Banana Republics

The phrase "banana republic" was coined after the World War II, to portray the fledgling republics of Latin and Central America, where the democratic institutions were regularly trampled to protect the interests of a single American company, having the near monopoly of the production of bananas in the region. Later on, nation states even in other parts of the world, routinely flouting citizens civic rights, showing similar lack of respect for the rule of law, and peculiarly prone to external influence, were dubbed as banana republics.

There were times when General Musharraf was very fond of bragging that Pak army was not like an army of a banana republic, where commanders didn’t listen to their chief. As far as I can recall it has been a long time since Musharraf alluded to this distinction. Perhaps, he is not sure of it anymore. I am not in position to speculate about his benchmarks for defining banana republics, what is happening in Pakistan these days, however, make traditional banana republics look like superpowers in comparison.

On one hand, the mere hint of dissention among the ranks or doubting the infinite competence of military officers result in stern rebuke from Musharraf. On the other, according to tenacious rumours going around, Musharraf is likely to be protected by the US marines in the near future( 1) in the way Afghan President Hamid Karzai is guarded by the Americans., with improvement on the current background monitoring of Musharraf’s security Could it become weirder?

Furthermore, to alleviate the risk of more assassination attempts he would soon move to Aiwan-e-Sadr. The chief of Army Staff scared of travelling mere 12 miles from the Army House at Rawalpindi to the President’s Office in Islamabad, massive security measures notwithstanding! A half-million plus army is unable or unwilling to protect its supreme commander. For his maiden address to the Parliament, deferred for more than 13 months, they had to send even the regular employees of the apex houses on leave, and Musharraf came to the joint session with bullet-proof vest (2) under his sherwani.

A cursory glance at some of the major developments preceding this pitiful state of affairs would be helpful in discerning the existing situation and its causes.

To cut a long story short, in the aftermath of 9/11 there was no option left for Pakistan but to ditch Taliban. Actually, it was wrong to rely on such a retarded lot in the first place.

As a result of September 11, the international milieu in general and American aversion for anything remotely resembling terrorism in particular was doomed to create unbearable diplomatic pressure. Sustaining jihad in Kashmir as usual was out of question. Next logical step was substantial reduction of tension across the Line of Control, if not total normalization of relations with India.

The two above-mentioned factors have arrayed Islamists, once staunchly nurtured by the army, against the top policy maker. Many observers would agree with me that the foremost reason for the attempts on Musharraf’s life was his two major U-turns on Taliban and Kashmir. Unfortunately, it is a question of time that these self-styled soldiers of God, in mufti and khaki alike, will succeed in settling scores. Headless chickens, hatched by the military, are coming home to roost.

So question arises: has Musharraf done anything wrong in this regard? Were there any other viable alternatives?

The answer is no, not at all - every head of government would have done exactly so. Only, the pace of decision making and its implementation would have differed due to inherent inertia of a political process. So, what are we haggling about then? Yeah, he definitely did everything right as the head of government but everything wrong as the army chief. And herein lies his fundamental error, the fatal anomaly that would in all likelihood cost him life.

Had there been a civilian government - without clearly visible manipulating military hands -- no one could blame the military chief for these somersaults. Military could have conveniently taken cover under the “orders from the political leadership”. The same very terrorists would have been trying to blow up the motorcades of the civilian prime minister, leaving the discipline and unity of the armed forces intact.

During the course of the LFO negotiations, the General explained that he did not want to contest presidential elections with other civilians in race because that would be beneath his dignity.3) Now same “bloody civilians” were declaring him dictator, chanting for death penalty to him during his speech that was televised live, and the most he could do was to show them fists at the end. Nasty uncivilized parliamentarians were booing, heckling and abusing the army chief, and he was helpless to counter those vituperative attacks. Some simpletons naively believe that despite working fulltime in coalmines, one can keep his clothes and face clean.

Musharraf was absolutely right when he thundered on the floor of the parliament, Some elements with ulterior motives try to malign the army and other institutions. They do not understand that maligning these national institutions is in fact maligning Pakistan."4) The only problem is that he and his uniformed colleagues steadfastly refuse to concede (or grasp) that it is their own repugnant behaviour that is destroying the image of the armed forces. The elements that hakis readily and wrongly accuse, are nothing more than minor actors in this sordid game. Only fear, never respect, can be extracted through browbeating.

On top of it, a four star serving general in SSG fatigues wearing garlands and gaudy headgears, together with a number of other senior military officers, addressing crowds of government servants gathered under duress across the country for his referendum is probably not the most effective mode for enhancing the standing of the armed forces among ordinary mortals. To be frank, only bangles and ghungroos were missing.

Similarly, when chief of the army staff has a unique (dis)honour to be “validated” by the largest number of absconders, defaulters and looters, elected at his behest through most brazen electoral engineering, neither insiders nor outsiders feel obliged to tender respect. These claptraps have not only eroded the respect for the uniform but also pitched a vast section of civil society against armed forces. This is what I call deception and treason. You are entitled to have a definition of your own.

Though I have long wished and advocated military’s withdrawal from the limelight and its return to the barracks, now it has become an urgent necessity. It will restore a degree of normalcy to the political process and preserve the unity of the armed forces.

The army is shifting its general headquarters (GHQ) from Rawalpindi to the federal capital as part of plan to enhance security for President Gen Pervez Musharraf 5). Billions of rupees of poor masses were first squandered on a senseless referendum to provide farcice legitimacy to the General in the game of keeping hold on power. Adding insult to injury, now billons more will be spent on shifting the whole GHQ his personal concerns. Countries and nations have armed forces to defend them. In Pakistan, the nation is required to protect the sheepish generals. Great.

By the way, why shouldn’t Musharraf also acquire American citizenship as most of his immediate family members have already done? Or does he already have one? Who knows, American marines are just trying to protect one of their own citizens. After all, America is known to take good care of its citizens abroad unlike mango fiefdom of ours. If we can have caretaker prime minister and serving finance minister carrying blue passports then why not also an American national as army chief and president in one?

Quoting from a news report, recently carried by the Chicago Tribune, would aptly summarize this piece: "Before we were constrained by the border. Musharraf did not want that. Now we are told we’re going into Pakistan with Musharraf’s help," "We don’t have enough forces but we can rely on proxy forces in that area," said a military source, referring to Pakistani troops. (7) Over to the good judgement of worthy readers. Draw your own conclusions.

Long live Pakistan.

Footnote:
It is a sheer tragedy that a nation, an army that produces lions like Karnal Sher Khan, a most recent symbol of Pakistani pride and gallantry, who went to the Heaven fighting at Kargil with such courage that an Indian officer, who had seen his valour at first hand [graciously] recommended him for the Nishan-e-Haider, is led by such self-seeking spineless generals.

There can only be two explanations. First, as long as our military officers confine themselves to their stipulated sacred duty of defending geographical borders of the country they remain second to none. It is only their penchant for extra-curricular activities that let them down - badly. Second, the selection, promotion and training of our star officers must be hopelessly flawed. Ostensibly, something seriously wrong happens beyond the rank of Colonel. Otherwise, how come valiant junior officers turn into incompetent, pusillanimous, parasitical monsters the moment they get stars? There must be some special filtering mechanisms at the Staff College, sieving everything honourable out of its participants.

Sources:
1) The Friday Times, Jan 16 - 23, 2004
2) Daily Ausaf, January 18, 2004
3) Editorial, Daily Times, Jan 3, 2004
4) Dawn, Jan 18, 2004
5) Dawn, Jan 30, 2004
6) The Friday Times, Jan 16 - 23, 2004
7) Chicago Tribune, January 28, 2004