The Pakistan story has become very complicated recently. It is one of the largest masses of population in the world, that has been on the verge of collapsing for some time. The US has played a major role both in the instability that Pakistan is facing as well as holding it all together.
If hell breaks loose in Pakistan, as it will, India has the most to be concerned about. It has 200 million Muslims who are the "blacks" of India. It also has a large number of desperately poor and fair number of disenfranchised and militant dissidents. The fact that Pakistan is lurching from one crisis to another should be a cause of great concern for the whole world. The question is no longer, who is to blame. The Pakistan Army, the US, India, Saudi Arabia all share in the blame. The question is can Pakistan be stabilised or will it become another Iran. Slowly but surely Pakistan is inching towards a revolution which will be very bloody.
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Friday, August 13, 2010
Monday, June 14, 2010
Report back from Pakistan
I have just returned from Pakistan where I am deeply involved in working through NGOs in two areas
1. The establishment of Institutions caring for those with mental health Issues. I am motivated to do this because two of my siblings suffer from mental health issues and because this is a neglected area not just in Pakistan but worldwide.
2. Working on Poverty alleviation and women’s uplift through an NGO which gives out loans to women through microfinance.
These subjects take me to Pakistan twice a year and give me the opportunity to interact with Pakistanis from various segments of society. My wife was also in Pakistan but on a different mission. She brought back handicraft made by poor women so that she could sell them here and make money for similar women, so that they can be helped to get educated and to acquire skills.
Impact of US policies from the perspective of ordinary Pakistanis
In a recent survey conducted by Gallup, it was revealed that the US is most unpopular in three countries. These countries being Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. After Israel , Egypt is the largest recipient of US aid and considered an ally. Pakistan also received substantial aid and is considered an ally. Saudi Arabia receives military aid and equipment and is also an ally. We are therefore most unpopular with those that we aim to help. Next in line of unpopularity is Turkey, another ally. If we look at the case of Pakistan, it would give us some clues to what we are doing wrong that even our friends are unhappy with us. Here are five important points.
1. Killing Democracy in Pakistan by supporting dictators and yes men. Unlike Pakistan’s neighbor India who decided a long time ago that being an ally of the US was not in their best interest but that building up a democracy was, Democracy has not been allowed to take root in Pakistan. I do not wish to leave an impression that the US alone bears responsibility for the absence of democracy in Pakistan but we can see a common thread in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, none of which is a democratic country and we know how the US killed democracy in Iran. To this day the US proclaims itself to be a champion of Democracy while actively destroying it in those countries that look to it for guidance.
2. The unnecessary killing of women and children and other innocent people by drone attacks and other aerial bombings. The so called high value targets who get killed are quickly replaced by others who are more hard line and what is left therefore are just innocent bodies, distraught widows and orphaned children. It will only take one person to emerge from this carnage as the new Osama Bin Laden.
3. Making Pakistan a dependant and pariah nation. Dependant on the IMF and US aid. Pakistan continues to remain on the edge of Bankruptcy. It has a mushrooming population, not enough energy for its needs ( I used to be without electricity everyday for at least four to five hours and sometimes eight. It was much worse in the villages) galloping inflation and no plans for the future except to live from hand to mouth. The common man sees the hand of The US in forcing valuable resources to be diverted to the military and away from education, health and infrastructure.
4. Making Pakistan fight an American war and creating conditions of a civil war, with Pakistanis killing Pakistanis. The rise of religious extremism in Pakistan is a tool freely used by Pakistani politicians as well as American planners. Religious extremists are well funded, well armed and well motivated to continue dividing a society which only wants peace and to be able to get o with their lives. Many people are beginning to wonder that it might be better to side with these extremists if the real enemy is America and not the extremist. After all the extremists are also demanding that US forces quit Pakistan.
5. The perception that the US is waging a war against Islam is strengthened by the number of Muslim countries that the US has recently attacked and the others that it wishes to attack. The common man does not fail to see to see the common thread in US Policy and believes that Pakistan will be attacked at some future date not because it bears any animosity to America but because it is Muslim.
For those people interested in knowing the reaction of Pakistanis to the Time Square would be bomber, the reactions run from one of total denial to those who see it as a CIA plot. Such is the mistrust of the US that the average Pakistani goes for all sorts of conspiracy theories rather than believe what is reported in the press.
How does one respond to allegations that Pakistan is training militants to harm US Interests.
Historically the Taliban are a joint creation of the US, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Putting guns into the hands of Muslim extremists was our idea. This was part of the plan to defeat the Soviet Union and bring down communism. It succeeded wildly but all the cost of this success has been laid at the footsteps of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghanistan has been lost to a civil war for 30 years and Pakistan has inherited 4 million Afghan Refugees , a gun culture and porous borders with Afghanistan. People are quick to blame these countries for terrorism and no one acknowledges the debt owed by the so called free world to the people of these countries. These countries are the true martyrs as they continue to bleed and their people continue to suffer. They will never be able to hold their heads high again amongst the comity of nations because they stand accused of corruption, mismanagement and breeding terrorism and not as warriors who shed their blood fighting communism.
The Lashkae Tayyaba and the Jaishi Mohammadi are people trained and bred by the Pakistan Army as freedom fighters to support the struggle of the Kashmiri people against the brutal suppression of their people by a 500,000 strong Indian Army. They were diverted at the request of The US to fight in Afghanistan. How do these people feel when they are asked to turn their guns against their own people the very people who they fought side by side against the Soviets. How would they feel when suddenly American guns are trained against them ? How would they feel when they went from good guys to bad guys in sixty seconds?
The US walked away after the defeat of the Soviet Union and instead of building up an impoverished and decimated nation, left it to the warlords former, friends and supporters to sort it out by letting the fittest survive. They allowed India and Pakistan to fight a proxy war using Afghanistan as a battle ground. So who abandons friends like this, only a people whose definition of self interest is I am alright jack, the rest can go to hell. So who has the right to call anyone else corrupt.
We like to believe in making things simple and seeing things in black and white in saying you are with us or against us but do we realize how much suffering we cause to our own friends and how much we are responsible for creating enemies where none existed before.
No one in Pakistan or Afghanistan for that matter had wished to harm America but I cannot say that this is true anymore. There are a lot of very angry people in Pakistan (and Afghanistan). There are more people in Afghanistan than Pakistan who have lost loved ones but we must remember that the Pushtun in Pakistan are the same people as the Pushtun in Afghanistan. If they feel that the only way to bring the message home to America is to kill the loved ones of America then they will be tempted to do so.
For eight years Americans have known that the man sitting in the White house has been following a policy based on lies, deceit and a violation of all the principles that we believe in. During his period, American credibility and prestige have been hurt perhaps irreparably. We have demolished countries and decimated their people all in the name of American security and we have created enemies where none existed before. In short we have made the world a less safer place for Americans. Having said this we now see a man who we struggled hard to elect, following the exact same policies oblivious to the harm they are doing to America, its friends and the rest of the world. Clearly it is the interests of the Military Industrial complex that seems to take precedence over everything else. Not content with destroying the US Economy, destroying Iraq, destroying Afghanistan and supporting an Apartheid regime in Israel we now want to open another front in Iran and try to destroy that country also.
I only wish to say that the policies that we have followed for the last 10 years are not in the interests of this country and unless we can do something to elect people who represent us and our interests and not those of big money we are doomed as a nation and as a People.
What can we learn about our approach to US policy in Pakistan?
1. Giving aid to countries which only makes them dependant is not in the interest of those countries, including Pakistan. The whole matter of Aid needs to be reviewed and revisited.
2. Using force to resolve problems only alienates people particularly our friends. The use of force has only helped to destroy countries and not build them. The US is getting a reputation as a destroyer of countries and not as a builder. We live in a past where we like to remind people look how we help to rebuild Germany and Japan. Look at how we saved Europe from the Nazis but we forget that this was a very long time ago. Ever since we became the world’s sole super power, we seem to have become nasty and dictatorial.
3. Owning up to our own mistakes seems to be a problem for us. It some how goes against the grain of seeing ourselves as the good guys who can do no wrong or if we do wrong then our intentions were good and therefore it is not a crime in the same category as the wrongs of the other side. Unfortunately there is no other side. Our enemies are non states. We are fighting in many cases shadows of our own imagination. We are drumming up excuses to keep our war machine happy. While we are doing all this we are neglecting our own country. The one trillion spent in Iraq and similar amounts spent in other parts of the world could have helped us resolve our domestic issues. There is rampant economic injustice, our Banks are bankrupt and need massive financial aid, Our health system is captive to the Insurance Industry and we end up spending 18% of GDP on a health system which leave a huge number of American uninsured. Our Social Security system is bankrupt and above all we are the largest creditor nation in the world with no hope of ever repaying our debts. Unemployment has remained at a little below 10% with no sign of improving, the stock market has finally recognized that the future is bleak. So instead of attending to our problems here why are we killing innocent people in Afghanistan and creating a situation where we will end up spending huge amounts of money on security.
Conclusion
We are living in a world which has suddenly shrunk not in terms of population but the impact that an individual can have on events. The forces that want an unequal world are right now in charge. They are rich and powerful beyond words. Those of us who wish to focus on Justice above everything else are the subjugated and the powerless. Let us make no mistake about it. The powerful can crush the powerless like we crush ants under our boots. All that the powerless have to do is to stand up as one for a better world. We have seen how first in Vietnam and now in Afghanistan the weaker party was able to withstand the full might of the most powerful nation in the world. Ultimately America has been weakened inextricably from its futile wars. I do not believe that we have learnt our lesson and so it is even more necessary that we renew our efforts to stop this craziness.
I am only saying today what Martin Luther has already said 43 years ago.
“Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.”
Ladies and gentlemen we must not only move on, we must try to stop this madness.
1. The establishment of Institutions caring for those with mental health Issues. I am motivated to do this because two of my siblings suffer from mental health issues and because this is a neglected area not just in Pakistan but worldwide.
2. Working on Poverty alleviation and women’s uplift through an NGO which gives out loans to women through microfinance.
These subjects take me to Pakistan twice a year and give me the opportunity to interact with Pakistanis from various segments of society. My wife was also in Pakistan but on a different mission. She brought back handicraft made by poor women so that she could sell them here and make money for similar women, so that they can be helped to get educated and to acquire skills.
Impact of US policies from the perspective of ordinary Pakistanis
In a recent survey conducted by Gallup, it was revealed that the US is most unpopular in three countries. These countries being Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. After Israel , Egypt is the largest recipient of US aid and considered an ally. Pakistan also received substantial aid and is considered an ally. Saudi Arabia receives military aid and equipment and is also an ally. We are therefore most unpopular with those that we aim to help. Next in line of unpopularity is Turkey, another ally. If we look at the case of Pakistan, it would give us some clues to what we are doing wrong that even our friends are unhappy with us. Here are five important points.
1. Killing Democracy in Pakistan by supporting dictators and yes men. Unlike Pakistan’s neighbor India who decided a long time ago that being an ally of the US was not in their best interest but that building up a democracy was, Democracy has not been allowed to take root in Pakistan. I do not wish to leave an impression that the US alone bears responsibility for the absence of democracy in Pakistan but we can see a common thread in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, none of which is a democratic country and we know how the US killed democracy in Iran. To this day the US proclaims itself to be a champion of Democracy while actively destroying it in those countries that look to it for guidance.
2. The unnecessary killing of women and children and other innocent people by drone attacks and other aerial bombings. The so called high value targets who get killed are quickly replaced by others who are more hard line and what is left therefore are just innocent bodies, distraught widows and orphaned children. It will only take one person to emerge from this carnage as the new Osama Bin Laden.
3. Making Pakistan a dependant and pariah nation. Dependant on the IMF and US aid. Pakistan continues to remain on the edge of Bankruptcy. It has a mushrooming population, not enough energy for its needs ( I used to be without electricity everyday for at least four to five hours and sometimes eight. It was much worse in the villages) galloping inflation and no plans for the future except to live from hand to mouth. The common man sees the hand of The US in forcing valuable resources to be diverted to the military and away from education, health and infrastructure.
4. Making Pakistan fight an American war and creating conditions of a civil war, with Pakistanis killing Pakistanis. The rise of religious extremism in Pakistan is a tool freely used by Pakistani politicians as well as American planners. Religious extremists are well funded, well armed and well motivated to continue dividing a society which only wants peace and to be able to get o with their lives. Many people are beginning to wonder that it might be better to side with these extremists if the real enemy is America and not the extremist. After all the extremists are also demanding that US forces quit Pakistan.
5. The perception that the US is waging a war against Islam is strengthened by the number of Muslim countries that the US has recently attacked and the others that it wishes to attack. The common man does not fail to see to see the common thread in US Policy and believes that Pakistan will be attacked at some future date not because it bears any animosity to America but because it is Muslim.
For those people interested in knowing the reaction of Pakistanis to the Time Square would be bomber, the reactions run from one of total denial to those who see it as a CIA plot. Such is the mistrust of the US that the average Pakistani goes for all sorts of conspiracy theories rather than believe what is reported in the press.
How does one respond to allegations that Pakistan is training militants to harm US Interests.
Historically the Taliban are a joint creation of the US, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Putting guns into the hands of Muslim extremists was our idea. This was part of the plan to defeat the Soviet Union and bring down communism. It succeeded wildly but all the cost of this success has been laid at the footsteps of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghanistan has been lost to a civil war for 30 years and Pakistan has inherited 4 million Afghan Refugees , a gun culture and porous borders with Afghanistan. People are quick to blame these countries for terrorism and no one acknowledges the debt owed by the so called free world to the people of these countries. These countries are the true martyrs as they continue to bleed and their people continue to suffer. They will never be able to hold their heads high again amongst the comity of nations because they stand accused of corruption, mismanagement and breeding terrorism and not as warriors who shed their blood fighting communism.
The Lashkae Tayyaba and the Jaishi Mohammadi are people trained and bred by the Pakistan Army as freedom fighters to support the struggle of the Kashmiri people against the brutal suppression of their people by a 500,000 strong Indian Army. They were diverted at the request of The US to fight in Afghanistan. How do these people feel when they are asked to turn their guns against their own people the very people who they fought side by side against the Soviets. How would they feel when suddenly American guns are trained against them ? How would they feel when they went from good guys to bad guys in sixty seconds?
The US walked away after the defeat of the Soviet Union and instead of building up an impoverished and decimated nation, left it to the warlords former, friends and supporters to sort it out by letting the fittest survive. They allowed India and Pakistan to fight a proxy war using Afghanistan as a battle ground. So who abandons friends like this, only a people whose definition of self interest is I am alright jack, the rest can go to hell. So who has the right to call anyone else corrupt.
We like to believe in making things simple and seeing things in black and white in saying you are with us or against us but do we realize how much suffering we cause to our own friends and how much we are responsible for creating enemies where none existed before.
No one in Pakistan or Afghanistan for that matter had wished to harm America but I cannot say that this is true anymore. There are a lot of very angry people in Pakistan (and Afghanistan). There are more people in Afghanistan than Pakistan who have lost loved ones but we must remember that the Pushtun in Pakistan are the same people as the Pushtun in Afghanistan. If they feel that the only way to bring the message home to America is to kill the loved ones of America then they will be tempted to do so.
For eight years Americans have known that the man sitting in the White house has been following a policy based on lies, deceit and a violation of all the principles that we believe in. During his period, American credibility and prestige have been hurt perhaps irreparably. We have demolished countries and decimated their people all in the name of American security and we have created enemies where none existed before. In short we have made the world a less safer place for Americans. Having said this we now see a man who we struggled hard to elect, following the exact same policies oblivious to the harm they are doing to America, its friends and the rest of the world. Clearly it is the interests of the Military Industrial complex that seems to take precedence over everything else. Not content with destroying the US Economy, destroying Iraq, destroying Afghanistan and supporting an Apartheid regime in Israel we now want to open another front in Iran and try to destroy that country also.
I only wish to say that the policies that we have followed for the last 10 years are not in the interests of this country and unless we can do something to elect people who represent us and our interests and not those of big money we are doomed as a nation and as a People.
What can we learn about our approach to US policy in Pakistan?
1. Giving aid to countries which only makes them dependant is not in the interest of those countries, including Pakistan. The whole matter of Aid needs to be reviewed and revisited.
2. Using force to resolve problems only alienates people particularly our friends. The use of force has only helped to destroy countries and not build them. The US is getting a reputation as a destroyer of countries and not as a builder. We live in a past where we like to remind people look how we help to rebuild Germany and Japan. Look at how we saved Europe from the Nazis but we forget that this was a very long time ago. Ever since we became the world’s sole super power, we seem to have become nasty and dictatorial.
3. Owning up to our own mistakes seems to be a problem for us. It some how goes against the grain of seeing ourselves as the good guys who can do no wrong or if we do wrong then our intentions were good and therefore it is not a crime in the same category as the wrongs of the other side. Unfortunately there is no other side. Our enemies are non states. We are fighting in many cases shadows of our own imagination. We are drumming up excuses to keep our war machine happy. While we are doing all this we are neglecting our own country. The one trillion spent in Iraq and similar amounts spent in other parts of the world could have helped us resolve our domestic issues. There is rampant economic injustice, our Banks are bankrupt and need massive financial aid, Our health system is captive to the Insurance Industry and we end up spending 18% of GDP on a health system which leave a huge number of American uninsured. Our Social Security system is bankrupt and above all we are the largest creditor nation in the world with no hope of ever repaying our debts. Unemployment has remained at a little below 10% with no sign of improving, the stock market has finally recognized that the future is bleak. So instead of attending to our problems here why are we killing innocent people in Afghanistan and creating a situation where we will end up spending huge amounts of money on security.
