Kicked off by the late-Benazir Bhutto, “the lost decade” was capped by the then much-welcomed military coup of President Pervez Musharraf. Nine years later, Musharraf’s tenure, which saw not only economic stabilization but stellar growth alongside unprecedented media liberalization, appears to be nearing its end falteringly.

With the much-anticipated parliamentary elections only days away and the military distancing itself from Musharraf, we are presented with a stark comparison between Pakistan’s military and democratic governments that raises key questions.

Why is it that military governments, who have been so successful at providing good economic management, fallen each time to popular opposition? Why is it that popular civilian leaders always return to power only to bring the country to the brink each time?

The two key variables here are policy and leadership.

Military-led governments have been successful managers of the country, their reigns typically leading to gains in the economy and social indicators, but they fail to provide genuine leadership. Their success in developing the country can be attributed to the technocrats they usher in to provide policy expertise in their respective fields. Yet these technocrats are only good at being policy experts, not politicians. Former Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz is a case-in-point. Despite his corruption free background and immense success in reviving Pakistan’s economy, Aziz was incapable of winning a single seat in Pakistan’s parliament without the patronage of the Chaudhries of Gujrat.

On the other hand, democratically elected governments have enjoyed popular support and provided leadership while actively mismanaging the country and overseeing declines in the economy. Their deficiency was and continues to be sound, consistent policies. Brought to power time and time again on the shoulders of empty rhetoric and patronage, Pakistan’s political parties appear to be forever trapped in the inertia of political in fighting; maintaining their stranglehold on government becomes their raison d’etre, resulting in very little progress.

Pakistan’s democratically elected governments have taught us that democracy alone is not the answer.

Democracy with serious, detailed and substantive policy is.

There needs to be an infusion of policy expertise and a serious commitment towards enacting policy, bridging the gap that has divided military and democratic regimes.

This highlights the major need for consensus among all of Pakistan’s ruling elite. Good policy cannot be applied without everyone on board — that includes the political parties and the military. Many die-hard democrats cringe at the mention of the latter, but the cold truth is that for the near- to medium-term, the military is the guarantor of the Pakistani state, as it has been for the last 60+ years.

If Pakistani civil society does not begin to hold its political parties to higher standards, we will continue to witness the re-enactment of history by the same players, at the risk of wearing down an already decrepit stage.

Today, it did. A suicide bomber detonated himself amidst a 70-member police contingent, minutes before a weekly lawyer’s protest in front of the Lahore High Court. The body count currently stands at 20 officers and 2 civilians dead, with scores wounded.

More Attacks to Follow?
Insider Brief sources further go on to state that Pakistani intelligence was aware of 8 suicide bombers that had entered Lahore to carry out attacks. With this attack, 7 still remain at large. This is despite a major breakthrough in late December (that went unreported) when law enforcement in Sargodha busted a terrorist ring. They recovered 10 tons of explosives and numerous detonators along with a number of terrorists comprising of bomb and suicide jacket makers.

Who Was Targeted?
Accounts vary as to who the bomber intended on attacking. Dawn reports that police were the intended targets wherein the bomber approached police and immediately detonated himself. Individuals familiar with the situation stated that a number of the police officers killed were fresh graduates from the police academy. This wouldn’t be the first attack on security forces or cadets. Suicide bombers in Pakistan have had a history of attacking not only cadets, but seasoned personnel from Pakistan’s military, paramilitary and law enforcement agencies.

CNN, quoting the same or similar sources as Dawn, tells a different story where the bomber approached the site of the impending lawyer’s rally, was stopped by police and then detonated himself. This presents the most interesting angle. A suicide bombing on the police is only tactical in nature. Pakistan’s security forces are rather large in number, and Punjab’s in particular are well funded and well equipped. For jihadists to “waste” scarce resources (e.g. explosives, the bomber, and the device itself) on small scale attacks is not sustainable.

An attack on the lawyer’s rally could potentially be strategic.

