Can Musharraf Bring Democracy to Pakistan? By Andrew L. Jaffee, January 8, 2004	Home   Search   Forum   Terms

I wonder what Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf is thinking today. There were 2 almost-successful assassination attempts against him in the short span of 11 days – just last month. He survived one attack by a few seconds. You would think these events might cause him some level of introspection. So what makes Pakistan’s President tick? Is he really an American ally in the war on terror? Will he fulfill his promise of bringing democracy to Pakistan?

Musharraf was born into a middle class family in Delhi, India in 1943. During the bloody partition of largely Muslim Pakistan and mostly Hindu India, Musharraf and family moved to Pakistan. He lived in Turkey from the ages of 6 to 13 and, very interestingly, considers Kemal Ataturk his personal hero. I say this is very interesting because Ataturk founded Turkey and insisted that the country be modern and secular. Musharraf started his military career in 1961 and fought in the Indo/Pak wars of 1965 and 1971. It should be noted that the Pakistani military has traditionally been dominated by Punjabis. Despite his not being Punjabi, Musharraf rose through the military ranks to become top dog.

When General Jehangir Karamat, head of Pakistan's army, resigned in 1998, then-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif appointed Musharraf to the post. Sharif thought that Musharraf would be a relatively weak military leader since he wasn’t from the Punjabi officer class. Sharif reasoned that Musharraf wouldn’t be able to establish a strong base of support. Boy, was Sharif wrong. He tried to fire Musharraf in 1999. Musharraf responded by taking control of Pakistan and appointing himself president – a move that was unconstitutional. Musharraf claimed at the time that he would bring democracy to Pakistan.

Since his accession to power, Musharraf has presided over tough times at home. The president has had to deal with constant tensions with India, repercussions of the 9/11 attacks against America, the fall of the Taliban in next-door Afghanistan, internal dissent, accusations of arms proliferation, and recently with several assassination attempts against his own life.

In 1998, India and Pakistan played "dueling nuclear tests", taunting each other and putting the whole world at risk. In 2002, the two countries came to the brink of war over Kashmir. Just last year Pakistan tested three missile prototypes all capable of delivering nuclear warheads deep into India. But now Musharraf and India’s Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee are planning to meet in February to mend fences. India and Pakistan issued a joint statement Tuesday which said:

To carry the process of normalisation forward, the president of Pakistan and the prime minister of India agreed to commence the process of a composite dialogue in February 2004.

The two leaders are confident the resumption of the composite dialogue will lead to the peaceful settlement of all bilateral issues, including Jammu and Kashmir, to the satisfaction of both sides.

The 9/11 attacks against the U.S. put Pakistan in a strange position. Remember the Taliban? These Islamist thugs ruled most of Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. They provided a safe haven for Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network. al-Qaeda probably planned the 9/11 attacks from Afghanistan. Pakistan – under Musharraf – was one of the few nations that maintained official diplomatic relations with the Taliban. It was only on November 22, 2001 that Pakistan severed its ties with the Taliban. What took so long? Why did Pakistan have these ties in the first place? The president had to know what the Taliban were up to. Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), most certainly knew. In fact, the ISI is suspected of having supported both the Taliban and al-Qaeda. So what is the relationship now between Musharraf and the ISI? According to Time Magazine,

Since Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf threw in his lot with the U.S. after Sept. 11, he has been wrestling to gain control over the 10,000-strong ISI, a group of soldiers, field agents, sneaks and tens of thousands of additional informers so formidable and independent its critics call it "a kingdom within a state." The stakes for Musharraf and the U.S. are high. Transforming the organization from one that has abetted Islamic militancy to one that combats it is fundamental to both Washington and Islamabad as they struggle to impose moderation on a radicalized part of the world. The preliminary signs are that Musharraf, despite many obstacles, may actually be succeeding in taming the ISI. …

And Musharraf needs the ISI's loyalty for his own survival. Popular anger against America runs high in Pakistan because of civilian casualties caused by U.S. bombing in Afghanistan and Washington's stalwart support of Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians, who, like most Pakistanis, are mainly Muslims. With Musharraf firmly allied with Washington, the fury extends to him as well. Western diplomats say the threat of assassination is ever present for Musharraf. He packs a silver-plated derringer in his chest pocket and always leaves his presidential office in an armor-plated Mercedes, using two others as decoys. The ISI is in charge of "the chief's" security.