Conclusion
We are living in a world which has suddenly shrunk not in terms of population but the impact that an individual can have on events. The forces that want an unequal world are right now in charge. They are rich and powerful beyond words. Those of us who wish to focus on Justice above everything else are the subjugated and the powerless. Let us make no mistake about it. The powerful can crush the powerless like we crush ants under our boots. All that the powerless have to do is to stand up as one for a better world. We have seen how first in Vietnam and now in Afghanistan the weaker party was able to withstand the full might of the most powerful nation in the world. Ultimately America has been weakened inextricably from its futile wars. I do not believe that we have learnt our lesson and so it is even more necessary that we renew our efforts to stop this craziness.
I am only saying today what Martin Luther has already said 43 years ago.
“Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.”
Ladies and gentlemen we must not only move on, we must try to stop this madness.
Does Pakistan support the Taliban?
After Obama, declared Afghanistan to be the right war, he quickly announced that he will be leaving Afghanistan soon. Both Pakistan and Afghanistan view the US as being there temporarily. They feel that to bring eventual peace to the area, a deal will have to be done with the Taliban. Amazingly the US has less credibility with either Pakistan and Afghanistan than do the Taliban.
Aside from what one may feel about the beliefs of the Taliban, they are still from the area and are related by blood to both Afghanis and Pakistanis.
The most amazing turn around in recent times has been that of Karzai from being anti Pakistan to now being anti US and viewing Pakistan as being part of the solution. Karzai is ferociously biting the hand that feeds him. The resignations in his cabinet have been those of the Northern Alliance people, who are supported by the Indians. If any one's days are numbered it is more Karzai than Zardari.
The Taliban have some how hung in there long enough for the US to run out of steam and make all sorts of serious mistakes. The Drone attacks are a mistake that the US fails to recognise and have helped turn round people like Karzai. The typical answer of the US to any mistake is to say we did not apply it forcefully enough and therefore let us send in more troops, throw more bombs, kill more people. The Taliban are therefore quickly becoming David to the American Goliath.
Aside from what one may feel about the beliefs of the Taliban, they are still from the area and are related by blood to both Afghanis and Pakistanis.
The most amazing turn around in recent times has been that of Karzai from being anti Pakistan to now being anti US and viewing Pakistan as being part of the solution. Karzai is ferociously biting the hand that feeds him. The resignations in his cabinet have been those of the Northern Alliance people, who are supported by the Indians. If any one's days are numbered it is more Karzai than Zardari.
The Taliban have some how hung in there long enough for the US to run out of steam and make all sorts of serious mistakes. The Drone attacks are a mistake that the US fails to recognise and have helped turn round people like Karzai. The typical answer of the US to any mistake is to say we did not apply it forcefully enough and therefore let us send in more troops, throw more bombs, kill more people. The Taliban are therefore quickly becoming David to the American Goliath.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
The role of Kashmir and the Army in Pakistan
Pakistan has built up the 5th largest army in the world and has erroneously fallen upon the rent an army concept. America has been instrumental in feeding upon the ambitions of the various army generals to keep Pakistan under their influence.
The army has now become an integral part of the political structure. Pakistan's generals are no better or worse than it's political leaders, although they ( the generals) have been less covetous of personal fortunes than the civilians.
I believe in any future political set up the army must agree to keep out of politics in return for some form of consultative role. The Turkish example might be worth studying.
Kashmir is a lost cause for all but the Kashmiris but it has spawned the huge defense spending on both sides and has resulted in Pakistan today becoming a Nuclear power. In many ways Pakistan's nuclear capability has come at the expense of the literacy of it's citizen, but without it's nuclear muscle Pakistan would be a pariah nation shunned by all including the US.
For better or worse Pakistan has the misfortune of sharing a border with Afghanistan, which is today the wild west of Muslim fundamentalists and this will no doubt shape the future of what Pakistan will become. If India has shaped Pakistan's past, Afghanistan will likely shape it's future. This is what happens to a people who have no legitimate vision of their own. They are buffeted by fate and others.
Khusro
The army has now become an integral part of the political structure. Pakistan's generals are no better or worse than it's political leaders, although they ( the generals) have been less covetous of personal fortunes than the civilians.
I believe in any future political set up the army must agree to keep out of politics in return for some form of consultative role. The Turkish example might be worth studying.
Kashmir is a lost cause for all but the Kashmiris but it has spawned the huge defense spending on both sides and has resulted in Pakistan today becoming a Nuclear power. In many ways Pakistan's nuclear capability has come at the expense of the literacy of it's citizen, but without it's nuclear muscle Pakistan would be a pariah nation shunned by all including the US.
For better or worse Pakistan has the misfortune of sharing a border with Afghanistan, which is today the wild west of Muslim fundamentalists and this will no doubt shape the future of what Pakistan will become. If India has shaped Pakistan's past, Afghanistan will likely shape it's future. This is what happens to a people who have no legitimate vision of their own. They are buffeted by fate and others.
Khusro
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
A Dialogue on Pakistan
" Pakistan has 173 million people and 100 nuclear weapons, an army which is bigger than the American army, and the headquarters of al Qaida sitting in two-thirds of the country which the government does not control,"
Half of the failed states on the list failed because the US tried to impose a regime on them.
In the case of Pakistan by far the largest , the US and its ally are not and have not been on the same wave length, either under Musharraf or Zardari. This results in constant finger pointing. The US says Pakistan is not doing enough, The Pakistanis say the US is using too much force. The difference of opinion with partners is not resolved through consensus but by the US bullying it's partner into submission. Both the US and Pakistan admit that their joint strategy is not working but neither party is coming up with any new thinking.
Contrast this with the other partnership where the partners are on the same wavelength. This is US/Israel. They are equally committed to the use of force and attrition while playing lip service to peace. Even this policy is in tatters, achieving nothing but disaster and an adverse domino effect on the surrounding world.
All US analysts are now saying that the US policy is helping the Taliban, yet the US imagination does not fit comfortably into a non violent policy, other wise Palestine could have been resolved many years ago. The US has now become even more than before the problem and not the solution.
The real issue of the haves and the have nots is not being attended to either inside the US or outside. The have nots are the people of failed states, all two billion of them. Pakistan is about to become the first state where the have nots will try to take matters in their own hands.
Khusro
Khusro,
You are being logical again. You do realize that just because a course of action would be catastrophic is no guarantee that the US will refrain from following it.
I completely agree that the Pakistanis must resolve their own problems -- and also the Lebanese, as Mirene pointed out in another message. The issue I have is that the solutions that the people choose might not (in fact probably would not) further the US agenda, and this will be stymied.
Let's skip over the centuries of Western colonial divide-and-rule style interference for the moment and assume that left to their own devices humans are smart enough to overcome the history and work together to solve problems. I want to look at a more recent example instead.
George Bush demanded, against much advice, that Palestinians be allowed to hold elections. If it could be taken at face value this is a perfectly fine idea. But wouldn't you know it, those darn Palestinians up and elected the "wrong" people. And we all know what has happened since. And yet the Palestinians are blamed for the fact that they are factionalized and the leadership is ineffectual.
In other words, you may solve your own problems "democratically" if and only if the solution you choose is consistent with US interests. Otherwise there will be hell to pay.
Similarly, what if the Lebanese were to decide to give Hezbollah a ruling majority? I'm not saying whether this would be in their best interests domestically or not, it's just a "what if". Can we safely predict that the US would abide by the will of the people and call and congratulate Nasrullah on his victory?
Or would they demand that Hezbollah first denounce Iran, recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and agree to become a responsible member of the international community -- i.e., abide by Washington's dictates? And failing that would they link up with some Dahlan type to undermine, disunify or outright overthrow the new government?
The Afghan occupation is in my view a perfect example of (delayed) "mission creep". The Bush cabal went in, got a toehold, and quickly turned their attention to Iraq, which was the real target, and forgot about Afghanistan. After a while, as cooler heads had predicted from the outset, the Taliban regrouped and reasserted themselves. This was allowed to fester for several years as the Iraq escapade wasn't exactly going as planned.
When someone finally decided to pay attention to it, they noticed that the FATA in Pakistan was a place where the British-drawn border was treated as non-existent by the resident Pashtuns. Here comes the "Cambodia-Laos" strategy -- just go over the border and kill people.
Well of course this is illegal, and it's no longer possible to conduct aerial bombardment in secret, so low-profile drones are employed instead. But guess what: the drones also kill innocent bystanders along with (or instead of) the intended targets, and this pisses people off. Meanwhile, you muck around in the internal politics of the country pretending to promote "democracy", causing more instability and resentment. Spoon in the pre-existing tensions with India (which has its own lunatic fringe and ethno-religious strife) and pretty soon you have a situation ready to boil over.
Now, what do you think are the chances that the US will step back and let the temperatures cool, or will they panic at the thought that those nukes could wind up in "Islamic fundamentalist" hands and overreact? This was reportedly only narrowly averted several times while Bush and Musharraf were in power; Zardari's government is not able to assure anyone that it has things under control.
This is what I meant by an invasion of Pakistan. Not that the US is looking for an excuse to do this, but may be considering it as a contingency, recognizes that it will be a mess and needs to prepare the public. Or perhaps instead they will get their proxy to do it (India), as they instigated Ethiopia to invade Somalia. That way, if the worst happens and nukes go off (oops), it will only kill the locals instead of US troops and can be blamed on them and not on us.
This sounds appalling, I know that, and Machiavellian in the extreme. But the truth is I can see no discernible difference in substance (as opposed to style) between Bush and Obama; the same militaristic idiots are still running things, and the imperial agenda remains intact. One's expectation ("hope") that Obama would proceed cautiously and non-violently in other parts of the world has not been fulfilled -- in his first week in office he had already authorized several drone attacks in Pakistan. Blood on his hands in his first week in office.
I believe that the people on the ground if left in peace to do this will step back from the brink, as they have done before, because they are simply not suicidal. But I do not expect the US to abandon its bogus "war on terror" or its underlying hegemonic agenda, which it must do if the rage that has been engendered around the world during the past eight years (let alone prior decades) is to truly dissipate. Obama has made clear that he sees "humanitarian intervention" as a legitimate role for the United States, and that he will not do anything to change the selfish, wasteful American way of life if such action would interfere with the priorities of the power interests.
Mary
Mary,
I don't believe a full scale invasion is on the cards. If it were ever to happen, India would be involved and a lot of pre invasion rhetoric would come from India. Part of the reason why the Pak Army will not withdraw it's forces from the Eastern borders is because that is where it expects the attack to come from.
Ironically the enemies of Pakistan are neither to the East or West. Pakistanis are their own worst enemies.While I rail against the unproductive policies of the US which do make matters worse but the problems of Pakistan can only be solved by the Pakistanis.
Khusro
"I believe that the people on the ground if left in peace to do this will step back from the brink, as they have done before, because they are simply not suicidal. But I do not expect the US to abandon its bogus "war on terror" or its underlying hegemonic agenda, which it must do if the rage that has been engendered around the world during the past eight years (let alone prior decades) is to truly dissipate." Mary Fox
Mary,
The point you make about the local leadership being helpless in the face of powerful and persistent interference from the US, whether in Pakistan or Lebanon is a valid one. How does one get rid of an Imperial power which wants to control you? Gandhi is given as an example but Gandhi would never have succeeded without World War II weakening the British. The Ayatollah Khomeini is a better example of single handedly dislodging the Shah. Along come the Taliban, with the promise of dislodging the US and not much else. They are certainly not ideal but they may be an example of the wrong people at the right time. Non State actors come alive when the State actors are hijacked by Empire and non State actors do not have the luxury of being nice specially when confronted by a ruthless and all powerful enemy.
You and I and many others are convinced that the Imperial policy of the US is not just bad for Afghanistan, Pakistan and the rest of the Middle East but disastrous for the US. The logic that you accuse me of is rampant in Washington. It does not take into account unintended consequences. The unintended consequences of US Foreign policy are having a bigger impact then the intended consequences. The only difference is that the unintended consequences are shaping a new world in which the US will be thrown out of each of the countries which they covet today. This will not happen before millions of innocent lives are lost or displaced. This will not happen before the US is humiliated as they were in Vietnam as they were by Osama as they were by Khomeni and as they are now being by the Taliban. The increasing rise of non sate actors like Hezbollah is a reaction to corrupt Governments supported by the US. How else do people take matters into their own hands.
Obama is our chosen person to get us out of an immoral, unjust and criminal policy. While the writing is on the wall that even he may not be up to it, we have to give him more time than a 100 days. At the same time we have to start getting more active to let him know where we stand.
Khusro
Half of the failed states on the list failed because the US tried to impose a regime on them.
In the case of Pakistan by far the largest , the US and its ally are not and have not been on the same wave length, either under Musharraf or Zardari. This results in constant finger pointing. The US says Pakistan is not doing enough, The Pakistanis say the US is using too much force. The difference of opinion with partners is not resolved through consensus but by the US bullying it's partner into submission. Both the US and Pakistan admit that their joint strategy is not working but neither party is coming up with any new thinking.
Contrast this with the other partnership where the partners are on the same wavelength. This is US/Israel. They are equally committed to the use of force and attrition while playing lip service to peace. Even this policy is in tatters, achieving nothing but disaster and an adverse domino effect on the surrounding world.
All US analysts are now saying that the US policy is helping the Taliban, yet the US imagination does not fit comfortably into a non violent policy, other wise Palestine could have been resolved many years ago. The US has now become even more than before the problem and not the solution.
The real issue of the haves and the have nots is not being attended to either inside the US or outside. The have nots are the people of failed states, all two billion of them. Pakistan is about to become the first state where the have nots will try to take matters in their own hands.
Khusro
Khusro,
You are being logical again. You do realize that just because a course of action would be catastrophic is no guarantee that the US will refrain from following it.
I completely agree that the Pakistanis must resolve their own problems -- and also the Lebanese, as Mirene pointed out in another message. The issue I have is that the solutions that the people choose might not (in fact probably would not) further the US agenda, and this will be stymied.
Let's skip over the centuries of Western colonial divide-and-rule style interference for the moment and assume that left to their own devices humans are smart enough to overcome the history and work together to solve problems. I want to look at a more recent example instead.
George Bush demanded, against much advice, that Palestinians be allowed to hold elections. If it could be taken at face value this is a perfectly fine idea. But wouldn't you know it, those darn Palestinians up and elected the "wrong" people. And we all know what has happened since. And yet the Palestinians are blamed for the fact that they are factionalized and the leadership is ineffectual.
In other words, you may solve your own problems "democratically" if and only if the solution you choose is consistent with US interests. Otherwise there will be hell to pay.
Similarly, what if the Lebanese were to decide to give Hezbollah a ruling majority? I'm not saying whether this would be in their best interests domestically or not, it's just a "what if". Can we safely predict that the US would abide by the will of the people and call and congratulate Nasrullah on his victory?
Or would they demand that Hezbollah first denounce Iran, recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and agree to become a responsible member of the international community -- i.e., abide by Washington's dictates? And failing that would they link up with some Dahlan type to undermine, disunify or outright overthrow the new government?
The Afghan occupation is in my view a perfect example of (delayed) "mission creep". The Bush cabal went in, got a toehold, and quickly turned their attention to Iraq, which was the real target, and forgot about Afghanistan. After a while, as cooler heads had predicted from the outset, the Taliban regrouped and reasserted themselves. This was allowed to fester for several years as the Iraq escapade wasn't exactly going as planned.
When someone finally decided to pay attention to it, they noticed that the FATA in Pakistan was a place where the British-drawn border was treated as non-existent by the resident Pashtuns. Here comes the "Cambodia-Laos" strategy -- just go over the border and kill people.
Well of course this is illegal, and it's no longer possible to conduct aerial bombardment in secret, so low-profile drones are employed instead. But guess what: the drones also kill innocent bystanders along with (or instead of) the intended targets, and this pisses people off. Meanwhile, you muck around in the internal politics of the country pretending to promote "democracy", causing more instability and resentment. Spoon in the pre-existing tensions with India (which has its own lunatic fringe and ethno-religious strife) and pretty soon you have a situation ready to boil over.
Now, what do you think are the chances that the US will step back and let the temperatures cool, or will they panic at the thought that those nukes could wind up in "Islamic fundamentalist" hands and overreact? This was reportedly only narrowly averted several times while Bush and Musharraf were in power; Zardari's government is not able to assure anyone that it has things under control.
This is what I meant by an invasion of Pakistan. Not that the US is looking for an excuse to do this, but may be considering it as a contingency, recognizes that it will be a mess and needs to prepare the public. Or perhaps instead they will get their proxy to do it (India), as they instigated Ethiopia to invade Somalia. That way, if the worst happens and nukes go off (oops), it will only kill the locals instead of US troops and can be blamed on them and not on us.
This sounds appalling, I know that, and Machiavellian in the extreme. But the truth is I can see no discernible difference in substance (as opposed to style) between Bush and Obama; the same militaristic idiots are still running things, and the imperial agenda remains intact. One's expectation ("hope") that Obama would proceed cautiously and non-violently in other parts of the world has not been fulfilled -- in his first week in office he had already authorized several drone attacks in Pakistan. Blood on his hands in his first week in office.
I believe that the people on the ground if left in peace to do this will step back from the brink, as they have done before, because they are simply not suicidal. But I do not expect the US to abandon its bogus "war on terror" or its underlying hegemonic agenda, which it must do if the rage that has been engendered around the world during the past eight years (let alone prior decades) is to truly dissipate. Obama has made clear that he sees "humanitarian intervention" as a legitimate role for the United States, and that he will not do anything to change the selfish, wasteful American way of life if such action would interfere with the priorities of the power interests.
Mary
Mary,
I don't believe a full scale invasion is on the cards. If it were ever to happen, India would be involved and a lot of pre invasion rhetoric would come from India. Part of the reason why the Pak Army will not withdraw it's forces from the Eastern borders is because that is where it expects the attack to come from.
Ironically the enemies of Pakistan are neither to the East or West. Pakistanis are their own worst enemies.While I rail against the unproductive policies of the US which do make matters worse but the problems of Pakistan can only be solved by the Pakistanis.
