the coup appears to have changed in complexion, thereby affording him greater assertiveness. The top decision-making group at the GHQ now comprises Lt. General Mahmood, Lt. General Yousuf, and Lt. General Ghulam Ahmed.

            Except for Lt General Mahmood, who was one of the original coup makers, the other two are new to the group.  Further changes are in offing in a few months time.  There are reports of nomination of a vice chief of army staff.  However, with Lt. General Usmani’s appointment as deputy chief of army staff, there appears no emergency for General Musharraf to create a new post.  There is much speculation in the press about Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz being appointed prime minister.  Highly placed sources confirm that although the issue was under discussion for quite some time, the idea has now been shelved and Aziz may at the most be given the status of a senior minister.

            Significantly, the latest development came just 15 months before the Supreme Court deadline for elections, raising serious questions about the restoration of democracy.  Apparently, General Musharraf’s rise to the presidency is part of a strategy to devise a permanent political role for the military and pave the way for a military backed quasi-democratic set-up by October next year.  It is quite clear that the generals do not believe in transferring power, but sharing power with the elected civilian representatives .

            General Musharraf has vowed to uphold the Supreme Court ruling and hold elections within the stipulated time.  However, he has also hinted at effecting some major changes in the Constitution   aimed at strengthening the powers of the president and providing a dominant political role for the National Security Council comprising the chief of the armed forces.  In previous political set-ups, the president played a largely ceremonial role and all powers were concentrated in the office of the prime minister.  Given the constitutional changes in the offing however, most political observers fear that the parliament will function as a rubber stamp under General Musharraf’s guided democracy and intensify political polarisation.  Such an arrangement has already been rejected by almost all the political parties.

            There was some speculation that after ensuring a dominant role for the military and consolidating himself as an all-powerful president, General Musharraf may decide to call parliamentary elections much before the October 2002 deadline.  However, the general has strongly denied the rumours.  Meanwhile, the local government elections which will be over by August this year may give further boost to the regime’s position and reinforce its confidence enough to install a quasi-civilian set-up with a parliament placed under several constraints.  Some sources believe the elections can be held as early as March with a view to win international legitimacy.

            General Musharraf’s assumption of the presidency provoked a strong reaction from the United States and other western countries, who believe the move will lead Pakistan further away from democracy.  The development came just as the Bush administration was sending signals indicating its desire to improve relations with Pakistan and lift some of the sanctions placed on it following the nuclear tests.  “That process may be stalled at least for the time being,” commented a senior official.  It is quite apparent that the new US administration has prioritised the democracy issue, linking it to improving relations with Pakistan.  The Commonwealth has also warned of a tougher stance vis-a-vis Pakistan when the heads of states meet in Brisbane in October this year.  The Commonwealth suspended Pakistan’s membership after the coup, demanding a swift return to democracy.  An early election may thus help the regime win some badly needed international legitimacy.

            However, the general disapprobation over Musharraf’s latest move is unlikely to affect the IMF and World Banks’s financial support to Pakistan.  The multi-national agencies appear quite impressed by the regime’s economic reforms and its effort to bring about fiscal discipline.  “A silent revolution is taking place in Pakistan,” maintains a high-ranking World Bank official in Washington.  There has been a visible increase in World Bank funding to Pakistan.  Similarly, the IMF, despite reservations on certain issues, appreciates the economic policies set in motion by the military government.  Pakistan hopes to get IMF’s Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) by the end of this year.  Low economic growth aside, most economic analysts believe that the regime has stablised the economy.  But it will, nevertheless, take a long time for the economy to take off.

            On the domestic front, General Musharraf does not face many problems as the political parties have so far failed to mobilise public support for their struggle for the restoration of democracy.  The 15-party Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy (ARD) has remained a non-starter with little mass credibility for its component parties. With the split having rendered the Pakistan Muslim League ineffective, the PPP is the only major party left in the alliance.  Most of the political parties outside the alliance are not prepared to take on the military regime.  Sporadic agitation by the MQM and Sindhi nationalist parties has not given it much cause for concern.

           General Musharraf’s donning of his new hat has come ahead of his crucial summit meeting with the Indian leaders next month. It will be the first high level contact between the two estranged nuclear weapon states after May 1999 when the conflict in Kashmir pushed them to the brink of a full-scale war.  Some analysts believe that his increased power may give the general more confidence with the Indian leaders.  “The summit may have been one of the factors in Musharraf’s hasty decision as he wants to meet the Indian leaders with a more credible standing,” says an official.

