Struggle for Pakistan's soul

[Bull]

"Outside observers of Pakistan's state and society may be a trifle surprised by the acrimony caused by the passage through its parliament of legislation entitled Protection of Women's Rights Bill."

"Reduced to basics, Zia's Islamisation, they argue, was a bid to legitimise his seizure of power and Musharraf's present liberalism a device to make another term of office in military uniform acceptable to people and the international community."

"A frequently asked question is why he did not carry out the long overdue review of a bad law for seven years of absolute power."

"In Pakistan's polarised politics it is natural that the minimal amendment made now is hyped as an Ataturk-style reformation"

Read the full article here..
http://gulfnews.com/opinion/columns/world/10085398.html

 

[Bull]

why he did not carry out the long overdue review of a bad law for seven years of absolute power?

 

[Thunder]

Elections are coming up, that's why he is doing such things. Someitmes he talks about secularism to please his western masters, and sometimes he talks about islam to please muslims. While in reality, pakistan is still there where it was 10 years ago for your average pakistani, and no just because there are a few fancy buildings being built in pakistan does'nt make us devloped. Those buildings are for the rich, not to help your average pakistani.

Musharraf like every other desi priesdient is doing nothing but securing his seat and power. Sometimes by pleasing his western masters and sometimes giving us hope that he will do soemthing to help the ummah. But in reality, it's all about him


As for the article, don't expect anything from pakistan for a while, because of the lack of eduction, extermists previl. The idea that pakistan will lead the ummah is nothing but a idea as of today, the ummah will have to wait for a open-minded leader to rule pakistan that will end the extermits rule in pakistan. A morden islamic state, not a extermist state like afghanistan or a secular state like turkey. A morden islamic state. But that is just a dream,

 

[blain2]

why he did not carry out the long overdue review of a bad law for seven years of absolute power?

I think a similar question could be posed as to why the GoI has not been able to budge on its stated position on Kashmir? The answer is quite simple....due to domestic politics....when Musharraf started off trying to build a political alliance, he relied on the Islamist parties....as time has gone on, the agendas have have become divergent and the support from secular parties for such bills has increased. It was a matter of opportune time to push this bill forward. Had Musharraf tried this two years ago, it would have been much more difficult to get it through.

Absolute power is what it seems to you..in Pakistan, nobody wields the absolute power,...not even the Army! Musharraf is also subject to many similar pressures as any civilian leader when the issues pertain to religion....nobody can walk over issues that have religious implications...thus the difficulty.

 

[Awesome]

why he did not carry out the long overdue review of a bad law for seven years of absolute power?

Musharraf's absolute power is a myth to further destabilize the legitimate powers he holds or exercises. Musharraf is carrying forward all democratic norms and only using lawful methods to influence change. Otherwise in the future when he's gone things can be reversed since they'd have only come by unlawful methods.

Hisbah bill is being challenged under the same constraints. Any dictator can overrule it. But only a leader would bring the change from the grassroots levels.

Struggle for the soul? Well it's change, and all nationwide change requires a concentrated struggle.

 

[Bull]

I think a similar question could be posed as to why the GoI has not been able to budge on its stated position on Kashmir? The answer is quite simple....due to domestic politics....when Musharraf started off trying to build a political alliance, he relied on the Islamist parties....as time has gone on, the agendas have have become divergent and the support from secular parties for such bills has increased. It was a matter of opportune time to push this bill forward. Had Musharraf tried this two years ago, it would have been much more difficult to get it through.

Absolute power is what it seems to you..in Pakistan, nobody wields the absolute power,...not even the Army! Musharraf is also subject to many similar pressures as any civilian leader when the issues pertain to religion....nobody can walk over issues that have religious implications...thus the difficulty.

You have answered that question as if it was me who asked it.

Please read the article,its the author who asks not me,so dont bring in GoI or Kashmir into it jeez!!!!

 

[Bull]

Musharraf's absolute power is a myth to further destabilize the legitimate powers he holds or exercises

Well under what right did he pardon NZ and expel BB?

 

[Contrarian]

I think a similar question could be posed as to why the GoI has not been able to budge on its stated position on Kashmir?

They have not been able to budge their position on Kashmir, because they dont want to budge on Kashmir. Musharraf could not do what he wanted to do because of domestic pressures. that is not the case with the Indian govt. The enire nation is one in its statement that India will wage a war against ANY enemy in the world for its last inch of teritory ilncuding Kashmir, and North east.

The only other solution would be unless we are offered something very substantial in return to offset that. But that is valid only to China. We have already got recognition for Sikkim from them. And the recent statements by the govt and people on the Tawang and Arunachal Pradesh issue seems that that is not the case for China also.Pakistan has nothing that it can offer India that could be traded for redrawing the borders.

 

[Awesome]

Well he wasn't President then. But in any case Presidential powers in most countries would allow pardons. He did not pardon anyone either. It was a deal, details are sketchy.

How most people see it, the Saudi Royalty at that time did not trust Musharraf nor did they recognized him as the rightful leader. If they would've pulled out their support at a near defaulting stage, it would've been the wraps for Pakistan. In times of crisis the President can make some calls, without proper channels. Mainly when proper channels don't exist any more.

Like in the case of war a Presidential order can evoke the draft and anyone of age can be called to serve.

Musharraf did come to power through his position in the army. If power was what he wanted to exercise then he wouldn't have called himself Chief Executive. He wouldn't have either conducted the referendum that made him President and brought some sort of more constraints on his power. Later he conducted the General Elections which legally just carries a vote in the NSC. It's a strong vote since most of the other members on the NSC may choose to side with him.

