There are growing murmurs in Europe that Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has overplayed his hand under advice from the Americans, setting off the slow demise of Pakistan not only as a democracy but also as a governable country.
A nightmare is shaping up on the streets of cities big and small in Pakistan. Pity its people battered between the hammer of military dictators and the anvil of civilian despots and Islamic totalitarians, blind to their struggle to feed and raise children in safety.
The current mess should ring alarm bells louder than in the past because the pro-American Zardari is losing control of the streets not only to the trained terrorists of local Taliban and Jihadist groups but more importantly to the thugs of his pro-Islamic civilian opposition.
In normal times, there might be reason to celebrate the failure of police and civil administration to put down street rallies opposing a corrupt government. Such failures repeated over time brought the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, Georgia’s Rose Revolution, the Czech-Slovak VelvetvRevolution and the Pink (or Tulip) Revolution in Kyrgyzstan.
But the situation in Pakistan is entirely different. This is a fratricidal fight between the country’s only two significant political figures: Zardari and Nawaz Sharif, his Islamist-leaning opponent. They are caught in a medieval time wrap as they vent their enmity on the streets regardless of the damage visited upon the country.
The Americans want Zardari to step up the armed fight against the Taliban and its supporters within Pakistan, especially as President Barack Obama is sending at least 17,000 more US troops there.
In the last few weeks, rattled by the Swat Valley falling into Pakistani Taliban hands, the Americans are thought to have connived at Zardari betraying the pact he made with Sharif when he became President after democratic elections in February 2008.
Under that pact, Zardari should have shared power with Sharif and rehabilitated key judges kicked out by former President Pervez Musharraf. Instead, he stymied the judges and manipulated the system to disqualify Nawaz and his brother Shahbaz Sharif from standing for political office. He also dethroned Shahbaz, who was Chief Minister of Punjab, which is the country’s richest province and has always dominated all of Pakistan. Thus, he also tried to save himself from corruption charges that the rehabilitated judges are expected to pursue against him.
There could not have been a more resounding war declaration than these acts. Had the gamble worked, the Americans could have persuaded a more powerful Zardari to continue their war on terror openly on Pakistani territory.
But the refusal of the police and civil administration to use overwhelming force to break the back of protesting Sharif supporters has put paid to Zardari’s chances of consolidating power.
The sinister military is keeping out of the way to allow the civilian politicians to hang themselves more effectively. It may enter the picture when the country is on the verge of breakdown to bring stability, but for a price. That price will be Obama’s acquiescence to turning it into a modern force capable of handling insurgency on Pakistani territory and facing down India in a conventional war.
Obama may have to pay that price to avoid the frightening prospect of the entire NATO alliance being bogged down for decades in Afghanistan or having to withdraw ignominiously without achieving any significant military goals.
If he rearms Pakistan, the rapprochement with India will certainly suffer and the US strategic line in the sand against China will be harder to draw. In any case, India is a reluctant partner in keeping a check on China. If Pakistan is strengthened, India will turn openly hostile to the US for domestic political reasons.
The NATO and US troop strength in Afghanistan will soon reach 100,000, only a little less than the operational forces the Soviet Union committed there so disastrously at any one time. Ahead of the NATO Summit in April, Obama has turned Afghanistan into the battlefield where he wants to make a personal mark as the President who turned the tide in favour of America. Without India’s cooperation, it will be harder to pacify Afghanistan.
From India’s viewpoint, NATO success in stabilizing Afghanistan is most desirable. But many in Pakistan’s military see it as encirclement from the West by NATO and its puppet government in Kabul and from the East by India. The choices for Obama could not be more fraught with perilous consequences.