What's new

Uncle Sam Your Game In Pakistan Is Exposed!

people believe me this mindset of encouraging the army to intervene in politics has got to change. we r in the 21st century. let the politicians fight it out. the army should keep a eye on things and play its constitutional role.

I completely agree.

Democracy is a messy thing, and it takes time to perfect and mature. We keep starting on the process and then stopping it after a couple of years because "its not working". Of course it isn't, it hasn't been given enough time.

Only recently I would argue is India beginning to see positive changes in its democratic institutions.

People are not going to become saints if we educate the entire population, which is an argument used against having democracy in Pakistan. The politicians will still be corrupt and power hungry, and the intrigues will continue.

Let the system play out and mature.
 
.
Araz,

Thank you.

Mr Quereshi did upset me, even though I think Gen Musharraf has done his bit and could have done more.

But if democracy has to come, so be it.

Vox Populi, Vox Dei!

Give it a chance and as Agnostic has said they can't change overnight!
 
. . .
Here is Cowasjee in his usual humorous manner:

May 25, 2008 Sunday Jamadi-ul-Awwal 19, 1429




Despair on the line




By Ardeshir Cowasjee


LEST we forget, let me reiterate. Those now at the helm of the affairs of the republic that is Pakistan, this God-given man-made nation, guiding us along the path to destiny, whether they sport glittering Colgate smiles, implanted pricey hair, dyed locks, wigs, perukes, toupees or whatever, thanks to that marvellously wicked NRO forced upon a willing President General Pervez Musharraf by his well-wishers, the Yanks, have been made to appear as white as driven snow.

This unconstitutional and undemocratic piece of legislation, which should have been rubbished by our courts, has imbued them all — the happy returnees and those who have been with us over the past eight years — with implicit faith in themselves, their allies and their sycophantic inept confidants.

But, lest they forget, let them remember that this amnesty forced upon the people has not proven to them, the people, or even gone halfway to convincing them, that the crimes with which these mercenary ‘high-ups’ were charged have not been committed. That they have been let off the hook is merely the worst form of expediency, under the hypocritical garb of ‘reconciliation’ (reconciliation? — it is a perfect con job).

That man of great perception (there were no others to follow him) our founder and maker, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, once prophesied shortly after the making of his country, realising the calibre of men and women around and about him, that each successive government of Pakistan would be worse than its preceding one. This prediction, made 60 years ago, has been eerily correct, and continues to be so.

Pakistan’s newspaper of record, this publication, founded by none other than Jinnah, yesterday editorialised on the present political mess — a masterly understatement. The heading cannot be disputed: ‘Depressing scenario’.

To summarise and to add a few comments: Asif Zardari, unelected representative of the people and himself a relic of the 1990s, has flexed his unrepresentative democratic muscle and referred to his and the republic’s president as a “relic of the past”.

Flying into uncharted realms of fantasy, he has maintained that the people (that flailing horse forever being flogged) are not interested in their stomachs or their erratic electricity supply but only in the departure of Musharraf. Dawn, without elaborating, states that Zardari’s outburst has “sent shockwaves through political circles” and “exacerbated the sense of uncertainty and anxiety in the country”.

Why did Zardari utter? Well, says Dawn, it could mark a change in his policy of reconciliation, or it could be brinkmanship. On the one hand, one member of the famous coalition (we are not sure whether it is on or off) has it that the people want nothing other than the ousting of Musharraf whilst on the other hand, the other member tells us that the beloved awam wants nothing but the restoration of the judiciary.

Since our politicos are convinced that they are not worried about their creature comforts, let them come to an understanding at least about the premier importance of either Musharraf or the judiciary. As says the editorial, Zardari has been castigated for his retreat from the Murree Declaration vis-à-vis the judiciary, so in sticking to his reluctance to agree on the restoration he perhaps found it expedient to have a go at Musharraf hoping to ease tensions, in view of the “pressure from his allies and even elements in his own party” who were unhappy with his ostensible game of footsie with the president.

