|
Though
President Musharraf's latest sojourn to the United States may have
reinforced his status as America's favourite dictator, his standing
as a credible leader has hit a new low. During his inordinately
long stay in New York, for the United Nations' General Assembly
session, and to promote his newly published autobiography, Musharraf
became the focus of an unprecedented media blitz, even appearing
on Jon Stewart's "Daily Show," a satirical evening news
programme - the first head of state to do so. For America, Musharraf
remains an ally of convenience, at least in the war against Al-
Qaeda.
But
his credibility, as a man who can be trusted, has been critically
exposed when confronted with the paradox between his rhetoric and
reality. His efforts to promote himself as a standard bearer in
the fight against Islamic extremism fell flat in the face of his
policies at home.
Over
the seven years since he seized power, in what he often describes
as " counter-coup," Musharraf has turned into a crafty
politician. The dramatic turn of events in the aftermath of 9/11
had thrown him to the centre of international politics, as the head
of a front-line state in the US war on terror. From an international
outcast for his support to the Taliban and the man who facilitated
jihadi networks, Musharraf became a key partner in the US strategy
in the region. Musharraf has thrived in his new found status, but
his position is becoming increasingly tenuous as he walks a thin
line between his support for the US and his government's continuing
links with the Islamists.
Musharraf's
chutzpah was on full display when he cited Talibanisation as a bigger
threat than Al-Qaeda during his three-week-long trip to Europe and
the United States. "The west may have missed a shift in the
'center of gravity' of terrorism, from Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda
to the Taliban," he warned in his speech before the European
Parliament in Brussels. " The real danger...lies in the emergence
and further strengthening of the Taliban," he said.
Ironically,
his pronouncement came just a week after Pakistani authorities signed
a controversial truce agreement, ending a three-year-long military
campaign against the militants in troubled North Waziristan. On
paper, the military's deal was with the "tribal leaders,"
but in effect it has empowered the local Taliban who have been actively
involved in the insurgency across the border in Afghanistan. The
deal relieved the pressure on the army, and so, on Musharraf.
After
the accord was signed on September 5, Pakistan released hundreds
of tribal prisoners captured during the military campaign and returned
their weapons. The militants, in turn, agreed that they would stop
crossing into Afghanistan to attack coalition forces.
But far from taming cross-border violence, the truce appears to
have contributed to a deterioration in the eastern Afghan border
provinces of Khost, Paktia and Paktika. U.S and Afghan military
officials say that the truce has made it easier for militants to
operate in the region and to send weapons and fighters across the
border. There have even been reports that the Taliban leader in
Afghanistan, approved the peace deal. Mullah Dadullah, a Taliban
commander leading the insurgency against NATO forces in the southwestern
Afghan provinces of Kandahar and Helmand, told Pakistani journalists
that the truce in North Waziristan had their support.
Militants
have set up offices in Miramshah, the regional centre of North Waziristan,
under the banner of the Department of Vice and Virtue, with the
aim of curbing what they see as antisocial activities. A shura,
or religious council, was created to run the regional administration
and mete out justice according to a strict interpretation of Sharia.
Taliban militants vowed to enforce harsh punishments for any digression
and told local families to report robberies, car thefts and murders.
Mosques issued warnings against any defiance.
Musharraf,
however, insists that the deal has blocked Talibanisation. "There
will be no Al-Qaeda activity in our tribal [area] or across the
border in Afghanistan," Musharraf declared at a joint press
conference with Bush in Washington. "There will be no Taliban
activity. . . . There will be no Talibanisation."
Musharraf
has tried to project himself as indispensable to the west and as
a man who could stop Pakistan's drift into religious extremism.
In an interview with BBC 4 radio during his visit to London, Musharraf
warned that the west would be "brought to its knees" without
his government's cooperation in the so-called war on terror. "If
we were not with you, you won't be able to manage anything,"
he declared.
Musharraf used the US trip to sell his book, In the Line of Fire,
published by an American company, Simon & Schuster.
It is rare for a sitting head of state to publish his autobiography.
The task is better left to retirement. Then why did Musharraf, under
siege on every side, choose to do so? The answer is clear. He wanted
to rebut his detractors: those in Pakistan who accuse him of being
an American lackey, and those in the west who think he has not completely
severed his ties with the militants. But his precarious balancing
act has provoked more fire from all sides. His doublespeak is more
apparent than ever.
