mr42O
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2009
- Messages
- 6,178
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Mr Nawaz Sharif once used to say that he would never sign the CTBT. Now he has made a firm commitment to the United Nations that he will sign it soon. Is this pledge credible?
Mr Sharif also said that Pakistan would never resile from its historic, multilateral, core-issue, position on Kashmir. Now he has agreed to talk with India on the other contentious issues and given a commitment to negotiate a settlement over Kashmir bilaterally (see page 7). Is his pledge credible?
The question of Nawaz Sharif’s credibility has cropped up time and again. Karz Utaro, Mulk Samvaro. MQM. Kalabagh. Pakhtoonkhwa. IMF. Ad nauseam. If the fellow had only been a congenital liar and fool, we might have shrugged off his vices as befitting any run-of-the-mill politician. But as a prime minister who wants to become Amir ul Momineen, his omissions and commissions make him a veritable security risk for Pakistan. Worse, the latest revelations by Rehman Malik, a former senior FIA officer, now show Mr Sharif out to be a plunderer at par with the likes of Benazir Bhutto and Asif Zardari.
Mr Malik’s allegations against Mr Sharif seem no less solid than those of Mr Sharif’s against Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari (see page 4-6). Yet the Ehtesaab Commission, the Ehtesaab Cell and the courts seem interested in pursuing only one set of allegations against one set of rulers rather than against both. More alarming is the fact that the home establishment and the international community has also inexplicably turned a blind eye to Mr Sharif’s gross misdemeanours. If ordinary people see this as a grand, and unforgivable, domestic and international conspiracy to undo Pakistan, can anyone blame them?.
Mr Rehman Malik’s report, however belated, is an eye opener. Details were apparently collected by the FIA during Ms Bhutto’s tenure from 1993-96. They were not publicised because Ms Bhutto wanted the standard covenant among thieves to stand firm. Therefore Mr Malik absconded with the FIA files when Ms Bhutto was overthrown in 1996 so that the caretakers would not get any funny ideas about accountability. How could they, if the record against Mr Sharif was missing and the record against Ms Bhutto needed at least one year to put together, as Senator Saif ur Rehman’s dogged efforts have demonstrated?
But Mr Sharif did not abide by the rules of the game after he came to power. Indeed, he went after Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari with a vengeance. Ms Bhutto tried to talk sense into him but failed — her statements of support for Mr Sharif in early 1997 were directed at seeking a mutually profitable deal for herself and her husband. Then she tried to fight the charges and delay proceedings against her at home and abroad. But in vain. The covenant has now irrevocably (unwittingly, say some) broken at both ends.
We welcome Mr Malik’s intervention, whatever his motivations. And we hope that there is more to come. In the meanwhile, we take pleasure in noting Mr Sharif’s hollow and rather pathetic response to the charges levelled by The Observer. There is also a sense of deja vu in this situation. When the Surrey Palace was unveiled by another British paper in 1996, Ms Bhutto denied the charges indignantly. Indeed, Mr Zardari said that he intended to sue the paper, secure in the belief that his front offshore companies would stand up to scrutiny. In the event, nothing of the sort happened. So too with Mr Sharif. Mr Zardari’s role is now to be played by Hussain Nawaz Sharif.
I will sue the paper, says he self-righteously, pointing out that his family has merely “leased” two out of the four London flats valued at œ4 million. But unlike the Zardaris, the Sharifs haven’t even got their cover story organised adequately. Mr Khalid Anwar, their laiyer (sic), says that only one of the flats is on lease to the Sharifs! In the meanwhile, the Sharifs have complained about The Observer’s misconduct to the Press Council of Britain. But it is revealing that their complaint does not say a single word of defense against the substantial charges levelled by The Observer — money laundering, front accounts, secret properties, offshore companies, the works.
In any other country, a prime minister accused of such gross misconduct would have either resigned in shame or been ousted in disgrace. But in Pakistan, we seem to live by particularly despicable standards. There is no attempt by the courts, for example, to take suo moto cognisance of Mr Sharif’s corruption. Indeed, the Supreme Court has been quietly sitting on an important case (ISI funds) lodged in 1996 by Air Marshall (r) Asghar Khan against Mr Sharif et al since Justice Sajjad Ali Shah was ousted nearly ten months ago.