The Motives
The average Pakistani currently does not trust the government. Pakistan is rife with speculation, no matter how sensational, that the government (read: President Pervez Musharraf and company) was behind the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

A sucessful bombing of a lawyer’s rally would immediately have people guessing who was behind the attack. Consider this line of potential reasoning/questions: Jihadists? Too simple an explanation. Was the government behind the attack? Were they looking to intimidate the lawyer’s movement? Were they looking to create an excuse to postpone elections by staging bombings at the onset of Muharram?

In this case, security forces halted the attack, at great cost to themselves, and saved many other lives in the process. Had the bomber succeeded, the government’s credibility would have taken a greater hit in the minds of an increasingly disenchanted and disenfranchised population, looking for excuses to direct their rage at the establishment. The potential outcome could have resulted in another wave of violence, chaos and instability for the Musharraf government — a jihadist’s dream scenario.

Strategies for Security
To counter the growing number of suicide bombers and related instability, the Pakistani goverment must take on a two pronged approach.

First, it must actively direct state resources to target and eliminate both the leadership of jihadist organizations and their bomb making infrastructure. Worthy of study is the Israeli model that has proven incredibly successful over the past decade resulting in a significant decline in suicide bombings within Israel proper.

Aside from having developed superior anti-suicide bomber tactics for security forces (e.g. identifying and eliminating potential suicide bombers), the key to Israeli success has been the targeted assassinations of terrorist leaders and particularly bomb makers. The Israeli’s know full well that making suicide vests and other improvised explosive devices (IEDs) is not a simple task but one that requires immense experience and training. The news is full of “wannabe” bomb makers who regularly blow themselves up as they toy with unstable chemical compounds. Denying terrrorist organizations the ability to produce bombs is the equivalent of taking away an infrantryman’s bullets.

Second, and most importantly, the government of Pakistan must placate its restless population, whose patience has grown thin in light of the present bout of socio-economic deterioration. Countering jihadists is just a stop-gap solution to counter short-term instability and violence. To reinstill stability (if it ever existed) in Pakistan for the long haul, the establishment must find a way to bring all sections of society to the table, create a consensus and instill a sense of participation in government for the populace. The most immediate way to do that is hold free and fair elections; unfortunately, from what our sources tell us, the elections in February will be anything but.

Bilawal Zadari is a 19-year old with no political experience and questionable Urdu skills, having lived most of his life abroad. Sources have indicated that Benazir had provided a list of advisors who would serve as a sort of council of regents for Bilawal with his father as principal advisor until he was politically able and legally eligible to run for office.

The question begs to be asked: will the PPP survive?

The Short Answer
Yes.

The Long Answer
In the short term, the PPP will ride the crest of emotional outpouring and sympathy arising from the death of its leader and likely emerge as the winner of the next parliamentary elections. But what about the long term? Bilawal Zardari will not be taking on full party leadership for another 5 years. Can the party hold together and maintain its popularity until then? If history is any indicator, the answer again is yes.

Pakistani Precedent. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was probably Pakistan’s most popular politician after Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan’s founder. His name and that of his family continues to elicit a cult-like following in all four of Pakistan’s provinces. Aside from being an impressive orator (just search YouTube), intelligent, and charismatic, Bhutto was the first politician that spoke for Pakistan’s poor and brought forth a populist message. Despite his many flaws, even those in middle and upper class were enthralled with the man.

Consider this: Zia-ul-Huq rose to power in 1978. He hanged Zulfikar Bhutto in 1979. After Zia’s mysterious death in 1989, a decade later, Benazir Bhutto swept elections and became prime minister. Two truncated premierships later and after nearly 8 years in exile, Bhutto returned to Pakistan as one of the most of the popular politicians in Pakistan’s political landscape.

The power of the Bhutto name is demonstratedly immense.

Subcontinental Precedents. In Pakistan, it’s the Bhutto’s. In India, it’s the Gandhi’s. The Gandhi dynasty of India presents a similar story of the power of a name tied with the longevity of a party. Indhira Gandhi, headstrong Indian prime minister and chairwoman of the National Congress party was assassinated in 1984. Her politically inexperienced son, Rajiv Gandhi, then an airline pilot, took on party leadership and became prime minister that same year. He was assassinated in 1991, following his parliamentary defeat in 1989. In 1998, 7 years after Rajiv’s death, his Italian-born wife, Sonia, became chairwoman of the Congress Party which finds itself in power today.