Khusro
"I believe that the people on the ground if left in peace to do this will step back from the brink, as they have done before, because they are simply not suicidal. But I do not expect the US to abandon its bogus "war on terror" or its underlying hegemonic agenda, which it must do if the rage that has been engendered around the world during the past eight years (let alone prior decades) is to truly dissipate." Mary Fox
Mary,
The point you make about the local leadership being helpless in the face of powerful and persistent interference from the US, whether in Pakistan or Lebanon is a valid one. How does one get rid of an Imperial power which wants to control you? Gandhi is given as an example but Gandhi would never have succeeded without World War II weakening the British. The Ayatollah Khomeini is a better example of single handedly dislodging the Shah. Along come the Taliban, with the promise of dislodging the US and not much else. They are certainly not ideal but they may be an example of the wrong people at the right time. Non State actors come alive when the State actors are hijacked by Empire and non State actors do not have the luxury of being nice specially when confronted by a ruthless and all powerful enemy.
You and I and many others are convinced that the Imperial policy of the US is not just bad for Afghanistan, Pakistan and the rest of the Middle East but disastrous for the US. The logic that you accuse me of is rampant in Washington. It does not take into account unintended consequences. The unintended consequences of US Foreign policy are having a bigger impact then the intended consequences. The only difference is that the unintended consequences are shaping a new world in which the US will be thrown out of each of the countries which they covet today. This will not happen before millions of innocent lives are lost or displaced. This will not happen before the US is humiliated as they were in Vietnam as they were by Osama as they were by Khomeni and as they are now being by the Taliban. The increasing rise of non sate actors like Hezbollah is a reaction to corrupt Governments supported by the US. How else do people take matters into their own hands.
Obama is our chosen person to get us out of an immoral, unjust and criminal policy. While the writing is on the wall that even he may not be up to it, we have to give him more time than a 100 days. At the same time we have to start getting more active to let him know where we stand.
Khusro
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Our skewed world view won't let us see the real Pakistan
Sample
"We face a related problem in Afghanistan where we are still hoping to build the
state we want the Afghans to want, rather than the state that they actually
want. Ask many Afghans which state they hope their own will resemble in a few
decades and the answer is "Iran". "
Editorial Comment
The author wants us to re examine the whole notion of Pakistan being a failed state. He characterizes it as a state who has learnt the art of damsel in distress. This is a kinder version of my view which is that of a Pakistan as a whore or a kept woman who constantly raises the spectre of being chased by the Mullah and then secretly meets with the Mullah in the darkness of night. Pakistan's future seems to lie between being raped by the Mullah or the West.
Is there a real possibility that Pakistan could become the Sunni version of Iran? Definitely.For Iran the only way to avoid the predicament of Pakistan was to shut off it's borders to the West but this could not be done except by first getting rid of the Shah and other colonised Iranians. This is the scenario that keeps Western planners sleepless. With Pakistan will go Afghanistan, Bangladesh and a potentially destablised India.
What the West knows is that except for a minority of the elite who are nurtured by them the general population in the Muslim world whether Shia or Sunni regard them as the real enemy. This does not mean that these people are Taliban sympathisers( evidenced by the way they vote) but given the choice between being raped by the West or the Taliban, they would choose the Taliban ( their own people).
Events are moving with the speed of light and battle lines are being drawn for the coming blood shed. Thirty five thousand US troops will not be enough in Afghanistan and neither will attacking Iran be an option. Withdrawal of US troops from Iraq will not be an option. The legacy of Bush will consume the Middle East in flames and Obama will be too busy dousing fires at home to come out with a sensible Foreign policy. People like Chas Freeman who could have made a difference have been sidelined by people who do not understand what havoc they have already wrought.
There is no shortage of people in the US who understand the scenario that I have outlined better than me and who could offer a solution out of this which will work but their voices are constantly silenced and their participation in decision making sabotaged. The reckoning to the US of this madness has already happened in a loss of its standing and prestige in the world. Can this loss of credibility get any worse? Read this essay again in six months ( yes 6 months) and you will see the speed of the deterioration.
Khusro
--- On Sun, 3/15/09, sshusain@aol. com wrote:
To see this story with its related links on the guardian.co. uk site, go to
http://www.guardian .co.uk/commentis free/2009/ mar/15/jason- burke-pakistan
Our skewed world view won't let us see the real Pakistan
The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on
countries that neither want nor need them
Jason Burke
Sunday March 15 2009
The Observer
First for the good news: Pakistan is not about to explode. The Islamic militants
are not going to take power tomorrow; the nuclear weapons are not about to be
trafficked to al-Qaida; the army is not about to send the Afghan Taliban to
invade India; a civil war is unlikely.
The bad news is that Pakistan poses us questions that are much more profound
than those we would face if this nation of 170m, the world's second biggest
Muslim state, were simply a failed state. If Pakistan collapsed, we would be
faced by a serious security challenge. But the resilience of Pakistan and the
nation's continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to
together pose questions with implications far beyond simple security concerns.
They are about our ability to influence events in far-off places, our capacity
to analyse and understand the behaviour and perceived interests of other nations
and cultures, about our ability to deal with difference, about how we see the
world.
Pakistan has very grave problems. In the last two years, I have reported on
bloody ethnic and political riots, on violent demonstrations, from the front
line of a vicious war against radical Islamic insurgents. I spent a day with
Benazir Bhutto a week before she was assassinated and covered the series of
murderous attacks committed at home and abroad by militant groups based in
Pakistan with shadowy connections to its security services. There is an economic
crisis and social problems - illiteracy, domestic violence, drug addiction - of
grotesque proportions. Osama bin Laden is probably on Pakistani soil.
For many developing nations, all this would signal the state's total
disintegration. This partly explains why Pakistan's collapse is so often
predicted. The nation's meltdown was forecast when its eastern half seceded to
become Bangladesh in 1971, during the violence that preceded General Zia
ul-Haq's coup in 1977, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, when Zia was killed
in 1988, during the horrific sectarian violence of the early Nineties, through
sundry ethnic insurgencies, after 9/11, after the 2007 death of Bhutto and now
after yet another political crisis. These predictions have been consistently
proved wrong. The most recent will be too. Yesterday, tempers were already
calming.
Some of the perpetual international hysteria is stoked by the Pakistanis
themselves. Successive governments have perfected the art of negotiating by
pointing a gun to their own heads. They know that their nation's strategic
importance guarantees the financial life support they need from the
international community. More broadly, our understanding of Pakistan is skewed.
This is in part due to centuries of historical baggage. Though few would quote
Emile Zola on contemporary France, Winston Churchill, who as a young man fought
on the North-West Frontier, is regularly cited to explain today's insurgency.
This legacy also includes stereotypes of "Mad Mullahs" running amok, an image
fuelled by television footage that highlights ranting demonstrators from
Pakistan's Islamist parties though they have never won more than 14% in an
election.
For many Britons, Pakistan represents "the other" - chaotic, distant, exotic,
dirty, hot, fanatical and threatening. Yet at the same time, Pakistan seems very
familiar. There is the English language, cricket, kebabs and curries and figures
such as Imran Khan. There are a million-odd Britons of Pakistani-descent who
over four decades have largely integrated far better in the UK than often
suggested.
It is the tension between these two largely imaginary Pakistans that leads to
such strong reactions in Britain. We see the country as plunged in a struggle
between the frighteningly foreign and the familiar, between fanaticism and
western democracy, values, our vision of the world and how it should be ordered.
Yet while we are fretting about Pakistan's imminent disintegration, we are blind
to the really important change.
Recent years have seen the consolidation of a new Pakistani identity between
these two extremes. It is nationalist, conservative in religious and social
terms and much more aggressive in asserting what are seen, rightly or wrongly,
as local "Pakistani" interests. It is a mix of patriotic chauvinism and moderate
Islamism that is currently heavily informed by a distorted view of the world
sadly all too familiar across the entire Muslim world. This means that for many
Pakistanis, the west is rapacious and hostile. Admiration for the British and
desire for holidays in London have been replaced by a view of the UK as
"America's poodle" and dreams of Dubai or Malaysia. The 9/11 attacks are seen,
even by senior army officers, as a put-up job by Mossad, the CIA or both. The
Indians, the old enemy, are seen as running riot in Afghanistan where the
Taliban are "freedom fighters". AQ Khan, the nuclear scientist seen as a
bomb-selling criminal by the West, is a hero. Democracy is seen as the best
system, but only if democracy results in governments that take decisions that
reflect the sentiments of most Pakistanis, not just those of the Anglophone,
westernised elite among whom western policy-makers, politicians and journalists
tend to chose their interlocutors.
This view of the world is most common among the new, urban middle classes in
Pakistan, much larger after a decade of fast and uneven economic growth. It is
this class that provides the bulk of the country's military officers and
bureaucrats. This in part explains the Pakistani security establishment' s dogged
support for elements within the Taliban. The infamous ISI spy agency is largely
staffed by soldiers and the army is a reflection of society. For the ISI, as for
many Pakistanis, supporting certain insurgent factions in Afghanistan is seen as
the rational choice. If this trend continues, it poses us problems rather
different from those posed by a failed state. Instead, you have a nuclear armed
nation with a large population that is increasingly vocal and which sees the
world very differently from us.
We face a related problem in Afghanistan where we are still hoping to build the
state we want the Afghans to want, rather than the state that they actually
want. Ask many Afghans which state they hope their own will resemble in a few
decades and the answer is "Iran". Dozens of interviews with senior western
generals, diplomats and officials in Kabul last week have shown me how deeply
the years of conflict and "nation-building" have dented confidence in our
ability to transplant western values. Our interest in Afghanistan has been
reduced to preventing it from becoming a platform for threats to the west. In
Afghanistan, as in Iraq, the west has glimpsed the limits to its power and to
the supposedly universal attraction of its values.
The west's dreams of a comfortable post-Cold War era have been rudely shaken. We
have been forced reluctantly to accept the independence and influence of China
and Russia. These are countries that we recognise as difficult international
actors pursuing agendas popular with substantial proportions of their citizens.
Other countries, particularly those less troubled than Pakistan or Afghanistan,
are likely soon to join that list.
This poses a critical challenge in foreign policy. Worrying about the imminent
collapse of Pakistan is not going to help us find answers to the really
difficult questions that Pakistan poses.
Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited 2009
"We face a related problem in Afghanistan where we are still hoping to build the
state we want the Afghans to want, rather than the state that they actually
want. Ask many Afghans which state they hope their own will resemble in a few
decades and the answer is "Iran". "
Editorial Comment
The author wants us to re examine the whole notion of Pakistan being a failed state. He characterizes it as a state who has learnt the art of damsel in distress. This is a kinder version of my view which is that of a Pakistan as a whore or a kept woman who constantly raises the spectre of being chased by the Mullah and then secretly meets with the Mullah in the darkness of night. Pakistan's future seems to lie between being raped by the Mullah or the West.
Is there a real possibility that Pakistan could become the Sunni version of Iran? Definitely.For Iran the only way to avoid the predicament of Pakistan was to shut off it's borders to the West but this could not be done except by first getting rid of the Shah and other colonised Iranians. This is the scenario that keeps Western planners sleepless. With Pakistan will go Afghanistan, Bangladesh and a potentially destablised India.
What the West knows is that except for a minority of the elite who are nurtured by them the general population in the Muslim world whether Shia or Sunni regard them as the real enemy. This does not mean that these people are Taliban sympathisers( evidenced by the way they vote) but given the choice between being raped by the West or the Taliban, they would choose the Taliban ( their own people).
Events are moving with the speed of light and battle lines are being drawn for the coming blood shed. Thirty five thousand US troops will not be enough in Afghanistan and neither will attacking Iran be an option. Withdrawal of US troops from Iraq will not be an option. The legacy of Bush will consume the Middle East in flames and Obama will be too busy dousing fires at home to come out with a sensible Foreign policy. People like Chas Freeman who could have made a difference have been sidelined by people who do not understand what havoc they have already wrought.
There is no shortage of people in the US who understand the scenario that I have outlined better than me and who could offer a solution out of this which will work but their voices are constantly silenced and their participation in decision making sabotaged. The reckoning to the US of this madness has already happened in a loss of its standing and prestige in the world. Can this loss of credibility get any worse? Read this essay again in six months ( yes 6 months) and you will see the speed of the deterioration.
Khusro
--- On Sun, 3/15/09, sshusain@aol. com
To see this story with its related links on the guardian.co. uk site, go to
http://www.guardian .co.uk/commentis free/2009/ mar/15/jason- burke-pakistan
Our skewed world view won't let us see the real Pakistan
The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on
countries that neither want nor need them
Jason Burke
Sunday March 15 2009
The Observer
First for the good news: Pakistan is not about to explode. The Islamic militants
are not going to take power tomorrow; the nuclear weapons are not about to be
trafficked to al-Qaida; the army is not about to send the Afghan Taliban to
invade India; a civil war is unlikely.
The bad news is that Pakistan poses us questions that are much more profound
than those we would face if this nation of 170m, the world's second biggest
Muslim state, were simply a failed state. If Pakistan collapsed, we would be
faced by a serious security challenge. But the resilience of Pakistan and the
nation's continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to
together pose questions with implications far beyond simple security concerns.
They are about our ability to influence events in far-off places, our capacity
to analyse and understand the behaviour and perceived interests of other nations
and cultures, about our ability to deal with difference, about how we see the
world.
Pakistan has very grave problems. In the last two years, I have reported on
bloody ethnic and political riots, on violent demonstrations, from the front
line of a vicious war against radical Islamic insurgents. I spent a day with
Benazir Bhutto a week before she was assassinated and covered the series of
murderous attacks committed at home and abroad by militant groups based in
Pakistan with shadowy connections to its security services. There is an economic
crisis and social problems - illiteracy, domestic violence, drug addiction - of
grotesque proportions. Osama bin Laden is probably on Pakistani soil.
For many developing nations, all this would signal the state's total
disintegration. This partly explains why Pakistan's collapse is so often
predicted. The nation's meltdown was forecast when its eastern half seceded to
become Bangladesh in 1971, during the violence that preceded General Zia
ul-Haq's coup in 1977, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, when Zia was killed
in 1988, during the horrific sectarian violence of the early Nineties, through
sundry ethnic insurgencies, after 9/11, after the 2007 death of Bhutto and now
after yet another political crisis. These predictions have been consistently
proved wrong. The most recent will be too. Yesterday, tempers were already
calming.
Some of the perpetual international hysteria is stoked by the Pakistanis
themselves. Successive governments have perfected the art of negotiating by
pointing a gun to their own heads. They know that their nation's strategic
importance guarantees the financial life support they need from the
international community. More broadly, our understanding of Pakistan is skewed.
This is in part due to centuries of historical baggage. Though few would quote
Emile Zola on contemporary France, Winston Churchill, who as a young man fought
on the North-West Frontier, is regularly cited to explain today's insurgency.
This legacy also includes stereotypes of "Mad Mullahs" running amok, an image
fuelled by television footage that highlights ranting demonstrators from
Pakistan's Islamist parties though they have never won more than 14% in an
election.
For many Britons, Pakistan represents "the other" - chaotic, distant, exotic,
dirty, hot, fanatical and threatening. Yet at the same time, Pakistan seems very
familiar. There is the English language, cricket, kebabs and curries and figures
such as Imran Khan. There are a million-odd Britons of Pakistani-descent who
over four decades have largely integrated far better in the UK than often
suggested.
It is the tension between these two largely imaginary Pakistans that leads to
such strong reactions in Britain. We see the country as plunged in a struggle
between the frighteningly foreign and the familiar, between fanaticism and
western democracy, values, our vision of the world and how it should be ordered.
Yet while we are fretting about Pakistan's imminent disintegration, we are blind
to the really important change.
Recent years have seen the consolidation of a new Pakistani identity between
these two extremes. It is nationalist, conservative in religious and social
terms and much more aggressive in asserting what are seen, rightly or wrongly,
as local "Pakistani" interests. It is a mix of patriotic chauvinism and moderate
Islamism that is currently heavily informed by a distorted view of the world
sadly all too familiar across the entire Muslim world. This means that for many
Pakistanis, the west is rapacious and hostile. Admiration for the British and
desire for holidays in London have been replaced by a view of the UK as
"America's poodle" and dreams of Dubai or Malaysia. The 9/11 attacks are seen,
even by senior army officers, as a put-up job by Mossad, the CIA or both. The
Indians, the old enemy, are seen as running riot in Afghanistan where the
Taliban are "freedom fighters". AQ Khan, the nuclear scientist seen as a
bomb-selling criminal by the West, is a hero. Democracy is seen as the best
system, but only if democracy results in governments that take decisions that
reflect the sentiments of most Pakistanis, not just those of the Anglophone,
westernised elite among whom western policy-makers, politicians and journalists
tend to chose their interlocutors.
This view of the world is most common among the new, urban middle classes in
Pakistan, much larger after a decade of fast and uneven economic growth. It is
this class that provides the bulk of the country's military officers and
bureaucrats. This in part explains the Pakistani security establishment' s dogged
support for elements within the Taliban. The infamous ISI spy agency is largely
staffed by soldiers and the army is a reflection of society. For the ISI, as for
many Pakistanis, supporting certain insurgent factions in Afghanistan is seen as
the rational choice. If this trend continues, it poses us problems rather
different from those posed by a failed state. Instead, you have a nuclear armed
nation with a large population that is increasingly vocal and which sees the
world very differently from us.
We face a related problem in Afghanistan where we are still hoping to build the
state we want the Afghans to want, rather than the state that they actually
want. Ask many Afghans which state they hope their own will resemble in a few
decades and the answer is "Iran". Dozens of interviews with senior western
generals, diplomats and officials in Kabul last week have shown me how deeply
the years of conflict and "nation-building" have dented confidence in our
ability to transplant western values. Our interest in Afghanistan has been
reduced to preventing it from becoming a platform for threats to the west. In
Afghanistan, as in Iraq, the west has glimpsed the limits to its power and to
the supposedly universal attraction of its values.
