In The Line Of Fire:  A Political Review 

Ahmad Reza Taheri

In a summarized way, based on my understanding, few words can be noted down from Musharaf’s published memoir. The book, in fact, has dealt with Musharaf’s political life.

It would make the readers to realize that being in politics, on its highest stage would create automatic tougher confrontations with different segments of a political society for a politician, so that would leave him/her in a state of frequent critical moments of how to react, manage, and to make proper decisions. 

Well, the first noteworthy issue was Pakistan’s state before presidency of Musharaf, where  lack of a proper political vision in Nawaz Sharif and his thirst for excessive power had led him unknowingly towards a political suicide.

This allowed Pakistan to turn over a new chapter: General Musharaf, with the help of his men escaped the air crash, and finally took the control of Pakistan. Although, in army uniform, but turned out to be a realist politician, who could save Pakistan from severe foreign economic sanctions and perhaps from a military aggression. 

Immediately after 9/11 attacks in America, in his most undiplomatic and emotional statement, Richard Armitage, the deputy secretary of state, warned Musharraf, the president of Pakistan, that Pakistan has to decide: whether it is with America, or with the terrorists, and that if Pakistan sided with the terrorists, then it should be prepared to be bombed back to the Stone Age…! 

This indeed was a visible threat that could have virtually pushed back Pakistan to a total failed state. Thus, the fate and destiny of many Muslims both within and without Pakistan was hanging on Musharraf’s decision making capability.

If Musharraf had not sided with America on the war against Taliban, then Pakistan would have to encounter with a grave and terrible scenario that subsequently might have led her to turn into a form of religious fundamentalist, to say the least. Or perhaps, it could take the shape of a lawless state like current Iraq. But, more importantly could be the fatal strike that could hit and damage Islam badly in the world, even worse than today.

Fortunately, Musharraf avoided all of this. He canceled a probable war between Islam and the West by turning the wheel towards his national interest in particular and Muslim’s interest in general.

Therefore, the fundamental outcome of his final decision so far has been generally positive for Pakistan. One can feel and see the economic developments taken place under presidency of Mushaaraf --- what Pakistan inherited in 1999 and what it achieved by 2005, in short, some figures are listed, as follows:

·                                 Gross domestic product had risen from 65 $ billion to 125 $ billion --- almost double in five years.

·                                 Overall foreign debt had been reduced from 39 $ billion to 36 $ billion.

·                                 Per capita income had risen from 460 $ to 800 $.

·                                 Foreign exchange reserves had risen from a partly 300 $ million to 12.5 $ billion.

·                                 Exports were hitting 17 $ billion for 2006, whereas they were only 7.8 $ billion in 1999.

·                                 Though, import was still more than the export earning, but this rise in imports had been healthy and positive, because a part from the near doubling of demand for oil, most of the rest of import expenditure was on capital goods.

·                                 In 1999, only thirty nine cities in Pakistan were connected to internet, while by 2006, two thousands cities and towns had been connected to it. 

Secondly, in his published memoir, Musharraf clearly had noted down that “they helped created the Mujahidin, fired them with religious zeal in seminaries, armed them, paid them, fed them, and sent them to a jihad against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.  The Taliban too, were not a new post-Soviet Union phenomenon. They were taught by the same teachers in the same seminaries that had produced the Mujahidin.” It is, indeed, what Dr. Samir Amin had elaborated much earlier in his paper ‘Political Islam.’

This clearly indicates that behind every political and social scene there exists material interest: Almost, every form of relationship is based on material interest --- material interest ignores and if necessary break its bans, whatever…!

Furthermore, the book, between the lines, tells us that, factors such as: baseless emotion, tradition, and radical form of religion do not work at all in international politics, and what works better is rationality. 

Musharraf would want to convince the world, particularly the Americans that the war on terror is not that much easy, as perhaps was perceived by the western powers. Pakistan on its own had done its best, but to overcome the terrorism even in Pakistan itself is not the job of Pakistan alone, rather this is to rely on a  true collective obligation  --- more cooperation and assistance from international community in general and western powers in particular is needed to combat terrorism.

Thirdly, with reference to social development, a very fundamental factor that may produce a hopeful result in the future is the policy of social re-construction of seminaries in Pakistan --- putting an eye over seminaries by making them to register the institutions with the government, and bringing about a revolution in seminaries by introducing other subjects such as: sciences. In theory, this sounds ideal, but to what extent it can be practiced in Pakistan is dubious.   

The other matter that can be felt in Pakistan is the lack of a democratic culture. Democracy, as a practice can be difficult in a country like Pakistan, where its constitution has some fundamental contradictions with democracy in its true sense of the term, and where masses are mostly religious and traditional. Democracy i.e. “western democracy” cannot be forced into another country of different socio-political structure. Democracy must take its roots, then it can grow, otherwise, it would lead the country toward an anarchic state.

For countries like Pakistan, as its history tells us, rulers like Musharraf are far better for the good of people than the so-called democrats. Democracy would work in Pakistan only when people themselves prove that they deserve it. To bring about a workable form of democracy, the pre-condition is that each and every citizen must develop in themselves the culture of democracy, which this unfortunately cannot be achieved overnight.

The last, but not the least lesson one can learn from this book is that dictators are different, depending upon their social bases and organizations. There are dictators, whom are dictator in their mental set-up like Saddam Hussain, or kings of Saudi Arabia, and there are dictators, whom are democrat in their mental set up, but a given circumstances make them to act like a dictator, example can be taken of Mushaaraf himself.  The latter ones are more successful than the former ones, because, in such  cases, mental structure is erected on concrete foundation.

كپي برداري از مطالب این وبلاگ با ذكر منبع بلامانع است