“For the rest of us, we are continuously swallowing democracy tablets”

By Dr. A.K. Enamul Haque

with Philip Shaw

Happy New Year.  As I write this piece I am in an airplane flying to Bangkok via Kuala Lumpur aboard Malaysian Airlines.  So I cannot really tell whether it is a happy new year from Bangladesh or from “over Myanmar”!  In any case I wish all of you a very fruitful new year.

Having said all this let us turn to the events of the world in the past year.  It was not all happy faces everywhere!  Ms Bhutto of Pakistan is now dead.  The Hindu religious coalition party is back in power in the Indian State of Gujarat.  The Taliban are getting stronger in Afghanistan. In Iraq peace is still a far cry.   Palestinians are divided in two pieces!  Somalia is still on fire!  Kenya is in crisis.  Putin has promised to become Russia’s PM!  President Bush is set to leave!  Mrs. Clinton has lost to Obama. (not Osama!).  World crude oil prices are up and have crossed hit the 100-dollar a barrel mark! The US dollar is down!

Summarize all these and you can quickly see that the world is not yet at peace!  The promises made to us by our leaders did not materialize at all.  Such a situation often frustrates everybody.  Sometimes they revolt against the system and often get killed by the bullets of the law enforcing authorities.  The phenomenon that often strikes me the most is that our leaders tend to define everything for us.  They pretend to know everything and provide a solution which most of us at times swallow.

Take the example of democracy.  Establishing “democracy” in the world was once on the agenda of President Bush (when he attacked Iraq).  Here is what that democracy looks like today.  In Pakistan, General Musharraf’s government, who assumed power by force, is accepted by the US government as a “just” government.  Musharraf is perhaps the first person in the world who named himself as the “CEO” of Pakistan [as if it is a company owned by US and run by Him!].   His predecessor Mr. Nawaz Sharif was elected democratically but his problem was that he soon fired the Army Chief, the President and also the Chief Justice.  Against such a heinous work Musharraf assumed power.  The misdeeds of Mr Sharif were such that any one except the Government of India did not oppose Musharraf’s illegal assumption of power. [The Indian government delayed the SAARC Summit on the pretence that they are not ready to talk to Him].  The general public of Pakistan liked the overthrow of power by Musharraf. (including Ms Bhutto, perhaps she was hoping that she can now come back to power after some initial teething period).  The Western governments liked it too because the military government does not have to listen to the people of the country and in this sense the old system of colonial rule by putting a pawn in power would work! [Unfortunately these same governments wanted to “establish” democracy in the Middle East].

Soon the soldier-come-humble-servant of the West [Mr. Musharraf] started a “cleaning” operation” [in fact it was a cleansing operation!] and threw Ms Bhutto and Mr. Nawaz Sharif out of the country (for life!). However, the people of Pakistan started protesting against the misrule of the puppy.  Very soon they were labeled as the “extremists”, the “Taliban” etc. etc.  Killing began once again and this time against the common people, who in most cases are simple people who have strong religious beliefs.  Musharraf used their religious beliefs and showed to the western world that he is their person and only he could be trusted.

Meanwhile, the Chief Justice of Pakistan was fired and Musharraf elected himself President.  Protests against the firing of the Chief Justice made the West a little anxious and they soon realized that his days were over.  The fight against “terror” has not ended and so the “terror technique” against the common people must go on.  Ms Bhutto would soon become the princess of the West.  They started negotiating with her.  You must realize that democracy was not at issue here.  Soon Ms Bhutto became the icon of liberal Muslims, a great leader [who was convicted by the Musharraf on corruption charges!] and returned to Pakistan.  Meanwhile, Musharraf hedged his second plan.

Unlike the norm, he decided to elect himself into power for another five year term before the expiry of the parliament which he hand picked [and democracy watchdogs of the world recognized it as a credible election] some years ago.  The outgoing parliament, which has no authority in, the future beyond their five-year mandate decided to “elect” a President for the next five years!  The game was crystal clear to all.  Musharraf is not going to go away.  Protests mounted within Pakistan.  The Chief Justice was fired again!  The election of the parliament was called as a show of normality in Pakistan.

In the meantime, Ms Bhutto negotiated a deal with Musharraf [perhaps under heavy pressure from his bosses in the West] and agreed to support him in return of withdrawal of all [so called] corruption charges.  For her it was necessary to regain her control of politics. However, the Pakistani leader was not fully happy with the deal as he too realized that Ms Bhutto could easily turn the wave against her.  If she becomes the Prime Minister of Pakistan then she could easily bring rules, which will implicate the President for his illegal acts in the past.  On the other hand, he had to swallow the Ms Bhutto pill.

Nawaz Sharif, living in exile, was also charged with corruption but he was asked not to return to Pakistan.  He decided to return to Pakistan but was thrown out of the airport despite the fact that the Supreme Court asked the government to allow him to return to Pakistan and face charges.  Mr. Sharif is a difficult case.  He is not the person of the “democracy lovers”.  Considering this, he is rather a safe bet for Mr. Musharraf.  On the other hand, Ms Bhutto is a problem.  Her return to Pakistan (despite repeated requests by Mr. Musharraf to postpone her return) and her popularity (most of it is a “no vote” against the incumbent president) became a problem for both Musharraf and Sharif.

