Asia
Pakistan rebels against the new viceroys
Published 22 November 2007
One phrase rings out across Islamabad at every demonstration against General Pervez Mush arraf. Interview any of the protesting lawyers wearing the black-and-white suits they inherited from British barristers, or the wealthy and sophisticated young Pakistanis, graduates of the most sought-after American and British universities, or their immaculately dressed parents (and in some cases grandparents), and you will hear this phrase again and again: "civil society".
It has become the motif of the democratic dissidents who have taken to the streets in protest against the president's autocratic rule, not just here in the capital, but in Karachi and Lahore as well. At first it sounds vague, an insipid slogan dreamt up by sociology lecturers. But it captures a nascent political movement demanding an end to the oligarchy enjoyed by the army and to political parties centred on feudal dynasties.
The "civil society groups" referred to by Pakistan's media and the protesters themselves are made up of people from the liberal, westernised intelligentsia. It's a consciously non-party political movement. Go to any of the small daily rallies of a hundred or so people - often outnumbered by the police and security services watching from across the road - and you will find some supporters of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, and far more who support neither.
Among these non-partisan protesters are many who say they have never marched in the streets before. They are lawyers, doctors and writers, former diplomats and students. Almost all have studied or worked or travelled in the west, or have relatives who have done so.
Yet one anti-government group is notable for its absence from the movement. The most remarkable aspect of these extraordinary demonstrations is that militant Islamists have had absolutely no involvement. Said one former civil servant, while holding a placard demanding the reinstatement of the chief justice and Supreme Court: "Like the generals, the mullahs have no interest in an independent judiciary."
The people at the heart of the "civil society" protests are polar opposites of the militant Islamists who have led the charge, until now, against General Musharraf, burning US and British flags along the way. But now the unthinkable is happening: the liberal, secular intelligentsia are, like the Islamists, openly expressing their anger towards the west. The most naturally pro-American sections of Pakistani society have become disenchanted and hostile because of the blatant and, to many, insulting interference by Washington in Pakistan's affairs.
The frustration has been accumulating for decades as successive US administrations have failed to break their addiction to backing military governments. The fact most often quoted by liberals is that US aid to Pakistan has always risen during periods of military rule and fallen under civilian regimes. One female academic at the heart of the protests told me: "Washington preaches democracy, but at the same time it tries to patch together backroom deals for Musharraf with civilian politicians who themselves have dubious records." Her reference is to Bhutto, the leader of the Pakistan People's Party, who has been portrayed as a Joan of Arc figure in the western media. This is in stark contrast to her reputation in Islamabad.
Members of the intelligentsia remember the allegations (to put it diplomatically) of massive corruption and state paralysis during her two terms in office - though she was hardly the first to face such charges. But now a new challenge to Bhutto's credibility has risen - her reliance on US backing. She could not have returned to Pakistan were it not for US pressure on General Musharraf to negotiate a power-sharing deal. Her initial decision to take part in these talks caused disappointment among her supporters. Only later, after seeing the damage caused by being too close to Washington and the general, did she declare that she would not work with Musharraf.
Above all else, it has been the naked, unthinking manner in which US officials have exercised their influence that has stuck in the gullet of the liberal and secular classes. With a swagger that would have embarrassed British viceroys, American diplomats as lowly as the consul general in Karachi have issued statements demanding that the Pakistani state do this or that. As a result, something that I thought impossible has come to pass - opposition to US policy now extends from the madrasas all the way to the capital's dinner-party set.
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
