Political cauldron

The latest Gallup poll suggests that 71 percent of the people of this country want "harsh or mild punishment" for former President Musharraf. Should this statistic send a warning to the government?
Or should it continue to dither on the issue, the favoured option of the government clearly evident from the recent statements on the floor of the House by Prime Minister Gilani, where he suggested that a unanimous resolution in favour of trying Musharraf be passed by the National Assembly before any action is taken, considered an impossibility, given the existence of remnants of the Musharraf-sponsored (Q) League who remain opposed to the former General's accountability.
In this, the Prime Minister is being supported by a barrage of PPP elected and unelected supporters on private television channels, an element that needless to say, was lacking on other issues like on the repeal of the seventeenth amendment. This, to political analysts closely watching the President-Prime Minister power game, if indeed a game is being played at all, shows a complete unanimity of views between the two.
For an appropriate response to the above question, the government may be well advised to revisit the poll statistics on the previous thorny issue that faced it, namely the restoration of the judiciary. In August of 2008, a mere six months before the Long March that forced the government to capitulate on that issue - a Gallup poll revealed that 67 percent of a national sample were still interested in the continuing judicial crisis.
This interest was in spite of hectic efforts, considered to have been successful to quite an extent, made by the then-Law Minister Farooq Naek, elevated to the post of Senate Chairman since, to split the lawyers along political lines and to dissociate those who were pro- PPP from supporting it. Interestingly, the August 2008 poll asked a follow up question: "In your view, which is more important: restoring judges or controlling inflation"? An overwhelming majority, 71 percent, said that inflation was more important.
The government would, no doubt, claim that in line with public opinion, it reduced inflation from a high of over 25 percent to a low of around 12 to 13 percent. This is a significant reduction indeed, so why does the public not feel favourably disposed towards the government? Food inflation, the major expenditure item for subsistence/low income families, has remained in the 20 percent range. Add higher electricity tariffs and one is faced with drawing middle income groups into the ranks of the discontented, with respect to government efforts to control inflation.
The political scene, as we all can recall, was becoming dangerously hot before the March 16 long march. While one had the unequivocal sustained support for the restoration of the judiciary by parties that did not take part in the 2008 elections yet, blowing hot and cold, one also had PML (N) supporting the restoration of the judiciary. In contrast, the PPP government never openly stated that it was opposed to the restoration of the judiciary, deposed by Musharraf on 3 November 2007, but referred to procedural differences - differences that melted, once the long march began. And Pakistan had political peace for exactly five months.
In August, one more ingredient was thrown into the cauldron of Pakistani politics, 'bubbling' a lot more than the three witches in Macbeth could ever manage: the charges levelled by Altaf Hussain, Chief of the MQM, accusing Nawaz Sharif of not stopping the attacks on MQM workers in 1992. To allege that the money for bribes came from the president's kitty is irrelevant, as that money, our tax money, should have been used for development. To argue that those who took the money were equally to blame is not in question. A quick way to resolve this issue is to simply release all the tapes and files - whose existence is not in question as this has been repeatedly claimed by former ISI and MI personnel appearing on TV - and let the politicians answer the charges and indeed make retribution for past actions to the nation. If part of the retribution is a dip in their popularity ratings, then so be it.
At present, there is a media circus, with each former IB Director and ISI Director General trying to present a version that is different from what was presented in 1992. MQM and PML (N) politicians are presenting their own versions. However, few would disagree with two facts: (i) that an operation against political workers was launched in 1992, irrespective of whether the political workers were engaged in criminal activity or not, or whether the aggrieved party leadership was privy to the operation or not, or indeed whether the aggrieved party then formed an alliance with the party it has singled out for accusation; and (ii) the military and the ISI were involved in politics and money was given to several party leaders to weaken the PPP.
This may well be PPP's lob (as in tennis) to PML (N)'s shot against the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO). And a winning lob it is: it is designed to not only stop any attacks on the NRO, but also to stop demands for Musharraf's trial. And then again, some argue that maybe the Establishment, which was reportedly engaged in a minus-one formula, minus Zardari, is now engaged in reducing Nawaz Sharif's high popularity ratings.
And this is where the powers that be are confusing the issue: the NRO is tantamount to benefiting individuals and a party as a whole, getting paid to change your own loyalty or other peoples' loyalty benefits individuals or a party (reference to the by now defunct IJI) but Musharraf flouted the constitution and sinned against the entire nation, therefore it is not up to the President or the Prime Minister to pardon him. To argue facetiously, as only Fauzia Wahab can, and state that the party is not into the politics of revenge and therefore would not be interested in bringing Musharraf to book, would only be pertinent with respect to victimisation done to her party members, individually or collectively.
Musharraf wronged each and every Pakistani and for that the polls should be used as indicators of the most appropriate action to take. The PML (N) has indicated that it may consider another long march to force the government to capitulate again. Nawaz Sharif may have lost his popularity after the recent revelations to make a long march led by him not as successful, as on March 16 - though Benazir Bhutto, and by extension the PPP, never lost popularity after signing the NRO, proof of which is in the election results; but with 71 percent clamouring for harsh or mild punishment for Musharraf, a long march may well bring out as many as on March 16.
Would the army fire on the crowds to protect its former Chief? Would foreign powers, who brokered the deal that included Musharraf's resignation allow his trial? Should the army not be allowed to try its leader? Would a witch hunt start that will derail the entire system? These are weighty questions indeed, but it must be recalled that many powers, inside and outside the country, were opposed to the restoration of the judiciary as well. Musharraf's trial is against Musharraf as the President and not as Chief of Army Staff and last but not least, a witch hunt for Musharraf's supporters may prove ineffectual for one simple reason: he will have a hard time proving that he took decisions that were of a consensual nature.