military did not refrain from once more seizing
power. There was no outcry or support for the
politicians.
In 1999 Pakistan reverted for the fourth time
to military rule, overthrowing the civilian gov-
ernment. General Pervez Musharraf appointed
himself president. The army occupies a priveleged
position having infiltrated all branches of the
bureaucracy at state and provincial level. In the
West Musharraf was shunned. Pakistan’s assistance
to the Taliban and North Korea’s nuclear ambi-
tions especially aroused American anger. But
Pakistan is a nuclear power and had to be treated
with care. The defining moment for Musharraf
was 11 September and the US determination to
fight al-Qaeda in its home base, Afghanistan.
Musharraf abruptly changed and threw in his lot
with the US risking Muslim outrage in the greater
national interest. Pressure on Musharraf to step
down ceased with equal suddeness now that he
had become an ally. This, in turn, encouraged
Musharraf to pursue his campaign in Kashmir.
There had already been a serious crisis in the
summer of 1999, but in the winter of 2001 it
escalated to a confrontation that threatened to
flare into war. The trigger was exchange of gunfire
and fighting across the line of control in Kashmir,
the infiltration of guerrillas aided by Pakistan on
the Indian side and finally the attack by terror-
ists on India’s parliament on 13 December while
in session. India blamed Pakistan, the attackers
were killed but nine Indians lost their lives.
In October 2002 Musharraf restored the sem-
blance of civilian rule permitting a general elec-
tion for the Assembly. A divided opposition
allowed Musharraf’s supporters to gain a narrow
win. But the most remarkable aspect was the rise
of the opposition Islamic religious parties. There
is strong opposition to Musharraf’s US friendly
policy and anger at his abandonment of the
Taliban. Musharraf remained firmly in control
holding the position both of president and chief
of the army. Kashmir remains the most important
goal making it difficult for Musharraf to respond
to Indian approaches. The Pakistan army contin-
ued to support irregular units entering Indian-
controlled Kashmir where they committed
terrorist attacks.
India’s democracy is embodied in its constitution,
which, enacted by the Constituent Assembly in
November 1949 came into force in January 1950.
In its form of government the Republic of India
leans heavily on British constitutional theory. The
president has a similar role to that of the sover-
eign; the power of government is exercised by the
prime minister, who chooses his Cabinet col-
leagues and is dependent on the majority support
of a political party competing regularly at general
elections. The Indian constitution departs from
its unwritten British model by incorporating a Bill
of Rights; another novel feature is the inclusion
of ‘Directive Principles’ of state policy, intended
in a positive way to remedy particular Indian con-
ditions of exploitation and discrimination such as
exist in the caste system of untouchables. India
was proclaimed a secular state. Except for one
period of authoritarian rule under Indira Gandhi’s
Emergency (1975–7), democracy – with general
elections by adult suffrage, freedom of speech and
of the press, the toleration of non-violent polit-
ical opposition, an independent judiciary and
freedom from arbitrary arrest – has prevailed since
independence. This reflects a harmonisation of
British tradition and post-independence Indian
political will. But, in practice, Indian democracy
is specific to India, and no mere copy of that in
Britain or in the US.
Political parties do not function as in most
Western parliaments. The prime minister’s role
became pre-eminent not only in comparison with
the president’s, but – under Nehru – in relation
to the Assembly as well. This was one conse-
quence of Nehru’s complete dominance of
politics for the eighteen consecutive years he
served as prime minister. He was not even for-
mally chosen as their leader by the Congress
Party, but the mantle of Gandhi’s heir unques-
tionably fell on his shoulders. He enjoyed support
throughout the country and enjoyed touring and
addressing mass rallies. He carried the Congress
Party with him at every general election, in 1952,
1957 and 1962. In the Assembly, the Lok Sabha,
Congress was by far the strongest party with never
less than 45 per cent of the total vote; the other
parties were fragmented and drew support only
from largely regional bases. So India looked like
1
FREEDOM AND CONFLICT IN THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT 637