NSC = National Security Council, the body which would from now on be used to dismiss key members of the government, army, judiciary. Hence it makes it crucial for Musharraf to keep the majority vote in the NSC in his favor.

Oh and Musharraf never expelled BB. She's been absconding from Pakistan ever since NS came to power.

 

[Bull]

How most people see it, the Saudi Royalty at that time did not trust Musharraf nor did they recognized him as the rightful leader. If they would've pulled out their support at a near defaulting stage, it would've been the wraps for Pakistan. In times of crisis the President can make some calls, without proper channels. Mainly when proper channels don't exist any more.

Well yes, that means Pakistan would be at the mercy of PA chiefs in the future as anybody can call the shots and do the what they feel is right for the country.otherwise why would he fear leaving the PA chief post to somebody?

Mushraff didnt conduct the election on his will,there was pressure on him to do so.He amended the constitution and continues to be the Pres as well as the PA chief.

 

[Awesome]

Army has never been able to take over without the consent of the public. When Musharraf took over from NS, it was like the best thing had happened with Pakistan.

Musharraf didn't have any serious pressure on him in 2002. He had presented the road to democracy plan way back in 1999, itself which was to last three years. The only pressure there was, was to meet a deadline. The main power in Pakistan is now with a body of various leaders of Pakistan, the NSC. Musharraf mainly now wants to keep one extra vote. Plus since other army generals sit on the NSC, he wants to call the shots for them too.

Musharraf CAN be thrown out of the NSC too. All someone needs is a majority vote.

 

[niaz]

Well yes, that means Pakistan would be at the mercy of PA chiefs in the future as anybody can call the shots and do the what they feel is right for the country.otherwise why would he fear leaving the PA chief post to somebody?

Mushraff didnt conduct the election on his will,there was pressure on him to do so.He amended the constitution and continues to be the Pres as well as the PA chief.

In a way NSC provides a safety valve. If the PA top brass is unhappy with the state of the country, NSC forum will provide a place to air their views and let the steam off. However, NSC is not an elected body and in a democracy, a non elected body cannot ride roughsod over an elected body/ or elected leaders. But this may still be the least damaging alternative to avoiding future miliatry coups.

How to retire gracefully is an endemic problem with all the non elected strongman. Ayub Khan tried to solve it by making himself a 'Field Marshal' who never really retires. Zia was Chief of the Army for 11 years. Mushy faces the same problem. Let us say he is elected President again and some other General is Army chief. Parliament and the prime minister can always forcibly remove the president ( Ask him to resign as in the case of Ghulam Ishaq). What would Mushy do ? "Raise the chickens"??. Thus the delimma and reluctance to take off the uniform.

 

[blain2]

You have answered that question as if it was me who asked it.

Please read the article,its the author who asks not me,so dont bring in GoI or Kashmir into it jeez!!!!

Understand the gist of my point with regards to Kashmir and GoI before you go off on your rant. If you still don't get it then let me know and I will try to explain it again. I did not point out the Kashmir situation just to bring India and the Kashmir issue into this for the hell of it.....simple point is that difficult policy decisions are not easily made...I used the example of Kashmir issue to point out that hard policy decisions require the right time and the right environment. Similar reason for Musharraf to wait for as many years before he pushed the bill through.

 

[blain2]

They have not been able to budge their position on Kashmir, because they dont want to budge on Kashmir. Musharraf could not do what he wanted to do because of domestic pressures. that is not the case with the Indian govt. The enire nation is one in its statement that India will wage a war against ANY enemy in the world for its last inch of teritory ilncuding Kashmir, and North east.

The only other solution would be unless we are offered something very substantial in return to offset that. But that is valid only to China. We have already got recognition for Sikkim from them. And the recent statements by the govt and people on the Tawang and Arunachal Pradesh issue seems that that is not the case for China also.Pakistan has nothing that it can offer India that could be traded for redrawing the borders.

Oh geez please get off your jingoistic high horse with all this talk about "one nation and one inch" trash! Pakistan has just as much a claim on Kashmir as India does and its simply people like you with this self-limiting "my precious" attitude that is holding up the Kashmir issue.

The simple point is like us you guys also have certain quarters that are unwilling to come to terms with Kashmir on a equitable basis. For as long as there is no will to take on these elements and work around the obstacles, things do not get done. This was my original point about why Musharraf waited to get the Hisbah bill through...he actually worked the media, religious and secular parties and individuals, and when the time was right, pushed the bill through....for many issues, including Kashmir, the same sort of leg work is required on both sides. In the long run, an ongoing Kashmir problem creates bigger problems for India than it does for Pakistan.

Pakistan does not have to offer ANYTHING to India on Kashmir....Kashmir has its own dynamics and one day the Kashmiris will give India the big mighty birdy and say we want to have it our way...with force, India is only repressing the aspirations of the Kashmiris (something which we had tried to do in EP and failed miserably)...the problem is not going away...Kashmiris are already at the point where they say India and Pakistan can go to hell, so your inch here or there does not really count for much.

 

[blain2]

Well yes, that means Pakistan would be at the mercy of PA chiefs in the future as anybody can call the shots and do the what they feel is right for the country.otherwise why would he fear leaving the PA chief post to somebody?

This is the reason we have the NSC now. This provides a consitutional framework for the Armed Forces to be heard at the highest level. In the future, there will no longer be a need for the Army Chief to take over as long as there is a working mechanism of checks and balances.

This lack if framework was one of the major shortcomings in the Pakistani political landscape. In the future, it would discourage the military from taking over.