Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
81

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

President Musharraf loosing power, I do not see that happening in near future, at least not because of all this hue and cry that is going on at the moment. After 11 September 2001 there was much stronger hue and cry against President Musharraf than what it is now, and even after that, in 2002 election, President and his party won the election. I cannot see much difference today; rather I feel that President is much stronger today than he was after 11 September 2001.

[Those who believe that 2002 election was rigged then what would make this election any different? If that is so, why opposition are demanding election, or that President should contest for Presidency from next assembly, as if election would be rigged they have no chance and most likely President’s party may even win two-third majority in assembly, to change the constitution they would like to. So why bother? stay where they are in Dubai and London. Actually, I believe that in next election, MMA might even lose NWFP and Balochistan so it is best for MMA that no election happens].

Nevertheless, only force that can give any jitter to President is lack of support from armed forces. But it seems that armed forces are well behind the president. Even though support from masses does not matter as much to those that have military behind them, still I believe that President Musharraf have quite a huge public support behind him (regardless of all propaganda and dislike by opposition). I believe that opposition knows that too, as that is the reason opposition are protesting with election commissioner about President making appeals to people to vote party of his choice. If President was unpopular, opposition would have been happy, as appeal from an unpopular President would have been seen as advantage than disadvantage by opposition.

As far as political party is concerned, I believe that the only party that matters most is MQM, because they hold the economical blood line of Pakistan, that is Karachi, and any worsening law and order situation in Karachi can cause big financial problem for the country, that in turn could make many in the country go against government. Though at present MQM are supporting President (and government in Islamabad), still, even if they withdraw their support, their effect of making government weak could take few years, as country (as well as President) can still survive for few years with deteriorating economical situation.

From outside world, only country that matters is USA, and they are also supporting President. Nevertheless, USA could not change government in Pakistan (if they could have, Musharraf would never have got into power neither he would have stayed in power for that long). What USA could do is make Pakistan weaker financially, by using their influences on different world financial institutions and countries from where Pakistan find helps and trades (American influence is very effective if country is financially weak and has thugs as rulers).

Again, that can also take long time and government can survive years, as many countries survived even when they had/have bad relation with USA (like Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Korea, Libya in past, Afghanistan in past, Iraq in past, China in past, etc). Nevertheless, as Pakistan exchange reserve is increasing and economy is becoming stronger, Pakistan dependence on USA is decreasing fast.

So, I believe that people could huff and puff, wheeze and gasp, but that is what they can do at most. As far as President is concerned, I believe that he would be still there next year or probably even after 5 years, maybe even after 10 years, if nothing unusual happens to President (that can happen to anyone) or country. That is what I believe, if someone believe differently, it is their choice, there is no certainty whatever a person believes, hence do believe what one likes, and be happy, there is no tax on living in dream world :hoonh:

82

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

I see, intelligent discussion is only when I say "all hail the king Musharraf". When did I become moderator, I am not aware of that, its probably site error, I used to be one but in other sections.... anyway, lets get back to the topic.

83

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

If it was an altruistic grassroots movement sure, but events have indicated that it is anything but, so I can not support it.

to oppose one thing its not imperative that you must support another.

84

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

chaudhry saab

but when benazir can go and whine about secualirsm and linberalizationa nd womsn's rights when she is talking to reporters in the west, she has precious little to show for anything she did in her tenure in these areas.

85

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Benazir says that she will rule the country for the next five years followed by five years rule by Nawaz Sharif.

86

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

^Yeah just learned of this new formula/deal whatever. MashAllah!

Hail Democracy! :dhimpak:
Or was it dummy-crazy?

Bechari massoom qaum, wants to decide its fate…
:smack:

87

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Are u sure BB will not come after FIVE years of Nawaz and we can get rid of bhutto & co ?

88

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Well I just conveyed the latest news. What can I say about their intentions.

89

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.


ok so it won't be a two-year circus?