The west's dreams of a comfortable post-Cold War era have been rudely shaken. We
have been forced reluctantly to accept the independence and influence of China
and Russia. These are countries that we recognise as difficult international
actors pursuing agendas popular with substantial proportions of their citizens.
Other countries, particularly those less troubled than Pakistan or Afghanistan,
are likely soon to join that list.
This poses a critical challenge in foreign policy. Worrying about the imminent
collapse of Pakistan is not going to help us find answers to the really
difficult questions that Pakistan poses.
Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited 2009
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Aftermath of the attack in Lahore
Editorial Comment
What is not mentioned in this analyses is the impact on India. The biggest threat to India's future is a Talibanised Pakistan. The use of force by India to forestall this will mean that the Pakistan Army will step in on the side of the Taliban and India will become a front line State. Any Military solution including the one being tried by the US, plays into the hands of the Taliban. Like Osama, they are relying on continued bombing by US drones in order to recruit people to their cause.
An Indian incursion will fast forward the demise of Pakistan and the rise of extremists from Afghanistan, all the way to Bangladesh. India cannot afford to open the Pandora's box that is it's 200 million destitute Muslims, who are the blacks of India.
May be now people can see why I have been forecasting the coming blood shed. There is a predictability about events knowing the hawkish stance of all the players. Both Musharraf and Zardari have presented, over the severe objections of the US, an alternate approach but have not been able to show tangible results to the impatient Americans.While The US is quick to blame the lack of results from the approaches made to the Taliban, they do not point to the failure of there own policies.
A fast deteriorating Pakistan is a direct result of US policies and not anything Zardari is doing or Musharraf was doing. Labeling people as enemies and then going after them in hot pursuit is a uniquely American activity. The Bush doctrine of, If you are not with us then you must be against us, is the reverse of , live and let live and creates an unneccesarliy hostile and dangerous world. How blind America is to having made this a more dangerous world is seen by the fact that even Obama cannot see this.
We are all helpless in a world dominated by a mad power, which clings on to a power that it has long ago sold to it's own version of us verses them. No country today stands as an example of foolishly handing over its soul and body to America for more than 60 years as does Pakistan. For years case studies will be written quoting Pakistan as the worst case of Imperialist abuse. It is a tale of lust in which no one has been more depraved then the Pakistanis.
Khusro
The Guardian, Thursday 5 March 2009
Whole provinces beyond the writ of the state, Islamist insurgents uniting for a broader fight, terror attacks conceived, plotted and exported: Pakistan was in serious danger of implosion before the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team on Tuesday brought the parlous security situation in the country to a wider international audience.But security is not the only problem of a country which the United States now considers a greater threat than neighbouring Afghanistan. With the economy teetering, political tumult building and social conditions ripe for extremists, nuclear-armed Pakistan faces six critical threats to the rule of law and governance of the state.
Security
The current violence started in summer 2007, when security forces routed armed militants at the Red Mosque in Islamabad. That event turned militant groups which were focused on India or Afghanistan inwards, to Pakistan itself. A campaign of suicide bombings started, in which Taliban-style extremists in the north-west, near the Afghan border, joined forces with jihadist groups based in Punjab, Pakistan's heartland. The fatal attack on Benazir Bhutto in December 2007 and the strike against Islamabad's Marriott hotel demonstrated that insurgents were aiming high and frequently being successful.Large parts of Pakistan have been snatched from government control. Most of the tribal area, the semi-autonomous sliver of land that runs along the Afghan border, is now firmly in the control of the Pakistani Taliban, who play host to al-Qaida commanders. Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, may be hiding in the tribal territory. This week, the Guardian learned that three rival Pakistani Taliban groups had formed a united front to wage war in Afghanistan, promising further instability there. Much of the North-West Frontier province is menaced by marauding extremists, with citizens having to form village militias to defend themselves. The vast Swat valley has been taken over by a band of Taliban guerrillas. In an attempt to bring some peace to Swat, the government agreed last month to impose Islamic law in the area. In Baluchistan, Pakistan's largest but most sparsely populated province, the threat from Afghan Taliban elements is compounded by a long-running Baluch nationalist rebellion. Punjab, by far the most populous and richest province, is also threatened by extremists in its midst. There are many jihadist groups, including Lashkar-e-Taiba, the outfit blamed for the Mumbai attack in November.
Intelligence services
The aims of Pakistan's premier spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), are the big question: does it still support at least some of the extremist groups?The ISI, once heavily backed by Washington, masterminded the mujahideen resistance in Afghanistan to the Soviet invasion in the 1980s, training and financing the insurgents. The ISI then decided to use the same tactics against India, founding a series of militant groups that started a violent resistance to Indian rule in the disputed region of Kashmir. The agency also nurtured a number of sectarian outfits, such as Sipah-e-Sahaba.Then, in the mid-1990s, the ISI helped create a new Islamic movement in Afghanistan, the Taliban, which rapidly managed to take over the country. It also spawned a copycat Pakistani Taliban movement.The problem is that many of these militant groups, which were used to further Pakistan's foreign policy and domestic aims, have slipped out of the ISI's control. The groups have turned on the state itself, under the influence of al-Qaida.
The economy
The rule of President Pervez Musharraf, from 1999 to 2008, was characterised by an economic boom. But, just as elections were held in February 2008, that boom was turning to bust.Inflation is now running at some 25%, while the currency and the stockmarket have been pummelled over the last year. Much of Pakistan's textile industry, which had accounted for about half of its exports, is closed as a result of chronic power shortages and lack of competitiveness.Late last year, Pakistan was forced to go on its knees to the IMF for an emergency $7.6bn bail-out, as it was threatened by imminent bankruptcy. The economic crisis means that unemployment and poverty are on the increase, the very conditions that breed extremism. The economy and poor governance have meant a failure to provide the country with an education and health system that serves most of the population. As a result, many poor people send their children to free madrasa schools, where the education is almost exclusively religious, sometimes preaching a radical version of Islam. Millions of children have few workplace skills and knowledge only of Islam.
Politics
Pakistan's politics has always been tumultuous, with the country under military rule for most of its 61 years of existence. The last period of army rule ended in 2008, but the new democratic dispensation has floundered. In particular, the two main political parties, the Pakistan Peoples party, which runs the federal government, and the party of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, are in a state of war. Last week, Islamabad dismissed the provincial government in the all-important Punjab province, which had been run by Sharif's party. Sharif and a pressure group of lawyers calling for judicial independence are now going to take their opposition on to the streets. With poor governance in Islamabad and a lack of fundamental political consensus on how the country should be run, there are already rumours that the army is about to step back in.
The military
Army chief Ashfaq Kayani has repeatedly indicated that he does not want to see the army step back into the political fray, but with a government struggling to cope with the security situation, many predict that he will eventually intervene. The army is pervasive in Pakistan, dominating the economy: there are dozens of military businesses, it is prominent in land ownership, and, of course, it is the most important political institution. When foreign leaders want to deal seriously with Pakistan, they talk to the army chief.The army is in charge of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, making the unity and integrity of the military an international concern. The ISI also comes under the army. Politicians and ordinary Pakistanis live in fear of the military.
International allies
Since 9/11, Pakistan has been courted by the west, which suddenly realised that the country held the key to international security. Relations with India steadied somewhat after a critical stand-off in 2002. But the Mumbai attacks have drawn the two neighbours back into confrontation.China too watches with concern at the apparent disintegration of its neighbour and close ally.Pakistan's western backers are impatient with its failure to deal with the militant safe havens along the Afghan border. Britain is concerned at Pakistani involvement in its own terror problems: Gordon Brown said recently that three-quarters of known British terror plots had links to Pakistan. American efforts to take matters into its own hand with attacks on Pakistani territory have frayed relations further. But the west cannot turn on a country whose co-operation is needed for security. The fear is that isolation could push Pakistan into collapse
What is not mentioned in this analyses is the impact on India. The biggest threat to India's future is a Talibanised Pakistan. The use of force by India to forestall this will mean that the Pakistan Army will step in on the side of the Taliban and India will become a front line State. Any Military solution including the one being tried by the US, plays into the hands of the Taliban. Like Osama, they are relying on continued bombing by US drones in order to recruit people to their cause.
An Indian incursion will fast forward the demise of Pakistan and the rise of extremists from Afghanistan, all the way to Bangladesh. India cannot afford to open the Pandora's box that is it's 200 million destitute Muslims, who are the blacks of India.
May be now people can see why I have been forecasting the coming blood shed. There is a predictability about events knowing the hawkish stance of all the players. Both Musharraf and Zardari have presented, over the severe objections of the US, an alternate approach but have not been able to show tangible results to the impatient Americans.While The US is quick to blame the lack of results from the approaches made to the Taliban, they do not point to the failure of there own policies.
A fast deteriorating Pakistan is a direct result of US policies and not anything Zardari is doing or Musharraf was doing. Labeling people as enemies and then going after them in hot pursuit is a uniquely American activity. The Bush doctrine of, If you are not with us then you must be against us, is the reverse of , live and let live and creates an unneccesarliy hostile and dangerous world. How blind America is to having made this a more dangerous world is seen by the fact that even Obama cannot see this.
We are all helpless in a world dominated by a mad power, which clings on to a power that it has long ago sold to it's own version of us verses them. No country today stands as an example of foolishly handing over its soul and body to America for more than 60 years as does Pakistan. For years case studies will be written quoting Pakistan as the worst case of Imperialist abuse. It is a tale of lust in which no one has been more depraved then the Pakistanis.
Khusro
The Guardian, Thursday 5 March 2009
Whole provinces beyond the writ of the state, Islamist insurgents uniting for a broader fight, terror attacks conceived, plotted and exported: Pakistan was in serious danger of implosion before the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team on Tuesday brought the parlous security situation in the country to a wider international audience.But security is not the only problem of a country which the United States now considers a greater threat than neighbouring Afghanistan. With the economy teetering, political tumult building and social conditions ripe for extremists, nuclear-armed Pakistan faces six critical threats to the rule of law and governance of the state.
Security
The current violence started in summer 2007, when security forces routed armed militants at the Red Mosque in Islamabad. That event turned militant groups which were focused on India or Afghanistan inwards, to Pakistan itself. A campaign of suicide bombings started, in which Taliban-style extremists in the north-west, near the Afghan border, joined forces with jihadist groups based in Punjab, Pakistan's heartland. The fatal attack on Benazir Bhutto in December 2007 and the strike against Islamabad's Marriott hotel demonstrated that insurgents were aiming high and frequently being successful.Large parts of Pakistan have been snatched from government control. Most of the tribal area, the semi-autonomous sliver of land that runs along the Afghan border, is now firmly in the control of the Pakistani Taliban, who play host to al-Qaida commanders. Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, may be hiding in the tribal territory. This week, the Guardian learned that three rival Pakistani Taliban groups had formed a united front to wage war in Afghanistan, promising further instability there. Much of the North-West Frontier province is menaced by marauding extremists, with citizens having to form village militias to defend themselves. The vast Swat valley has been taken over by a band of Taliban guerrillas. In an attempt to bring some peace to Swat, the government agreed last month to impose Islamic law in the area. In Baluchistan, Pakistan's largest but most sparsely populated province, the threat from Afghan Taliban elements is compounded by a long-running Baluch nationalist rebellion. Punjab, by far the most populous and richest province, is also threatened by extremists in its midst. There are many jihadist groups, including Lashkar-e-Taiba, the outfit blamed for the Mumbai attack in November.
Intelligence services
The aims of Pakistan's premier spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), are the big question: does it still support at least some of the extremist groups?The ISI, once heavily backed by Washington, masterminded the mujahideen resistance in Afghanistan to the Soviet invasion in the 1980s, training and financing the insurgents. The ISI then decided to use the same tactics against India, founding a series of militant groups that started a violent resistance to Indian rule in the disputed region of Kashmir. The agency also nurtured a number of sectarian outfits, such as Sipah-e-Sahaba.Then, in the mid-1990s, the ISI helped create a new Islamic movement in Afghanistan, the Taliban, which rapidly managed to take over the country. It also spawned a copycat Pakistani Taliban movement.The problem is that many of these militant groups, which were used to further Pakistan's foreign policy and domestic aims, have slipped out of the ISI's control. The groups have turned on the state itself, under the influence of al-Qaida.
The economy
The rule of President Pervez Musharraf, from 1999 to 2008, was characterised by an economic boom. But, just as elections were held in February 2008, that boom was turning to bust.Inflation is now running at some 25%, while the currency and the stockmarket have been pummelled over the last year. Much of Pakistan's textile industry, which had accounted for about half of its exports, is closed as a result of chronic power shortages and lack of competitiveness.Late last year, Pakistan was forced to go on its knees to the IMF for an emergency $7.6bn bail-out, as it was threatened by imminent bankruptcy. The economic crisis means that unemployment and poverty are on the increase, the very conditions that breed extremism. The economy and poor governance have meant a failure to provide the country with an education and health system that serves most of the population. As a result, many poor people send their children to free madrasa schools, where the education is almost exclusively religious, sometimes preaching a radical version of Islam. Millions of children have few workplace skills and knowledge only of Islam.
Politics
Pakistan's politics has always been tumultuous, with the country under military rule for most of its 61 years of existence. The last period of army rule ended in 2008, but the new democratic dispensation has floundered. In particular, the two main political parties, the Pakistan Peoples party, which runs the federal government, and the party of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, are in a state of war. Last week, Islamabad dismissed the provincial government in the all-important Punjab province, which had been run by Sharif's party. Sharif and a pressure group of lawyers calling for judicial independence are now going to take their opposition on to the streets. With poor governance in Islamabad and a lack of fundamental political consensus on how the country should be run, there are already rumours that the army is about to step back in.
The military
Army chief Ashfaq Kayani has repeatedly indicated that he does not want to see the army step back into the political fray, but with a government struggling to cope with the security situation, many predict that he will eventually intervene. The army is pervasive in Pakistan, dominating the economy: there are dozens of military businesses, it is prominent in land ownership, and, of course, it is the most important political institution. When foreign leaders want to deal seriously with Pakistan, they talk to the army chief.The army is in charge of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, making the unity and integrity of the military an international concern. The ISI also comes under the army. Politicians and ordinary Pakistanis live in fear of the military.
International allies
Since 9/11, Pakistan has been courted by the west, which suddenly realised that the country held the key to international security. Relations with India steadied somewhat after a critical stand-off in 2002. But the Mumbai attacks have drawn the two neighbours back into confrontation.China too watches with concern at the apparent disintegration of its neighbour and close ally.Pakistan's western backers are impatient with its failure to deal with the militant safe havens along the Afghan border. Britain is concerned at Pakistani involvement in its own terror problems: Gordon Brown said recently that three-quarters of known British terror plots had links to Pakistan. American efforts to take matters into its own hand with attacks on Pakistani territory have frayed relations further. But the west cannot turn on a country whose co-operation is needed for security. The fear is that isolation could push Pakistan into collapse
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Letter to my son
"Never trust America. You make it your ally at your peril. You believe it at your risk. It is a standing hazard."
Humayun Gauhar's father, Altaf Gauher was a brilliant man but nevertheless became an American stooge. The sad reality is that America at it's peak was irresistible and Pakistan became one of it's biggest victims. India was able to resist successfully.
Will it take a full American attack on Pakistani soil to unite Pakistan? I am afraid it will take nothing short of that. Will it take the destruction of another few Muslim countries to unite Muslims. I am afraid it will take nothing short of that. My scenario of the upcoming blood bath of Muslims is exactly this. It is not a prescription that I recommend. It is simply inevitable. It is the nature of the American beast.
The denial within America that it is no longer Number one is complete. The Muslims cling to past glories even after 1400 years, how can the American forget while their buildings and highways are still intact? The danger of this denial is acts of desperation in wanting to attack Iran and Pakistan never mind the Economic cost to America or the cost in lives of Iranians and Pakistanis.
One million Pakistanis will die in the coming years. That is almost certain. The only question is will they die in vain. Will those who survive have learned a lesson never to be forgotten? Do they need to die for others to learn?
Khusro
Subject: LETTERS TO MY SON:Humayun Gauhar
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 06:02:53 +0000
Subject: LETTERS TO MY SON THE NATION Sunday, 14th September 2008
Humayun Gauhar
The Americans boots are coming , an event long predicted. Prepare
yourself.
Humayun Gauhar
My dear Ali:
You have been bombarding me with questions about the US and NATO attack
on us. Look, son, they attacked us a long time ago. The only difference
is that now they have escalated and exacerbated the situation by
actually putting boots on our soil. Given Admiral Mullen's remorseless
statement, its entirely possible that this will happen again. Given
Bush's statement that the next president's biggest challenge would be
Pakistan and if there were another 9/11 it would come from FATA, it is
certain. Given General Kiyani's admirable response, it is also entirely
possible that Pakistan will retaliate. Then America may escalate from
helicopter gunships to F-16s or even stealth bombers. I hope this
doesn't happen, for it spells near total destruction for us, or at
least part of our country, all of which are equally dear to us. The
situation is so dangerous that apparently European NATO has distanced
itself from it, except Britain. They know that P
akistan will make Iraq
look like a picnic and Afghanistan like a massage parlour. The New York
Times, which reflects the US establishment' s thinking, claims that Bush
authorized entry of American military personnel into Pakistan. To
discredit Kiyani, whom they were lionizing only a few days ago, they
also claimed that he knew about the bombing of the Indian embassy in
Kabul, allegedly by the ISI.
Can we stand up to them, you ask, and cite the example of Iran? I have
told you that Iran has the most potent weapon in the world. It's called
Unity. They demonstrated it in their war with America's puppet Saddam's
Iraq. They are undefeatable. So were the Vietnamese for exactly the
same reason. Unity is one of the three words of our national motto, the
others being faith and discipline. We have none of them. But if we can
forge unity in our ranks, faith and discipline will inevitably follow.