Indeed,
the book is a skewed interpretation of events and has predictably
provoked intense controversy, both at home and abroad. Musharraf
has ignited headlines all over the world with his account of his
role in Pakistan's war on terror, but he has not been telling the
full story. There is a huge gap between what he professes and what
he does. While speaking of his desire for eradicating religious
extremism from society, he ignores his government's continued links
with Islamic extremists.
Not
surprisingly, he has been accused of distorting facts to justify
his various actions and policies. But the slip is too obvious. The
book is too much about himself. A man of destiny, a natural leader
and best soldier, he claims. This is not a modest text. The authoritarian
mindset is apparent. Many revelations seem reckless. He shows no
understanding of history and social dynamics - or maybe that is
too much to expect from a former commando turned politician.
Musharraf
justifies the Kargil incursion, which had brought Pakistan to the
brink of war with India. "Considered purely in military terms,
the Kargil operations were a landmark in the history of the Pakistan
army," is Musharraf's claim about a conflict that is generally
regarded as the worst debacle in the country's history. He insists
that the ceasefire was a mistake and Pakistan was in an advantageous
position to negotiate a better deal with India. He repeated his
argument that India was not in a position to start an all-out war
with Pakistan. Musharraf remains under the illusion that the incursion
highlighted the Kashmir issue and had ultimately forced Indian leaders
to come to the negotiating table. "I would like to state emphatically
that whatever movement has taken place so far in the direction of
finding a solution to Kashmir, is due considerably to the Kargil
conflict," he says about the military adventure, which most
defence analysts agree caused a serious blow to Pakistan's Kashmir
cause.
The
most controversial part of Musharraf's book stems from his claim
that after the September 11 attacks, Richard Armitage, then the
US deputy secretary of state, threatened that America would bomb
Pakistan "back to the Stone Age," if Musharraf did not
withdraw his support for the Taliban. The comment, according to
the author, was made during a meeting with the ISI chief. "This
was a shockingly barefaced threat, but it was obvious that the United
States had decided to hit back , and hit back hard," said Musharraf.
The
situation became quite ugly when Armitage categorically denied having
said that. " I didn't have the authority to make such a threat,"
Armitage retorted. There is no evidence anywhere else to substantiate
Musharraf's claim. Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed met Armitage on September
12 and 13, and according to the minutes of the meeting, the tone
of the US official was terse, but there was no mention of him delivering
the threat. In fact, General Mahmood surprised Armitage by acceding
to seven points that the US required Pakistan to comply with, which
also included providing airbases for American troops to launch attacks
on Afghanistan. Musharraf is also wrong when he says that he did
not allow American forces to operate from Pakistani soil. Hundreds
of American troops were based at Jacobabad airbase for almost 18
months after the fall of the Taliban regime. It is quite apparent
that his tall claims were meant for domestic consumption, but the
ploy backfired. That revelation has not appeased his critics, as
some politicians and former generals reacted contemptuously, maintaining
that he is Bush's lackey.
Musharraf's
claim that he is striving to make Pakistan a moderate Muslim country
received a serious blow when his government backtracked on the promise
to reform the controversial Hudood laws dealing with rape and adultery,
which victimise women.
Pakistani
and international human rights groups have long demanded repeal
of the existing laws that criminalised all extra-marital sex. A
woman who fails to prove that she was raped could then be charged
with adultery under the same legislation. The Hudood laws made it
almost impossible to prosecute rapists. Hundreds of women are jailed
every year under the notorious laws, which make a rape victim liable
to prosecution for adultery if she fails to produce four male witnesses.
The
government had proposed to replace the controversial laws with a
new 'Protection of Women Bill' that placed the crime of rape within
the country's secular penal code. The bill would, for the first
time, allow rapists to be tried under civil law. The move was supported
by liberal political parties and women's rights groups. But the
ruling party backtracked on its promise after the MMA threatened
to quit the parliament in protest. The government has also ceded
to the demand by the Islamists to let the rape victims choose between
either prosecuting suspects under the four-witness rule or under
Pakistan's civil penal code.
Pakistan
today, appears to be in a greater political mess than when Musharraf
seized power. He has delivered to the US several hundred Al-Qaeda
operatives, including the masterminds of the September 11 attack.
There is, however, little evidence of him showing the same kind
of resolve when it comes to dealing with Islamic extremism at home.
A major reason for Musharraf's failure to root out extremism and
Islamic militancy is lack of consistency in his policies.
Musharraf
may have stolen the media limelight in America, but his policies
have come under increasing attack, questioning his sincerity to
stamping out extremism at home.
|