90

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Musharraf ‘modernizing force’ in Pakistan: Newsweek](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19263098/site/newsweek/)

Can Pakistan Mix Well With Democracy? - New York Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/17/weekinreview/17rohde.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)

U.S. boosts Musharraf - Washington Times](http://www.washtimes.com/world/20070616-112114-7547r.htm)

91

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

:)

92

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Errrrr, weren’t we hearing the same noise of ‘support’ before NS was overthrown, before Zia was killed, before ZAB was killed, etc?we all know how ‘loyal’ the yanks are! :slight_smile:

Interesting article on American ‘influence’ in Pakistan, and whether is can defy overwhelming opinion of Pakistani’s
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\06\19\story_19-6-2007_pg3_6

**America’s interest in Pakistan **

Troika may be America’s choice but the Pakistani street will be the final arbiter. Yes, America has its say but she also has a history of misreading the street and a history of failing, as in Iran, Nicaragua, Venezuela, the Philippines and Panama

America’s Priority Number One is the ‘war on terror’. Its Priority Number Two is the security of our nuclear arsenal. America’s foreign policy is all about ‘Realism’ whereby its ‘primary motivation’ is the ‘desire for military and economic power or security’ and not ‘ideals or ethics’.

The ‘war on terror’ is now all about power while the safekeeping of our nuclear weapons is all about security. Democracy, on the other hand, is all about ideals while the issue of human rights is all about ethics. Rule of law, independence of the judiciary, transparent elections, an independent media, civilian rule and supremacy of the constitution are all ideals.

Who would America support in Pakistan? Remember, America is all about ‘military and economic power’. Remember, ideals and ethics are both subsidiary considerations. So, who would America support in Pakistan? Answer: A Pakistani leader — or an institution — that would assist America in her ‘war on terror’ in tandem with safeguarding our nuclear stockpile.

President-cum-COAS Musharraf has delivered more than any other Pakistani could (on both counts). Naturally, *status quo ante bellum — *or as things were pre-March 9 — suits America the best. But the Pakistani street has put Musharraf’s political survival at stake. Deputy Secretary Negroponte, Assistant Secretary Boucher and Commander of US Central Command Admiral Fallon were all in Islamabad to safeguard America’s priorities, nothing more.

Under the current scenario, America wants to preserve Pakistan Army’s primacy in Pakistani politics in order to achieve her two priorities. Troika, a three-horse-drawn sledge, may be America’s instrument of choice. Musharraf, minus the uniform, stays on as president along with an elected prime minister and a new COAS. Hypothetically, an elected prime minister will broaden Musharraf’s political base and the new COAS will take care of America’s priorities. Presently, besides Musharraf, General Ahsan Saleem Hayat (Armoured Corps; commissioned 1967) and General Ehsan-ul-Haq (Army Air Defence; commissioned 1969) are both four-star army generals.

For the prime ministerial slot, the two obvious choices are Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto. Sharif has a history of getting entangled with Generals Aslam Beg, Asif Nawaz, Waheed Kakkar, Jahangir Karamat and Pervez Musharraf while Bhutto has a history of settling issues through compromises.

Troika may be America’s choice but the Pakistani street will be the final arbiter. Yes, America has its say but she also has a history of misreading the street and a history of failing, as in Iran, Nicaragua, Venezuela, the Philippines and Panama. America also has a history of burying democracies and a history of sustaining dictators like General Martinez (El Salvador), General Pinochet (Chile), General Doe (Liberia), General Abacha (Nigeria), General Branco (Brazil), Duvalier (Haiti), Mobutu (Zaire), Salassie (Ethiopia) and General Suharto (Indonesia).

To be certain, the Musharrafian regime remains convinced that it can weather the storm, uphold the façade, win elections and regain absolute control. Our intelligence outfits are experienced in polluting and then diluting politicians but this is the first time they are facing a judge who they are failing to pollute or dilute.

One thing our GHQ often overlooks is that America needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs America. America is stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan, we aren’t. Plus, Pakistan is the sole lifeline to 26,000 American troops of the 82nd Airborne Division, the 3rd Brigade of the 10th Mountain Division and their special operations forces — in effect, GHQ, whether it realises or not, actually holds the balance of power in the current Pakistan-America equation.

93

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

People should make up their mind. Only two days ago they were ecstatisc thay the US newspapers were asking the US govt. to stop supporting President Musharaf. :D

94

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Amazing.

95

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Balanced, in-depth and clear look at situation in Pakistan today. Long article, but worth the read. It basically suggests that political parties, no matter how active, are polorized, confused and will not be able to fight the ‘war against terror’. Moreover, pressuring Pakistan and Musharraf is not the solution to problems. Daniel talks about Pakistan’s achievement and mistakes in war on terror; also how can Pakistan move forward. It all comes down to a personality who can move forward in all fronts, reforms, war against terror and coperation between political parties-U.S, political parties-military and U.S-military.