Then no power on earth can defeat us. Though we seem incapable, an
American attack might do just that: bring us together as a nation like
nothing ever has. I told you I am an incorrigible optimist in even the
bleakest situations. So should you be. So should all young men and
women.
If we cannot forge unity, then we will face a situation far more
dangerous than in 1971 when our country was rend asunder. We refused to
respect the verdict of the people, lost a war against India and half
our country with it
. Why? Because we attacked our own people for the
'crime' of having voted for their choice so they were not with us when
war came. Then India was backed by a the Soviet Union, while our great
friend and ally the United States stood by twiddling its thumbs. Now we
are being attacked directly by the sole and strongest-ever superpower,
our old friend and ally America. And again the people of the Frontier
may not be with us for the grievous harm that has been caused them.
There is still time to reclaim their emotional allegiance.
General Kiyani's statement was the voice of the people, just what they
wanted to hear. They have become skeptical over the years, and who can
blame them? If American soldiers set foot in Pakistan again and
Kiyani's words become bullets, the people will be galvanized
instantaneously. It will then be for the government to mobilize a
galvanized people, unify them and fire them with nationalist zeal. It
will have to open many other fronts, diplomatic and media especially.
Which means it will have to open the strategic communications front to
manage perceptions in our favour before they are formed against us. The
war will be won. So, finally, will real independence, for we would have
paid a price for it. And that is when we will treasure Pakistan as more
precious than our lives, not precious because it has been good to live
off for a few. If we fail, then we are staring certain sl
avery in the
face.
Let's get down to brass tacks. The US wanted five things from
Musharraf. When he wouldn't comply they engineered his removal.
One: They want to distance us from our best and true friend China,
especially from our strategic relationship with it, like Gwadar Port.
Gwadar is a deep-sea port that can house nuclear submarines and is
closest to the mouth of the Straits of Hormuz, the main shipping lane
on which oil from the Middle East and the Caspian Basin goes to the
world. Musharraf didn't agree. Result: every new prime minister of ours
first goes to China on an official visit and Saudi Arabia on a
religious visit to underline Pakistan's close relationship with these
two countries. The new prime minister hasn't been to China yet on an
official visit (the one to the Olympics opening ceremony was last
minute and forced, when Musharraf couldn't go) and there seems to be no
urgency to undertake one. Zardari said he would go to China immediately
after taking oath as president. That has been cancelled and he is going
to the UK instead, the country which started the rot. But China is
mature and wise. It knows that this is an aberration caused by
ideological confusion and lack of identity, purpose and direction. In
any case, it will not simply stand by and watch Pakistan go down the
drain and let its encirclement be complete after investing so much in
it.
Two: They want to
question Dr. A. Q. Khan and through him 'persuade'
the UN Security Council to pass a resolution asking America to bring
our nuclear assets under International Atomic Energy Agency (read US)
supervision and control. They want to defang our nuclear programme.
Musharraf didn't agree. The new government's slain leader had already
said that she would allow the IAEA to question Dr. Khan under certain
conditions.
Three: They want to castrate our ISI and place it indirectly under
their control and then too our army in the war on terror. Musharraf
didn't agree. Result: the new government tried to place the ISI under
the control of the interior ministry. There was a hue and cry. The
notification has still not been rescinded. Remember, a handful of
British controlled India through intermediaries, the class of Indians
they had created, basically us, which was English in every respect
except for the colour of their skins.
Four: They want to be 'invited' to enter Pakistani territory to hunt
down terrorists. Musharraf didn't agree. Result: come the new
government and they have already landed in three helicopter gunships in
Pakistan's Angoor Adda, targeted a particular house and blown up part
of it, and killed 20 civilians, women and children included. And while
our foreign minister was fulminating and our corps commanders were
meeting, their missile attacks continued.
In short, they want to occupy Pakistan without bothering to
conquer it
and put a puppet government here to do it's bidding, as they have in
Afghanistan and Iraq. Musharraf is gone and the popular perception is
that the US has finally managed to install a government of its choice
under the garb of democracy, its latest weapon, shamelessly forgetting
how they used to support dictatorships to fighting communism. The
re-visitation of its earlier weapons, the IMF and the World Bank with
their inhuman conditions, through which America creates perpetual
economic dependence, is already upon us. Soon food will also become a
weapon: Kissinger said years ago, 'Control the food and you control the
nations.' Is it symbolically significant that the running dog of US
neo-imperialist capitalism was chief guest at the new President's
oath-taking ceremony?
Lets stop lamenting and blaming others and ask: what lesson do I learn
from this?
One: Never trust America. You make it your ally at your peril. You
believe it at your risk. It is a standing hazard. It has every right to
ask you to do things that are in its interest. You should agree if and
only if it is in your interest too, not otherwise. More importantly,
never agree on the basis of IOUs: get what you have to get first, or
simultaneously, and then go ahead. They use us. That is their right. We
get used. That is our stupidity. Learn to use them. That is our right.
Israel does it to perfection, not because America lov
es it but because
it fears as many as three million of them. They're brilliant.
Two: Every single government in Pakistan has committed suicide. They
are like Lemmings. They have a death wish. They don't work with
pragmatism, consensus or wisdom. They always take things to breaking
point.
Three: Learn this most important of all lessons. It's all very well to
blame others for your woes, but no one will help you, not even the
Almighty, unless you start helping yourself first. No one will put your
house in order for you. You have to do it yourself. Pakistan is
crawling with extremists, militants and terrorists of all hues and many
nationalities. Our compatriots in the Frontier give them refuge under a
misplaced sense of 'hospitality' . We have millions of Afghans. Send
them back now that their country has been 'liberated' and they are
enjoying the joys of 'democracy'. There are many others too, westerners
included. Get rid of them also. Pakistan is rived with CIA agents
everywhere, deeper and wider than you can imagine. Clean up your
country in your own interest, not anyone else's. If you can't, or
don't, please spare us the bellyaching.
Abba
Humayun Gauhar's father, Altaf Gauher was a brilliant man but nevertheless became an American stooge. The sad reality is that America at it's peak was irresistible and Pakistan became one of it's biggest victims. India was able to resist successfully.
Will it take a full American attack on Pakistani soil to unite Pakistan? I am afraid it will take nothing short of that. Will it take the destruction of another few Muslim countries to unite Muslims. I am afraid it will take nothing short of that. My scenario of the upcoming blood bath of Muslims is exactly this. It is not a prescription that I recommend. It is simply inevitable. It is the nature of the American beast.
The denial within America that it is no longer Number one is complete. The Muslims cling to past glories even after 1400 years, how can the American forget while their buildings and highways are still intact? The danger of this denial is acts of desperation in wanting to attack Iran and Pakistan never mind the Economic cost to America or the cost in lives of Iranians and Pakistanis.
One million Pakistanis will die in the coming years. That is almost certain. The only question is will they die in vain. Will those who survive have learned a lesson never to be forgotten? Do they need to die for others to learn?
Khusro
Subject: LETTERS TO MY SON:Humayun Gauhar
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 06:02:53 +0000
Subject: LETTERS TO MY SON THE NATION Sunday, 14th September 2008
Humayun Gauhar
The Americans boots are coming , an event long predicted. Prepare
yourself.
Humayun Gauhar
My dear Ali:
You have been bombarding me with questions about the US and NATO attack
on us. Look, son, they attacked us a long time ago. The only difference
is that now they have escalated and exacerbated the situation by
actually putting boots on our soil. Given Admiral Mullen's remorseless
statement, its entirely possible that this will happen again. Given
Bush's statement that the next president's biggest challenge would be
Pakistan and if there were another 9/11 it would come from FATA, it is
certain. Given General Kiyani's admirable response, it is also entirely
possible that Pakistan will retaliate. Then America may escalate from
helicopter gunships to F-16s or even stealth bombers. I hope this
doesn't happen, for it spells near total destruction for us, or at
least part of our country, all of which are equally dear to us. The
situation is so dangerous that apparently European NATO has distanced
itself from it, except Britain. They know that P
akistan will make Iraq
look like a picnic and Afghanistan like a massage parlour. The New York
Times, which reflects the US establishment' s thinking, claims that Bush
authorized entry of American military personnel into Pakistan. To
discredit Kiyani, whom they were lionizing only a few days ago, they
also claimed that he knew about the bombing of the Indian embassy in
Kabul, allegedly by the ISI.
Can we stand up to them, you ask, and cite the example of Iran? I have
told you that Iran has the most potent weapon in the world. It's called
Unity. They demonstrated it in their war with America's puppet Saddam's
Iraq. They are undefeatable. So were the Vietnamese for exactly the
same reason. Unity is one of the three words of our national motto, the
others being faith and discipline. We have none of them. But if we can
forge unity in our ranks, faith and discipline will inevitably follow.
Then no power on earth can defeat us. Though we seem incapable, an
American attack might do just that: bring us together as a nation like
nothing ever has. I told you I am an incorrigible optimist in even the
bleakest situations. So should you be. So should all young men and
women.
If we cannot forge unity, then we will face a situation far more
dangerous than in 1971 when our country was rend asunder. We refused to
respect the verdict of the people, lost a war against India and half
our country with it
. Why? Because we attacked our own people for the
'crime' of having voted for their choice so they were not with us when
war came. Then India was backed by a the Soviet Union, while our great
friend and ally the United States stood by twiddling its thumbs. Now we
are being attacked directly by the sole and strongest-ever superpower,
our old friend and ally America. And again the people of the Frontier
may not be with us for the grievous harm that has been caused them.
There is still time to reclaim their emotional allegiance.
General Kiyani's statement was the voice of the people, just what they
wanted to hear. They have become skeptical over the years, and who can
blame them? If American soldiers set foot in Pakistan again and
Kiyani's words become bullets, the people will be galvanized
instantaneously. It will then be for the government to mobilize a
galvanized people, unify them and fire them with nationalist zeal. It
will have to open many other fronts, diplomatic and media especially.
Which means it will have to open the strategic communications front to
manage perceptions in our favour before they are formed against us. The
war will be won. So, finally, will real independence, for we would have
paid a price for it. And that is when we will treasure Pakistan as more
precious than our lives, not precious because it has been good to live
off for a few. If we fail, then we are staring certain sl
avery in the
face.
Let's get down to brass tacks. The US wanted five things from
Musharraf. When he wouldn't comply they engineered his removal.
One: They want to distance us from our best and true friend China,
especially from our strategic relationship with it, like Gwadar Port.
Gwadar is a deep-sea port that can house nuclear submarines and is
closest to the mouth of the Straits of Hormuz, the main shipping lane
on which oil from the Middle East and the Caspian Basin goes to the
world. Musharraf didn't agree. Result: every new prime minister of ours
first goes to China on an official visit and Saudi Arabia on a
religious visit to underline Pakistan's close relationship with these
two countries. The new prime minister hasn't been to China yet on an
official visit (the one to the Olympics opening ceremony was last
minute and forced, when Musharraf couldn't go) and there seems to be no
urgency to undertake one. Zardari said he would go to China immediately
after taking oath as president. That has been cancelled and he is going
to the UK instead, the country which started the rot. But China is
mature and wise. It knows that this is an aberration caused by
ideological confusion and lack of identity, purpose and direction. In
any case, it will not simply stand by and watch Pakistan go down the
drain and let its encirclement be complete after investing so much in
it.
Two: They want to
question Dr. A. Q. Khan and through him 'persuade'
the UN Security Council to pass a resolution asking America to bring
our nuclear assets under International Atomic Energy Agency (read US)
supervision and control. They want to defang our nuclear programme.
Musharraf didn't agree. The new government's slain leader had already
said that she would allow the IAEA to question Dr. Khan under certain
conditions.
Three: They want to castrate our ISI and place it indirectly under
their control and then too our army in the war on terror. Musharraf
didn't agree. Result: the new government tried to place the ISI under
the control of the interior ministry. There was a hue and cry. The
notification has still not been rescinded. Remember, a handful of
British controlled India through intermediaries, the class of Indians
they had created, basically us, which was English in every respect
except for the colour of their skins.
Four: They want to be 'invited' to enter Pakistani territory to hunt
down terrorists. Musharraf didn't agree. Result: come the new
government and they have already landed in three helicopter gunships in
Pakistan's Angoor Adda, targeted a particular house and blown up part
of it, and killed 20 civilians, women and children included. And while
our foreign minister was fulminating and our corps commanders were
meeting, their missile attacks continued.
In short, they want to occupy Pakistan without bothering to
conquer it
and put a puppet government here to do it's bidding, as they have in
Afghanistan and Iraq. Musharraf is gone and the popular perception is
that the US has finally managed to install a government of its choice
under the garb of democracy, its latest weapon, shamelessly forgetting
how they used to support dictatorships to fighting communism. The
re-visitation of its earlier weapons, the IMF and the World Bank with
their inhuman conditions, through which America creates perpetual
economic dependence, is already upon us. Soon food will also become a
weapon: Kissinger said years ago, 'Control the food and you control the
nations.' Is it symbolically significant that the running dog of US
neo-imperialist capitalism was chief guest at the new President's
oath-taking ceremony?
Lets stop lamenting and blaming others and ask: what lesson do I learn
from this?
One: Never trust America. You make it your ally at your peril. You
believe it at your risk. It is a standing hazard. It has every right to
ask you to do things that are in its interest. You should agree if and
only if it is in your interest too, not otherwise. More importantly,
never agree on the basis of IOUs: get what you have to get first, or
simultaneously, and then go ahead. They use us. That is their right. We
get used. That is our stupidity. Learn to use them. That is our right.
Israel does it to perfection, not because America lov
es it but because
it fears as many as three million of them. They're brilliant.
Two: Every single government in Pakistan has committed suicide. They
are like Lemmings. They have a death wish. They don't work with
pragmatism, consensus or wisdom. They always take things to breaking
point.
Three: Learn this most important of all lessons. It's all very well to
blame others for your woes, but no one will help you, not even the
Almighty, unless you start helping yourself first. No one will put your
house in order for you. You have to do it yourself. Pakistan is
crawling with extremists, militants and terrorists of all hues and many
nationalities. Our compatriots in the Frontier give them refuge under a
misplaced sense of 'hospitality' . We have millions of Afghans. Send
them back now that their country has been 'liberated' and they are
enjoying the joys of 'democracy'. There are many others too, westerners
included. Get rid of them also. Pakistan is rived with CIA agents
everywhere, deeper and wider than you can imagine. Clean up your
country in your own interest, not anyone else's. If you can't, or
don't, please spare us the bellyaching.
Abba
Sunday, September 21, 2008
The Taliban
I have no doubt in my mind that Talibanisation is coming and that it is the only way to rid Pakistan of the US, which is fast becoming an enemy rather than an ally. It is also the only way to rid Pakistan of it's elitist leeches. To drive foreign forces out of the country has to be the first step towards freedom.
The question is does this mean making a pact with the devil. Kamal's report shows that the Taliban are capable of growing and maturing. If they do not then they have no hope of dealing with the horrendous issues created by the ruling elite in Pakistan. Younger and better educated people will bring their own sense of realism. So it is important to recognise that the Taliban cannot and will not stick to the formula of growing beards and forcing Hijab on women and cutting off peoples hands.
It is important to remember that America and Australia were first built by Religious outcasts, bandits, con men, adventurers and all sorts of other undesirables thrown out from their mother societies. When these people were joined by more regular people, they were forced to reorganise themselves and build rules more consistent with an orderly society which did not tolerate adhoc decision making.
I see a similar parallel for the Muslim world whose biggest challenge is to throw of the yoke of American Imperialism. If they do not then country after country in The Muslim world will be decimated, their people made homeless and their lands and resources confiscated. The plunder of Iraq has not hit the Muslim world which are used to reading the US version of it. The total decimation of Afghanistan has similarly not hit the Muslim world to the extent that it is not happening to them. At the moment the Taliban are the only people standing in the way of the decimation of Pakistan.
The Iranians are the only people who are not under occupation, militarily, economically or politically. Pakistan is a basket case. They are occupied economically and politically and are about to be occupied militarily. America gains nothing from occupying Pakistan. in fact their problems will increase 1000 fold but so embarrassing is their defeat at the hands of the Taliban that they want to shift the blame to Pakistan.
Kamal's conclusion that there is no Military solution to this issue is not a solution that is on any ones table. America is hellbent on a military solution. In fact they are incapable of a diplomatic solution. They can only negotiate from a position of strength and they are getting weaker not stronger. The weaker they get the more belligerent they are becoming that the problem is not having used enough force. The so called "surge" is being trotted out as a huge success and a formula to be followed. The surge has done nothing for the Iraqis. It simply corrected a mistake that the Americans had made of sidelining the Sunnis.
The problem of American Foreign policy is that there is no policy. In the past the policy was to fight Communism and to protect the interests of the State of Israel.After the fall of Communism, the policy has dwindled to protecting the interests of the State of Israel. The Interests of Israel, whatever they may be, are the mantra of both candidates who want to lead "the free world" ( another laughable notion).
I believe that the bazzars in Pakistan are full of women and children, shopping like crazy for new clothes, gifts, jewelry and sweetmeats for the coming Eid Celebration. While the Marriot burns in Islamabad and the throngs go about their business as if it will all pass, I wonder if this is the time to celebrate or to hunker in for the coming catastrophe.
Khusro
--- From: K.ShoaibSubject: [khusroelley] TalibansTo: khusroelley@ yahoogroups. comDate: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 3:00 AM
“The new Taliban movement has created a parallel government structure that includes defence and finance councils and appoints judges and officials in some areas. It offers cash to recruits and presents letters of introduction to local leaders. It operates Web sites and a 24-hour propaganda apparatus that spins every military incident faster than Afghan and Western officials can manage.
