Fears eclipse Pakistan elections

By Maheen A. Rashdi

While an uneasy calm prevails in Pakistan`s capital city of Islamabad and its economic hub, Karachi, underneath the surface the mood is restive. There is apprehension and fear of a post-election turmoil, the likes of which the country might not have seen yet.
Findings of a survey conducted in Pakistan by the US-based International Republican Institute reveal that a vast majority disapproves of the government actions taken since November 2 last year, and wants to vote for opposition parties in the February 18 election. That hardly comes as a surprise, since the public mood could not have been expected to be benevolent towards President Musharraf and his ruling coterie who in recent months have been responsible for the scarcity of essential food items and then their phenomenal price-hike, added to the worst ever shortage in the energy sector. In a country where more than 70 percent struggle for two meals a day, their daily battle for survival matters more than any ideology that a political leader or government may stand for.
As for the election process itself, there is strong scepticism regarding their fair management and the opposition is pre-empting matters by spreading about that the establishment is going to manipulate the process. Reports claim that votes are already up ‘for sale’ and that there is an average of 14,000 duplicate votes in each constituency.
With less than a week to go, electioneering too does not have enough spunk in it to warm prospective voters towards a preferred candidate. The election commission has outlined rather stringent rules of campaign, but it is mostly the fear of violence that is keeping the political parties from taking out large rallies, the same fear which might keep voters away on election day. There are still suspicions that President Musharraf may be looking for new excuses to postpone the elections, but analysts believe they WILL be held because it is a clear demand put forth by the US and EU. The US grant of 24 million dollars in bilateral and multilateral funding to Pakistan to ensure free and fair elections on February 18, speaks of its very earnest (almost desperate) desire of seeing a democratic re-awakening in Pakistan, ironically under an ex-dictator.
Apart from the underlying implications concerning US intervention in all of Pakistan’s affairs, there is not much thrill to be got out from the contesting parties. While election rules are being broken with larger than life posters seen at some points, instead of big rallies only small corner meetings in party headquarters are being conducted. Of course, the PPP – especially in the province of Sindh – does not need to do much to garner support because of the ‘sympathy vote’ that it is sure to gain after the brutal assassination of its glamorous leader. But a recent announcement by the late Ms Bhutto’s husband of running for the prime minister’s slot is becoming a bit difficult to swallow even for some staunch PPP loyalists as past record (earning him the epithet of Mr 10 percent) of his corrupt practices during BB’s two-time tenure as prime minister still rankles with the public.
The All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM) is indulging in wishful thinking by demanding the dissolution of the National Security Council and restoration of the deposed judges, wanting Musharraf to step down before the elections -- not a vote-gathering slogan by any standard. Mr Nawaz Sharif however, may get his piece of the pie, as he seems to be the only one playing his cards intelligently, becoming less antagonistic towards the US while keeping the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (the fundamentalist party hitherto his strong ally) at arms length.

In the backdrop of all this the TV channels’ wings have been clipped further by disallowing them to air political press conferences. But the biggest concern is the latest dictate issued by the electronic media’s regulatory body which prohibits the channels from following the voting process and announcing partial results as they unfold. The final result only will be aired, which, say critics, will give the government a chance to overturn the result if it does not ‘suit’ all interests. If that happens, will the public and the media (ergo responsible for many cataclysmic political changes) swallow it tamely? And if they do raise a voice what kind of force will be applied to quell it?