Pakistan votes

IT IS said that the darkest hour is just before the dawn. Pakistan had been suffering a prolonged period of widespread unrest, political or otherwise, that did threaten to destabilise the country at various points of time. The past one year had been especially critical for the people of Pakistan as the country reeled from a series of bloody disturbances some of which also gave birth to mass movements striving for democracy. As the nation votes in the national and provincial elections, people in Pakistan can certainly hope for a new beginning. President Musharraf has promised his nation a ‘free, fair, transparent and peaceful’ election. Although Sunday’s suicide attack in the tribal town of Parachinar that killed 39 people flies in the face of any such claim of peaceful polls and there are reports on the possibility of widespread rigging, scepticism and fear shouldn’t be getting the better of Pakistani voters. The polls are the first step towards lifting the country out of the morass of power struggles and curbs on civil liberties. A lot is at stake for all the parties and players concerned. To begin with, the results of today’s elections — certainly the most crucial in the history of Pakistan — would in all probability be a referendum on President Musharraf’s eight-year rule. His popularity seemed to be on the wane following his decision to rein in the judiciary and gag the media to perpetuate his power. But the leader, who relinquished his army top job last December, seems to be in no mood to quit or throw up his hands in despair. During his recent tour of Europe, he continued to project himself as the only candidate who can bring democracy to his country and offer a lasting stability. And he still asserts that people of Pakistan want him to rule the country. Therefore, it remains to be seen how the president will react if the people of Pakistan vote against him. Is he ready to accept such a verdict and allow his country to relish a fair democracy?
Going by the public mood, it’s Benazir Bhutto who reigns supreme in the hearts of people. There’s no denying that the assassination of the country’s most charismatic leader was one of the darkest hours in the history of the nation. And her scarifice for her country shouldn’t be allowed to go to waste. Pollsters have already predicted a huge sympathy wave that might lead her party to wrest power from the present incumbent. Then there’s Nawaz Sharif who also seems to be back into the fray, vowing to join hands with democratic forces. The new Pakistani army chief has sent a strong message to the nation that the military establishment will not meddle in political affairs. Only time will tell whether the army is going to stick to this stand because, after all, Pakistan is a country that has been under military rule for more than three decades. In the final analysis, with the polls, there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel.




Road of perdition

THE Lebanese Army’s intervention between rival factions in Beirut to break up street clashes raises questions about the role of the fractured country’s armed forces. Despite its reputed neutrality, the army has found itself confronting the supporters of one side in the current political deadlock. The army has so far been seen as neutral in the political crisis but the clashes, between Sunni and Shiite neighborhoods, have raised fears that some might be trying to drag the army, which many believe to be the country’s last hope, into a confrontation with the Shiite which could lead to the collapse of the military. The clashes are only one more problem in the long list of woes triggered by the country’s not having a president since November. Fouad Siniora, the man who became prime minister at a turning point in Lebanon’s history, has perhaps one of the most difficult tasks of any politician anywhere. He has to run whatever government is left while keeping the country afloat. On the surface, Lebanon is barely functioning. Under the surface it’s not much better — a snake pit of sectarian strife, foreign intervention and endless plotting and assassinations.
Lebanon’s strength was in its openness and pluralism. Now the same things are its undoing. The country has become a target for meddling foreign powers, a victim of personal agendas and an arena for vendetta. French, American and Arab initiatives have failed. Electing Gen. Michel Suleiman as president is a reasonable option by any normal standard. Suleiman has been backed by all sides as the favored consensus candidate to take over the presidency. But there are people in Lebanon who won’t listen to reason. They would sooner drag the country into the abyss than let it survive. Lebanese leaders cannot continue calculating how many people each side can mobilize in a show of strength that inevitably leads to ever-heightening tension backed by ever more vitriolic rhetoric. Once the street takes over, it picks up a violent logic all its own. A breakthrough in the deadlock might come about on Feb. 26, the next date set for a parliamentary session to elect a president. An agreement on the election of a president is allegedly being concluded. The March 8 and March14 F ronts and the president will be allocated 10 Cabinet seats each. In addition to the likely election of military chief Michel Suleiman, a new elections law will be put in place. The four most sensitive Cabinet portfolios will be divided between opposition and government while the Interior Ministry will be allocated to the president. But will it work? During the 1975-1990 civil war, the army fragmented along sectarian lines. If it were to do so again, many Lebanese would lose hope of averting another largely sectarian civil war between the factions supporting and opposing the Beirut government. Today’s Lebanon is a shadow of its former self. It is heading down the same road of perdition that is now so common in the region. It seems to have forgotten that freedom is a blessing, not a curse.

—Arab News