Author:
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: June 26, 2003
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=26459
Exiled Pakistan premier Nawaz Sharif
may have been badly mauled politically but he refuses to fade away. Having
left Pakistan under an alleged deal with General Pervez Musharraf's regime,
Sharif and his family are not supposed to either return to the country
or create any political trouble for General Musharraf. However, Sharif
has continued to manoeuvre politically and run his party from long- distance.
Daily Times' Washington correspondent Khalid Hasan interviewed him via
e-mail to ascertain his views on a range of issues confronting Pakistan.
Excerpts:
Q.: A virtual political deadlock
has developed in Pakistan and there appears to be no meeting point between
parties of the opposition and General Pervez Musharraf. How can the situation
be resolved?
A.: The underlying cause of the
stalemate characterising the Pakistan political arena is the illegitimacy
on which Musharraf has tried to base his edifice. How can one man play
with the destiny of 140 million people? There is only one recourse to it
now. Musharraf has to drop his LFO completely, give up his uniform and
step down. This crisis will itself find its way to its logical end: an
end which I clearly see as the triumph of the democratic forces in Pakistan.
As things stand today it is one person versus the whole country.
Q.: There have been calls for a
grand national reconciliation...
A.: There can be no parleys with
traitors. However, the need for a national reconciliation is a must among
the democratic forces in the country. A code of conduct must be defined
for the future under which all democratic norms be respected by the political
forces of the country.
Q.: How can the Pak Army be kept
out of politics now and forever?
A.: In my opinion it is not the
belief of the armed forces in general that the politicians are incapable
of ruling the country. They also do not believe that they have equal rights
to exercise political power in running the government. The top military
leadership has unfortunately acquired a lust for power and contempt for
the constitution, parliament and the politicians. Things can function smoothly
if they learn to respect the constitution and the law of the land. It requires
a concerted effort by all the democratic forces of the country to show
the military its way back to the barracks.
Q.: You have always been seen as
a man of action who believes in doing things. But here you are in Saudi
Arabia for the last three years in a state of passivity. What are you waiting
for?
A.: I am leading a proactive life.
I keep myself abreast and up to date with all the developments of the world
and at home. I am in touch with the people of my country, which is most
important. I read, watch the media and surf the Internet. All this clears
one's vision and assists one to reflect. It cannot be denied that today's
reflections are tomorrow's accomplishments. However, at times prudence
demands meditation and the patience to wait and observe. Remember the oxen
are slow but the earth is patient.
Q.: Reports say that your Pakistani
passport has expired and it is not being renewed. Is that what is keeping
you in the Kingdom? Why have you done nothing?
A.: A passport is the right of
every citizen including the man who has twice been the Prime Minister of
Pakistan. My passport has expired since the last two years. Musharraf perhaps
wants me to compromise - that would never happen Insha Allah. What worries
me is not the issue of my passport per se but the disrespect to law in
today's Pakistan. I am worried about the common man as to what his future
is under such unlawful environment. I wish there was a judge or a court
in Pakistan to take cognisance of this.
Q.: Is it possible for you and Ms
Bhutto to together land in Pakistan to call the regime's bluff and make
its stay in power untenable. Or would you like to return under some sort
of an ''arrangement'' with the regime?
A.: While Ms Benazir Bhutto and
I are unanimous on the need for the restoration of democracy in Pakistan,
we have had no discussions or understanding regarding our return. Insofar
as return by ''arrangement'' with Musharraf is concerned, if that were
to be an option, I would not have had to undergo what I had to. General
Mahmood and his team of senior generals wanted to strike a deal with me
on the fateful night of the coup i.e. October 12, 1999 in return for my
resignation as Prime Minister and for dissolving the parliament. Or at
least I could have taken advantage of the deal offered to me here in Jeddah
through high-profile emissaries from Musharraf. I may add that there are
politicians who also believe in self-respect and honour more then the politics
of opportunism.
Q.: The rise of the MMA and the
Taliban-like agenda it is pushing through is causing great anxiety all
round because many see them as terrorists. How do you see these developments?
A.: The continuity of bad governance,
creation of a political vacuum by forcibly keeping the major political
parties away from the scene and the failure of Musharraf's government to
address geopolitical concerns, has culminated into the natural consequence
of emergence of clerics. Regarding the MMA, it is unfair to compare them
with terrorists. In politics whatever may be one's belief or ideology,
one must learn to be tolerant towards others, giving them the right to
their point of view. It is only then that animosities and indeed extremisms
can be avoided. In the absence of an atmosphere of accommodation, resilience
and tolerance the hardliners get promoted as is being experienced in Pakistan.
Q.: What, once for all, is the Kargil
story?
A.: Kargil is a long story; long
enough to disallow its exhaustion here. However, all events in the aftermath
of Kargil episode especially 12th October 1999 are inextricably linked.
Insha Allah the true version of the misadventure of Kargil shall not remain
a secret like the truth behind the fall of Dhaka. The facts shall be brought
before the public and all those responsible shall have to account for their
deeds. Kargil is a skeleton in Musharraf's closet. For the time being,
I can only say I took every thing on my shoulders to save our army from
a major embarrassment.
Q.: Back in 1988, it is now denied
by nobody, it was the ISI that cobbled together the IGI. Why as Prime Minister
did you not abolish the political wing of the ISI and restore its original
charter which was external security?
A.: Unfortunately Pakistan is a
country where no so-called political government is free to exercise its
writ because the military leadership keeps breathing down its neck. In
such an uneasy environment it is difficult for a political government to
out rightly cut the military to size unless all the political forces join
their hands together. ISI is doing nothing today but politics. It seems
to have forgotten its primary task and is only concentrating on making
and breaking of political parties; it is instrumental in changing the loyalties
of politicians, invading and capturing political offices, rigging elections
and pressurising and blackmailing members of parliament and politicians.
Yes, the charter of duties of the ISI has to be redefined if we are to
safeguard the country from both internal and external enemies.
Q.: In 1997 you were returned to
office with a massive mandate. It is the general view that not satisfied
with that, you tried to grab more and more power, proceeding on the questionable
assumption that you should have your own handpicked men, loyal to you,
in every position. Wasn't it this thinking that led to the showdown with
the CJ of the Supreme Court, the then COAS and not much later with your
own handpicked COAS, now the President?
A.: I have always fought to uphold
the Constitution and the norms of democracy. I have indeed refused to compromise
on principles. If a hardened swindler refuses to give up his conduct, the
solution is not to legalise his criminality. As they say evil rises to
the surface when good men remain silent. It is our greatest weakness, that
people have been able to leave unpunished after causing disasters. Thus
we have those responsible for the fall of Dhaka at large with no questions
asked. Our tragedy from the outset has remained that infiltrators have
been successful in conspiring their ways to the corridors of power through
illegal intrusion on the realms of those actually mandated by the people.
My experience twice as PM has indeed
been mind-boggling. My conclusion is that due to undemocratic powers like
Article 58(2)(b), duly backed by the army chief, the mandate and the ensuing
authority of the Prime Minister is disregarded and they resort to blackmail
through each other to compromise on his constitutional authority for which
he is accountable to his electorate.
This tug of war inevitably leads
to a clash resulting in disruption of the democratic process. It has happened
in the case of the dismissal of the Assemblies in 1990 and then in 1993
when to our surprise, the military took over key establishments like the
TV station even before President Ghulam Ishaq Khan's dissolution order
was issued. The then army chief General (Abdul Waheed) Kakar had no authority
to send the forces anywhere without the Prime Minister's orders.
The ambit of authority of the army
chief does not allow him to meddle with the country's internal politics.
Thus a proposal by General Jahangir Karamat for a National Security Council
over and above the PM and the Cabinet was not simply undemocratic but an
attempted assumption of executive authority under the illegal sanction
of military might. When this was pointed out, he like an officer and a
gentleman accepted his fault and asked for an early retirement. In his
words ''... a lesson for posterity''.
But the abuse of the trusteeship
of the armed forces of the country to make such a proposition and then
to disrupt the business of the country by implications of such statements
continued unabated. Things were not dissimilar when I dismissed Musharraf.
In his case it was basically a chain of events leading from Kargil that
made me resort to such action.
Q.: It has been said that had you
and Ms Bhutto learnt to live and let live, democratic politics would have
flourished and Pakistan would not have been under military rule...
A.: Rightwing political politics
was consolidated during General Zia's regime, aimed at checkmating PPP.
The consequence was a yawning gap between left and right-wingers. This
divide has played a somewhat negative role in the political arena. In the
final analysis it is the feeling of superiority of the army over civilians,
a legacy of the Raj, and the greed for power which goads the Army Chief
to usurp the government.
Q.: Did the Pakistan army sabotage
the Lahore Summit Process in 1999? What were the understandings reached
between your government and that of Mr Vajpayee? Former ambassador Niaz
Naik has made some astonishing claims about a solution having been found
for Kashmir. Isn't it time you spoke as to what the Lahore process was
and what it wasn't?
A.: I can only say here that Mr
Vajpayee and myself had almost decided a deadline for a peaceful resolution
of the Kashmir dispute. Mr Vajpayee's visit to Lahore was a link in the
chain. Had it not been for Kargil whereby all our plans were sabotaged
the issue of Kashmir would have reached a historical resolution long ago.
(Courtesy; Daily Times)