Musharraf is naturally not too pleased about this public display from the man he has done so much for. But then, what is the old saying about the dog biting the hand that feeds it? And, Zardari opened fire only after his last and final case (so he thinks) had been dismissed by one of the many courts forced to come to his rescue.

Yes, right is the editorial when it opines that the optimism that came with the dawning of Feb 19 “appears a distant memory”. But why does it not wish to point a finger of blame? They, the men running the national show, are all to blame. They are neither politicians of stature nor statesmen — they are minnows when it comes to political responsibility and statesmanship. If Musharraf has let us down, and if things progress as they seem to be progressing, these men he has brought in to play democratic politics are well on the way to letting us down with a bigger bang.

Dawn says that the “will of the people as manifest in the election results has not been entirely respected”. Putting it factually and bluntly, the will as manifested — relief from the inflated prices and shortages of the basic needs of the masses — has been trampled underfoot.

But yes, the “key players” have indeed chosen to “sacrifice the larger national interest at the altar of personal gain and ego”.

Now, why should we pretend to be so naïve as to be surprised by this? Did these key players, the two main democrats plus their sidekicks, not do exactly the same during the decade of the 1990s as they yo-yoed with the fate of Pakistan? Those of us who kept our heads firmly out of the clouds during this past year expected nothing more. In fact, what is surprising is that so far their shenanigans have not been more outrageous. However, time will tell.

And yes, there are “few reasons for optimism”, and that “we will find leadership at all tiers and in all areas of state” is indeed “a forlorn hope”. It is nowhere on the horizon. The danger lies in further deterioration, both political and economical. It also lies in the presidency. Musharraf tends to be reckless and if he is cornered, this recklessness may provoke him into doing something both he and his country may later bitterly regret. It is imperative that he keeps his cool, that he thinks long and hard before he acts.

One headline yesterday proclaimed ‘A foreign hand is involved in violence’ — the perennial excuse now offered by the Senate Standing Committee for the Interior on the prevalent absence of law and order.

Is it a foreign hand that has brought about the dog-eat-dog manifestation and vigilantism? Is it a foreign hand that captured and burnt to death alleged robbers in Karachi and Lahore? Is it a foreign hand that caused the slaughter (literal throat-cutting) in the precincts of Islamabad’s NDC of the wife and children of a serving military officer posted overseas? No, it is native desperation.

Nil desperandum no longer applies.

arfc@cyber.net.pk

DAWN - Cowasjee Corner; May 25, 2008
 
.
Salim, the link I highlighted in red in my previous post.

Ayaz Amir having run on the ticket of the PML-N, is surprisingly not sparing in his criticism of NS for much the same that Cowasjee criticizes him for.

Is it a foreign hand that has brought about the dog-eat-dog manifestation and vigilantism? Is it a foreign hand that captured and burnt to death alleged robbers in Karachi and Lahore? Is it a foreign hand that caused the slaughter (literal throat-cutting) in the precincts of Islamabad’s NDC of the wife and children of a serving military officer posted overseas? No, it is native desperation.

Nil desperandum no longer applies.

Well that answers AQ.
 
.
AM,

A very powerful article!!

All I say is that out of all this confusion, let the country stabilise and move on.
 
.
people believe me this mindset of encouraging the army to intervene in politics has got to change. we r in the 21st century. let the politicians fight it out. the army should keep a eye on things and play its constitutional role.

Believe me I agree with you. The Army should play its Constitutional role. But at the same time the politicians have a Constitutional role to serve the people not rob them. So if does it matter what the Constitution says. What should happen is we must encourage the politicians to fulfill their promises. The Army has always come into power on a popular mandate. Now I wish our politicians play their constitutional role and so does our army but history has proven development in Pakistan has happened only under the Army.
 
.
Although I'm not nearly knowledgeable enough to judge the accuracy of many of the stated facts in the article, one thing is self-evident even to the casual observer; that Pakistan's leaders serve foreigners and not the people of Pakistan and in that respect I think this article is dead on.
 
