While the Musharraf regime may be unaware of it, the law of causality – the relationship between cause and effect still holds. That is to say, the qualitative consequences of any action will be harmonious with its nature. In re the political landscape of any State, only the policies pursued today will determine the outcome tomorrow. It is this simple dictum that the current leadership seems to have overlooked.

Upon his cataclysmic ascent to power some seven years ago, General Musharraf presented to a weary nation an agenda for the reformation of the State. Yesterday, while addressing a press conference on his tour down-under, he spoke of the rapid development in Pakistan under his auspices in a number of areas. I intend to focus here on three areas in particular; the establishment of a sustainable political system, freedom of the media and the much-trumpeted empowerment of women.

Since the assumption of power, the general has moved to occupy the office of the President as well. Not surprisingly, the parliamentary elections held in 2002 brought his favoured political parties into power in the federal and provincial governments. A local government structure has been forced upon the State under the purported pretext of providing “grass root democracy”. These are the broad political sweeps of the current regime. The consequence is a political setup devoid of transparency and ambiguous in the jurisdiction of the actors involved. It is a hybrid system, a freak-contrivance wherein the source of power is still the post of the military chief rather than the Presidency. Had it not been so, the general would not have been so adamant regarding the retention of his uniform at the cost of such bad press from home and abroad. These actions have led to a formulation where devolution of power exists only on paper, while all consequential orders come from the top. They have rendered a potent bureaucracy with a proud history toothless, degrading it to petty squabbles with local politicians over issues of authority. These measures have spawned a parliament plagued with daily walkouts by the opposition and meaningless argumentation over non-issues, while the man on the street waits for reform.

The system is jagged and inefficient. It serves the express purpose of reserving all power for the general, which seems to have been its raison d’etre in any case. Nonetheless, it is with puzzlingly genuine pride that General Musharraf speaks of the current political dispensation as a substantive achievement, even when it is patent that this system is designed to last only as long as himself.

In a much similar vein does the general speak of the unprecedented freedom provided to the media. While he affectedly treats it as more of a privilege than a right when he declares that “media in Pakistan is more free than in many developed countries”, the general is not far off the mark. It is true that this regime has been very liberal as compared to its predecessors, both political and military, in allowing criticism of its policies in the local media. The fact that we have at our luxury an array of private news channels to choose from, as compared to the discomfiture of a mediocre State-run propaganda mouthpiece as our only source of local news in the past, goes to the credit of this regime. Having said that, it doesn’t say a lot for press freedom.

A scrutiny of the local media reveals that publications in both languages have been focusing more on what can best be described as generalised criticism of the government and her policies. Everyday, one comes across articles – not dissimilar to this one in daily newspapers, censuring the socio-economic and political policies of the government from a broad perspective. Such criticism is acceptable to the regime, as it generally holds an entity rather than individuals responsible. Moreover, it is synthetic, macrocosmic condemnation that does not cause problems for the government, and bodes well for its image in the international community for having allowed its publication.

However, it has been observed that the current regime has little patience with media coverage of specific issues that, in its view, threaten its image. Instances abound, of journalists being beaten up, harassed and even thrown in jail for reporting on sensitive issues. Last year, Sarwar Mujahid from a local Urdu newspaper was picked up from his home at night in a commando operation, for reporting on the Okara Military Farms. Amir Mir of the Herald suffered similar harassment last year, while Shaheen Sehbai was driven abroad. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) recorded over 50 attacks on journalists between 2002-04 with at least three killed, along with dozens harassed, arrested, tortured or threatened. Further, the recently proposed bill to grant sweeping powers to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) does not augur well for the freedom of electronic media in times to come.

The print and electronic media are themselves to partly blame for this absence of hard-hitting journalism. However, the military regime certainly does not help by creating an environment of constant fear of retribution among journalists, for the sin of displeasing their capricious overlords. In other words, the media is free only insofar as it tows a convenient line of microcosmic censorship drawn by the general. That is probably why we seldom come across substantive articles on issues such as the Gwadar housing corruption, the Defence Housing Authority scams or the Okara Military Farms, apart occasional daring insights from stalwarts like Ardeshir Cowasjee and Farhatullah Babar.

The current regime especially prides itself on empowerment of women in line with General Musharraf’s philosophy of enlightened moderation. Talking to the Auckland Foreign Correspondents’ Club on June 17, he cited greater representation of women in national, provincial and local assemblies as proof of his government’s efforts for women’s rights. Sadly, the ground realities speak otherwise. As circumstances exist at present, the only concrete emancipation witnessed by virtue of empowerment of women through enlightened moderation has been the erection of exotic billboards featuring women in skimpier outfits than before. The general’s regime has been utterly impotent to even initiate any semblance of a debate on real issues plaguing women in Pakistan, such as rampant domestic violence, education and the infamous Zina Ordinance.

The recent treatment of Mukhtaran Mai by the government is a lamentable case in point. General Musharraf recently admitted to ordering a travel ban on her – lifted only after a plea to the Prime Minister – for avowedly ‘protecting the image of Pakistan’. He went on to trash NGOs, and defended his orders by stating that rape was not “a rampant malaise” in Pakistan, and that a bad image of the country might discourage tourists.

Such a stance is flawed on two main counts. First, the imposition of such restrictions on a victim of rape for the crime of being violated is as bad as it sounds. It gives a vivid account of the state of law and justice in the State, and that serves to tarnish the image of Pakistan. Further, while rape may not be a rampant crime in Pakistan, such maltreatment of victims of crimes can only serve to embolden criminals to act with impunity in a State where the victims, and not the guilty, are apparently hounded.

Second, the Mukhtaran Mai incident spread like wildfire all over the world when it was uncovered three years ago, and hardly anyone with even a remote interest in the region would be aware of her tragedy. It makes no sense to have banned her from travelling when there is little that the world does not already know. Individual freedom is a sacred right in any civilised society. Holding it hostage in the name of “national interest” under the excuse that it might dispirit tourists from visiting the country by evoking a “bad image”, reeks of the lowest form of utilitarianism. The general should be smart enough to realise that it is actually his unashamed admission of ordering the ban on Mai’s travel that will be splashed in newspapers across the world and bring a bad name to Pakistan.

No system with an inherent contradiction can remain operative for long. Political systems are designed with a vision to accomplish long term goals for the entire State, and are not tailored to suit individuals. In a similar manner, policies of the current government should be formulated with a view to fulfilling the nation’s needs, rather than the interest of a select few. If the State is to make the progress that the current regime claims that it has made, its policies need to be rid of contradictions.