Sindhi’s, Seraiki’s, and the Poverty Stricken. Beyond emotionalism and the sentiment attached to the Bhutto name, there is the simple fact that the PPP has a solid, core constituency upon which to rely. Without the PPP, Pakistan’s Sindhi’s, Seraiki’s, and many of the nation’s poor, wouldn’t have a party to represent them. Punjabi’s after all, have the Pakistan Muslim League in all its lettered variants. The Sindh has the PPP. (Province-centric parties are ultimately dangerous though and only heighten the risk of ethnic/sectarian strife in Pakistan.)

The PPP survived the loss of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. So too will it surive the loss of Benazir.

The elections in Pakistan are just about two weeks away. Musharraf is fulfilling his promise by my reckoning; or was it the Americans, the Brits, or the lawyers and politicians in Pakistan who deserve the credit? The burning question of the day is will the elections in Pakistan be fair and free? The media in the US and the opposition parties in Pakistan are convinced that they will be opaque and rigged. Scores of international observers are on their way to Pakistan to monitor the elections though they too are convinced they will be rigged, such is the power of suggestion. Now where does this leave Musharraf, between a hard place and a rock? I think so.

Almost every body who is anybody in the US, starting with powerful voices on the Hill, the media, every South Asian think tanker worth his salt and let us not forget the Pakistani American scholar struggling to find a position in the land of opportunity have lambasted Musharraf for everything wrong in Pakistan. Let Ambassador Durrani and his team rave and rant that Musharraf is the best thing that has happened to Pakistan in recent decades, alas the opinion die is cast; Musharraf is a dictator and the elections will be rigged.

The Pakistani media, which expanded exponentially under Musharraf, the whiskey swirling liberals in Islamabad and Lahore and the major political parties with impeccable democratic credentials from the right, the left and the center all warn of the upcoming rigged elections, as they brainwash the representatives of foreign Government and the foreign media of the dictatorial credentials of Musharraf. The Joan of Arc launched by the US is a hot favorite for her liberal credentials. Of course we will turn a blind eye to her dictatorial credentials within her party and her Mr. 10 % who is upping the rate to 15 % because of global warming and the rising price of oil. Another favorite is the Saudi launched democrat who during one of his tenures launched a frontal attack on the Supreme Court and has deep connections with the religious right. Another positive about the Saudi launch is his ambition to become the Amir ul Mohmaneen, the rightful successor of the Zia ul Haq legacy, so help us God.The patient commoner of Pakistan with the wisdom of poverty, has discovered the right formula for obtaining justice in Pakistan and I quote him, “if you have a case in court, you have multiple choices — hire a lawyer, or hire a judge, if the going gets tough better still hire a judge through a lawyer, and in case you have no money lump it.”  It is this wisdom that kept the common citizen from joining the protesting penguins (black suited lawyers); the alternatives to Musharraf did not appeal to them. Nor do they appeal to me.

I honestly believe Musharraf is indeed the best thing that has happened to Pakistan in a long time. He has turned around the sick economy of Pakistan, has improved the lot of the common man, enhanced the status of women, built the civil society, is improving education and is a true liberal. Not a single scandal of corruption against his name. Let me not push my luck but I feel he has done more for democracy than any of his recent predecessors. Yes he has made mistakes, is fighting an unpopular war and his popularity has plummeted. Incidentally his popularity is no worse than that of the Congress in the US. Musharraf at the helm for another five years will be in the best interest of Pakistan and I believe the US too, mark my words.

The list of requirements — as to what they are we can’t quite say — are being provided discreetly to avoid the perception that Musharraf is capitulating to or acquiescing to American demands.

The White House appears to be taking a pragmatic (some would say flawed) approach to Pakistan’s elections, allowing for imperfections and potential manipulation in exchange for what in its eyes may be stability and the empowerment of a coalition of “moderates” in Pakistan.

The long, windy march to democracy continues.