Here is a commentry in LA times. It essentially takes Pakistan down the Algerian model. Guppies in Pakistan: is this even remotely reasonable? Are the religious parties that strong? I think this guy is way off from all I have read in the past.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_27-8-2002_pg1_4
COMMENTARY
Musharraf Plays Rough in a Tough Neighborhood
By RANAN R. LURIE
Last week, President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan broke his promise both to his nation and the world about stepping down as the strongman of his country by October. In my interview with him last year, he was very insistent about his democratic plans. I must admit that I was sold on his sincerity. But with his announcement Wednesday that he was extending his presidency five years, he flatly contradicted himself. He chose political dishonor rather than risk being swept aside by a tsunami of Islamic fundamentalist voters in the election set for October.
The Algerian example was his warning beacon. In 1990, the Islamic Salvation Front, whose goal was nothing less than transforming Algeria into a full-fledged religious Islamic state, won a stunning electoral victory over the ruling socialist-military party. The military was shocked by the success of the Islamic fundamentalists and halted the electoral process and suspended parliament.
The chaos and disaster that have hit Algeria since, fomented by the fundamentalists who were cheated out of power, have cost more than 100,000 civilian lives, officially, and probably more than 250,000, realistically.
The difference between Pakistan and Algeria is that Musharraf, who saw Pakistani polls heavily supporting the Islamic fundamentalists, decided to retake full control before rather than after the elections.
He has been a military persona since a young age, and his reactions are swift and self-preserving. He knew that by joining the United States’ fight against the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, he had crossed the line forever in the eyes of his fanatic Muslim brothers. But he also knew what could have happened if he had not done so.
Musharraf now faces what almost every Muslim leader confronts: the danger of being weakened by the democratic process that the West cherishes. Islam is a very tough, no-nonsense neighborhood in which you have to be strong to survive as a leader. The potential of assassination is skyrocketing for every Muslim leader, especially in Muslim societies toying with democracy. The masses see equality as a dangerous Western tool because, for starters, it grants women equality with men (“one person, one vote”) and because Islam simply cannot separate itself from the state; basically it is the state.
Musharraf knows too well that being a dictator in a Muslim country is nothing to be ashamed of. The problem is the big white brother of the West with the grand democratic ideas who might frown over some of his actions. However, right now white brother needs him much more than he needs white brother.
Until Sept. 11, Pakistan had only four friends: China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi. On Sept. 12, the Americans joined the fan club and will probably stay until it wins its wars on terror.
What should fascinate the free world more than anything else about Musharraf’s situation is that he represents a problem every Arab leader faces today: the predicament of choosing between the religion of democracy and the religion of Islam.
Ranan R. Lurie is a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington and a syndicated columnist and cartoonist.
Doesn’t it shows how well Author’s education is ?