Fight for what’s right
The U.S. must stand up for democracy in Pakistan
Jessica Stewin, Volunteer Staff
Pakistan General Pervez Musharraf imposed a state of emergency on Nov. 3, suspending the rights of the nation by declaring a state of emergency and effectively suspending Pakistan’s constitution. The general has not given a date when the state of emergency will be lifted, but the political climate of the country seems all too familiar.
Muslims looking to live by the Islamic guidelines founded the nation of Pakistan and separated from India on Aug. 14, 1947. However, Pakistan has never had a true democratic government. Instead, democratic uprisings have been continuously crushed by oppressive military governments. Military governments often rely on the “theory of necessity,” passed down by the Pakistan Supreme Court in 1954, which sets the judicial precedent for dismissal of the government and the parliament by the president. The theory has remained and enables military takeovers to undermine any democratic dreams of the masses.
The old theory, however, is not the only factor enabling such regimes. American gestures of aid seem to come at rather inopportune moments for democratic hopefuls. In 1953, the American government launched a large-scale food and military aid effort into Pakistan. It is notable that the aid followed just months after the dismissal of the country’s first civilian government. Yet two decades later, when an elected Pakistan government came to power in 1972, the two governments conflicted. However, when another military regime took over in 1977 (and agreed to fight soviets in Afghanistan) billions of dollars flooded into Pakistan.
Military action thus far has not focused on the Islamic militants but on the activism of the Supreme Court.
Recently, the United States announced its concern that Musharraf has not put a time limit on the country’s state of emergency — but has not said what will happen should Musharraf refuse to set a date. President George W. Bush has encouraged that the rights of Pakistanis should be restored. This encouraging cheerleading from Bush is a huge change of pace from the president who launched the war on terror. Like a new-age-hippie parent, he encourages fair play, but with no hint of punishment for disobedience.
Parliamentary elections are scheduled for January 2008, but with the current state of affairs it is doubtful that democratic elections will ever take place. The country is outraged, and rightfully so. The White House has acknowledged this, in an unnecessary confirmation of the obvious by spokeswoman Dana Perino. Perino said, “In order to have free and fair elections, they can’t be held under a state of emergency. We don’t see how it is possible.” A dozen U.S. human rights groups have urged Bush to stop military aid to Pakistan if Musharraf does not end his emergency rule and release the politicians, jurists, and other civil rights activists that were taken into custody. Two prominent Pakistani layers reported that more than 20,000 lawyers have been put in detention following the declaration of a state of emergency. Former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto was first put under house arrest just hours before the beginning of one of the mass rallies he had called in order to protest the emergency rule. The country’s major voices for democracy are being suppressed. This should be more than a concern, and encouragement is far too small of a response from the U.S.
Encouragement for fair play is the only action being taken, though, and I would never suggest it would have anything to do with the nuclear warheads that Pakistan possesses. The U.S. government has said these are not a concern. It’s not a concern for them and so clearly not a concern for anyone.
Musharraf justified the declaration of a state of emergency on the grounds that Islamic militancy is a huge threat to Pakistan. Jihadists have seized control of swaths of northwestern Pakistan and deadly suicides have been launched, mainly on security forces. Hundreds have died in the violence this year. However, the state of emergency seems less focused on the Islamic militants and more on the activism of the Supreme Court.
Mohammad Akram Sheikh, past president of the bar of the Supreme Court of Pakistan has asked for “President Bush to kindly withdraw his recognition.” Sheikh said that, “President Musharraf is not part of any solution; he is part of the problem. Let those in civil society chose their own leader for regulating their own affairs.” This is a concept the U.S. government, being a democratic nation itself, would surely understand. Democracy creates citizens with a voice, with the power to elect their representative so that their issues are looked after.
So why has Bush not taken action? He is willing to storm the gates in only a select few nations, where the outcome will have a direct benefit to the United States. But for those who he deems worthy he allows their regimes to reign, letting democracy slide.
Jessica Stewin is a University 1 student.