No matter. Truth will out. And one day, as surely as day follows night, the Bhuttos and the Sharifs and all their vocal collaborators and silent protectors, will pay the price for betraying Pakistan. That is the law of nature.
http://www.najamsethi.com/truth-will-out-2/
Mr Sharif also said that Pakistan would never resile from its historic, multilateral, core-issue, position on Kashmir. Now he has agreed to talk with India on the other contentious issues and given a commitment to negotiate a settlement over Kashmir bilaterally (see page 7). Is his pledge credible?
The question of Nawaz Sharif’s credibility has cropped up time and again. Karz Utaro, Mulk Samvaro. MQM. Kalabagh. Pakhtoonkhwa. IMF. Ad nauseam. If the fellow had only been a congenital liar and fool, we might have shrugged off his vices as befitting any run-of-the-mill politician. But as a prime minister who wants to become Amir ul Momineen, his omissions and commissions make him a veritable security risk for Pakistan. Worse, the latest revelations by Rehman Malik, a former senior FIA officer, now show Mr Sharif out to be a plunderer at par with the likes of Benazir Bhutto and Asif Zardari.
Mr Malik’s allegations against Mr Sharif seem no less solid than those of Mr Sharif’s against Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari (see page 4-6). Yet the Ehtesaab Commission, the Ehtesaab Cell and the courts seem interested in pursuing only one set of allegations against one set of rulers rather than against both. More alarming is the fact that the home establishment and the international community has also inexplicably turned a blind eye to Mr Sharif’s gross misdemeanours. If ordinary people see this as a grand, and unforgivable, domestic and international conspiracy to undo Pakistan, can anyone blame them?.
Mr Rehman Malik’s report, however belated, is an eye opener. Details were apparently collected by the FIA during Ms Bhutto’s tenure from 1993-96. They were not publicised because Ms Bhutto wanted the standard covenant among thieves to stand firm. Therefore Mr Malik absconded with the FIA files when Ms Bhutto was overthrown in 1996 so that the caretakers would not get any funny ideas about accountability. How could they, if the record against Mr Sharif was missing and the record against Ms Bhutto needed at least one year to put together, as Senator Saif ur Rehman’s dogged efforts have demonstrated?
But Mr Sharif did not abide by the rules of the game after he came to power. Indeed, he went after Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari with a vengeance. Ms Bhutto tried to talk sense into him but failed — her statements of support for Mr Sharif in early 1997 were directed at seeking a mutually profitable deal for herself and her husband. Then she tried to fight the charges and delay proceedings against her at home and abroad. But in vain. The covenant has now irrevocably (unwittingly, say some) broken at both ends.
We welcome Mr Malik’s intervention, whatever his motivations. And we hope that there is more to come. In the meanwhile, we take pleasure in noting Mr Sharif’s hollow and rather pathetic response to the charges levelled by The Observer. There is also a sense of deja vu in this situation. When the Surrey Palace was unveiled by another British paper in 1996, Ms Bhutto denied the charges indignantly. Indeed, Mr Zardari said that he intended to sue the paper, secure in the belief that his front offshore companies would stand up to scrutiny. In the event, nothing of the sort happened. So too with Mr Sharif. Mr Zardari’s role is now to be played by Hussain Nawaz Sharif.
I will sue the paper, says he self-righteously, pointing out that his family has merely “leased” two out of the four London flats valued at œ4 million. But unlike the Zardaris, the Sharifs haven’t even got their cover story organised adequately. Mr Khalid Anwar, their laiyer (sic), says that only one of the flats is on lease to the Sharifs! In the meanwhile, the Sharifs have complained about The Observer’s misconduct to the Press Council of Britain. But it is revealing that their complaint does not say a single word of defense against the substantial charges levelled by The Observer — money laundering, front accounts, secret properties, offshore companies, the works.
In any other country, a prime minister accused of such gross misconduct would have either resigned in shame or been ousted in disgrace. But in Pakistan, we seem to live by particularly despicable standards. There is no attempt by the courts, for example, to take suo moto cognisance of Mr Sharif’s corruption. Indeed, the Supreme Court has been quietly sitting on an important case (ISI funds) lodged in 1996 by Air Marshall (r) Asghar Khan against Mr Sharif et al since Justice Sajjad Ali Shah was ousted nearly ten months ago.
No matter. Truth will out. And one day, as surely as day follows night, the Bhuttos and the Sharifs and all their vocal collaborators and silent protectors, will pay the price for betraying Pakistan. That is the law of nature.
http://www.najamsethi.com/truth-will-out-2/
heads
