Hypocrisy of Musharraf Lovers

I have closely observed some people who have been supporting Musharraf since he took over power and have studied their general behavior. I have been troubled by what I see as blatant hypocrisy on their side. Their favorite word and excuse to run away from any difficult argument is the word “choice”. Whenever anyone criticizes Musharraf or his policies the word “choice” is the one that I hear most frequently. Simply put, their argument in most cases is that “he had no choice” but to take such and such step otherwise we would all have been doomed.

Tired of Musharraf Lovers’ (henceforth known as MLs) use of the word “choice” and their hypocrisy, I have taken up just a few issues where I think MLs use double standards.

As they say that change should come from within and our leaders are only a reflection of what we are. So in order to have a better Pakistan we should first do soul searching ourselves, analyze our own behavior, and see whether what we say and do makes any sense.

This attempt of mine is not a profound or deep study of any scholarly level. It is just a simple cobbling together of a few issues that I think exist both during elected governments’ and dictators’ time and compare how people react differently to these issues depending on who is in power.

Argument-1

It was so bad of Nawaz Sharif to have the Supreme Court’s sanctity trampled by an illiterate & uncouth crowd to save his premiership, but it was fine for Musharraf to fire half the Supreme Court over fears that the majority of judges will give a verdict against him or his PCO.

The purpose of both Nawaz & Musharraf was the same; to hold on to power. In Nawaz’s case Musharraf supporters turn red with fury. But in the General’s case they are much more understanding, saying that he had no “choice”. To me, this “choice” thing was true for Nawaz too. He also had no “choice”, otherwise the wise Sajjad Ali Shah would have put him behind bars.

Or is the fact that Nawaz physically sent people over to the Supreme Court what irks MLs the most? Trying to get rid of judges by physically threatening them is not acceptable but doing the same through an executive order is fine? Should the way in which the crime is committed lessen the degree of punishment? Killing by poisoning is acceptable but murdering with a bullet is not?

Argument-2

It was totally unacceptable of NAWAZ & BB to put their own favorites & relatives e.g. Asif Zardari, Nahid Khan, Shahbaz Sharif at top positions in Pakistan and it was all due to favoritism, nepotism, and all other “isms” in the same category. But Musharraf giving hundreds of juicy civilian posts to his favorite generals, brigadiers et al, all over Pakistan is absolutely fine. When BB/NS deploy their own people at important positions then it is corruption and they are just trying to keep their favorites happy. But if any post is given to Generals it is only because they are ultra competent and really deserve the job, and not because Musharraf is trying to keep his own constituency and top lieutenants happy.

A fine example in this regard is of our omni present for-life PCB Cricket Chairman, Gen. (now retired) Tauqir Zia.

If what has happened to cricket in Pakistan in the last three years had ever happened in a democratic dispensation, the PCB Chairman would not have been able to hold on to his job for very long. At least not as long as our current Chairman has. There would have been so much pressure on the elected Prime Minister to relieve him of his duties, especially if the Prime Minister had made one of his own men the Chairman of PCB.

Our cricket in the last three years has gone to the dogs. The whole nation has been crying at this state of affairs and what does Musharraf do? He wholeheartedly praises this general (Musharraf’s own man) in a recent interview saying that he’s done a fine job. Makes me shudder if this is our CE’s idea of a fine job. Going from finalists in the ’99 World Cup to not even being able to enter the second round in ’03 WC is doing a fine job in Musharraf’s opinion???!!!

This sorry episode of our cricketing history also exposes the myth of accountability in the Armed Forces. If being virtually made the PCB Chairman for life is punishment for being an incompetent Chairman then we can say bye bye to accountability forever. And don’t even mention Ojhri Camp.

Argument-3

Have MLs, who never tire of reminding us of what a visionary Musharraf is and how he has saved Pakistan from certain destruction, ever thought of what propelled him to come up with Kargil? What prompted these Generals, who imply that they are so well educated in the affairs of strategy and global issues, to take up an action like Kargil? Especially when Pakistan had recently conducted nuclear tests, had sanctions slammed on it, and was out of favour with both Europe and the U.S. Any idiot in those days would tell you that there would be no support for the Pakistani cause no matter how true we ourselves might believe the cause to be.

Musharraf launched the Kargil Operation knowing very well what the international reaction to this operation will be. But he still went ahead with it. Why? Wasn’t this action against the interests of Pakistan? What prompted him to do this, especially in such an inhospitable international political environment?

A general who took Pakistan almost to the brink of destruction now sits merrily in Islamabad proclaiming himself to be the greatest savior of Pakistan and no one questions him. In my view this is the biggest irony.

Is it that our Generals are warrior-like only when they are not in power and will do anything to discredit the elected government? But in the blink of an eye they become the embodiment of wisdom and rationality when they illegally take over power and then bend over backwards to avoid wars in order to save their plots, cushy jobs, and their iron grip on power. Musharraf could not come to Wahgah to salute the Indian PM. But all of a sudden he become statesman-like and was happy to salute every Tom, Dick & Harry during his visit to India.

