Just excerpts because it’s a bit long…he’s touched on the Iraq war, and various other things..I am just pasting the bit relevant to Pakistan.
Q. There is a big controversy about the Pakistani president giving up his uniform, which is still not settled. What do you think of that?
A. This simply does not happen in democracies or in civilized countries. It is quite unfortunate that we in Pakistan were promised democracy, but instead we have a facade of democracy. There is no transfer of power from the military to the civilian setup. It’s just a puppet setup. One man holds all the levers of power. Nowhere can one man have the right to amend the constitution of a country.
Q. So what should political parties do? Should they agitate?
A. If the opposition accepts the amendments to the constitution then they are betraying the people of Pakistan. Because those who voted for people like me and other opposition leaders, did not vote for us to sit in a rubber stamp Parliament and uphold the puppet government. They voted for a democratic setup. I’m afraid there is no alternative to democracy. We are not going anywhere. For one year now there has been no transition of power. Power is in fact consolidating more and more in the hands of Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
Q. What do you think should have happened?
A. There is no substitute to pure democracy. Pure democracy means separation of power. It means the rule of law. It means upholding the constitution. Upholding the constitution means institutions functioning in their own constitutional orbits. There is no alternative to this. There is no such thing as controlled democracy. It has never worked. So what should have happened was that the institutions, mainly the Pakistan judiciary, should have been strengthened and empowered, made accountable to an independent body like the judicial commission and then all other institutions should function in the sphere of power granted to them by the constitution. That’s how developed countries function. Unfortunately, in Pakistan all institutions are subordinated to the army. We are going nowhere.
Q. Is there no hope for democracy in Pakistan?
A. I have a firm belief that we’ll have pure democracy. I have no doubt that the process of change has already started in Pakistan. It was stopped temporarily by the sham elections and the sham democracy we have right now, but nothing can stop this process of change. I’m convinced that it’s only a matter of time. Public awareness in Pakistan has increased enormously. People are more aware today than ever before, and that’s why people rejected the last controlled, rigged elections. Especially in cities there was hardly any turnout because people do not want the establishment meddling in their affairs anymore.
Q. Do you think the army will give up so easily?
A. I think the army as an institution realizes that if it gets involved in civilian affairs its own professionalism will be affected. I do believe that the Pakistani Army is probably the only institution that has been functioning professionally. Other institutions have been systematically destroyed in Pakistan. To preserve the institution of the army, it is important that it stays away from civilian affairs.
Q. Your comments on the recent arrest of opposition leader Javed Hashmi on charges of treason.
A. The only law under which Javed Hashmi has been arrested is the law of the jungle — might is right. How can you arrest someone for having a letter? The letter was given to all of us, all parliamentarians. I was also given a copy. Inquire about the letter or reject it. But you can’t arrest a man for treason because he has a letter which all parliamentarians got.
It’s giving the government a bad name. It’s exposing the government all the time. It’s not very good. It exposes the shallowness of our democracy. Even the speaker did not know about it. It shows there is no rule of law.
Q. Is the system of party funding going to change to allow parties like yours to do well in elections?
A. In politics there is no such thing as a small party or a big party. In Pakistan, unfortunately, we do not have a strong election commission or a strong judicial system. Therefore, they allow money that has come from corruption to play a part in the elections, and you cannot expect people who have made money by legal means to fight against corrupt money. It’s a very tall order. Anywhere in the world, even in the United States, people are questioning the use of money in politics. The more money is used in an election campaign, the greater the corruption in the country — the more those politicians tend to be corrupt to retrieve that money when in power. That has been proven worldwide. The only way is to cut down the money spent in elections. That’s where the election commission comes in. And I have to say that the Indian Election Commission has been very forceful in implementing the limits on election spending.
Q. Where do you see your party — Movement for Justice — in the next couple of years?
A. I have no doubt in my mind that our party will succeed. It will succeed because the party has credibility. People in Pakistan now realize that here is a party that twice had a chance to join the establishment-backed parties and come into power, and twice the party rejected power and stood for its principles and its ideology. I think credibility is the most important thing a political party can have. Once you have credibility then that credibility gets converted into a vote bank. And I have no doubt that this party will come into power — if not in the next election, the election after that. Remember one thing, our biggest backing is the youth vote.