Our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan,? US President Barack Obama declared on December 1 as he announced his new war strategy for Afghanistan, including sending 30,000 extra troops there. President Obama?s comment certainly dramatised the changing mood of his administration in executing the war. In return for offers of a broader strategic partnership and expanded intelligence sharing, and non-military economic aid to Pakistan, its seeks Islamabad to pursue the Afghan Taliban based in Pakistan, especially their leadership based in the Balochistan?s capital, the so-called Quetta shura… But the Pakistan army would have none of that demand, for it considers the Afghan Taliban as a strategic asset to counter India?s growing influence in Kabul once the US troops vacate Afghanistan. It leaves the US with limited options, the least attractive of which is expanding the drone attacks beyond the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.
Now, the difficulties the US faces are compounded by a deepening political crisis in Pakistan, as it selectively battles the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan that has shocked the nation with its relentless bombing campaign in its cities. The Supreme Court on December 16 struck down a controversial amnesty deal that has protected President Asif Ali Zardari, a reliable US partner, and his allies from corruption charges. The ruling prompted calls for Zardari to step down and face criminal charges that were shelved two years ago as part of the amnesty.
A court declared illegal the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) that pardoned thousands of politicians and bureaucrats who faced corruption and criminal cases between 1986 and 1999. The NRO was passed in October 2007 by then President Pervez Musharraf in a desperate bid to rescue himself of the political hot water he had got into. The NRO allowed Benazir Bhutto to return from exile, but she was assassinated two months later, leaving Zardari, her widower, to lead the Pakistan People?s Party (PPP) to victory in national elections in February 2008. He became President when Gen Musharraf resigned under threat of impeachment in August 2008.
?The NRO is in conflict with the constitution,? ruled the Supreme Court bench headed by Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary. The court quashed charges against a number of key politicians from the ruling Pakistan People?s Party, including interior minister Rehman Malik and defence minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar. The National Accountability Bureau has started moving applications in accountability courts, seeking revival of corruption references withdrawn under the NRO.
The decision to annul the NRO had been widely expected, but the court went further, ordering restoration of all cases against Zardari, including a $60-million money laundering case in a Swiss court that was hastily withdrawn by Pakistan after the PPP came to power in 2008. It is alleged that after the Swiss released in 2008 the money that was frozen while court cases were brought against Zardari and Bhutto, it was apparently returned to offshore bank accounts in Zardari?s name.
Already weakened by deep unpopularity, the court ruling imperils the political fortunes of Zardari. Although he retains immunity from prosecution while in office, that won?t cover cases abroad. However, the imminent danger for him is that, as the Supreme Court has discarded the NRO, it will open the floodgates of legal challenges on the legitimacy of his election as President. Zardari would be gambling with his political future if doesn?t give up several of his important powers-like the authority to dissolve parliament, dismiss the prime minister and appoint military chiefs-to strengthen parliamentary democracy in Pakistan. A few weeks ago, amid mounting pressure, Zardari had relinquished command of the country?s nuclear arsenal. Pakistan?s democracy would gain if the court ruling yields structural reforms in the power set-up.
Zardari was imprisoned from 1990 to 1993 and 1997 to 2004 in numerous cases, but he was never convicted in any one of them. He and associates declaim that the corruption charges against them were politically motivated. There are grounds to believe that some of the charges indeed were. Political accountability, like any other term associated with modern good governance, is a grossly abused term in Pakistan. It all boils down to the single-minded pursuit of those who are in the government to malign, torment and persecute those who have been thrown out of it. With twists and turns of political fortunes, it ebbs and flows but accountability has never known to achieve anything worthy of all the money spent on investigating it.
The military-intelligence establishment has been at it since 1958, when the army seized power for the first time. Accountability of corrupt politicians, that is its theme song. In the process, it has made a valiant attempt to diminish politicians, particularly leaders of non-religious parties, tainting them all with the brush of corruption. This is a historical given in Pakistan.
But, certainly, it is not that politicians are incorruptible. In Pakistan, some of them are indeed monstrously corrupt. Take Zardari, for example. Even though he has not been convicted, the alleged scale of Zardari?s corrupt activities shocked even seasoned observers. He has been accused of accumulating assets worth $1. 5 billion around the world through illegal means. A global search for assets bought secretly by Zardari found that he had acquired properties in the US, Britain and elsewhere through offshore companies and frontmen. It is alleged crimes of this magnitude that a military dictator sought to whitewash through NRO for political expediency.
Yet, accountability is perhaps better understood as the army-intelligence establishment?s most successful stratagem to intervene in politics, cover the tracks of massive corruption in its own ranks and blackmail politicians in order to divide and rule. It is in this backdrop that the Supreme Court, with its December 16 judgement, has asserted its independence and authority. Having set the country on a new course, can the Supreme Court change the narrative of government accountability in Pakistan? More than $1.5 billion is riding on this question.