Military Intervention
...his cabinet, and the leaders of his opposition under “protective custody.” It seemed that “Operation Fair-Play” had ended the political crisis which began in March, cost some 500 lives, and further weakened Pakistan’s troubled economy. Citizens, even the ones apprehensive of military rule, felt relieved. Bhutto’s right wing opponents and their merchant supporters distributed the traditional halvah in street celebrations. In reality, the coup d’etat has compounded Pakistan’s predicament.
In a televised speech General Zia-ul-Haq, the Commander-in-Chief, emphasized the care-taker role of the military, and promised fair elections under its supervision - thus meeting the original demand of the opposition which had launched mass agitation to protest the rigging of elections on March 7. Whether or not the General can keep the promise is a matter of anxious speculation here. It is reasonable to assume that he wishes to do so. The appointment of a high-powered election commission and the release of most political leaders support the assumption. Public opinion is mobilized in favor of fresh elections; if they were unduly delayed there shall be agitation. Above all, the army’s public image has suffered greatly from identification with Bhutto’s government. In order to be rehabilitated as the arbiter of Pakistani Politics, it must now prove itself in the role of an efficient and scrupulous caretaker. But the army faces dilemmas which, given divisions within its ranks, it may not be able to resolve, and thus prolong military rule for an indefinite period.
A Contrast With India
Whatever the outcome, there is little doubt that this latest augmentation of the army’s role in politics will worsen the malaise which underlies all of Pakistan’s political crises, and further complicates its political future.
At the heart of this most recent conflict lay the unresolved tension...
View Full Essay