.
US and the moderates



Saturday, July 12, 2008
Tasneem Noorani

The media in Pakistan has some of us in such deep addiction that we have to read the Pakistani newspaper even when abroad; knowing fully well that what we are going to read is not going to be necessarily pleasant. But this instinct for looking for the unpleasant, when one is neither responsible for anything nor constrained to keep in touch on any other count, can only be because we Pakistanis are not capable anymore of being comfortable in a serene and tranquil environment.

From the newspapers it appears that the country is imploding. Multiple blasts in Karachi to terrorise the public. A suicide attack in Islamabad on the anniversary of the government action against the inmates of Lal Masjid by hitting at policemen trying to do their duty. A huge blast in Kabul to blow up the Indian embassy, whose shock waves will certainly travel to Islamabad, because the Afghan government, which is ever looking for reasons to point figures at Pakistan, will find it perfectly plausible to say that it is done by forces which want to derail relations between India and Afghanistan. Who better to blame than Pakistan?

The prime minister reveals on good authority that Mangal Bagh has a lifelong desire to blow up the Parliament in Islamabad, because he was only interested in helping those candidates in the Feb 18 elections who would give him a commitment to sneak suicide bombers into the Parliament.

On the international scene, US News&World Report carries a quote from President Bush where he says that the biggest challenge to the next US president would be Pakistan, and not Iraq, or even Afghanistan, because both these countries are manageable but the same can perhaps not be said about Pakistan.

On the economic front there seems to be a fall, with the foreign exchange reserves falling, the rupee against the dollar in a free fall, stocks plummeting, food inflation at an unprecedented 19.7 percent. The previous economic team must be smirking
.

Now while this country is imploding and in an economic meltdown, the leaders of both major political parties are cooling their heels abroad, and the president is seen on TV watching cricket and smoking a Havana cigar.

What have the people of Pakistan done to deserve this? As individuals they are industrious, moderate, far more intelligent man to man than citizens of a number of successful countries. But back home they are citizens of a country in a rudderless drift with no voyage plan
.

Asif Zardari does not know how to deliver both on his international commitments and his commitment to his coalition partner. So it suits him to let things drift until both parties soften their stand .Nawaz Sharif has the burden of government in Punjab. Why would he want to rock the boat which has given him the governance of the biggest province and whose electorate decides who rules Pakistan, Musharraf is sitting smug and would let things drift, as firstly it shows him in good light by comparison and secondly he would like to hang in there in the hope that something will happen to restore his power. After all, he has the firm support of the "Chaudhry" of the world, at least until the next US president is sworn in.

It appears the only party interested in the running of this country are the Americans, seeing the hectic schedule of its ambassador. Americans are driven by their plan to have a hold in the area and their eternal fear that all conspiracies against the US mainland are being hatched here. That is why for them the will of the voter does not count for much, independence of the judiciary is a luxury a Third World country like Pakistan cannot afford and the resentment against them is only from a group of "mullahs" and has no popular support. For them, while democratic principals are important at home, internationally anything goes, as long their interest are served. All policies flow out of the barrel of the gun.

If the US government thinks that by throwing money and using their superior firepower in the area they will be able to make their mainland more secure, they are likely to be disappointed. Their disappointment is not so much of a worry as it will be one of the many foreign policy miscalculations they would have made; my fear is that in the process it will destroy the only homeland I have
.

I am too small a fry to make recommendation on foreign policy to a world power, but simply based on common sense, may I suggest a two-pronged action plan? Firstly, the US should withdraw physically from the area. The longer they stay the stronger the extremists will become, and extremism is a genie not so easy to put back in the bottle .Osama bin Laden, if he is alive, must be smirking in his cave at the current policy of the US government.

Secondly, if the US wants to really control this area on a sustainable basis, they have to make the people of the troubled area economically dependent on them, with individuals as the direct beneficiaries. Initiatives like the ROZs, duty-free imports, relocating major industrial ventures with buyback arrangements to the troubled areas, should be put on the fast track with a political will to get them through
.

With the present policy direction, it is only a matter of time before moderates in Pakistan become a minority and the US government is the only one which can alter that course.



