|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Musharraf Betrays Pakistan
 |
|
Pakistanis
have taken to calling their president “Busharraf” |
Pakistan
came into being on August 14, 1947. As the Creator willed it, the
date corresponded with the empowering night of Ramadan 27 of the
year 1366 after the Prophet’s Hijra. Its great destiny was thus
set from the start.
It
envisaged a magnanimous vision - a deliberate attempt to restore the
primacy of the Islamic Ummah that had been eclipsed by colonial
intervention. It was for this raison d’etre that Muslims of the
Indian subcontinent sacrificed their lives and all, undergoing
unparalleled sufferings in the annals of humankind, with over one
million dead and millions of others displaced from their homes and
properties.
The
Great Leader’s Testimony
Pakistan’s
Great Leader – Quaid-i-Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, reminded
the people at a rally on October 30, 1947, in no uncertain terms:
If
we take our inspiration and guidance from the Holy Qur’an, the
final victory, I once again say, will be ours… Do not be
overwhelmed by the enormity of the task… You only have to
develop the spirit of the Mujahids. You are a nation whose
history is replete with people of wonderful character and
heroism. Live up to your traditions and add to another chapter
of glory. All I require of you now is that everyone… must vow
to himself and be prepared to sacrifice his all… in building
up Pakistan as a bulwark of Islam and as one of the greatest
nations whose ideal is peace within and peace without… Islam
enjoins on every Mussulman to give protection to his neighbors
and to minorities regardless of caste and creed. 1
As
the leader of the All India Muslim League, Jinnah told his
counterpart, Mohandas K. Gandhi, in 1944, “We are a nation with
our own distinctive culture, art and architecture, names and
nomenclature, sense of values and proportion, legal laws and moral
code, customs and calendar, history and traditions, aptitude and
ambitions. In short, we have our own distinctive outlook on life and
of life.”2
The
Muslim League adopted the Pakistan resolution on March 23, 1940,
which called for the establishment of a sovereign, independent, and
Islamic country, comprised of Muslim majority provinces in the
Northwest and another in the Northeast. The following day, Lord
Zetland, Secretary of State for the colonial India, wrote of his
apprehensions regarding this proposition to Lord Linlithgow, the
British viceroy in New Delhi, saying:
[T]he
call of Islam is one which transcends the bounds of country. It
may have lost some force as a result of the abolition of
Caliphate by Mustafa Kamal Pasha, but it still has a very
considerable appeal as witness for example Jinnah’s insistence
on our giving undertaking that Indian troops should never be
employed against any Muslim state, and the solicitude which he
has constantly expressed for the Arabs of Palestine.3
Pakistan
provided material and moral support for many Muslim liberation
struggles. |
|
Furthermore,
he could not “help thinking if (a) separate Muslim state did
indeed come into existence in India, as now contemplated by the All
India Muslim League, the day would come when they might find the
temptation to join an Islamic Commonwealth of nations well nigh
irresistable.”4
This
explains the British mindset and why they were so opposed to the
creation of Pakistan. But God Almighty destined Pakistan for the
Muslims, and Muhammad Ali Jinnah was unambiguous in his declarations
in this regard. For example, when Lord Mountbatten, the last Indian
Viceroy made reference to the example of the Mughal Emperor, Akbar,
Jinnah replied:
The
tolerance and goodwill that the great Emperor showed to all
non-Muslims is not of recent origin. It dates back thirteen
centuries ago when our Prophet (peace be upon him) not only by
words but also by deeds treated Jews and Christians, after he
had conquered them, with the utmost tolerance and regard and
respect for their faith and beliefs. The whole history of
Muslims, wherever they ruled, is replete with humane and great
principles which should be followed and practised.5
And,
specifically addressing the people of the United States, in a radio
broadcast in February 1948, he said, “Pakistan is the premier
Islamic state and the fifth largest in the world,” adding that
despite “the terrible trials and tribulations” the country had
endured, “Pakistan will never be found lacking in extending its
material and moral support to the oppressed and suppressed peoples
of the world in upholding the principles of the United Nations
Charter.”6
In
fulfillment of this promise, Pakistan provided material and moral
support for the liberation struggles of Muslims from Algeria,
Tunisia and Libya to Sudan, Somalia, and Indonesia.
Meddling
by the Army
Muhammad
Ali Jinnah was cognizant of the task that lay ahead for the
newly-formed Pakistan’s defense forces. Just days ahead of
independence, he addressed the senior officers of the British Indian
armed forces who had opted for Pakistan, along with the three
British service chiefs at Edwards College in Peshawar. His message
was short and clear: “Now it is for you to build Pakistan as the
greatest Muslim state of the world.”7
To
this he added, “Pakistan would be a base where we will be able to
train and bring up Muslim intellectuals, educationists, economists,
scientists, doctors, engineers, technicians, etc. who will work to
bring about Islamic renaissance.”8
The
Quaid passed away a year after Pakistan became independent.
