Daily Times Editorial Dec 24, 2009

US view of NRO crisis

US special representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke seems fascinated by the “major political drama” unfolding in Pakistan in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to scrap the National Reconciliation Ordinance. Mr Holbrooke in an interview with an American TV channel said this “drama” had not so far affected US national security interests but has caused Washington to watch it “very carefully”. According to him, this “tremendous political drama involves the PPP, PML-N, Punjab province, the military, the Supreme Court and public opinion. Holbrooke’s explanation of the National Reconciliation Ordinance dispute was that former president Pervez Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto cut a deal and Musharraf promulgated the decree that gave amnesty to all members of Ms Bhutto’s party, including her husband and herself. The deal, he said, enabled Benazir to return to the country from self-imposed exile but she met a tragic end and her husband became the president. Mr Holbrooke, however, did not mention the role the US played in arranging the deal.
The US State Department, on the other hand, said it is working closely with the legitimate, democratically elected president and government and called the National Reconciliation Ordinance furore an “internal matter for Pakistan”. State Department spokesman PJ Crowley told a daily briefing that the government of President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani came to office through a parliamentary process and the “ongoing process between two branches of the Pakistani government is a judgement for the Pakistani people to make”. What is important, Crowley said, is that the Pakistani government and its leadership are seen as legitimate in the eyes of the people of Pakistan.
While some may see this diplomatic statement as a distancing of Washington from the present imbroglio gripping Pakistan, there is no denying the weight of the State Department’s endorsement of the legitimacy of the Pakistani government and president, elected through a constitutional parliamentary process in one of the fairest elections the country has seen. While the PPP failed to garner a simple majority in the National Assembly, it went on to form a coalition government at the Centre led by it. The president on the other hand, received an overwhelming mandate from the electoral college comprising all the assemblies. Those who dislike the government or the president should in all fairness refrain from advocating any extra-constitutional path for the removal of either. Parliamentary democracy requires the opposition, no matter how strongly it feels about the incumbents, to wait its turn at the ballot box, where the electorate should decide the fate of the incumbents.
It is a strange phenomenon in Pakistan’s history that we are either helpless before, or parts of the political class actively collaborate with, military dictators, lending them an average shelf life of 10 years. However, when it comes to democratically elected civilian governments and presidents, what may be called the ‘two and a half years itch’ seems to kick in and we lose patience with such elected incumbents mid-way through their term. This is a reflection of our unfortunate history of authoritarianism and praetorianism that has damaged the country beyond imagination. The advice to all players of the political game therefore, is to refrain from adventurism, confrontation and intrigues, and wait for their turn at the hustings.