The Rediff Special / J N Dixit

With the army's dominance in Pakistan, one should expect the adversarial distance in Indo-Pakistan relations to continue

The Council has come into being just weeks before Nawaz Sharief comes to power. Sharief has to establish a working relationship with this council despite the majority which he has in the national and provincial assemblies.

The election results may not lead to the creation of a stable government in Pakistan, because Sharief has to deal with a powerful presidency and entrenched army establishment in the party structure. The situation stands compounded by the loss of faith in political system, articulated in recent weeks by the political leaders of Pakistan themselves including acting prime minister Miraj Khaled.

Leghari, Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharief and Khaled all have been acrimoniously flagellating the quality of politics and political institutions of Pakistan. That a known democratic leader like Miraj Khaled lamented 'Pakistan being a crowd rather than a nation' and suggesting that salvation perhaps lies in letting the army manage the country is a tragic commentary on Pakistan's political predicament and at the same time a justification for the role given to the armed forces through the CDNS.

Indications are that the people of Pakistan, tired of skullduggeries of their political leaders, generally endorse this assessment of their acting prime minister. This being so, the council's creation is not going to be objected to by the people of Pakistan barring some marginal exceptions. Pakistan's major allies, the United States and Saudi Arabia, are not averse to this situation, because the stability and military reliability of Pakistan is more important to them strategically than Pakistan remaining a genuine democracy.

What are the implications for India? Our political parties and leaders should be alert and conscious about the implications of the legitimisation of the Pakistan army's role as the arbiter of Pakistani politics.

The corruption, the maladministration and the increasing dependence on our armed forces to manage our internal crises can generate a feeling amongst our army leaders also that if they are entrusted so frequently with the responsibilities of governance without the final decision making power, it would be more rational and justified for themselves to have the political and constitutional role of decision-making.

Though our more successful experiment in democracy may delay the process, this orientation can occur if we do not get our act together soon enough in our democratic framework.

With the army's dominance in Pakistani policy-making processes, one should expect the adversarial distance in Indo-Pakistan relations to continue, though with one positive possibility. If the armed forces lend some internal stability to Pakistan, Pakistan may be less inclined to be adventurist towards India though Pakistan would continue to be interventionist in our affairs when it suits it. We must be alert to this latter possibility.

The Pak army becoming a cardinal element in the Pakistani state structure is a warning to us about the importance of maintaining the integrity and functional efficiency of our democracy. We, as a people, and our politicians should heed this warning and revive our conscious commitment to the Constitution which we gave ourselves 46 years ago.

Tell us what you think of this column