Musharraf `buckled' under threat

[Srirangan]

‘Wo eent se eent baja dein gay’, ISI DG told Musharraf
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\09\25\story_25-9-2006_pg1_4

Richard Armitage, Daily Times can confirm, did not use the words attributed to him by President Pervez Musharraf in a CBS 60 Minutes interview, namely that unless Pakistan did American bidding, it will be bombed into the “stone age”.

However, neither the President of Pakistan, nor Richard Armitage, who has denied using such language, nor President Bush who said he was “taken aback” when he learnt what had been said, is being untruthful. What actually happened was that after his meeting with Richard Armitage, Lt Gen Mahmood Ahmed – who now wears a long, white beard and has reportedly gone Tableeghi – called Gen Musharraf from the Pakistan embassy in Washington.

The conversation took place in Urdu and when the president asked him what the bottom line of the American message was, Gen Mahmood replied in Urdu that the Americans were intent on the removal of the Taliban regime and would not let Pakistan stand in their way and if Pakistan did not fall in line and cooperate, “wo hamari eent se eent baja dey gain” or words to that effect.

That being so, President Musharraf’s recollection of the conversation with Gen Mahmood, who was then the director general of the ISI, is accurate, only he translated into English what he had been told in Urdu.

It is time for Gen Mahmood to go on record and reproduce exactly the words in which he conveyed the Armitage message to Gen Musharraf on that September day five years ago. khalid hasan

 

[Awesome]

Right but a "what would others think" question was thrown at me. What Pakistanis overseas see it as a perfect ploy to silence bush's threat to send thousands of troops to Pakistan.

Sri, even I suspected a little chinese whisper. But the key factor is "there was a threat" and Armitage's refusal falls short of denying that sparking disbelief amongst Americans. This is an unexpected disbelief by even myself. And I'm damn sure, he can't be seen threatening Pakistan again, twice.

 

[Srirangan]

Ofcourse there was a threat. Remember Rumsfield's 3 minute phone call? That was all it took mate.

There was a very serious threat, and as I've said before what Musharraf did was under circumstances where he had no other option. Anyone else would have done the same.

 

[Skeptic786]

Ofcourse there was a threat. Remember Rumsfield's 3 minute phone call? That was all it took mate.

There was a very serious threat, and as I've said before what Musharraf did was under circumstances where he had no other option. Anyone else would have done the same.

it was not rumsfeld but colin powells phone call....just for the sake of historical accuracy.

 

[Skeptic786]

Asim,

That is one person's personal opinion. Don't give it too much weight. The only opinions that mater are of Pakistanis back at home

After all, Musharraf should be answerable to his people, not to editors of foreign newspapers.

exactly...i agree,

by the same token should we take articles of Blair and Colin Powell published in The News ( pakistan paper part of Jang group ) as endorsements by Jang group or of People of Pakistan of their view.

 

[Spring Onion]

Sri come on
you want me to tell you how RAW had made the day here?
it was even task to weaken our economy while at work in Afghanistan under the cover of consulates. i wont go into details here.

 

[Bull]

Mushraff has used a diplomatic event to serve his personal interests a boost.

What has he gained by saying what he did?has pakistans image been tarnished or improved?

Wouldnt it have been better to portray a picture of Pakistan that realised the danger of extremism and chose to support US on WoT rather than say that we were forced by the US to do so.

Isnt he saying that hasnt they been tyhreatened by US,they might not have supported US in WoT.

Sri come on
you want me to tell you how RAW had made the day here?
it was even task to weaken our economy while at work in Afghanistan under the cover of consulates. i wont go into details here.

You know way to much jana...

 

[Skeptic786]

Mushraff has used a diplomatic event to serve his personal interests a boost.

What has he gained by saying what he did?has pakistans image been tarnished or improved?

Wouldnt it have been better to portray a picture of Pakistan that realised the danger of extremism and chose to support US on WoT rather than say that we were forced by the US to do so.

Isnt he saying that hasnt they been tyhreatened by US,they might not have supported US in WoT.



You know way to much jana...

Image has been tarnished no doubt.

Serving President of a country saying we did something after being threatened.....specially when the country is as strong as pakistan.......armed with Nuclear weapons and Missiles....not to mention army, navy and airforce sworn to do or die in the service of their motherland.

Cuba, Syria, Iran, Venzualla are probably fraction of Pakistani strength have never caved in to threats by the same beast.

 

[Zeeshan S.]

Bull you know what is really happening?

At least Musharraf has taken this issue seriously and put up for the American public. If it had keeping it inside then (American government) would have been considering Pakistan a coward nation especially that **** *** Armitage that tried to say those words. This issue has really put up a pressure on Armitage and those who were behind this statement.

I know why your thinking that it didn't portray a good image of Pakistan, but not everyone is thinking the same way that you are.

Pakistan has supported the U.S and made the correct choice, and this is what no one can change. This issue had to be made public, and has been done so.

 

[Srirangan]

it was not rumsfeld but colin powells phone call....just for the sake of historical accuracy.

Wasn't Powell the one who paid the visit?

 

[Srirangan]

Bull you know what is really happening?

At least Musharraf has taken this issue seriously and put up for the American public. If it had keeping it inside then (American government) would have been considering Pakistan a coward nation especially that **** *** Armitage that tried to say those words. This issue has really put up a pressure on Armitage and those who were behind this statement.

I know why your thinking that it didn't portray a good image of Pakistan, but not everyone is thinking the same way that you are.

Pakistan has supported the U.S and made the correct choice, and this is what no one can change. This issue had to be made public, and has been done so.

You make it sound as if Musharraf has "enlightened the American masses". Trust me, and after 2-3 weeks you'll realize it yourself, Musharraf has just become a target.

He has put himself on the shooting range, and his national and international critics are going to just pick off the ludicrious claims in the book like vultures. I think it has already started in Pakistan.

There is a reason why diplomats are to be diplomatic. It is called saving your neck. Musharraf's obsession to be a macho blunt bold speaker makes him an ideal target.

I can't comprehend why he's given so many opening not only for his critics but also for his political/military opponents within Pakistan.

 

[Skeptic786]

Wasn't Powell the one who paid the visit?

yes ...but the phone call to mushy was also made by Powell.

 

[Awesome]

Mushraff has used a diplomatic event to serve his personal interests a boost.

What has he gained by saying what he did?has pakistans image been tarnished or improved?

Prevents Bush from saying that twice. And Musharraf will have to say no very soon and Bush would have to say ok.

Wouldnt it have been better to portray a picture of Pakistan that realised the danger of extremism and chose to support US on WoT rather than say that we were forced by the US to do so.

He did say it was a very rude remark. But anyway that would've been a lie. The war only spread the danger of extremism. And brought it from Afghanistan to Pakistan.

Isnt he saying that hasnt they been tyhreatened by US,they might not have supported US in WoT.

Which would be the truth.

 

[Awesome]

It's a response to all the other writers and their books which had their own perspectives of Musharaffian events.

 

[Srirangan]

"Musharrafian events"

Care to explain that? The WoT, Pakistani politics, Kargil, Indo-Pak relations are not "Musharrafian Events". I'm sorry but you seem to be unable to look beyond one man.

I mean, you might even consider yourself to be a PR Officer of Pakistan, but Musharraf is not Pakistan.