MLs never tire of reminding us - at least a thousand times a day - how Musharraf has saved Pakistan from utter destruction by making a U-turn on Afghanistan and siding with the U.S. It would be so very nice of them if they can also remind us-even if only once a day- how he brought us perilously close to an unnecessary all out war with India and had hundreds of innocent Pak Army soldiers killed in vain. Soldiers who were brothers, husbands, sons of ordinary Pakistanis. All this at a time when his own son was sitting pretty in Boston.

It would be interesting to hear from MLs why their favorite general took up Kargil action and why he had “no choice” but to go ahead with that operation?

Can MLs please explain to us what type of a “selfless visionary” would take such an unnecessary step? What was the great hurry to start a useless mini war? And can a man who happily sent hundreds of soldiers under his command to their deaths for his personal objectives and ulterior political motives ever be true and loyal to Pakistan and act in a selfless way?

Argument-4

MLs constantly refer to Asif Zardari as an example of corruption in Pakistan and are always asking for severer punishment for him even though the guy is already in jail for a few years now. But when it is pointed out to them that dozens of people as corrupt as Zardari have entered the NA/PA/cabinet under Musharraf’s watchful eyes, their answer is simple; he had “no choice” but to let these people in so that he could himself hold on to power.

What MLs are effectively saying is that elected prime ministers “have a choice” and it is their mistake if corrupt people enter their cabinets and the assemblies. On the other hand poor, helpless army generals “don’t have any choice” but to let these corrupt people get elected to the assemblies so that our fine generals can hold on to power! This baffles me!

Corruption during an elected government’s time is reason enough to overthrow the assemblies, but the same type of corruption is quite acceptable as long as it ensures that Musharraf stays in power!

Argument-5

Musharraf lovers used to demand resignation from NS/BB after every bomb blast or sectarian killing. But since Oct. 99 they have become so much more understanding and come up with statements like “give him more time” or “law and order cannot be improved in a day - be patient” etc etc. It is amazing to see how all of a sudden their patience level is now hitting the skies.

The question is, aren’t the same statements that are now being offered in Musharraf’s defense also true when elected governments are in power? But the demands from elected governments are quite different. They should resign at once when people get killed. But when the same happens during an all-powerful dictator’s rule, we should give him more time.

If BB/NS could not control law and order situation it was because their administrations were incompetent. When generals can’t improve the situation, it is not because their admins. are corrupt. It is because law and order is such a difficult issue to deal with that it takes ages to bring about any change. Amazing how the criteria change with the change of government from civilian to Army and how general lovers all of a sudden become so patient and see the light.

Argument-6

Nawaz Sharif donating LDA plots to his favorites when he was the Punjab Chief Minister was ultimate corruption but generals grabbing prime land whenever they feel like is not protested against. Generals have distributed thousands of acres of my country’s land to each other and not even a whimper of protest from MLs.

Rangers have killed more than a dozen Pakistanis in Okara on the issue of land and most MLs are not even aware of this. The bullets that the Rangers fire on my people are paid through my taxes and the taxes my fellow Pakistanis pay. I do not want to pay for a bullet that will ultimately find me as a target. I would rather that the Army turn the barrels of their guns for a change and point them to the place towards which we actually pay them to point their guns to. A hint: That place is towards the East of our borders.

Argument-7

BB should be hanged for treason for exposing General Musharraf’s plan to take over Sri-Nagar but Musharraf should not be punished for taking over the country. I believe the same laws that MLs quote in order to make a case of treason against BB and the same constitution that spells out punishment for traitors also tells us how to deal with ambitious army generals who take over power. Why insist on only the selective use of laws?

Argument-8

And one last thing that MLs never tire of mentioning i.e. Nawaz & BB are cowards because they have left the country. If they are brave enough they should come back and face charges in the courts. How naïve can MLs be? The question to them is: Are our courts independent enough to give impartial verdicts free of any pressure from the Army?

NS & BB are cowards because they don’t come back to face charges in the courts that rubber-stamped Musharraf’s - and till date every tin-pot dictator’s - usurpation of power? It is like having a trap set up for a lion and then labeling the lion as a coward because he does not want to put his foot inside and become easy prey for his hunters. I am sure NS & BB will get some “real” & “pure” Army style justice if they ever come back to face charges. BB & Nawaz might be stupid but they are not as stupid as some MLs think.

I have seen MLs change their views as soon as Musharraf changes his. Their mind-set seems to work like this; “We have to support Musharraf in everything he does and every action he takes. So whenever he makes a U-turn we will invariably do the same. And even if we ever have to criticize him we will always end our conversation on the note that he is the best choice we have and is the best thing ever to happen to Pakistan since Quaid-e-Azam, and of course he had no choice”.

And these statements come from the same people who label PPP Jiyalaas as fools and idiots for following and accepting whatever BB says!

I rest my case.