A False Choice in Pakistan by Daniel Markey

**Summary: ** Americans are increasingly frustrated with Pakistan’s counterterrorism efforts, but the United States should resist the urge to threaten President Pervez Musharraf or demand a quick democratic transition. Getting Islamabad to play a more effective role in the war on terrorism will require that Washington strike a careful balance: pushing for political reform but without jeopardizing the military’s core interests.

96

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Now even Pakistani writers who had practically written off Musharraf a few weeks ago, are suddenly realising he is going nowhere.

Receding political crisis

By Nasim Zehra

The hundred-day old lawyers’ movement is not waning but it may no longer remain the principal focus for Pakistan’s mainstream political energy. Two interesting developments, some political rethink in Pakistan’s ruling circle and the beginnings of electoral activities may veer political energy towards electoral politics. Forced to some extent by the pressure exerted by the lawyers’ movement, there is a review of political strategy within the Musharraf camp. Some of the likely results of this rethink may be General Pervez Musharraf’s re-election as president by a newly elected assembly, relatively early elections and the government’s extra efforts to convince the opposition that it is keen to hold ‘fair and free’ elections. Dialogue for an end to the confrontation with two key opposition parties, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI), despite its ups and downs will continue. Unless some political development that radically counter these trends emerges on the political scene, the grave political threat of a major destabilisation that the lawyers’ movement had posed to the Musharraf regime seems to be receding. This notwithstanding however the crisis of governance, with a weak writ of the state, and the absence of justice with weak institutions etc. will persist. The unscripted resistance to the high-handedness of state power has indeed provided muscle power to a hitherto weak judiciary. In the apparent strengthening of the judiciary, the lawyers’ movement appears to have impacted one of the principal causes of lack of good governance – the unaccountable exercise of executive and state power. For example the possibility of judicial intervention to block unfair practices by the ruling party, the establishment or the election commission through suo moto action or the admission of petitions by opposition parties, would serve as a deterrent to blatant tampering with the election process. Interestingly this fact has been acknowledged by none other than Benazir Bhutto. Bhutto emphatically stated in her mid-June interview with Geo television that the government does not have the capacity to rig elections in the way that it rigged them in 2002. Similarly a relatively independent judiciary’s engagement on general Musharraf’s re-election by the current National Assembly too must be factored in as the regime strategists decide on the re-election question. Furthermore, the lawyers’ demand for the reinstatement of the CJP is one that will not fizzle out. The judicial process will have to address the questions of the presidential reference, the CJP’s reinstatement both against the backdrop of the president’s illegal move of rendering him “ineffective” and against the backdrop of the CJP’s post removal political-populist role. The Musharraf regime recognises that the relatively independent judiciary will address the question of the CJP’s future within legal parameters. Reportedly there has been indirect back-channel engagement between the CJP and the Musharraf camp. There is still no indication that either side is willing to give up its current position.

However, the two key political demands of the lawyers’ movement which go beyond the judiciary’s independence are Musharraf’s removal and an end to the military’s involvement in politics. In identifying Musharraf’s ouster the lawyers’ movement overstretched its own capacity. As a widely supported legitimate ethical movement raising the chronic issues of power politics, the lawyers’ movement also seeks immediate results in Pakistan’s current mainstream politics. Its political objective is to ensure Musharraf’s removal and that is unlikely to happen. As matters now stand in electoral politics, the demands and the threats of mainstream politicians of the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI), the PML-N and Imran Khan are not likely to be backed by concrete action. For example there is no indication that either or all of the three will boycott elections with General Musharraf as the incumbent president. They are demanding his ouster and Qazi Hussain Ahmad has also threatened to boycott the elections but given the track record of the JI it will opt for pragmatism rather than for radical action involving a boycott. PML-N may attempt a return of its leaders from London but its men in the field will want to fight the ballot battle. Meanwhile the political competition between mainstream parties including the PML-N and the PPP will accentuate. Political parties the world over compete with each other and so will Pakistan’s political parties. The recent somewhat amusing claim by Benazir Bhutto of a PPP-PML-N agreement on taking turns to rule Pakistan for five years each, was contradicted by the PML-N. The fissures between the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) partners may become public. The MMA may begin to unravel under the pressure of JUI’s pro-government leanings versus the JI’s anti-Musharraf stance. In Pakistan for multiple reasons the gap between mainstream politics and ethics is barely shrinking. Imran Khan, the maverick politician who combines ethics, principles and politics functions largely without party machinery. He may influence the urban vote bank as an electoral partner of a party such as the PML-N. On his own for now he is the emerging voice of conscience on Pakistan’s power scene; he is to Pakistan’s mainstream political scene what Asma Jehangir is to Pakistan’s human rights scene. The demands of electoral politics are complex and contradictory. The lawyers’ movement is an urban movement, with support from the political parties insofar as it weakens their adversary the Musharraf regime. The political parties have a partial commitment to the lawyers’ political agenda. Their principal objective is to do well in the imminent ballot battle. PML-N and Qazi sahib may be equally committed to Musharraf’s removal.

