Can Mullahs Be Trusted to Run

a Country?

The recent general elections in Pakistan have ushered in yet another era of uncertainty in that country. Until the final count, there was widespread suspicion that Pakistani president General Pervez Musharraf had already arranged the outcome by engineering defections from Pakistan Muslim League, the party of the former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. According to pundits once in power the king’s party would rubber stamp everything the president wants, including constitutional amendments that he had earlier made to strengthen his position.

Instead, for the first time in Pakistan’s history, Mutahida Majlas-e-Amal (MMA), a coalition of six disparate religious parties, swept the polls in two of the four provinces and garnered enough seats in the parliament to deny a majority government to other mainstream parties. Their success at the polls introduces a new dimension in the US-Pakistan relations and an unpredictable variable in Pakistan’s commitment to the war against terrorism.

The voters were angry with the two main parties, Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League (PML), for incompetence and rampant corruption during their rule. Since 1989 these two parties have taken turns at the helm of the country. Both of their leaders are in exile, Bhutto in London and Sharif in Saudi Arabia but continue to cast a long shadow on Pakistani politics.

In 1997 Nawaz Sharif was returned to power with an overwhelming majority in the parliament. Within three years he ran the economy into ground, assumed dictatorial powers and took on the army. He also made the mistake of firing the then army chief Pervez Musharraf who was at the time out of the country for a conference. When Sharif refused to allow Musharraf’s plane to land in the country the army took over and dismissed the government. Mr. Sharif was arrested and charged with corruption and also with endangering the lives of passengers on board that flight. In a behind the scene agreement, Pervez Musharraf allowed him to leave the country. He and his family now live in Saudi Arabia as guests of the Saudi royal family.

Benazir Bhutto was out of the country when Sharif was toppled. Soon the military government charged her with corruption and issued warrants for her arrest. She lives in Dubai but frequently travels to the US and Great Britain to keep in touch with the party loyalists in those countries. Her husband Asif Zardari, a federal minister in her cabinet, known as Mr. Ten Percent for the percentage of kickbacks he demanded for government contracts, remains behind bars in Pakistan.

In the past Pakistani religious parties have been noteworthy for their failure at the polls. In making a choice between the mosque and the parliament, the voters listened to the mullahs but voted for the politicians. This time however the mullahs were able to convince the voters otherwise. Increasing number of Pakistanis, particularly those along the north west frontier of the country, view America’s war on terrorism a later day crusade against Islam and Muslims. MMA exploited that sentiment by telling the voters that a vote against them would be a vote against Islam. This markedly skewed but simple approach to a complex issue was effective.

MMA is composed of fractious groups that have precious little in common except the religious cloak they wear. They differ from each other on many political issues and even on the interpretation of some of the thorny religious issues like the role of women in society, the interest banking and the freedom of expression in arts and entertainment to name a few. Some of the factions like the extreme right Sunni parties and the sole Shia party in the coalition has waged brutal and bloody reprisals against each other in the past.

It is questionable if they would be able to set aside their differences for the greater good of the country. Equally questionable is their vision of a moderate democratic society. Most of them are hopelessly stuck in a 7th century mindset that glorifies a system of governance that existed in the very early history of Islam. The implementation of an ancient model of governance, noble and pertinent at the time but out of step in a diverse 21st century society would lead to international isolation and economic disaster. Already some of the newly elected members of the parliament and provincial assemblies are promising the enforcement of Sharia law ala Taliban.

Politics, as the old cliché goes, is the art of compromise. How much flexibility would the religious parties have in bending their own rigid interpretation of Sharia? Would they implement in the two majority provinces a Taliban type system of government? Would they hinder the global war on terrorism that America has been waging since 9/11 and in which Pakistan is a pivotal ally? And most importantly would the extreme Sunni factions in the coalition accept Shias as Muslims? The answers to these and many other questions are anybody’s guess.

As of now they have promised to follow the 1973 Constitution that in many ways is a rather liberal document. It is possible that Jamaat-e-Islami, the dominant and somewhat moderate party in the coalition would have a moderating influence on other factions. Its leader Qazi Hussain Ahmad (a college contemporary of mine) is a bit more pragmatic than others in the coalition.

President Pervez Musharraf (and by extension the US) should accept the verdict of Pakistani people. MMA should be invited to form governments in the two provinces where they have majority. They should also be given an opportunity to form a central government if they can cobble a majority with other parties. At the end of the day the mullahs would have to prove to the voters that they are capable of running the country as well as attending the mosques five times a day. Any effort to set aside the election results would push Pakistan further into the clutches of fundamentalism. It might be helpful to remember what happened in Algeria five years ago.

In 1997 the Islamic Salvation Front of Algeria, as a result of winning the first round of local elections, was poised to form the national government. A blatant interference by the military on behest of the West deprived the Front from their legitimately earned right to govern. The Algerians are still paying for that interference. We must not repeat the same mistake in Pakistan. (Surgeon-writer S. Amjad Hussain is an op-ed columnist for the daily Blade of Toledo, Ohio. E-Mail: aghaji@buckeye-express.com)