Will Pakistan Unite Vs Terror?

[Captain1]

Re: Will Pakistan Unite Vs Terror?

@e33or

Despite the undoubted attachment of most of its people to some form of electoral politics, Pakistan remains a nation built around an army. Paradoxically, even the citizens who most talk of democracy often look to the army as potential savior - a kind of *deus ex *machina that, at crucial moments, can intervene to bring the nation out of an impasse. In just over half a century as a state, Pakistan has experienced four military coups - each initially welcomed by a majority of the people.

The reason being lack of accountability of a ‘present’ government, judiciary has never been independent, strong and corruption free. The reason army has enjoyed initial welcome is that people have always perceived army as corruption-free institution and always hoped that they will put the criminals on trial and hang’em. Army itself has never gone thru civilian accountability hence its corruption never opened up. There was one time accounting of army’s finances done in early 90s I think, less than 5% of accounts were checked and mishandling to the tunes of 5 crore (or was it 25 crore?) was discovered (remember it was early 90s, so 5 crore was still a lot, and I don’t know if 5 crore was of that current value or past value).

Both parties have managed to retain parts of their respective constituencies, especially in Sind and Punjab. But eight years is a long time in politics, and there’s every possibility that Pakistan may have moved beyond both former premiers. To seek high office, Bhutto and Sharif must acquire a new legitimacy - which can only come through elections.

Whatever happened to the 2-term rule? Why can’t we make such rule ‘untouchable’?

Pakistan today faces perhaps the strongest existential threat it has experienced since its inception in 1947. The terrorists operating in Swat (in the North-West Frontier province) can’t seize power in Islamabad. But they can exhaust the army in a seemingly endless war, thus encouraging the revival of other divisive forces, especially in the vast desert of Baluchistan province.

Interestingly enough, Benazir Bhutto who was responsible for giving rise to Taliban has been threatened and attacked by them (allegedly). However, Nawaz Sharif has neither been threatened nor been attacked (yet).

The closest Nawaz can get to “Taliban” is through MMA, if that connection is reasonable enough for him to not get threatened and attacked then the MMA should be blamed for the security of the country and banned as a political party.

A weakened army also would be unable to provide a minimum of law and order in the major cities - notably Karachi, where “sleeper” terrorist cells have mushroomed for years.

And what security has the “strong” army provided to that city? May 12 massacre occurred in the presence of same strong army, who was prosecuted? Not a single tear was shed by govt. The thug party in Karachi still enjoys the govt support and on street loot is still going on. What security? Unless “bhook-hartaal” was the only security threat.

Musharraf’s key word is “security,” while Bhutto and Sharif prefer “freedom.” But the two concepts are interdependent. There can be no freedom without security. The failure of Pakistan’s leaders to understand that banal truism has been at the root of the nation’s checkered experience over the last half-century.

Where does that security go when insurgents start gathering up a place? Why does the military/govt step in only when the wound is really bleeding? There has to be check done on this whole process.

Pakistan’s forthcoming election has suddenly assumed a geostrategic importance beyond that country’s actual importance. The prospect of a nuclear-armed state collapsing into chaos is one that few would contemplate with relish.

Thanks to someone using Taliban to score their importance.

What Pakistan needs is a united front against terror and a new government that can offer an alternative to both military rule and Taliban-style theocracy.

George W Bush used similar pretext to gain re-election… “unite against terror”.

The outside world should also offer a helping hand. The (British) Commonwealth, having had fun with gesture politics by suspending Pakistan’s membership, should offer help in monitoring the elections, along with the European Union, the United States and possibly even the United Nations.

Thanks for the help so far (supporting dictatorial regime and spreading chaos) :k:

The message of Pakistan’s leaders should be unity in diversity, unity against terror and diversity in competing visions for the nation’s future.

And when will hear unite against corruption, nepotism, loot-maar, extra-constitutionalism (word?) etc?