Unfortunately, Liaquat Ali Khan, the prime minister chosen by him,
was assassinated soon thereafter. After him, Ghulam Muhammad, who
exercised his powers as the ceremonial governor general of the
British Crown, dismissed the last legitimate political leader of
Pakistan, Khawaja Nazimuddin. This was an indication that although
the British had left, the soul and psyche of their obedient servants
was still at work. From then on, the bureaucrats, opportunists,
mercenaries, and agents had their heyday.
 |
|
Musharraf’s
policies are abandoning the Kashmiris |
Soon
after, the first coup attempt by the army in March 1951 was put
down, but the incident revealed that the military had its eye on
more than just its constitutional prerogatives, and after the ouster
of Nazimuddin, effective control passed into the hands of the
Commander-in-Chief, Ayub Khan. Thus an alliance developed between
the civil and military bureaucracies and the Feudal class, a remnant
of the colonial era.
While
both Liaquat Ali Khan and Nazimuddin had refused to join the Western
alliance, with the military’s ascension to power, Pakistan signed
a Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement with the United States in May
1954, and later in the same year joined the Western-dominated
eight-member South-East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO). This was
followed by Pakistan’s accession to the four-nation Baghdad Pact,
comprising Britain, Turkey, Iran and Iraq (later renamed the Central
Treaty Organization [CENTO] after the overthrow of the Iraqi
monarchy). A fourth security agreement, a bilateral Agreement of
Cooperation was also signed with the US.
Ayub
Khan thought that these agreements, especially the ones with the US,
would oblige the US government “under certain circumstances, to
assist Pakistan if she became the victim of aggression.” But
Washington had at the same time given “specific assurance” to
New Delhi that this agreement “could not be used against India.”
In
his naiveté, Ayub Khan thought that CENTO would provide “an
excellent and unique platform” for Muslim unity. But all these
security pacts were designed for no other purpose than to further US
interests, a fact Khan soon came to realize, as related in his
autobiography “Friends not Masters.” But shortly thereafter, he
had to pass on the reins of power to his army chief, Yahya Khan.
The
Break-up of Pakistan
Yahya
Khan was more involved with wine and women than with the affairs of
the state, which inevitably devolved upon a small clique of civil
and military bureaucrats. While most were involved in schemes to
consolidate their power, M.M. Ahmed, the head of the Planning
Commission and a Qadyani 9,
played a significant role in sowing the seeds of discord and
disunity between East and West Pakistan through the deliberate
formulation of policies that would create economic disparities
between the two sides.
Rather
than holding elections to resolve the simmering conflict, Ahmed
advised Yahya Khan to let it go, allowing the tensions to come to a
boil and leading to the consequent secession of East Pakistan, the
aftermath of which Pakistan has yet to recover from.10
The
British had left Pakistan, but the soul and psyche of their obedient
servants was still at work. |
|
The
secession was an anomaly; during partition, Muslims from East
Pakistan overwhelmingly supported the Pakistan movement.
Politically, they were more conscious and free from feudal control
than their compatriots in West Pakistan; their leaders were also
mostly educated and middle class. Having rid themselves of that
check on their power, Yahya Khan and his junta believed that their
quasi-military rule was secured, with the blessings of the US and
Pakistan’s feudal political leadership.
Bhutto
and Zia
The
secession debacle, however, was cataclysmic for the nation, and
Yahya Khan was forced to leave office in disgrace. The Hamoodur
Rahman Commission, which was appointed to investigate the
circumstances leading to the secession, concluded that it was “a
rot beginning from the top.”11
Whatever role was played by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as one of the three
principals involved, he set out to redeem himself once he became the
Prime Minister.
Bhutto
set out to depoliticize the army, and in the process attempted to
inject it with some Islamic character. He selected a junior and
rather non-descript but “praying” officer, Ziaul Haq as his army
chief.
Bhutto
matured into a world-class statesman who wanted to turn Pakistan
into “the greatest Muslim state of the world,” and initiated a
nuclear program to counter that being developed by rival India. But
his feudal traits let him down.
It
is interesting to note that General Ziaul Haq, who deposed Bhutto
and allowed him to be executed after the Supreme Court turned down
Bhutto’s appeal against a murder conviction, followed the same
strategic vision. He braved all opposition and pursued the nuclear
program. Furthermore, Ziaul Haq strengthened Pakistan’s friendship
with Afghanistan, providing training and organizational support for
efforts to evict the USSR from its territory. The US joined the
endeavor later on, when it saw the Afghan Mujahideen’s fortunes
changing.
