No Mr. President -- you shouldn't have said these things

The President's first proposition is purely political and in one sense plainly true: Punjab houses some 63 per cent of Pakistan population and if Punjabis settled in NWFP, Balochistan and Sindh are added to the tally, Punjabis will constitute something like 70 per cent or more of Pakistan population. Foolish will be the government that ignores Punjab's opinions or demands.

The categorical nature of President's remark however goes well beyond normal political prudence. He has emphasised Punjab's position in a more profound and radically different category than mere numbers. What is so extraordinary about Punjabis? What one meets in civilian life is a plethora of opinions among Punjabis; there is a rich plural intellectual life insofar as they concern themselves with public affairs. Why then did he hold up Punjab as the key to Islamabad's decision-making?

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Is Punjab some kind of a check on others over and above their numerical strength that is ordinarily decisive in day-to-day affairs? Are other provinces being told to go to Punjab first and win them over before you can decide on anything big in their areas? Well one recognises nothing special about Punjabis other than their numbers. Indeed, there are few complaints against Punjabis qua Punjabis. They are so warm-hearted and friendly, normally well-intentioned. The only complaint one has long entertained against Punjabis is that they are politically so docile and most politically aware Punjabis one knows have concurred in the view.

Why then is President so overawed by Punjab and Punjabis? Didn't Punjabis in general accept his rule in October 1999 without any trouble even after he had overthrown a Punjabi Prime Minister with a genuine base in Punjab? The President should know what he is talking. In which case one must look for reasons for his extraordinary deference to Punjab. The only reason that can hold up in scrutiny is the fact that ruling establishment, not counting him, is dominated by Punjabis; don't we all know that the Army is 70 per cent from Punjab and civil bureaucracy too is mainly Punjabis?

In short, he is in awe of the Punjab's share in the ruling establishment. His public articulation of this otherwise known fact means that other provinces should not insist on propositions that are unacceptable to the establishment. Does the President realise that this is setting Punjab against the other three provinces? It can cost Pakistan's national unity in a radical way: Punjab as a permanent check on all significant issues will not be acceptable to any Pushtoon, Sindhi or Baloch; that will be destructive of Pakistan's integrity.

As for Presidential obiter dicta on NSC much the aforesaid applies. He is warning all future generation of Pakistanis that should they try to disband, or rather degrade, the forces' participation level -- it is inconceivable that a civilian government will not want to know what the three forces' Chiefs think -- all hell will break loose and the Army Chief of the day will overthrow the Constitution and govern through Martial Law. This is incendiary stuff. What Mr. Musharraf is saying is that no major decision should be made without the concurrence of top generals -- or else!

Well, democracy is all about civilian (citizens') supremacy and rule in which armed forces are meant to obey orders of the government. An Army's perpetual threat of imposing Martial Law makes it an unwanted Army. No government can take a major decision in national security matters without knowing the professional assessments and wishes of the three or four Chiefs of Staff. All that is involved is what happens when the civilian government refuses to buy the hardware and other stuff according to the wish list of the generals. Here, the generals want to sit in on all decisions being made and not only about matters military. Their demands (or wishes) go well beyond mere autonomy in making decisions about what is to happen inside the Army, Air Force or Navy, including what equipment to buy. They now want a share in power as such -- perhaps a decisive share.

The nation, if it values human freedoms of its people, cannot subordinate itself to generals. At this rate, senior police officers will claim a share in provincial decision-making. Which will result in CMs becoming subordinates to their IGPs. These are days of devolution. In time chowkidars and security guards in every bank or institution would want to sit in on decision-making at local level. A line has to be drawn here. What is desired is democratic decision-making at all levels so as to reflect popular sovereignty: at the Centre, Provinces and municipal and district levels. Security services will have to be kept in their places.

'Foreign hand' was invoked during Balochistan's military operations in 1970s also. Bhutto government made much of it. At other times also this rather ubiquitous 'foreign hand' has been mentioned in especially bad cases of law and order violations in Punjab, Sindh, NWFP and also Balochistan. The government of the day scarcely ever stops to find out how much credibility does such invocations carry with the people. In most cases, security services, despite being so many and so strong, never find the culprits, often described as 'miscreants'. People think that to blame outsiders is the best way to cover up their own failures, or in some cases, their own designs.

Insofar as 'foreign hand' in Balochistan is concerned, the people are entitled to wonder what were the numerous security agencies doing; why did they wake up after two years of low-level insurgency? Why did they not know earlier and prosecute those found to be in league with the 'foreign hand'? Funds are a necessary part of such rent-an-insurgency techniques which can be traced. The government ought to bring cases to courts. The least it can do is to take the people into confidence and expose the foreigners' designs. If there is one or more foreign powers causing the insurgency-like actions, why not name them?

What the public knows is that nationalistically inclined Baloch people are protesting, in the only manner of protest they know, against Musharraf government's mega projects. They want a share in decision-making and more autonomy in their execution. They do not want to be outnumbered in their province. They want more autonomy for their provincial government. They seek more benefits for themselves from the exploitation of their mineral wealth, especially oil and gas. Most of these demands are just. Why should foreigners be needed to incite them to protest; they have enough reasons to protest.

As for Kalabagh Dam and Sindhi opposition to it, the President and his army of Ministers should sit down and explain. Why should it be supposed that Sindhis are out of their mind and are unable to see the benefits that will flow to Sindh from this Kalabagh Dam? Why are Sindhis not convinced of what the President is so sure: i.e. the new benefits that they are foregoing by not building this dam. It does look as if the establishment has actually decided to build the Dam and Sindhis are being browbeaten into accepting another fait accompli.

MB Naqvi is a leading columist in Pakistan.