Put the past behind: — Call for Musharraf’s trial
RETIRED General Pervez Musharraf has once again united a polarised polity and society. On Friday, as he and his legal eagles were running from court house to the police headquarters, the rest of the country came together to criticise him in the media and on the streets; in the Senate, politicians once again called for his trial under Article 6, merely underscoring the legal woes of the former dictator. In this context, it’s hard to not join this “sound and fury” calling for a trial of ‘public enemy number one’ but to do so would not be just. Indeed, no one can deny the role played by Gen Musharraf in the coup of 1999 and then in November 2007 when he imposed an emergency, deposed the judiciary, tried to censor the media and threw many people behind bars. But was he acting alone both times? In all honesty, he was not.
If the 1999 coup was bloodless it was because it enjoyed more widespread support than Pakistan would today like to admit to. And this is exactly why the emergency was rolled back in 2007 because it was unacceptable to the public at large. More than that, a trial of Gen Musharraf alone would simply throw a cover over his accomplices — the generals who helped him, the judiciary that validated the coup, the politicians who joined him and many others. To hold him guilty alone would simply perpetuate this myth that a military coup and the subversion of democracy is the ‘sin’ of an individual instead of a collective act.
This has even been acknowledged in the historic Supreme Court verdict on the 2007 emergency that pointed out the role played by judges and politicians in upholding undemocratic acts. In fact, that verdict was a sign of the maturity of Pakistani society — it had acknowledged past mistakes and was now ready to move forward. To now focus on Gen Musharraf and press for his trial would be reversal of our society’s evolution. His trial, if the current national mood prevails, will smack of vindictiveness and a desire for revenge — emotions that are best avoided. It needs to be realised that Gen Musharraf’s departure in 2008 and his arrest at present are possible because the door to military coups has been shut than to presume that his trial alone will prevent further coups. Sometimes justice is best served by letting history be, rather than forcibly dragging it into the present. Gen Musharraf too is part of Pakistan’s past and he should be left there.
A provocative deal: US-Middle East arms sales
THE US is reportedly working on a $10bn deal to sell weapons and aircraft to Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, ostensibly to counter Iran. Though approval is still required from Congress, US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel is due in the Middle East to seal the deal with the states concerned. News of the deal came a day after the Iranian president criticised “a foreign presence” in the Gulf, claiming it was a “source of insecurity”. It is not difficult to imagine how the arms sale will be perceived in Tehran. The arrangement will retain Israel’s military edge in the region while significantly boosting the capabilities of America’s Gulf Arab allies. As it is the Gulf is a lucrative market for the US arms industry. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have previously inked similar arms deals with Washington.
Considering the already volatile atmosphere in the Middle East, the deal will only ratchet up tensions in the region. It sends an aggressive signal to Iran indicating that should diplomacy fail on the nuclear stand-off, the heavy firepower will be rolled out. It also serves as a blunt reality check regarding the state of the Muslim world. While there is certainly no love lost between Tehran and Tel Aviv, the weapons deal speaks volumes for the mistrust between Gulf Arabs and Iranians, despite claims of Muslim brotherhood. The proposed deal is a stark reminder of the region’s geopolitical divisions, pitting Iran, Syria and Hezbollah on one side and the Gulf monarchies and Israel on the other, under the American umbrella. In a more rational world, the Gulf states could have put their considerable petrodollars to more productive use, instead of buying deadly toys aimed at their perceived enemies. Instead of raising the temperature through provocative rhetoric and questionable arms purchases, both the Arabs and Iranians should solve their outstanding issues through dialogue on a regional basis, while external players should refrain from fanning the flames of mistrust.
Long-term solution needed: ‘No-go’ areas
ON Thursday, the Sindh High Court, while hearing a petition seeking the recovery of a kidnap victim in Karachi, directed the provincial chiefs of police and the Rangers to eliminate ‘no-go’ areas in the city. This echoes the Supreme Court’s orders to the police and Rangers a few weeks ago while hearing the case pertaining to Karachi’s law and order problems. At the time, it had come to light that localities within the jurisdiction of at least seven police stations contained “partial no-go areas” where law enforcement officials could not enter without enormous risk to their lives.
One can scarcely quibble with the order per se. It is unacceptable that some neighbourhoods should be out of bounds for law enforcers while criminal gangs hold residents hostage by dint of intimidation and threats of violence, particularly with an election around the corner and the additional security concerns it entails. There has been some forward movement on this score during the last few weeks, with the Rangers carrying out clean-up operations in certain localities, arresting a number of alleged criminals and seizing weapons caches. However, to expect a comprehensive and sustainable clean-up of the city’s militant- and gang-infested areas within a short span of time is perhaps unrealistic. The likelihood that any such move would be vocife-rously resisted was illustrated soon enough with an attack on the Rangers outside their Korangi office, which killed four of its personnel and injured three. After all, a host of factors perpetuated over several years have led to this situation: among them, parochial politics, an influx of migrants due to natural disasters and militancy, unchecked proliferation of weapons and a highly politicised police force. This is a problem that will requ-ire both comprehensive action and political will to resolve.