When President Bush declared the war on terror"" in the weeks following 9/11, he looked desperately for allies in the Middle East that we could rely on to help fight Islamic extremists. One of those crucial states was Pakistan. The nation was an ideal partner because it had an established democracy, moderate political stability and nuclear weapons. Thankfully, President Pervez Musharraf agreed to help the United States combat terrorism.
Since then, he has done a decent job. His cooperation with U.S.-led coalition forces has been key in taking on the Taliban, and President Bush credits him with helping the United States capture some high- profile al-Qaida members. But he has not been perfect. Under his watch, the Taliban has gradually regained power in recent years.
On Nov. 3, Musharraf, who is also the head of the Pakistani army, declared a state of emergency and imposed martial law in the country. He has suspended the Constitution, resulting in losses of civilian rule and essential liberties for Pakistanis. Large rallies are now outlawed, lawyers have been jailed, the press has been gagged and, until last Thursday, Musharraf refused to hold open elections. He has been silencing his political opponents, even placing opposition leader Benazir Bhutto under brief house arrest. His own people now view him as a tyrant.
The Pakistani Supreme Court recognized the illegality of these events and its chief justice declared them unconstitutional. Unaffected by his plea, Musharraf appointed a new chief justice. President Bush and American diplomats are urging him to stop this action, but he has not.
I thought blocking democracy and silencing opposition was the goal of terrorists. Breaking down essential freedoms is not the way to make sure those freedoms endure. Musharraf claims to be doing this to secure stability, but it's having the opposite effect.
No matter how necessary Musharraf might think these measures to be, they're not very helpful. The loss of stability in Pakistan creates an opportunity for extremists to gain political influence, claiming that civilian rule doesn't work. It allows for conditions favorable for a coup d'état or a radical faction to assume power. This would be devastating in a nuclear country in the Middle East.
He is such a critical ally because he understands better than most how al-Qaida operates in Pakistan and Afghanistan and probably wants to capture Osama Bin Laden as much as the United States. He claims to want peace in the region, but his missteps may undermine those goals.
Last week, he made an important, but small, concession by promising elections next January. But he hasn't said whether the emergency rule will be ended by then. This would make it very hard for the elections to be pure and fair.
Without public assembly rights and open opposition, those elections could be merely empty tokens of democracy.
Musharraf needs to end martial law in Pakistan. That means restoring civil liberties to the Pakistani people. That means allowing free, unimpeded elections and political opposition. It means helping defeat the goals of Islamic extremism.
Furthermore, the president should remove himself as the Chief of Army Staff. He may have a military background, but no single person should have that much power. The problem with such unchecked authority is that it's unpredictable.
Too much turmoil can arise when so much centralized power rests on the whim of one man.
If Musharraf wants to promote democracy and peace in the region, he needs to start by making sure those things are protected in his own country. He can still be a vital aide to the United States, but he should start undoing his harmful policies and repairing the damage he's done to liberty in Pakistan.
*Brian Bisek is a sophomore with an undecided major. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.*
