Musharraf’s language and demeanour are the same as that of Egypt’s ruler Hosni Mubarak at the time of the 1987 elections for the Egyptian parliament. Twenty years later, Mubarak is still in power and the Egyptian people still have no real choice between leaders.

Egypt is a nation of a thousand NGOs and several political parties but there is no serious political challenge to Mubarak’s authority. Mubarak marginalised the real opposition, allowed western funded NGOs to work within pre-defined spheres, and has regularly held elections without allowing alternation in power.

Musharraf’s guns are trained on Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif for a reason. Having served as prime ministers, the two are visible reminders that Pakistan can be ruled by someone other than Musharraf. Once they are out of the way, Musharraf can follow Mubarak in holding election after election, changing rules and judges as often as he likes, and control the country with the help of the security services and large amounts of US aid.

Incidentally, Mubarak (who started out as an air force general) has been a civilian and out of uniform for the last 25 years but that has not eased the grip of the military and the intelligence services on Egypt’s polity. Musharraf’s decision to continue to live in ‘army house’ after ostensibly handing over command to General Ashfaq Kayani reflects his desire to be Pakistan’s Mubarak.

The holding of free and fair elections is not a technical issue; it is a matter of intent. A ruler or government that has no intention of sharing or transferring power is unlikely to hold free and fair elections.

... contd.