Yes ZAB absolutely was in the know. The military operation was started because ZAB and other politicians (I have a ton of newspaper cuttings from the timeframe) specifically were asking the military to take action for "mulk bacchao". The Army conducted the most fair and free elections in the then history of Pakistan and ZAB could have said "because its the right thing and Mujeeb has the clear majority, he should be the PM". Yahya was ready to have Mujeeb form the government. However Bhutto did not let it go and insisted on the stupidity of having two leaders across the wings. In your urge to blame the Army, you are ignoring the huge role that ZAB had played in the breakup of Pakistan.
Its not about what Bugti demanded since he, actually his father and later him, had got whatever they demanded from the days of independence. The issue is that he and others like him have treated Balochistan like a personal "Jageer". Displacing Baloch that fall out of favour with him from their land is not his God given right. The reason the insurgency persists is because of the fact that the sardars have such a strong control over their fiefdoms. What difference does it make for a poor Baloch to stick with Pakistan or not? His life is that of a wretch living under the yolk of the Sardar who gets paid in the millions and billions by the GoP yet does not do anything to uplift his tribesmen. Come tomorrow, I do not get electricity in my chak, should I pick up a gun and start fighting the Government of Pakistan? What is the precedence to be set here? That every Tom, Dick and Harry can hold a gun to our temple and hold us hostage? One day you make a deal with Bugti, next day the other nawab/sardar starts agitating because he wants new terms of compensation from the center all in the name of Baloch nationalism. This goes on while Balochistan continues to fall further behind while these Sardars live their comfortable lives in Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi or abroad. I personally have no sympathy for the cruel sardari system and its leadership, especially when they take up arms against the Government. Just like the TTP, the state needs to take firm action against them. Its interesting to see the double standards being applied here. On one hand you take a strong stand against extra-constitutional steps of Musharraf, but when Bugti trashes the very same constitution by taking up arms against the state and calling for secession, you make calls for giving the chap and his cronies what they want.
I have a major difference of opinion over what treason is altogether and that is because the reality in Pakistan is as such that Musharraf won't be the last of the military interventionists. There will be others. Each time you will be calling it treason but not addressing the fundamental reasons that lead to this problem. Keep in mind that while Musharraf and Nawz conflict was an added factor in the most recent take over, the previous ones were due to systemic breakdown in the governance of the Country.
Its chief and some on its bench are as guilty of treason as the General.
- Yahya had no right to become head of state, if he did forcibly occupy that chair he became THE decision maker. Going through articles and books written about that time it becomes clear that Yahya was least bothered by whats happening in East Pakistan. He was having orgies (even ex-service men mention that) DURING the war. I mean can there be more shameless creature? What right PA has to overthrow democratic govt when they protected the Nero of Pk? After losing that war another dictator was ready to declare martial law (Shujah Nawaz's book).
Even Mujeeb didn't expect that this thing will be dragged so far. Many today think that as a policy decision PA had decided that East Pakistan is a liability and deliberately did not try to seriously tackle the issue. Seriously speaking I also think on the same lines today. Far Far too many indications that PA never took the threat seriously. Just look at the rhetoric coming from Tiger Niazi who actually says in a later interview that (Translate) " Defeat was certain as India had released Sweet smelling women" He also quipped that "Jawans who fight and sleep in Bengal can't be expected to go to Jehlum for sex". Put it in the perspective of the shameful episode of rapes in '71. General Tikka (or was that Yahya?) famously said we want he land not the people SAME thing Musharraf is saying about Baluchistan. I mean do these dimwit ever learn?
Both Bhutto and Mujeeb were imprisoned and at one time both were sure they will be killed. Bhutto can be blamed for many things but breaking Pakistan is not one of them. The blame stops at Yahya and PA. They were in-charge and they were supposed to tackle this problem.
- Baluchis are a tribals, the institute of sardars exists for hundred of years and no one can force them to quit it. If Federation tries to force them it will be acting exactly like Britishers and their 'White Man's Burden'. Federation can only provide infrastructure and act as a catalyst in development of that area (which Federation never did for some reason). The insurgency exists because Baluch honor has been slighted by murdering Bugti. For all their evils Sardars still lead and thats the fact on ground.
Sardars have good reason to blame Federation, Baluchis have been deprived. There is no doubt about it. Whats extra constitutional when practically there is no Govt (or has been for that matter) in most of Baluchistan? Sardars in their capacity were not progressive but there was a lot Federation could have done which it didn't. From roads to schools to hospitals Baluchistan has been at the last place. The situation is so bad that people are now fighting this war knowing full well that they won't survive it and the geo-politics ensure that no one will help from outside (in a meaningful way). Do you have any idea how deprived a person has to be to knowingly throw his life away?
- An election could have been called within 3 months of takeover which no dictator did as they wanted to rule. The fundamental problem is that there is a culture in PA which treats civilians like a lower life form and has decided that these lower life forms can not be allowed to take part in any decision making process. During dictator's era the whole top hierarchy of Army benefits from getting key positions in public organizations.
Any army man who takes part (or has taken part) in overthrowing a constitutionally elected govt is a criminal and a traitor. That man has actively taken part in breakdown of law and order and creating an environment where different factions of this country feel compelled to use violent means for their genuine concerns. That man has also done his part in making this land of pure a banana republic and PA a laughing stock.
And mind it there won't be another Martial law. If it comes (and I dread that day) it will shame Zia's despotic era by miles as it will be impossible to handle the public without using violence. That martial law will likely see Pakistanis fighting against their own Army. PA has no saving grace now, Awam was drilled for decades about Barkaats of Jehad and most consider PA American touts who have back stabbed the Mujahideen. Lal Mosque was the water-shed moment, a dark stain which will never go away and can never be justified. PA has declared every single political party a traitor at one time or another. PPP, PMLN, ANP, Baluchistan and Sindhi nationals, MQM and any other party which dares to seek a democratic solution. Baluchistan and KPK are vehemently against PA for obvious reasons. PA always had the support of religious right and it has lost it after U-Turn on Taliban, leftists were already against PA ever since Bhutto's hanging. Which segment of this society is going to accept Martial Law?
- Chief can declare he was threatened and most will believe him. Chief can target Musharraf on 2nd emergency which does not include him or other judges.
?