Sharif decided to return to Pakistan again and this time Musharraf wanted him to be back to ensure that Ms Bhutto did not get a clean slate.   After all they are archrivals. For Pakistani people the choices were quite difficult.  They voted Ms Bhutto out once, replaced her with Mr. Sharif but he decided to kill the institutions of the country – the army, the judiciary and the presidency.  Musharraf came into power to “clean” the system but decided to simply eat the total system!  Ms Bhutto had now come back as a savior and her role was dubious too.  She had a deal with the Western leaders and Musharraf had to accept her return.  Pakistan is back in square one!   No progress – except that fact that Pakistan is now labeled as the country on the brink of collapse and probably the religious groups will take over.  So much for democracy!

Perhaps this feeling had led the West to accept Musharraf and Bhutto as the next group of leaders.  So, why go for democracy at all.  They asked for a compromise!  A coalition government with two leaders in power would be the reality.  But Sharif’s return had complicated the scene.  At the end, Ms Bhutto was killed, she is no more but people of Pakistan will one day evaluate her!  Not much in terms of a liberal Muslim woman but as a leader who was supposed to take Pakistan up and establish it as country which is religious but not fanatic. The people of Pakistan voted her in at her young age to prove this point only.

For the rest of us, we are continuously swallowing democracy tablets.  Hopefully, democracy means the government of the people, by the people, for the people and not government of the West, by the West, and for the West.  After saying all this, however, do not get me wrong.  You might say that here I am confusing the US with the West.  These two are not the same animal!  Nonetheless, many of us in the developing world can’t tell. There is not sufficient proof to us that they are different from each other in terms of their policies and politics.

Pakistan and the West: Not Everything Is As It Seems.
By Philip Shaw M.Sc.

Everyday I go on a 4 kilometre walk.  Everyday.  I do it in a valiant attempt to keep this 48-year-old body in reasonable shape.  December 27th was no different.  I got up, got my coffee, watched the news and set out on my walk.  Little did I know as I walked, events in Pakistan got out of control?  On my return the news was much different.  Benazir Bhutto was dead and many in the west were wondering what was going to happen next.

In short Benazir Bhutto had “juice” in the west.  Many people liked her because she was an attractive Muslim woman in a land where extremists seem to hold so much sway.  Her record to most people in the West was unknown.  She looked good on TV and the optics of that went a long way in the west.

I never cared for her, partly because of her record of corruption in Pakistani politics and partly because of the legacy of what happened in Bangladesh in 1971 during her father’s time.  Needless to say, Enamul’s account of her and the Pakistan political situation is a must read for everyone in the west.  Too many times what goes on in developing countries like Pakistan is interpreted by western minds.  Enamul’s account is a thoughtful, honest account from somebody who’s been there many times.

One thing Enamul didn’t say he knows a little bit about assassination attempts in Pakistan.  In December 2003 Enamul was in Rawalpindi doing some consulting work when Al Qeada made an attempt on General Musharraf using car bombs.  Needless to say they missed him.  However, I remember Enamul telling me how he couldn’t move through the city that day.  Pakistani security had shut everything down.

No matter how thorough Enamul’s account of the West’s complicity in Pakistan’s political instability I do take issue.  When I think of Pakistan’s number one enemy I think of India.  Benazir Bhutto would have complicated India’s relations with Pakistan.  It’s not that they like Musharraf.  However, he has shown some willingness to move on the Kashmir issue, something that has dogged the subcontinent throughout its history.   Needless to say, Indian leadership said all the right things.  The following is a direct quote taken from Newsweek magazine.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said, “I was deeply shocked and horrified to hear of the heinous assassination. In her death, the subcontinent has lost an outstanding leader who worked for democracy and reconciliation in her country.” (Newsweek Magazine International)

In South Asia I’ve always known India carries the big stick.  They control almost everything that goes on.  They could crush any South Asian rival like a bug.  That’s why many people exclaim in Bangladesh, “Why do we need an army?”  However, Pakistan has nukes and that makes them different. In my opinion India has just as much or more influence in Pakistan than anybody in the west.  Remember, nothing happens in South Asia without India knowing about it.

Still Enamul says, “For the rest of us, we are continuously swallowing democracy tablets”.  For those of us in the west, that’s a tough pill for us to swallow.  No, its not because we don’t think its true, its just hard for some of us who live in places like Canada, the United States and western European countries to understand what its like to live in a country without democracy.  In fact almost half of us in some western countries don’t even take the opportunity to vote.

It surely makes it very frustrating for people who live in places like Pakistan where there is so much confluence of global political interests.  They are constantly told to take the “democracy tablets” when in effect their democracy is more like a puppet with strings in Washington and New Delhi.

The question is will it ever change?   At the end of the day do we have American hegemony as Enamul implies?  Or in places like Pakistan will Washington be replaced with Beijing or some other place, which seeks to influence.  The answer is all of the above.  Nonetheless remember, everything is not always as it seems.