Musharraf Resigns as Head of Army
By Jane Clark
November 28, 2007 | Printer Friendly

The New York Times reports that Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf stepped down from his military post on November 28, 2007.  He will be sworn in for another presidential term as a civilian.  The power he once held will be diminished, but he has used the current state of emergency to amend the constitution to hold onto some of his influence.  His resignation from the army is intended as a concession to the Bush administration and his unhappy civilian population, but many people feel like it is not enough after the state of emergency and the arrests of hundred of lawyers and activists.

The Washington Post writes that Pakistani army officials are relieved that Musharraf has decided to relinquish his post.  There had been growing concern that political crisis in Pakistan would detract from the army’s ability to fight against extremists.  Musharraf’s hold on power could weaken further in January when parliamentary elections are scheduled to be held.  Both of his top rivals, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, have returned to Pakistan and will likely run for office.

In a November 21, 2007 op-ed piece in the Washington Post, Michael Gerson evaluates how the United States’ past decisions regarding Pakistan have affected the current state of affairs.  Gerson discusses how the initial desire to fund democracy building in Pakistan was overwhelmed by the billions of dollars of assistance to the military.

In light of the current upheaval, people are forced to question what will happen to the country if Musharraf were to fall from power.  Would he be replaced by a more democratic government or would the country be run by radical regime?   Musharraf was quoted in one report as saying that he admired Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who stayed in power by indicating to the US that they had to support his military rule or allow the country to be run by radical Islamists.  Musharraf appears to be following the same approach, as he has devoted all of his energy recently to imprisoning democratic opponents instead of fighting against terrorism.  Polls show that Pakistani citizens favor democracy and are sympathetic towards radical groups opposing a military regime, indicating that “in the long run, propping up favorable dictators to fight terrorism causes a backlash.”

Gerson writes that the situation in Pakistan should serve as a warning.  There is the potential for other military dictatorships to fall, giving way to Islamic radicalism.  He argues that the U.S. should commit to spending more energy facilitating political alternatives.  It is urgent that the United States start encouraging democratic ideals in strategically important countries in the hope that liberal forces might someday compete with radical Islam.  He writes that in Pakistan, there are a number of democratic leaders and responsible army officials who could take on the task of leading the country, giving the US some leeway in putting pressure on Musharraf. 

References:

New York Times: Musharraf Quits Pakistani Army Post

Washington Post: Musharraf Steps Down as Head of Pakistan Army

Washington Post: Where We Went Wrong in Pakistan