            For General Musharraf, in order to prevent Pakistan from economic collapse, it is important to ease tensions with India.  He has always expressed his willingness to go to Delhi for talks and his positive response to Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s invitation has not come as a surprise.  In an unprecedented move, he capped Pakistan’s defence expenditure and declared that he was going to Delhi with an open mind.  In a recent interview on

Pakistan television, he declared, “Pakistan’s economy is not compatible with its defence capability.”  Massive expenditure on defence, which still stands at 20 per cent of the national budget despite capping this year, causes a major drain on economy. Pakistani officials agree that de-escalation of tensions with India is necessary for economic development.

            However, attaining this objective will not be an easy task.  The General provoked the ire of Islamic fundamentalists when he warned them against religious terrorism and militancy and tried to restrict  the activities of militant groups, many of whom have been fighting the Indian forces in  Kashmir.  His pragmatic approach may not go down well either with some of his conservative and hard-line generals who want the regime to continue its support to the militancy in Kashmir and believe in the policy of “bleeding India.” These officers, a number of whom have served in the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency which has close links with the Islamic militant groups, contend that it is the “success of the jihad” that has forced India to come to the negotiating table and they thus oppose any flexibility in Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir.  As self-professed custodians of the “ideological frontiers” of Pakistan, they traditionally form the hard-line lobby on the Kashmir and nuclear issue.  “The two decades of war in Afghanistan and conflict in Kashmir have produced men at arms who consider themselves soldiers of Islam,” says Dr. Mohammed Waseem, a professor at the Quaid-i-Azam University.  “These hawks in uniform also include retired military officers who support the Taliban’s cause in Pakistan.  They seek out ideological allies among the Islamic political parties and militant groups actively engaged in ‘jihad’ in Kashmir.”                    

            These groups, which have grown in strength over the years and in many cases are heavily armed, oppose normalisation of relations with India without the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.  “We want the talks to be focused exclusively on Kashmir,” said Amirul Azeem, a central leader of the right wing Jamaat-i-Islami.  “Any flexibility on the issue will amount to betraying the jihad.”  Some other leaders of Islamic militant groups have warned General Musharraf of dire consequences if the military regime attempted to withdraw its support to the Kashmiri insurrection. They have called for vigilance against a possible “sell-out” to India.

            However, despite the growing influence of the Islamists in ranks of the military, the majority of army officers are of a liberal and moderate bent of mind, espousing essentially pragmatic views on issues concerning internal and external security.  “Most of these officers come from urban middle class backgrounds and profess more enlightened views on political and foreign policy issues,” says Dr. Mohammed Waseem.  They generally support a normalisation in relations with Delhi.  Apart from them, civil bureaucrats and business groups are looking forward to the summit with cautious optimism.

            The business community in particular, sees the prospect of increased trade as a consequence of improved relations with India.  “We hope the summit meeting will help in easing tensions and paving the way for improved trade relations between the two countries,” says Yasin Lakhani, a leading stock broker.  “Their logistical proximity makes increased trade beneficial for both nations.  While the legal trade between India and Pakistan may be minimal, smuggling or illegal trade between the two is a booming one billion-dollar industry.  Legalising it will naturally lead to enormous financial benefits,” said Lakhani.  While the small peace lobby is obviously enthusiastic about the summit, they have yet to establish themselves as a visible and articulate entity that can counter the hard-line Islamic groups.

            Closely watched by both hard-liners and peaceniks with often contrary agendas, General Musharraf walks a tightrope as he prepares for talks with the Indian leaders.  He will be under scrutiny  not only by the conservative militant Islamic groups, but also by the hard-line generals.  Although he appears stronger with his ascension to the presidency, the growing domestic opposition to the perpetuation of military rule has weakened his position to make peace with arch rival India.  At the same time, much is riding on the success of the talks in Delhi.  Pakistani officials maintain that the compulsion on Pakistan not to let the talks fail is enormous as Pakistani leaders have constantly been calling for a negotiated settlement of disputes with India.  However, the room to manoeuvre is restricted by the long-standing, thorny Kashmir issue which has been the major cause for the festering conflict in the region.  India has invited General Musharraf for talks after withdrawing its precondition that Pakistan should first put an end to alleged infiltration of Islamic militants into Kashmir.  “Although this has removed the main obstacle in the resumption of talks, it has also put the onus on Pakistan to come up with some offer for de-escalation of tension,” said a foreign ministry official. 

            The major obstacle confronting Pakistan is that they cannot concede much on Kashmir because of pressure from hard-line elements at home.  Pakistan may restrict the activities of the militants using Pakistan as a base, provided India agrees to reduce its forces in Kashmir.  The worst scenario for Pakistan would be if the talks collapse.  “It will be a step forward if the two leaders agree to continue the negotiations,” said a senior  official.  All eyes are on Musharraf.  Will he succeed in his first mission after assuming the role of president?