But
the scope of Ziaul Haq’s vision was wider still; this could not be
tolerated. It is alleged that the CIA engineered the plane crash
that killed Ziaul Haq.
Ziaul
Haq was succeeded by corrupt and inept civilian regimes that
alternated between Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. Pakistan
virtually became a one party state, with its polity dominated by the
army generals.
General
Musharraf: Take Over and Betrayal
General
Pervez Musharraf’s power-grab on October 12, 1999 was long in the
making. United States diplomats were quick in expressing relief at
“Musharraf's reputation as a modern thinker and religious
moderate, even though he heads an army that reportedly is rife with
Islamic zealots.”12
 |
|
Musharraf’s
crackdown saw many Arabs and Pakistani tribesmen slain |
Addressing
the Senate Foreign Intelligence Committee, a senior CIA officer and
former Pakistan station chief commented that the CIA could do
business with Musharraf. Considering his background and long
association with the US army, he said:
“Musharraf
may represent a last good chance to bring the powerful force in
the world and our system of values to bear on the course
Pakistan will choose for the new millennium … he might be able
to guide elements within Pakistan society away from the
dangerous, fundamentalist path . . . to a more reasonable and
responsible course.”13
From
Musharraf’s conduct since then, it’s clear that even that CIA
official may not have gauged him fully, given the extent to which
the Pakistani president continues to ingratiate himself with the
United States. Musharraf’s willingness to take up the United
States’ policies hook, line, and sinker has earned him the
nickname “Busharraf” among many Pakistanis, with many bitterly
joking that someone has hired their general.
Since
Bush’s historic 9/11 midnight telephone call to Musharraf,
Pakistan has become a vassal state – an entity with no national or
security interests of its own. Gradually, Musharraf is submitting to
the US’ grand designs for South Asia, wherein India serves as
America’s surrogate regional power – a power to which Pakistan
is subordinated.
Step
by step, the Musharraf junta is backing out of any commitment to the
heroic resistance of the Kashmiris and moving towards rapprochement
with and the acceptance of a Hinduized India. Also, Pakistan’s
nuclear capability was too hot a potato for Musharraf’s generals,
and the father of the Pakistani bomb, Abdul Qadeer Khan, is now
maligned as a nuclear black marketer.
Pakistan’s
Raison D’etre
Since
Bush’s 9/11 midnight phone call to Musharraf, Pakistan has become
a vassal state. |
|
Musharraf
and his bedfellows have not only betrayed Pakistan, but also
friendly Afghanistan, bartering Pakistan’s own security for an
unstable and unfriendly regime in Kabul. Today, Musharraf’s
mercenaries, in obedience to his white master in Washington, are not
only alienating history’s bravest people in a strategic area that
is essential to Pakistan’s very existence, but are also hunting
and gunning down stateless Arab and Muslim refugees from the Afghan
jihad days, men the US once supported and armed. What a contortion
of Pakistan’s raison d’etre! What a shame on Musharraf and his
gang!
But
the masses of Pakistan, momentarily confused into inaction, are now
ready to ignite a new war of independence, a massive uprising where
the popular will will exert itself to purge the “land of the
pure” (that is what Pakistan means) of all filth, in fulfillment
of their sacred duty to revalidate Pakistan’s raison d’etre.
Siraj Islam
Mufti, PhD, is a researcher
and freelance journalist. He frequently contributes articles to the
Islamic Circle of North America, Muslim American Society, and United
Association for Studies and Research.
[1]
Speech at a rally at the University Stadium, Lahore, October 30,
1947.
[2]
Jinnah-Gandhi talks, Delhi, 1944.
[3]
India Office Library, Document No. 609, and others, cited in
Speeches and statements of His Excellency Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada,
Organization of the Islamic Conference, 1988.
[4]
Ibid
[5]
Ibid
[6]
Ibid.
[7]
Speech at Edwards College, Peshawar, April 18, 1948.
[8]
Ibid.
[9]
A heretic sect, which believes in the prophethood of Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad (1835-1908). According to their ‘prophecies’, the
independence of Pakistan was temporary, and it would eventually join
with India, and they will bring it to this end. Al-Fatal, April 4,
1947 and May 17, 1947.
[10]
Hasan Zaheer, The Separation of East Pakistan, Oxford University
Press, 1995.
[11]
Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report by Justice Hamoodur Rahman,
October 1973. (Unauthorized copy published in August 2000 on www.india-today.com
and www.dawn.com.
[12]
Pamela Constable and Kamran Khan, Washington Post, October 19, 1999.
[13]
Source unspecified, quoted in “Great destiny,great betrayal” by
M.H. Faruqi. Impact International (London), Volume
34, Number 3, page 21, 2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