Segments of the ISI are part of the internal dissent that Musharraf faces. Some ISI members helped the Taliban fight the American invasion of Afghanistan. Some ISI support Kashmiri extremists fighting against Indian control of the province. Analysts believe this support of extremists stems partially from ISI sympathy for Islamists and/or wanting to maintain a pool of cannon fodder for fighting India. But Time claims that “the ISI has snapped into line with U.S. requests.” Let’s hope so.

And there are other dissident groups in Pakistan. The country is chock full of madrasas (extremist religious schools) which inculcate an early hatred of America in Muslim children. The country also has many Islamist political parties. But Musharraf seems to be taking them on. He is trying to get the madrasas to moderate and secularize their teachings. The president recently outlawed a number of religious militant groups in Pakistan and banned several separatist groups in Kashmir. Musharraf has sent his armed forces into the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region to fight al-Qaeda. Official Pakistani statistics show that at least 500 al-Qaeda members have been killed or detained inside Pakistan; unofficial figures show the number at about 1,500. Some al-Qaeda have been turned over to the American authorities. Musharraf has publicly warned the Pakistani Islamists to be tolerant of moderates (e.g., Sufi Muslims). These are positive steps from the president.

On the negative side, how does Pakistan explain selling nuclear weapons components to Libya? Bill Gertz of the Washington Times believes it’s possible that Musharraf didn’t know about the transfer of WMD technologies, or it was out of his control. What was Pakistan’s motivation for the transfer? Again, Gertz:

…there are really two motivations behind the spread of this nuclear technology. One is the kind of Islamist solidarity, the idea that Pakistan would come put Saudi Arabia under a nuclear umbrella.

The case of North Korea -- it's much more practical -- the Pakistanis traded nuclear technology for missile technology.

Whatever the motivations and whether Musharraf knew or didn’t know is a moot point now. Musharraf has to take control of the situation and stop all types of Pakistani weapons proliferation. But this type of problem is a symptom of a society that is not democratically transparent. So what has the president done to make Pakistan more transparent?

Musharraf has experimented with pseudo-democratic institutions. He permitted a parliament to be elected in October 2002. Yet he has pushed through constitutional amendments, which give him vast power, without parliament’s approval. Some political parties reject these amendments, and parliament has basically been deadlocked for some time. Musharraf recently made a deal with the Islamist parties. He agreed to resign his position as commander-in-chief of the armed forces by the end of 2004. In return, the Islamists grudgingly agreed to allow him to remain president until 2007. CNN.com says:

The vote to strengthen his presidency is being seen by some analysts as strengthening his political position for introducing constitutional changes towards a full democracy…

The BBC commented:

President Musharraf set out his vision of a modern, tolerant, democratic, Islamic Pakistan in an address to the nation in January, 2002.

It remains to be seen how far he can take Pakistan down that route before his time in power ends.

President Musharraf is walking a very fine line. His commitment to help the U.S. in the war on terror has earned him the hatred of the Islamists, as evidenced by the 2 recent attempts on his life. His strong-man position alienates Pakistanis who want democracy. Unfortunately, dealing with the Islamists must come before democracy. Islamism is an immense threat to Pakistan’s stability. Imagine a nuclear-armed Pakistan ruled by Islamists.

Musharraf may be a military dictator, but he’s no Saddam Hussein. Check the historical records if you don’t trust me. I believe he truly wants to bring stability and democracy to Pakistan. In an imperfect world, sometimes you need to take the best you can get. Musharraf is the best that is to be gotten from present-day Pakistan. Just keep in mind his admiration for Ataturk.