The writer is a former federal secretary.
Email: tasneem.noorani@tnassociates.net
 
.
SOS to the derelect servant - Mo' MONEY!! The Checks in the mail, honest. Message in a bottle -- throw the bottle back, give some other desperate a chance.


Editorial from IHT
Act fast to stem the Taliban's rising tide
Published: July 11, 2008


The swelling forces of Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters in Pakistan's border region pose a grave threat to U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan. They also pose a grave threat to Pakistan's people.

Pakistan's Taliban militias, like their Afghan counterparts, are trying to impose their harsh version of Islamic law. More than a thousand Pakistanis have been killed in terrorist attacks in the past year, mostly in the border areas where radical Islamic fighters are strongest.

Pakistan's new military and civilian leaders, caught up in their own power struggles, have been dangerously derelict in confronting the threat. Instead, they have deluded themselves that they can negotiate a separate peace with fanatic Taliban leaders. Experience has proved that will not work.

Sending U.S. troops into Pakistan's border regions to try to clean out Taliban and Al Qaeda forces is also not the answer - and would provoke even fiercer anti-American furies across Pakistan. The poorly paid, ill-trained and uncertainly loyal Frontier Corps in Pakistan is not up to the job.

Pakistan's civilian leaders and the new military commander, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, will need to commit to fighting the extremists - for the sake of their own country's stability - and to sending in elite units trained in counterinsurgency techniques.

Local tribal leaders also need to be weaned away from the Taliban. That will only happen if Islamabad and Washington provide substantial economic assistance. The United States has showered Pakistan with more than $7 billion in military aid over the past six years, with little of it actually being used for counterinsurgency purposes. Over the same period, Washington has provided less than $3 billion in all other forms of assistance.

This month, Senators Joseph Biden and Richard Lugar plan to introduce legislation that would provide up to $15 billion in aid to Pakistan over the next 10 years for economic development, health and education. Congress should move quickly to approve the aid.

The United States also needs to work with Pakistan's new government to establish spending priorities and to ensure that any future aid is channeled in ways that would strengthen the civilian government and allow it to regain control over a military that has too often been a law unto itself and intelligence services that seem far more loyal to the extremists than to their own government.

When Pakistan's prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, visits Washington this month, President George W. Bush should offer him strong support in exchange for a commitment to support Afghanistan's embattled government and fight terrorism in Pakistan.

Washington has made many mistakes - most notably supporting Pervez Musharraf for far too long. It has forfeited most of its credibility with the Pakistani people and reinforced their belief that the fight against extremism is not their own.


Both countries have an increasingly urgent interest in rolling back Al Qaeda and the Taliban and working together to promote democracy and development in Pakistan. Bush needs to persuade Pakistan's leaders of that - and he needs to do it now, before Al Qaeda and the Taliban get any stronger.
 
.
Believe me I agree with you. The Army should play its Constitutional role. But at the same time the politicians have a Constitutional role to serve the people not rob them. So if does it matter what the Constitution says. What should happen is we must encourage the politicians to fulfill their promises. The Army has always come into power on a popular mandate. Now I wish our politicians play their constitutional role and so does our army but history has proven development in Pakistan has happened only under the Army.

Rightly said, but i dont agree with your last sentence.
The Army has already sidelined itself, ofcourse it has to do what it has been instructed to do by the "political" government. It was never the itself who was operating in Balochistan and Wana earlier nor it is doing the same now. Mushraff being the president in uniform made retarded minds to think that it is the COAS who is influencing everything.
Army did operate in 1973 in Baluchistan and it is still doing the same in Bara and Wana with a democratic govt in place. Nobody is being pinched now as now it is a civilian face behind which the Army is operating as done in 1973 when the civilian face was Z.A. Bhutto. So it is never the Army itself who takes these kind of decisions. Ofcourse when a DCO or a Governor call upon the military to tackle a situation, retarded minds shouldn't be bothered by it as the fact is that the Army is doing what it is asked for.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom