MMA unity on the rocks?

BY THE time these lines appear in print the saga of Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) government in the NWFP will have become part of history, unless the Byzantine politics of Pakistan takes one more turn. Chief Minister Akram Durrani sent a letter on Monday evening, advising Governor Ali Jan Muhammad Aurakzai to dissolve the provincial assembly. The governor, constitutionally bound to accept the advice, accordingly dissolved the Assembly on Wednesday morning and was reported to have appointed Shamsul Mulk, a former chairman of Water and Power Development Authority, as care-taker chief minister. Now opens a new chapter of care-taker rule, which may naturally have an impact on the existing political alignments in the province. Of course, the anti-Musharraf All Parties Democratic Movement had all along been seeking dissolution of this assembly, thinking that such a development would undermine the credibility of the President’s electoral victory. But, as they say the barn-door was locked after the horse had bolted, much to the glee of the ruling camp. Article 41(3) of the Constitution says that the Electoral College for the presidential election shall consist of members of both the houses of parliament and the four provincial assemblies. The APDM had planned to have the NWFP assembly dissolved before the presidential election on October 6, but that plan fizzled out thanks to infighting between the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (JUI) and Jamaat-i-Islami, the two main components of the ruling MMA. However, the story how and why the NWFP chief minister did not seek dissolution of the assembly in time to be part of the APDM plan is not as bizarre as it appears to be. There was a method in the madness that apparently underlay the rapid flow of events ultimately resulting in non-dissolution of the NWFP assembly, though the blame game between the JUI(F) and JI continues. In his swan-song to the assembly, Durrani lamented the doings of “these opportunists (who) enjoyed the comforts of being in the ruling party but when their help was needed to tide over a difficult situation (the no-confidence move by the opposition) they tried to isolate me”.
He was alluding to the resignations by Jamaat members who had acted in step with other APDM members. But his job was still secure as the movers of no-trust vote against him were told by their higher leadership in Islamabad to withdraw their challenge, which they did. JUI chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman was bitter over the APDM members’ resignations that had upset Durrani’s applecart. He sees “no future” for the Nawaz Sharif-headed APDM, he said in an interview, adding his party was part of the opposition conglomerate in its individual capacity, and not as constituent of MMA, and would like to review its partnership in the light of “new situation”. Jamaat-i-Islami chief Qazi Hussain Ahmad, too, has conceded that the MMA is facing a “credibility crisis”. However, both the leaders have made it clear, in separate statements, that MMA would remain intact. One would be tempted to ask how come Qazi Hussain, the nemesis of present rulers and a committed warrior against President Musharraf’s pro-United States foreign policy, will remain a close ally of Maulana Fazlur Rehman, who is known to be receptive to persuasion from the powers that be? But for the latter’s active cooperation the regime-saving Seventeenth Amendment would not have been passed, and his protégé, violating the MMA policy, would not have attended the National Security Council session. In fact, JUI(F) and JI nurture two very different worldviews. JUI(F) is power-conscious, with a taste for enjoying power.

Anti-PKK campaign

TURKEY is rightly furious at Sunday’s killing of 12 soldiers, the highest military death toll in a dozen years. According to reports, Turkish troops yesterday pounded suspected Kurdish rebel camps in northern Iraq with artillery fire. And Premier Tayyip Erdogan has decided to allow the Turkish Army to make incursions into northern Iraq in pursuit of Kurdish PKK rebels and their Iraqi bases. This would indeed be a serious mistake and would play into the hands of the PKK. The rebels now have few bases in Turkey itself. During the cease-fire and the subsequent political offensive to win the hearts and minds of Turkish Kurds, Ankara was able to re-establish its authority in major parts of what had once been rebel-dominated territory. Most local Kurds deplored the rebel violence but resented the marginalization of Kurdish culture within Turkey. Much but not all of this discrimination has now been rolled back, not least by the first Erdogan government. There is a general desire among Turkish Kurds for peace, making it hard for PKK rebels to operate within Turkey. The Turks should therefore regard the forced relocation of the PKK’s bases to northern Iraq as both a political and military victory. Invading Iraq would very probably enable Turkey’s generals (already angry over an Islamist president) to score some victories. But politically and diplomatically these triumphs would in fact be defeats. Many Iraqi Kurds who currently deplore the PKK’s regionally destabilizing campaign would be incensed by any Turkish incursion and sympathize with the rebels. Equally the Iraqi government would point angrily to the agreement it has just signed with Ankara, on cross-border cooperation, which specifically ruled out any authorization for Turkish pursuit-and-destroy missions.
It must be hoped that by yielding to the pressure of his politically hostile generals and accepting the principle of incursions into Iraq, Erdogan is hoping to alarm the Iraqi Kurdish authorities into acting against the PKK. But everybody knows how much power the government in Baghdad wields and in what parts of Iraq. Erdogan has given himself something of an escape clause in that any incursion into Iraq must first be authorized by the Parliament, though that often-volatile assembly is very likely to reflect the deep anger of most Turks and demand that the PKK be dealt a severe blow. Nor is there any certainty that now they have received the premier’s approval in principle, Turkey’s uncompromising generals will not go ahead with an attack any way. The bitter truth is that Turkey must endure these grievous provocations without violating what is left of Iraqi sovereignty. It must play the long game and not be provoked into actions that will actually exacerbate and in no way solve the PKK insurgency. And it must avoid doing anything that will only add to the instability and violence the region suffers from on account of US-led invasion of Iraq.

—Arab News