US Policy towards the coup in Pakistan

30 Nov, 1999    ·   297

Dr. Subhash Kapila says that the United States has a responsibility to ensure that democracy returns to Pakistan and germinates without military intervention
Dr. Subhash Kapila
The United States was not surprised or caught off guard by the military coup in Pakistan on October, 12, 1999 by General Pervez Musharraf. The United States had prior knowledge of the impending coup as evident from the warning it gave to the Army against it. The United States , may have been surprised that the Pak Army hierarchy and General Pervaiz Musharraf chose to ignore the warning not to displace a constitutionally elected Prime Minister. Its policy and approaches following the coup need serenity. 

 

 

The pattern of initial US reactions was as follows:

 

 

1. It made all the right noises against the Coup.

 

 

2. It called for an early return of democracy.

 

 

3. While the coup, was expected its timing may not have been known. This was evident from the hesitating and tentative statements made by US official spoke persons in the White House and State Dept.

 

 

However, what was intriguing in these statements was that, while calls were being made for early restoration of democracy the same emphasis was not forthcoming in calling for early restoration of the suspended, constitutionally elected government of PM Nawaz Sharif. A question to which no answers are readily available is whether, despite its earlier position, the United States , now that the coup had taken place, was happy that PM Nawaz Sharif had gone.

 

 

After having made all the right noises against the military coup in Pakistan and arousing hopes that it would pressure the Pak General for an early return of democracy US policy has move taken opposite swing. The pattern move emerging is as follows:

 

 

1. It would do business with the Pak Generals and go in for constructive

 

 

engagement. 

 

 

2. Pakistan can not be ignored. US "cannot walk away because Pakistan is

 

 

important-because stability or the lack thereof in Pakistan will have an impact on Pakistan 's neighbours." (Karl Inderfurth, US Asstt. Secretary of State.)

 

 

3. Rather intriguingly, Washington views Musharraf as a man with moderate political views. (Bruce Reidel, Senior Director for South Asia , US NSC.)

 

 

What has emerged is that, like in the past, the United States would legitimize and patronize the military government in Pakistan . It seems that the State department and the Pentagon have succeded in persuading US policy formulators and decision makers that it Musharraf was not supported an isolated Pakistan would harden its stances. The question that arises is love would Pakistan harden it stances sinceit is no longer a front line state meriting special US attention. 

 

 

The implications arising from this emerging pattern is as follows:

 

 

1. Extended continuance of Pak Army Govt, as a result of the US stamp of legitimacy.

 

 

2. Pak General's sop of referendum or National Govt. would not amount to a democracy.

 

 

3. Previous military governance of Pakistan by President Zia brought about an intense Islamisation of Pak Society. The Present military regime of Gen Musharraf will add Islamic fundamentalism and Islamic militancy to Pakistan 's state orthodoxy.  

 

 

4. This arises because of three factors- (a) Musharraf's strong links with the Taliban and Osama bin Laden; (b) The Islamic fundamentalist middle core of Pak Army officers cadre; and (c) Compulsions arising from Pak domestic trends.

 

 

5. External economic assistance will get increasingly funded into state-sponsored terrorism in neighboring countries.

 

 

6. Nuclear weapons in Pakistan would be in the control of unpredictable and adventurous generals, endangering South Asian security.

 

 

Legitimising military dictatorships by the United States may have been a justifiable strategic objective during the Cold War. It is hardly so today, especially when the United States has been spear-heading the call for democracy in central and Eastern Europe and in Central Asia . The United States has a responsibility to ensure that democracy returns to Pakistan and germinates without military intervention. An Islamic fundamentalists military regime in Pakistan is a threat to the stability of South Asia . Central Asia and the Gulf. It would not be in the interests of the United States itself to have such regimes on the Eastern flank of the Hormuz Straits and in the Asian heartland. Surely, the United States does not want a second Talibanised state in South West Asia endangering its vital interests. 

 

 

 

POPULAR COMMENTARIES