Yet they know that given the current political configuration Musharraf’s removal is not an immediate possibility. In addition to some of the economic and foreign policy gains Pakistan made under Musharraf and because of his institutions’ support, Musharraf is there because the opposition parties will never unite to oust him, he is there because some of the competing political parties see him as a road to power, he is there because post 9/11 Pakistan’s opposition is genuinely split along ideological lines and some belong to Musharraf’s ideological leanings, he is there because there is no popular public uprising against him. For example a political crisis that could have shaken the system would have been an en bloc resignation of the entire opposition from the parliament after the bloody tragedy of May 12 in Karachi. Then the state was at its worst and its weakest and the public outraged. But the opposition was at its pragmatic best. It was passionately critical of the government but in no mood to take any radical action. Interestingly another unstated but a seemingly emerging political objective of the lawyers’ movement has to do with the person of the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Popular wisdom has tipped him as an alternative presidential candidate for a section of the opposition. That seems unlikely because every opposition party, maybe barring Imran Khan’s Tehreek-i-Insaaf, will not want a non-political and non-loyalist as its candidate. Some in the opposition will ‘play ball’ with the Musharraf regime and will look for a quid pro quo in exchange for supporting Musharraf or for not opposing him. While the answers to the fundamental questions of rule of law and of an independent judiciarythat the lawyers’ movement has raised, must come from the judiciary itself, the role of Pakistan’s mainstream political parties cannot be undermined. Unless mainstream politicians genuinely appreciate the importance of the rule of law, of governance within the constitutional framework, of strengthening state institutions, of recognising the potential of the parliament and Senate as legitimate political forums through which state institutions such as the army are steered towards playing their constitutional role, the lawyers’ movement will not influence Pakistan’s mainstream political culture as well as the exercise of unaccountable state power. Meanwhile as the logic of electoral politics spreads on Pakistan’s political horizon it will divert the bulk of Pakistan’s mainstream political energy away from trying to ensure Musharraf’s exit. Many in the opposition will no doubt attack Musharraf, the system and his policies in their election campaigns. But under Musharraf, if all else remains the same, the 2007 elections will be held. How the elections are conducted, fought and won will influence Pakistan’s ability to face the multiple challenges of rule of law, re-establishment of the writ of the state combined with the destabilised region surrounding Pakistan.

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=61224

97

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Argument should not be just about better person rather alternative. General Patraeus is much more intelligent, well read and experienced in foreign affairs than President Bush, but that does not mean he will be able to run the country better. Same applies to Pakistan, there are many politicians are not that good, but can lead the country better than Mushrraff, problem is they are not the alternative. They are just merely workers in their respective parties that are dominated by polarizing and corrupt leaders. This is the main reason we have to look for better alternative than just person. Someone who can run the country in all fronts forward does not matter mediocre but can carry the democratic institution ahead.

Pakistan is and has been dominated by Generals, lotays and families. We have to break away from this alliance.

98

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Book definition or reality?

99

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

what do you think I meant?
either way the point stands

100

Re: Musharraf will not be in office by this time next year.

Well said

After Musharraf, Pakistan needs a steady democratic system free of Army interference

Otherwise we will flip flop like we have been doing since 47

► Sensational Moments of Pakistani Cricket Team ◄