In the 1970s, President Nixon?s chief of staff, HR Haldeman remarked portentously as the Watergate scandal erupted: ?Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it?s very hard to get it back in.? History proved Halderman right ? it was the beginning of the end of Nixon?s political career.
This description reflected Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf?s action on that fateful day of March 9, 2007 when he sacked, Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary on the trumped-up charges of corruption and nepotism. Those were the heady days when Musharraf seemed like the military general determined to retain all powers in Pakistan for many more years to come. Yet, the unmistakable arrogance of absolute power, in full flow that day, marked the beginning of the general?s end, which eventually came on August 18, 2008, when Musharraf resigned as president of Pakistan.
When Musharraf seized power in Pakistan in October 1999 as a self-styled ?reluctant coup maker?, one of the commitments he made to his people was to build stable, democratic civil institutions and a strong, economically viable federation. This he did after accusing the civilian governments that ruled the country before him of destroying them. He also promised to relinquish power after a viable democratic polity and tolerant civil society have been built. However, after about nine years of unfettered power, he departs the scene for good, leaving the country in a more parlous state than at the time he inherited it.
And, for most Pakistanis, and many people in Western capitals, too, whether he survived the impeachment crisis had become secondary to the issue if what succeeds in ousting him. That signal possibly came from the army top brass which wanted the president to resign voluntarily than a former chief disgraced publicly at a time when the military?s own stocks are immensely down within and without the country. The US ambivalence just helped the army along.
Musharraf began the ?enlightened moderation? project in Pakistan on October 17, 1999 when, in his first address to the nation, he urged the religious right in his country to ?curb elements which are exploiting religion for vested interests and bringing a bad name to our faith?. However, on every reckoning, except perhaps the freer press he has allowed to flourish, Pakistan under his rule has slouched further towards regression, and it shows in the mayhem that stalks just about everywhere in his nation. It is the result of Pakistan?s meddling in Afghanistan since the 1980s, the state sponsorship of jehadi networks in Kashmir, the state?s deliberate fostering of the religious orthodoxy, promotion of a literalist interpretation of Islam, debasement of humanistic values of society and years of marginalisation of progressive democratic forces. Musharraf?s polemical wizardry in his resignation speech could hardly obscure the fact that he has failed to address these high-octane factors.
Musharraf?s troubles with the judiciary marked the popular tide turning decisively against him. By 2007, Musharraf has all washed up as redeemer of his promises of internal democracy based on tolerance and pluralism. More important, his waffling on fighting extremist Islamic terror was fast getting discredited in crucial foreign capitals. The US realised the general?s double-dealings with a particular vehemence after the failed peace deal with North Waziristan militants in 2006 which infuriated the US forces fighting in Afghanistan while strengthening the hands of the very extremists who want Musharraf meet a violent end.
Certainly, the General knew, when the going was good, that sidelining progressive democratic forces and silencing the judiciary was far easier than even a pretense of challenging right-wing religious parties as well as hardcore jehadi extremists. Even as freedom of judiciary, like representative democracy and rule of law, has always been a sham in Pakistan, every ruler attempted to tweak it for self-preservation or self-aggrandisement: Ayub Khan tried to ?pack? it, Ziaul Haq ?Islamise? it, Benazir Bhutto ?fix? it, and Nawaz Sharif ?worked on? it. And for many of them, meddling with the judiciary spelt the beginning of the end of their rule, Musharraf being the latest one.
If further proof was required on how military dictators failed Pakistan, just look at Musharraf?s tenure in power. And, if one takes the reflection of the general in his predicament and humiliation today against the backdrop of the messianic zeal of reform he displayed in October 1999, his story gets all the more pathetic.
Nevertheless, Pakistan?s greatest misfortune is that its ?democratic? leaders are not angels, either. So, here we go again. A military strongman exits the stage to herald the dawn of a new democratic order. Is it now the turn of the bickering, corrupt and autocratic feudal and industrial-class upstart lot to drag Pakistan?s image and democracy through the mud? History will judge the country?s democratic forces much more harshly if they fail the test yet again.
rajiv.jayaram@expressindia.com