"This is not the Taliban of Emirate times. It is a new, updated generation," said Waheed Mojda, a former foreign ministry aide under the Taliban Islamic Emirate, which ruled most of the country from 1996 to 2001. "They are more educated, and they don't punish people for having CDs or cassettes," he said. "The old Taliban wanted to bring sharia, security and unity to Afghanistan. The new Taliban has much broader goals -- to drive foreign forces out of the country and the Muslim world."
“Their statements focus on ridding Afghanistan of foreign occupiers and incompetent leaders. Although they use Islam to motivate followers, they regularly violate what people here consider to be basic Islamic tenets against such things as the murder of women and trafficking in opium.
Their predecessors used harsh punishments to instil law and order but were often pious Muslims. This year, the insurgents have killed teachers, mayors, policemen, truck drivers, doctors, female aid workers and Muslim clerics.
"These people claim to be Muslims, but they are nothing more than terrorists," said Abdul Razzak Qureshi, police chief of Paghman, a district in the mountains west of Kabul ”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/19/AR2008091903980.html?wpisrc=newsletter&sid=ST2008092000530&s_pos=
A longish but very readable article. It contains no pearls of wisdom, but its description of the sate of affairs in South/South East Afghanistan (which is consistent with other reports) is most revealing.
I contribute the following conclusions:
It demonstrates how badly the Western Alliance is losing the war. The stark image is of the Alliance and the (clown) Karzai with his limited supporters holed up under siege in Kabul and in a few tens of square miles at various Western Military bases. It further demonstrates that a large part of the Afghan ‘insurgents’ are home grown. Whatever the contribution of Pakistan and ISI and the US and CIA and Saudi Arabia in creating the original Taliban, for the US to blame Pakistan, to any extent, for the present Afghanistan situation is ridiculous (yes, many supply lines run through Pakistan, ISI has rogue elements, the Afghan Taliban have many sympathizers across the border who are willing to and do provide safe havens, etc. etc.)
The insurgents on both sides of the Pak-Afghan border comprise a multiplicity of groups. To name the main ones:
Old fashioned Taliban (led by Mullah Omar the leader of the pre-US Afghanistan )
These people claim to be Muslims, but they are nothing more than terrorists (quoted from above)
“The new Taliban has much broader goals -- to drive foreign forces out of the country and the Muslim world." (quoted from above)
Local power groups
Tribal Leaders of yore, happy to take advantage of power vacuums to extend their authority or who, having known nothing else, indignant at incursions into ancient tribal customs
Etc. etc.
To attempt a single (military or otherwise) solution is a recipe for failure
The military “solutions’ are failing on both sides of the border and as I wrote to the group recently“A degree of accommodation howsoever repugnant backed by a large dose of social and economic inputs are the only way to a lasting peace.”Sadly neither US/NATO or the Pak Govt./Army have even commenced trying to implement these complex, hence difficult, but essential measures
Regards
Kemal Shoaib
The question is does this mean making a pact with the devil. Kamal's report shows that the Taliban are capable of growing and maturing. If they do not then they have no hope of dealing with the horrendous issues created by the ruling elite in Pakistan. Younger and better educated people will bring their own sense of realism. So it is important to recognise that the Taliban cannot and will not stick to the formula of growing beards and forcing Hijab on women and cutting off peoples hands.
It is important to remember that America and Australia were first built by Religious outcasts, bandits, con men, adventurers and all sorts of other undesirables thrown out from their mother societies. When these people were joined by more regular people, they were forced to reorganise themselves and build rules more consistent with an orderly society which did not tolerate adhoc decision making.
I see a similar parallel for the Muslim world whose biggest challenge is to throw of the yoke of American Imperialism. If they do not then country after country in The Muslim world will be decimated, their people made homeless and their lands and resources confiscated. The plunder of Iraq has not hit the Muslim world which are used to reading the US version of it. The total decimation of Afghanistan has similarly not hit the Muslim world to the extent that it is not happening to them. At the moment the Taliban are the only people standing in the way of the decimation of Pakistan.
The Iranians are the only people who are not under occupation, militarily, economically or politically. Pakistan is a basket case. They are occupied economically and politically and are about to be occupied militarily. America gains nothing from occupying Pakistan. in fact their problems will increase 1000 fold but so embarrassing is their defeat at the hands of the Taliban that they want to shift the blame to Pakistan.
Kamal's conclusion that there is no Military solution to this issue is not a solution that is on any ones table. America is hellbent on a military solution. In fact they are incapable of a diplomatic solution. They can only negotiate from a position of strength and they are getting weaker not stronger. The weaker they get the more belligerent they are becoming that the problem is not having used enough force. The so called "surge" is being trotted out as a huge success and a formula to be followed. The surge has done nothing for the Iraqis. It simply corrected a mistake that the Americans had made of sidelining the Sunnis.
The problem of American Foreign policy is that there is no policy. In the past the policy was to fight Communism and to protect the interests of the State of Israel.After the fall of Communism, the policy has dwindled to protecting the interests of the State of Israel. The Interests of Israel, whatever they may be, are the mantra of both candidates who want to lead "the free world" ( another laughable notion).
I believe that the bazzars in Pakistan are full of women and children, shopping like crazy for new clothes, gifts, jewelry and sweetmeats for the coming Eid Celebration. While the Marriot burns in Islamabad and the throngs go about their business as if it will all pass, I wonder if this is the time to celebrate or to hunker in for the coming catastrophe.
Khusro
--- From: K.Shoaib
“The new Taliban movement has created a parallel government structure that includes defence and finance councils and appoints judges and officials in some areas. It offers cash to recruits and presents letters of introduction to local leaders. It operates Web sites and a 24-hour propaganda apparatus that spins every military incident faster than Afghan and Western officials can manage.
"This is not the Taliban of Emirate times. It is a new, updated generation," said Waheed Mojda, a former foreign ministry aide under the Taliban Islamic Emirate, which ruled most of the country from 1996 to 2001. "They are more educated, and they don't punish people for having CDs or cassettes," he said. "The old Taliban wanted to bring sharia, security and unity to Afghanistan. The new Taliban has much broader goals -- to drive foreign forces out of the country and the Muslim world."
“Their statements focus on ridding Afghanistan of foreign occupiers and incompetent leaders. Although they use Islam to motivate followers, they regularly violate what people here consider to be basic Islamic tenets against such things as the murder of women and trafficking in opium.
Their predecessors used harsh punishments to instil law and order but were often pious Muslims. This year, the insurgents have killed teachers, mayors, policemen, truck drivers, doctors, female aid workers and Muslim clerics.
"These people claim to be Muslims, but they are nothing more than terrorists," said Abdul Razzak Qureshi, police chief of Paghman, a district in the mountains west of Kabul ”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/19/AR2008091903980.html?wpisrc=newsletter&sid=ST2008092000530&s_pos=
A longish but very readable article. It contains no pearls of wisdom, but its description of the sate of affairs in South/South East Afghanistan (which is consistent with other reports) is most revealing.
I contribute the following conclusions:
It demonstrates how badly the Western Alliance is losing the war. The stark image is of the Alliance and the (clown) Karzai with his limited supporters holed up under siege in Kabul and in a few tens of square miles at various Western Military bases. It further demonstrates that a large part of the Afghan ‘insurgents’ are home grown. Whatever the contribution of Pakistan and ISI and the US and CIA and Saudi Arabia in creating the original Taliban, for the US to blame Pakistan, to any extent, for the present Afghanistan situation is ridiculous (yes, many supply lines run through Pakistan, ISI has rogue elements, the Afghan Taliban have many sympathizers across the border who are willing to and do provide safe havens, etc. etc.)
The insurgents on both sides of the Pak-Afghan border comprise a multiplicity of groups. To name the main ones:
Old fashioned Taliban (led by Mullah Omar the leader of the pre-US Afghanistan )
These people claim to be Muslims, but they are nothing more than terrorists (quoted from above)
“The new Taliban has much broader goals -- to drive foreign forces out of the country and the Muslim world." (quoted from above)
Local power groups
Tribal Leaders of yore, happy to take advantage of power vacuums to extend their authority or who, having known nothing else, indignant at incursions into ancient tribal customs
Etc. etc.
To attempt a single (military or otherwise) solution is a recipe for failure
The military “solutions’ are failing on both sides of the border and as I wrote to the group recently“A degree of accommodation howsoever repugnant backed by a large dose of social and economic inputs are the only way to a lasting peace.”Sadly neither US/NATO or the Pak Govt./Army have even commenced trying to implement these complex, hence difficult, but essential measures
Regards
Kemal Shoaib
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Pakistan the first sixty years
Pakistan the first sixty years
Sixty years ago nobody could have foretold that Afghanistan would become the center of the world as far as influencing world events. Two earth shaking events both involving Afghanistan have shaped the identity of Pakistan.
The "Global War on Terror" has been uncritically accepted by most in this country. But terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. You cannot declare war on a tactic. The way to combat terrorism is by identifying and targeting its root causes, including poverty, lack of education, and foreign occupation
Pakistan was born out of the policy of the British to divide and rule. It was also born out of the tussle of two men to do things their own way.
Undivided India today would boast half the Muslim population of the world. Nehru was mindful of this and wanted Pakistan as a separate state as much as Jinnah did. He just did not want to give up Kashmir. Nehru did not want to share power with the Muslims as much as Jinnah did not want to share power with the Hindus.
Pakistan was not economically viable nor Geographically compatible. It suited the Americans to develop a client state as a look out for Soviet intention in the region. They may not have helped in Pakistan’s creation but they soon latched on to Pakistan. They found a needy and admiring country.
The Pakistan Army built up by the US to fight the Soviets and by the Pakistanis to fight India has ruled the country for 50 of it’s 60 years. First General Ayub and then Gen Yahya took them into two humiliating wars with India.
As a military state more intent on arming itself and less on nation building Pakistan has emerged as a state which is still economically unsound. It relies on renting it’s army or selling Nuclear blue prints for its survival, if the US stops supporting it. It is equally desirous of becoming free of dependence on the US. Like India, it would like to meet the US as an equal but that has not been possible. Ayub, the first dictator that Pakistan had wrote a book titled “Friends not Masters”.
Twenty five years ago, Bhutto, Benazir’s father decided that Pakistan needed a Nuclear bomb to protect itself from almost certain annexure by India. When AQ Khan, a metallurgist working in Holland approached him, Bhutto jumped at the opportunity and set in motion a plan to secretly develop Nuclear capability.
Almost certainly the facility could have been taken out by the Israelis or the Indians but for US protection. Twice the countries destinies were altered as a result of events, not of it’s making. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan forced it into a position of being a front line state.
The US decided to look the other way in return for it’s cooperation. Regan repeatedly certified to Congress that Pakistan did not have nor possessed the capability for it’s own Nuclear bomb when the CIA knew differently.
The second time this happened was when Pakistan had already tested the bomb and had become an outcast state. September 11 changed all that and Pakistan once again became an indispensable ally of the US in it’s war on terror.
Effectively Pakistan has been a US colony from Day 1 . On both sides there has been a pretence that this is not so. The Army has been addicted to the military toys it got and have always dreamed of capturing Kashmir by a combination of subterfuge and force. The US has known for some time that Pakistan had the ability not only to build the bomb but to sell it on the open market , including to Osama. However other priorities have kept the US from dealing with this as a priority. Iraq has been central to US policy and not Afghanistan. It is often said that the US attacked the wrong country but how can you justify attacking your own colony. For the last 8 years it is the US who decides who rules Pakistan. Unfortunately their chosen successor Benazir was assassinated.
It is well known that the money that should have been spent on Education, Health Care, poverty alleviation, infrastructure went in to the Defense Budget. Today Pakistan is as in the past on the brink of economic disaster. The political leadership never had a chance. They spent a lot of time avoiding coups and only helped precipitate them. First Bhutto selected a simpleton( Zia) who would yes sir him , only to be toppled by him, then Nawaz fired Musharraf, only to be toppled by him.
Pakistan has a unique position in the world today. A country of 150 million people, with a huge standing army and armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons listed as a failed country. It cannot be allowed to go bankrupt. The people of Pakistan and many of its politicians and Generals have long come to the conclusion that America does not have its best interests at heart. They are desperate to stand up on their own feet and like its neighbour next door desperate to join in getting the benefit from the Asian resurgence but America will not let go. America has chosen to fight wars against faceless enemies, which America cannot win. The question is whether it will take Pakistan down with it.
Pakistan has very little experience of democracy. It’s politicians appear to be authoritarian by nature and the Army by training sees things in black and white. The Judiciary has consistently treated military coups as fait accompli and legitimized the army rule. The one instance where the Judiciary stood up to a dictator, it was summarily and unconstitutionally dismissed and the Chief Justice and his family put under house arrest. To his credit, Musharraf did hold elections and has tolerated a free press. The public resoundingly voted against the king’s party mostly because of the way Musharraf treated the Judiciary.
The people want Musharraf to go, they want the Judiciary of Iftekhar Chaudhry restored and they want the US to stop interfering in it’s affairs. None of this is happening. The decision of the future of Pakistan seems to rest in the hands of people who have not been elected and are basically unelectable. Asif Ali Zardari, Nawaz Sharif, Altaf Hussein, Pervez Musharraf and the US are today the main players and none of them have a seat in Parliament. The people taking the decisions are all godfather types who will stop at nothing including murder to have their way. All of them have in fact been responsible for killing or disappearing their opponents. The Army and the ISI have a mind of their own and will not listen to any one. They and the Bureaucracy represent an anti India stance which in today’s world is no better than a piece of fiction.
Like in many other countries where the US sabotages Democracy because it may not bring about the desired results, Pakistan’s hopes of ever becoming a democracy are very limited. This in spite of the fact that the Islamic parties who are not favored by the US have never done well in elections in Pakistan. This has nothing to do with the desire of the people to move towards a more Islamic country. They just do not trust the clergy.
The current situation is one where inflation is running at 25% and likely to go higher. The stock market has come down at least 40% YTD, there is load shedding in the major cities of 8 hours and above. Businesses are closing down for lack of electricity. A water shortage problem is looming ahead. Politics is at a stalemate over the restoration of judges and whether Musharraf should go. Inflation alone can cause serious day to day problems, with jobs not available. These are ideal grounds for recruitment by the Taliban. In the mosques and streets democracy is getting a bad name and each infraction by Americans of Pakistani territory is causing rising anger and increased anti Americanism.
As an agricultural Country Pakistan can be self sufficient as it produces enough wheat rice, cotton, sugar cane and milk. Cattle and Poultry are also available. Fruit and vegetable are plentiful. Mismanagement, however can even cause the country to import food. Trade with India could be a plus for Pakistan and China and the Middle East are friendly markets. US aid is a curse for Pakistan because it comes with so many strings attached. If you visit Pakistan, there is the facade of progress. Poverty is not on display as it is in India but the cities and cantonements that cater to the elite are just oasis in a desert and more mirages than reality. A nation where literacy is only 30-40% has lots of room to grow but is not allowed to.
“There are three interrelated power blocs in Pakistan . Of these the US lobby is the most influential, the most public and the most hated. It is currently running the country. The Saudis, who use a combination of wealth and religion to get their way, are second in the pecking order and less unpopular. The Chinese lobby is virtually invisible, never interferes in internal politics and for that reason is immensely respected, especially within the army; but it is also the least powerful outside military circles.In Cold War times, the interests of the three lobbies coincided. Not now.The War on Terror has changed all that..."
Pakistan has yet to produce a leader that can stand up to America. This is so critical for Pakistan that there is always the danger of the Military producing that leader but as America’s grip on the world weakens, Pakistan’s prospect of becoming a proud nation increase.
Sixty years is a short time in the life of a young nation. That nation is still striving to define it’s identity sandwiched between India and the USA. It has played it’s India card, it’s Nuclear card and is right now playing it’s Taliban card. It has survived against all odds by being in the right place at the right time. There is only one card left to play after this is over and that is the Muslim card. A secular leaning country in the grip of fundamentalist Islam will either convert itself into a battle field ala Afghanistan or convert it’s fundamentalists to become less rigid.
As a country twice the size of Iran, which is already Nuclear, the US has everything to gain by keeping it on it’s side. Pakistan has learnt to survive against big odds. It is the US which is in deep trouble.
Sixty years ago nobody could have foretold that Afghanistan would become the center of the world as far as influencing world events. Two earth shaking events both involving Afghanistan have shaped the identity of Pakistan.
The "Global War on Terror" has been uncritically accepted by most in this country. But terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. You cannot declare war on a tactic. The way to combat terrorism is by identifying and targeting its root causes, including poverty, lack of education, and foreign occupation
Pakistan was born out of the policy of the British to divide and rule. It was also born out of the tussle of two men to do things their own way.
Undivided India today would boast half the Muslim population of the world. Nehru was mindful of this and wanted Pakistan as a separate state as much as Jinnah did. He just did not want to give up Kashmir. Nehru did not want to share power with the Muslims as much as Jinnah did not want to share power with the Hindus.
Pakistan was not economically viable nor Geographically compatible. It suited the Americans to develop a client state as a look out for Soviet intention in the region. They may not have helped in Pakistan’s creation but they soon latched on to Pakistan. They found a needy and admiring country.
The Pakistan Army built up by the US to fight the Soviets and by the Pakistanis to fight India has ruled the country for 50 of it’s 60 years. First General Ayub and then Gen Yahya took them into two humiliating wars with India.
As a military state more intent on arming itself and less on nation building Pakistan has emerged as a state which is still economically unsound. It relies on renting it’s army or selling Nuclear blue prints for its survival, if the US stops supporting it. It is equally desirous of becoming free of dependence on the US. Like India, it would like to meet the US as an equal but that has not been possible. Ayub, the first dictator that Pakistan had wrote a book titled “Friends not Masters”.
Twenty five years ago, Bhutto, Benazir’s father decided that Pakistan needed a Nuclear bomb to protect itself from almost certain annexure by India. When AQ Khan, a metallurgist working in Holland approached him, Bhutto jumped at the opportunity and set in motion a plan to secretly develop Nuclear capability.
Almost certainly the facility could have been taken out by the Israelis or the Indians but for US protection. Twice the countries destinies were altered as a result of events, not of it’s making. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan forced it into a position of being a front line state.
The US decided to look the other way in return for it’s cooperation. Regan repeatedly certified to Congress that Pakistan did not have nor possessed the capability for it’s own Nuclear bomb when the CIA knew differently.
The second time this happened was when Pakistan had already tested the bomb and had become an outcast state. September 11 changed all that and Pakistan once again became an indispensable ally of the US in it’s war on terror.
Effectively Pakistan has been a US colony from Day 1 . On both sides there has been a pretence that this is not so. The Army has been addicted to the military toys it got and have always dreamed of capturing Kashmir by a combination of subterfuge and force. The US has known for some time that Pakistan had the ability not only to build the bomb but to sell it on the open market , including to Osama. However other priorities have kept the US from dealing with this as a priority. Iraq has been central to US policy and not Afghanistan. It is often said that the US attacked the wrong country but how can you justify attacking your own colony. For the last 8 years it is the US who decides who rules Pakistan. Unfortunately their chosen successor Benazir was assassinated.
It is well known that the money that should have been spent on Education, Health Care, poverty alleviation, infrastructure went in to the Defense Budget. Today Pakistan is as in the past on the brink of economic disaster. The political leadership never had a chance. They spent a lot of time avoiding coups and only helped precipitate them. First Bhutto selected a simpleton( Zia) who would yes sir him , only to be toppled by him, then Nawaz fired Musharraf, only to be toppled by him.
Pakistan has a unique position in the world today. A country of 150 million people, with a huge standing army and armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons listed as a failed country. It cannot be allowed to go bankrupt. The people of Pakistan and many of its politicians and Generals have long come to the conclusion that America does not have its best interests at heart. They are desperate to stand up on their own feet and like its neighbour next door desperate to join in getting the benefit from the Asian resurgence but America will not let go. America has chosen to fight wars against faceless enemies, which America cannot win. The question is whether it will take Pakistan down with it.
Pakistan has very little experience of democracy. It’s politicians appear to be authoritarian by nature and the Army by training sees things in black and white. The Judiciary has consistently treated military coups as fait accompli and legitimized the army rule. The one instance where the Judiciary stood up to a dictator, it was summarily and unconstitutionally dismissed and the Chief Justice and his family put under house arrest. To his credit, Musharraf did hold elections and has tolerated a free press. The public resoundingly voted against the king’s party mostly because of the way Musharraf treated the Judiciary.
The people want Musharraf to go, they want the Judiciary of Iftekhar Chaudhry restored and they want the US to stop interfering in it’s affairs. None of this is happening. The decision of the future of Pakistan seems to rest in the hands of people who have not been elected and are basically unelectable. Asif Ali Zardari, Nawaz Sharif, Altaf Hussein, Pervez Musharraf and the US are today the main players and none of them have a seat in Parliament. The people taking the decisions are all godfather types who will stop at nothing including murder to have their way. All of them have in fact been responsible for killing or disappearing their opponents. The Army and the ISI have a mind of their own and will not listen to any one. They and the Bureaucracy represent an anti India stance which in today’s world is no better than a piece of fiction.
Like in many other countries where the US sabotages Democracy because it may not bring about the desired results, Pakistan’s hopes of ever becoming a democracy are very limited. This in spite of the fact that the Islamic parties who are not favored by the US have never done well in elections in Pakistan. This has nothing to do with the desire of the people to move towards a more Islamic country. They just do not trust the clergy.
The current situation is one where inflation is running at 25% and likely to go higher. The stock market has come down at least 40% YTD, there is load shedding in the major cities of 8 hours and above. Businesses are closing down for lack of electricity. A water shortage problem is looming ahead. Politics is at a stalemate over the restoration of judges and whether Musharraf should go. Inflation alone can cause serious day to day problems, with jobs not available. These are ideal grounds for recruitment by the Taliban. In the mosques and streets democracy is getting a bad name and each infraction by Americans of Pakistani territory is causing rising anger and increased anti Americanism.
As an agricultural Country Pakistan can be self sufficient as it produces enough wheat rice, cotton, sugar cane and milk. Cattle and Poultry are also available. Fruit and vegetable are plentiful. Mismanagement, however can even cause the country to import food. Trade with India could be a plus for Pakistan and China and the Middle East are friendly markets. US aid is a curse for Pakistan because it comes with so many strings attached. If you visit Pakistan, there is the facade of progress. Poverty is not on display as it is in India but the cities and cantonements that cater to the elite are just oasis in a desert and more mirages than reality. A nation where literacy is only 30-40% has lots of room to grow but is not allowed to.
“There are three interrelated power blocs in Pakistan . Of these the US lobby is the most influential, the most public and the most hated. It is currently running the country. The Saudis, who use a combination of wealth and religion to get their way, are second in the pecking order and less unpopular. The Chinese lobby is virtually invisible, never interferes in internal politics and for that reason is immensely respected, especially within the army; but it is also the least powerful outside military circles.In Cold War times, the interests of the three lobbies coincided. Not now.The War on Terror has changed all that..."
Pakistan has yet to produce a leader that can stand up to America. This is so critical for Pakistan that there is always the danger of the Military producing that leader but as America’s grip on the world weakens, Pakistan’s prospect of becoming a proud nation increase.
Sixty years is a short time in the life of a young nation. That nation is still striving to define it’s identity sandwiched between India and the USA. It has played it’s India card, it’s Nuclear card and is right now playing it’s Taliban card. It has survived against all odds by being in the right place at the right time. There is only one card left to play after this is over and that is the Muslim card. A secular leaning country in the grip of fundamentalist Islam will either convert itself into a battle field ala Afghanistan or convert it’s fundamentalists to become less rigid.
As a country twice the size of Iran, which is already Nuclear, the US has everything to gain by keeping it on it’s side. Pakistan has learnt to survive against big odds. It is the US which is in deep trouble.
Friday, September 5, 2008
Bhutto Widower with clouded past
"Zardari is a businessman,” said a Western diplomat. “He says to himself: ‘I know I need American support. What do they want? They want this,’ ” meaning a stance against the Taliban."
Zardari seems to have brought over to his side the Haroons ( Dawn) and Najam Sethi ( The Friday Times). Salman Taseer( Governor Punjab and owner of the Times ) is already a pipliya. With the media behind him, he has established a firm ground for selling the "new" Zardari. The past misdeeds, suspected misdeeds ( including murder) of this man are splashed across the International media.
What damage he can do Pakistan pales in comparison to the damage done to America and the World by George Bush. Yet Bush was elected twice. So much for Democracy.
If Zardari will have his hand on the nuclear trigger in Pakistan, there is a possibility that McCain will have his hand on the nuclear trigger in America. Unlike Zardari, McCain is trigger happy. My point is that the world is going through its most dangerous phase since the Second World War. I have been predicting wholesale massacres to come for the last two years. The gathering clouds confirm that this will happen and not through the use of Nuclear weapons.
The number of Muslim casualties and homelessness will probably double from the great numbers that have already happened. The stakes in Pakistan are very high. The American ( not Nato) incursions into Pakistani territory time and again result in the deaths of women and children and not Al Qaida or the Taliban. Economically Pakistan has lost the ability to deny the US this privilege. With only three months of reserves left they are desperate for US money.
As Russia shows its muscle and the plan to attack Iran has misfired, whose blood can be given to an American public thirsty for some ones blood? Pakistan presents itself as the natural victim for an American ritual which started with Iraq. American power cannot be reconfirmed if it keeps losing wars against weak countries. The Americans understand that if they kill Betullah Meshud and Osama Bin Laden and Aiman Al Zawahiri, their problems will not be solved but look at the propoganda value of these kills with the public.
With an election around the corner, propaganda is all that matters. Let us kill a thousand Pakistani women and children by November and show the American public how tough we are. If we cannot have Musharraf, let us have Zardari because Nawaz is not an option. If Zardari is a killer so are we. There will be a meeting of minds unlike with Musharraf. Why did we not think of this before?
Khusro
--- http://www.nytimes. com/2008/ 09/05/world/ asia/05zardari. html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
Bhutto Widower With Clouded Past Is Set to Lead
Aamir Qureshi/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, is expected to become president of Pakistan on Saturday.
By JANE PERLEZ
Published: September 4, 2008
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of Benazir Bhutto, is set to become president on Saturday, an accidental ascent for a man known more as a wheeler-dealer than a leader. He will start his tenure burdened by a history of corruption allegations that cloud his reputation even as they remain unproved.
Though he has won the reluctant support of the Bush administration, which views him as a willing partner in the campaign against terrorism, Mr. Zardari will assume the presidency with what many consider untested governing skills as a tough Taliban insurgency threatens the very fabric of Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state of 165 million people....
http://www.nytimes. com/2008/ 09/05/world/ asia/05zardari. html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
Zardari seems to have brought over to his side the Haroons ( Dawn) and Najam Sethi ( The Friday Times). Salman Taseer( Governor Punjab and owner of the Times ) is already a pipliya. With the media behind him, he has established a firm ground for selling the "new" Zardari. The past misdeeds, suspected misdeeds ( including murder) of this man are splashed across the International media.
What damage he can do Pakistan pales in comparison to the damage done to America and the World by George Bush. Yet Bush was elected twice. So much for Democracy.
If Zardari will have his hand on the nuclear trigger in Pakistan, there is a possibility that McCain will have his hand on the nuclear trigger in America. Unlike Zardari, McCain is trigger happy. My point is that the world is going through its most dangerous phase since the Second World War. I have been predicting wholesale massacres to come for the last two years. The gathering clouds confirm that this will happen and not through the use of Nuclear weapons.
The number of Muslim casualties and homelessness will probably double from the great numbers that have already happened. The stakes in Pakistan are very high. The American ( not Nato) incursions into Pakistani territory time and again result in the deaths of women and children and not Al Qaida or the Taliban. Economically Pakistan has lost the ability to deny the US this privilege. With only three months of reserves left they are desperate for US money.
As Russia shows its muscle and the plan to attack Iran has misfired, whose blood can be given to an American public thirsty for some ones blood? Pakistan presents itself as the natural victim for an American ritual which started with Iraq. American power cannot be reconfirmed if it keeps losing wars against weak countries. The Americans understand that if they kill Betullah Meshud and Osama Bin Laden and Aiman Al Zawahiri, their problems will not be solved but look at the propoganda value of these kills with the public.
With an election around the corner, propaganda is all that matters. Let us kill a thousand Pakistani women and children by November and show the American public how tough we are. If we cannot have Musharraf, let us have Zardari because Nawaz is not an option. If Zardari is a killer so are we. There will be a meeting of minds unlike with Musharraf. Why did we not think of this before?
Khusro
--- http://www.nytimes. com/2008/ 09/05/world/ asia/05zardari. html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
Bhutto Widower With Clouded Past Is Set to Lead
Aamir Qureshi/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, is expected to become president of Pakistan on Saturday.
By JANE PERLEZ
Published: September 4, 2008
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of Benazir Bhutto, is set to become president on Saturday, an accidental ascent for a man known more as a wheeler-dealer than a leader. He will start his tenure burdened by a history of corruption allegations that cloud his reputation even as they remain unproved.
Though he has won the reluctant support of the Bush administration, which views him as a willing partner in the campaign against terrorism, Mr. Zardari will assume the presidency with what many consider untested governing skills as a tough Taliban insurgency threatens the very fabric of Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state of 165 million people....
http://www.nytimes. com/2008/ 09/05/world/ asia/05zardari. html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
Friday, August 8, 2008
The proposed impeachment of Musharraf
Musharraf is no longer going to Beijing, instead Gilani will go.
Zardari has promised to reinstate the Judiciary after Musharraf has been succesfully impeached. Surely if the Judiciary is reinstated now, they will force Musharraf out.
Zardari probably argues that Musharraf is more likely to sack the Government( and he has the power to do that) if there is a chance of the Judiciary being reinstated rather than if he is being impeached. Musharraf on the other hand promises that he will not sack the Government.
The hand of Zardari is written large on this latest move. He is too clever for Nawaz and has succeeded once again in delaying any action on restoring the judges. Nawaz's hatred for Musharraf and his need to take revenge for his ouster makes him a pliable object in Zardaris hand.
Within 5 months of the elections, Zardari has placed his men in strategic positions, Nawaz has been sidelined to the Punjab, Musharraf has been made powerless and the restoration of judges has been postponed indefinitely. There was a failed attempt to put the ISI under civilian control but no doubt he will try again.
Zardari has been able to achieve all this in spite of intense pressure from the lawyers to restore the judges, pressure from the Americans to keep Musharraf, pressure from Nawaz to get rid of Musharraf, pressure from dissidents within his own party who have been sidelined and reported pressure from his own children to restore the judges. In the game of power, Zardari is winning so far by keeping all the balls in the air. He reckons that time is on his side as he will agree to anything and do nothing. By neutralising Nawaz, he has taken the air out of the lawyers balloon which desperately need the support of a political party to show street strength.
The street smart Zardari recognises no ideology except power and money. His strength is that his opponents are weak and equally without ideology. The pretense of ideology in fact places a heavy weight on their shoulders and makes him more nimble. At the end of all this Musharraf will not be impeached, the Judges will not be restored, the ISI will continue to function independently of the civilians, America will pump in more money to keep the Economy going and Zardari will have made more money than in his previous incarnation.
Khusro
Zardari has promised to reinstate the Judiciary after Musharraf has been succesfully impeached. Surely if the Judiciary is reinstated now, they will force Musharraf out.
Zardari probably argues that Musharraf is more likely to sack the Government( and he has the power to do that) if there is a chance of the Judiciary being reinstated rather than if he is being impeached. Musharraf on the other hand promises that he will not sack the Government.
The hand of Zardari is written large on this latest move. He is too clever for Nawaz and has succeeded once again in delaying any action on restoring the judges. Nawaz's hatred for Musharraf and his need to take revenge for his ouster makes him a pliable object in Zardaris hand.
Within 5 months of the elections, Zardari has placed his men in strategic positions, Nawaz has been sidelined to the Punjab, Musharraf has been made powerless and the restoration of judges has been postponed indefinitely. There was a failed attempt to put the ISI under civilian control but no doubt he will try again.
Zardari has been able to achieve all this in spite of intense pressure from the lawyers to restore the judges, pressure from the Americans to keep Musharraf, pressure from Nawaz to get rid of Musharraf, pressure from dissidents within his own party who have been sidelined and reported pressure from his own children to restore the judges. In the game of power, Zardari is winning so far by keeping all the balls in the air. He reckons that time is on his side as he will agree to anything and do nothing. By neutralising Nawaz, he has taken the air out of the lawyers balloon which desperately need the support of a political party to show street strength.
The street smart Zardari recognises no ideology except power and money. His strength is that his opponents are weak and equally without ideology. The pretense of ideology in fact places a heavy weight on their shoulders and makes him more nimble. At the end of all this Musharraf will not be impeached, the Judges will not be restored, the ISI will continue to function independently of the civilians, America will pump in more money to keep the Economy going and Zardari will have made more money than in his previous incarnation.
Khusro
Friday, February 1, 2008
Letter from Pakistans Former Chief Justice
Letter from Pakistans Former Chief Justice
AN OPEN LETTER TO:
His Excellency The President of the European Parliament, Brussels .
His Excellency The President of France, Paris .
His Excellency The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom , London .
Her Excellency Ms. Condaleeza Rice, Secretary of State , United States of America , Washington D.C.
Professor Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum, Geneva .
All through their respective Ambassodors, High Commissioners and representatives.
Excellency,
h
I am the Chief Justice of Pakistan presently detained in my residence since November 3, 2007 pursuant to some verbal, and unspecified, order passed by General Musharraf.
I have found it necessary to write to you, and others, because during his recent visits to Brussels , Paris , Davos and London General Musharraf has slandered me, and my colleagues, with impunity in press conferences and other addresses and meetings. In addition he has widely distributed, among those whom he has met, a slanderous document (hereinafter the Document) entitled: “PROFILE OF THE FORMER CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTANâ€Â. I might have let this go unresponded but the Document, unfortunately, is such an outrage that, with respect, it is surprising that a person claiming to be head of state should fall to such depths as to circulate such calumny against the Chief Justice of his own country.
In view of these circumstances I have no option but to join issue with General Musharraf and to put the record straight. Since he has voiced his views on several public occasions so as to reach out to the public at large, I also am constrained to address your excellencies in an Open Letter to rebut the allegations against me.
At the outset you may be wondering why I have used the words “claiming to be the head of stateâ€Â. That is quite deliberate. General Musharraf’s constitutional term ended on November 15, 2007. His claim to a further term thereafter is the subject of active controversy before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. It was while this claim was under adjudication before a Bench of eleven learned judges of the Supreme Court that the General arrested a majority of those judges in addition to me on November 3, 2007. He thus himself subverted the judicial process which remains frozen at that point. Besides arresting the Chief Justice and judges (can there have been a greater outrage?) he also purported to suspend the Constitution and to purge the entire judiciary (even the High Courts) of all independent judges. Now only his hand-picked and compliant judges remain willing to “validate†whatever he demands. And all this is also contrary to an express and earlier order passed by the Supreme Court on November 3, 2007.
Meantime I and my colleagues remain in illegal detention. With me are also detained my wife and three of my young children, all school-going and one a special child. Such are the conditions of our detention that we cannot even step out on to the lawn for the winter sun because that space is occupied by police pickets. Barbed wire barricades surround the residence and all phone lines are cut. Even the water connection to my residence has been periodically turned off. I am being persuaded to resign and to forego my office, which is what I am not prepared to do.
I request you to seek first hand information of the barricades and of my detention, as that of my children, from your Ambassador/High Commissioner/ representative in Pakistan . You will get a report of such circumstances as have never prevailed even in medieval times. And these are conditions put in place, in the twenty-first century, by a Government that you support.
Needless to say that the Constitution of Pakistan contains no provision for its suspension, and certainly not by the Chief of Army Staff. Nor can it be amended except in accordance with Articles 238 and 239 which is by Parliament and not an executive or military order. As such all actions taken by General Musharraf on and after November 3 are illegal and ultra vires the Constitution. That is why it is no illusion when I describe myself as the Chief Justice even though I am physically and forcibly incapacitated by the state apparatus under the command of the General. I am confident that as a consequence of the brave and unrelenting struggle continued by the lawyers and the civil society, the Constitution will prevail.
However, in the meantime, General Musharraf has launched upon a vigourous initiative to defame and slander me. Failing to obtain my willing abdication he has become desperate. The eight-page Document is the latest in this feverish drive.
Before I take up the Document itself let me recall that the General first ousted me from the Supreme Court on March 9 last year while filing an indictment (in the form of a Reference under Article 209 of the Constitution) against me. According to the General the Reference had been prepared after a thorough investigation and comprehensively contained all the charges against me. I had challenged that Reference and my ouster before the Supreme Court. On July 20 a thirteen member Bench unanimously struck down the action of the General as illegal and unconstitutional. I was honourably reinstated.
The Reference was thus wholly shattered and all the charges contained therein trashed. These cannot now be regurgitated except in contempt of the Supreme Court. Any way, since the Document has been circulated by no less a person than him I am constrained to submit the following for your kind consideration in rebuttal thereof:
The Document is divided into several heads but the allegations contained in it can essentially be divided into two categories: those allegations that were contained in the Reference and those that were not.
Quite obviously, those that are a repeat from the Reference hold no water as these have already been held by the Supreme Court to not be worth the ink they were written in. In fact, the Supreme Court found that the evidence submitted against me by the Government was so obviously fabricated and incorrect, that the bench took the unprecedented step of fining the Government Rs. 100,000 (a relatively small amount in dollar terms, but an unheard of sum with respect to Court Sanction in Pakistan) for filing clearly false and malicious documents, as well as revoking the license to practice of the Advocate on Record for filing false documents. Indeed, faced with the prospect of having filed clearly falsified documents against me, the Government’s attorneys, including the Attorney General, took a most dishonorable but telling approach. Each one, in turn, stood before the Supreme Court and disowned the Government’s Reference, and stated they had not reviewed the evidence against me before filing it with Court. They then filed a formal request to the Court to withdraw the purported evidence, and tendered an unconditional apology for filing such a scandalous and false documents. So baseless and egregious were the claims made by General Musharraf that on July 20th, 2007, the full Supreme Court for the first time in Pakistan’s history, ruled unanimously against a sitting military ruler and reinstated me honorably to my post.
Despite having faced these charges in open court, must I now be slandered with those same charges by General Musharraf in world capitals, while I remain a prisoner and unable to speak in my defense?
There are, of course, a second set of charges. These were not contained in the Reference and are now being bandied around by the General at every opportunity.
I forcefully and vigorously deny every single one of them. The truth of these “new†allegations can be judged from the fact that they all ostensibly date to the period before the reference was filed against me last March, yet none of them was listed in the already bogus charge sheet.
If there were any truth to these manufactured charges, the Government should have included them in the reference against me. God knows they threw in everything including the kitchen sink into that scurrilous 450 page document, only to have it thrown out by the entire Supreme Court after a 3 month open trial.
The charges against me are so transparently baseless that General Musharraf’s regime has banned the discussion of my situation and the charges in the broadcast media. This is because the ridiculous and flimsy nature of the charges is self-evident whenever an opportunity is provided to actually refute them.
Instead, the General only likes to recite his libel list from a rostrum or in gathering where there is no opportunity for anyone to respond. Incidentally, the General maligns me in the worst possible way at every opportunity. That is the basis for the Document he has distributed. But he has not just deposed me from the Judiciary. He has also fired more than half of the Superior Judiciary of Pakistan – nearly 50 judges in all -- together with me. They have also been arrested and detained.
What are the charges against them? Why should they be fired and arrested if I am the corrupt judge? Moreover even my attorneys Aitzaz Ahsan, Munir Malik, Tariq Mahmood and Ali Ahmed Kurd were also arrested on November 3. Malik alone has been released but only because both his kidneys collapsed as a result of prison torture.
Finally, as to the Document, it also contains some further allegations described as “Post-Reference Conduct†that is attributed to me under various heads. This would mean only those allegedly ‘illegal’ actions claimed to have been taken by me after March 9, 2007. These are under the heads given below and replied to as under:
1. “Participation in SJC (Supreme Judicial Council) Proceedingsâ€Â:
(a) Retaining ‘political lawyers’: Aitzaz Ahsan and Zammurrad Khan:
It is alleged that I gave a political colour to my defence by engaging political lawyers Aitzaz Ahsan and Zamurrad Khan both Pakistan Peoples’ Party Members of the National Assembly. The answer is simple.
I sought to engage the best legal team in the country. Mr. Ahsan is of course an MNA (MP), but he is also the top lawyer in Pakistan . For that reference may be made simply to the ranking of Chambers and Partners Global. Such is his respect in Pakistan’s legal landscape that he was elected President of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan by one of the widest margins in the Association’s history.
All high profile personalities have placed their trust in his talents. He has thus been the attorney for Prime Ministers Bhutto and Sharif, (even though he was an opponent of the latter) Presidential candidate (against Musharraf) Justice Wajihuddin, sports star and politician Imran Khan, former Speakers, Ministers, Governors, victims of political vendetta, and also the internationally acclaimed gang-rape victim Mukhtar Mai, to mention only a few.
Equally important, Barrister Ahsan is a man of integrity who is known to withstand all pressures and enticements. That is a crucial factor in enaging an attorney when one’s prosecutor is the sitting military ruler, with enourmous monetary and coercive resources at his disposal.
Mr. Zamurrad Khan is also a recognized professional lawyer, a former Secretary of the District Bar Rawalpindi, and was retained by Mr. Aitzaz Ahsan to assist him in the case. Mr. Khan has been a leading light of the Lawyers’ Movement for the restoration of the deposed judiciary and has bravely faced all threats and vilification.
Finally, surely I am entitled to my choice of lawyers and not that of the General.
(b) “Riding in Mr. Zafarullah Jamali (former Prime Minister)’s carâ€Â:
How much the Document tries to deceive is apparent from the allegation that I willingly rode in Mr. Jamali’s car for the first hearing of the case against me on March 13 (as if that alone is an offence). Actually the Government should have been ashamed of itself for creating the circumstances that forced me to take that ride.
Having been stripped of official transport on the 9th March (my vehicles were removed from my house by the use of fork lifters), I decided to walk the one-mile to the Supreme Court. Along the way I was molested and manhandled, my hair was pulled and neck craned in the full blaze of the media, by a posse of policemen under the supervision of the Inspector General of Police. (A judicial inquiry, while I was still deposed, established this fact). In order to escape the physical assault I took refuge with Mr. Jamali and went the rest of the journey on his car. Instead of taking action against the police officials for manhandling the Chief Justice it is complained that I was on the wrong!
(c) Creating a political atmosphere:
Never did I instigate or invite any “political atmosphere. I never addressed the press or any political rally. I kept my lips sealed even under extreme provocation from the General and his ministers who were reviling me on a daily basis. I maintained a strict judicial silence. I petitioned the Supreme Court and won. That was my vindication.
2. “Country wide touring and Politicising the Issue:
The Constitution guarantees to all citizens free movement throughout Pakistan . How can this then be a complaint?
By orders dated March 9 and 15 (both of which were found to be without lawful authority by the Court) I had been sent of on forced leave I could neither perform any judicial or administrative functions as the Chief Justice of Pakistan. I was prevented not only from sitting in court but also from access to my own chamber by the force of arms under orders of the General. (All my papers were removed, even private documents).
The only function as ‘a judge on forced leave that I could perform was to address and deliver lectures to various Bar Associations. I accepted their invitations. They are peppered all over Pakistan . I had to drive to these towns as all these are not linked by air. On the way the people of Pakistan did, indeed, turn out in their millions, often waiting from dawn to dusk or from dusk to dawn, to greet me. But I never addressed them even when they insisted that I do. I never spoke to the press. I sat quietly in my vehicle without uttering a word. All this is on the record as most journeys were covered by the media live and throughout.
I spoke only to deliver lectures on professional and constitutional issues to the Bar Associations. Transcripts of every single one of my addresses are available. Every single word uttered by me in those addresses conforms to the stature, conduct and non-political nature of the office of the Chief Justice. There was no politics in these whatsoever. I did not even mention my present status or the controversy or the proceedings before the Council or the Court, not even the Reference. Not even once.
All the persons named in the Document under this head are lawyers and were members of the reception committees in various towns and Bar Associations.
3. Political Leaders Calling on CJP residence:
It is alleged that I received political leaders while I was deposed. It is on the record of the Supreme Judicial Council itself that I was detained after being deposed on March 9. The only persons allowed to meet me were those cleared by the Government. One was a senior political leader. None else was allowed to see me, initially not even my lawyers. How can I be blamed for whomsoever comes to my residence?
Had I wanted to politicize the issue I would have gone to the Press or invited the media. I did not. I had recourse to the judicial process for my reinstatement and won. The General lost miserably in a fair and straight contest. That is my only fault.
4. “Conclusionâ€Â:
Hence the conclusion drawn by the General that charges had been proved against me ‘beyond doubt’ is absolutely contrary to the facts and wide off the mark. It is a self-serving justification of the eminently illegal action of firing and arresting judges of superior courts under the garb of an Emergency (read Martial Law) when the Constitution was ‘suspended’ and then ‘restored’ later with drastic and illegal ‘amendments’ grafted into it.
The Constitution cannot be amended except by the two Houses of Parliament and by a two-thirds majority in each House. That is the letter of the law. How can one man presume or arrogate to himself that power?
Unfortunately the General is grievously economical with the truth (I refrain from using the word ‘lies’) when he says that the charges against me were ‘investigated and verified beyond doubt’. As explained above, these had in fact been rubbished by the Full Court Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan against which judgment the government filed no application for review.
What the General has done has serious implications for Pakistan and the world. In squashing the judiciary for his own personal advantage and nothing else he has usurped the space of civil and civilized society. If civilized norms of justice will not be allowed to operate then that space will, inevitably, be occupied by those who believe in more brutal and instant justice: the extremists in the wings. Those are the very elements the world seems to be pitted against. Those are the very elements the actions of the General are making way for.
Some western governments are emphasizing the unfolding of the democratic process in Pakistan . That is welcome, if it will be fair. But, and in any case, can there be democracy if there is no independent judiciary?
Remember, independent judges and judicial processes preceded full franchise by several hundred years. Moreover, which judge in Pakistan today can be independent who has before his eyes the fate and example of his own Chief Justice: detained for three months along with his young children. What is the children’s crime, after all?
There can be no democracy without an independent judiciary, and there can be no independent judge in Pakistan until the action of November 3 is reversed. Whatever the will of some desperate men the struggle of the valiant lawyers and civil society of Pakistan will bear fruit. They are not giving up. Let me also assure you that I would not have written this letter without the General’s unbecoming onslaught. That has compelled me to clarify although, as my past will testify, I am not given into entering into public, even private, disputes. But the allegations against me have been so wild, so wrong and so contrary to judicial record, that I have been left with no option but to put the record straight. After all, a prisoner must also have his say. And if the General’s hand-picked judges, some living next door to my prison home, have not had the courage to invoke the power of ‘habeas corpus’ these last three months, what other option do I have? Many leaders of the world and the media may choose to brush the situation under the carpet out of love of the General. But that will not be.
Nevertheless, let me also reassure you that I continue in my resolve not to preside any Bench which will be seized of matters pertaining to the personal interests of General Musharraf after the restoration of the Constitution and the judges, which, God willing, will be soon. Finally, I leave you with the question: Is there a precedent in history, all history, of 60 judges, including three Chief Justices (of the Supreme Court and two of Pakistan’s four High Courts), being dismissed, arrested and detained at the whim of one man? I have failed to discover any such even in medieval times under any emperor, king, or sultan, or even when a dictator has had full military sway over any country in more recent times. But this incredible outrage has happened in the 21st century at the hands of an extremist General out on a ‘charm offensive’ of western capitals and one whom the west supports.
I am grateful for your attention. I have no other purpose than to clear my name and to save the country (and perhaps others as well) from the calamity that stares us in the face. We can still rescue it from all kinds of extremism: praetorian and dogmatic. After all, the edifice of an independent judicial system alone stands on the middle ground between these two extremes. If the edifice is destroyed by the one, the ground may be taken over by the other. That is what is happening in Pakistan . Practitioners of rough and brutal justice will be welcomed in spaces from where the practitioners of more refined norms of justice and balance have been made to abdicate.
I have enormous faith that the Constitution and justice will soon prevail.
Yours truly,
Iftikhar Mohammad Choudhry, Chief Justice of Pakistan,
Presently: imprisoned in the Chief Justices House, Islamabad .
AN OPEN LETTER TO:
His Excellency The President of the European Parliament, Brussels .
His Excellency The President of France, Paris .
His Excellency The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom , London .
Her Excellency Ms. Condaleeza Rice, Secretary of State , United States of America , Washington D.C.
Professor Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum, Geneva .
All through their respective Ambassodors, High Commissioners and representatives.
Excellency,
h
I am the Chief Justice of Pakistan presently detained in my residence since November 3, 2007 pursuant to some verbal, and unspecified, order passed by General Musharraf.
I have found it necessary to write to you, and others, because during his recent visits to Brussels , Paris , Davos and London General Musharraf has slandered me, and my colleagues, with impunity in press conferences and other addresses and meetings. In addition he has widely distributed, among those whom he has met, a slanderous document (hereinafter the Document) entitled: “PROFILE OF THE FORMER CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTANâ€Â. I might have let this go unresponded but the Document, unfortunately, is such an outrage that, with respect, it is surprising that a person claiming to be head of state should fall to such depths as to circulate such calumny against the Chief Justice of his own country.
In view of these circumstances I have no option but to join issue with General Musharraf and to put the record straight. Since he has voiced his views on several public occasions so as to reach out to the public at large, I also am constrained to address your excellencies in an Open Letter to rebut the allegations against me.
At the outset you may be wondering why I have used the words “claiming to be the head of stateâ€Â. That is quite deliberate. General Musharraf’s constitutional term ended on November 15, 2007. His claim to a further term thereafter is the subject of active controversy before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. It was while this claim was under adjudication before a Bench of eleven learned judges of the Supreme Court that the General arrested a majority of those judges in addition to me on November 3, 2007. He thus himself subverted the judicial process which remains frozen at that point. Besides arresting the Chief Justice and judges (can there have been a greater outrage?) he also purported to suspend the Constitution and to purge the entire judiciary (even the High Courts) of all independent judges. Now only his hand-picked and compliant judges remain willing to “validate†whatever he demands. And all this is also contrary to an express and earlier order passed by the Supreme Court on November 3, 2007.
Meantime I and my colleagues remain in illegal detention. With me are also detained my wife and three of my young children, all school-going and one a special child. Such are the conditions of our detention that we cannot even step out on to the lawn for the winter sun because that space is occupied by police pickets. Barbed wire barricades surround the residence and all phone lines are cut. Even the water connection to my residence has been periodically turned off. I am being persuaded to resign and to forego my office, which is what I am not prepared to do.
I request you to seek first hand information of the barricades and of my detention, as that of my children, from your Ambassador/High Commissioner/ representative in Pakistan . You will get a report of such circumstances as have never prevailed even in medieval times. And these are conditions put in place, in the twenty-first century, by a Government that you support.
Needless to say that the Constitution of Pakistan contains no provision for its suspension, and certainly not by the Chief of Army Staff. Nor can it be amended except in accordance with Articles 238 and 239 which is by Parliament and not an executive or military order. As such all actions taken by General Musharraf on and after November 3 are illegal and ultra vires the Constitution. That is why it is no illusion when I describe myself as the Chief Justice even though I am physically and forcibly incapacitated by the state apparatus under the command of the General. I am confident that as a consequence of the brave and unrelenting struggle continued by the lawyers and the civil society, the Constitution will prevail.
However, in the meantime, General Musharraf has launched upon a vigourous initiative to defame and slander me. Failing to obtain my willing abdication he has become desperate. The eight-page Document is the latest in this feverish drive.
Before I take up the Document itself let me recall that the General first ousted me from the Supreme Court on March 9 last year while filing an indictment (in the form of a Reference under Article 209 of the Constitution) against me. According to the General the Reference had been prepared after a thorough investigation and comprehensively contained all the charges against me. I had challenged that Reference and my ouster before the Supreme Court. On July 20 a thirteen member Bench unanimously struck down the action of the General as illegal and unconstitutional. I was honourably reinstated.
The Reference was thus wholly shattered and all the charges contained therein trashed. These cannot now be regurgitated except in contempt of the Supreme Court. Any way, since the Document has been circulated by no less a person than him I am constrained to submit the following for your kind consideration in rebuttal thereof:
The Document is divided into several heads but the allegations contained in it can essentially be divided into two categories: those allegations that were contained in the Reference and those that were not.
Quite obviously, those that are a repeat from the Reference hold no water as these have already been held by the Supreme Court to not be worth the ink they were written in. In fact, the Supreme Court found that the evidence submitted against me by the Government was so obviously fabricated and incorrect, that the bench took the unprecedented step of fining the Government Rs. 100,000 (a relatively small amount in dollar terms, but an unheard of sum with respect to Court Sanction in Pakistan) for filing clearly false and malicious documents, as well as revoking the license to practice of the Advocate on Record for filing false documents. Indeed, faced with the prospect of having filed clearly falsified documents against me, the Government’s attorneys, including the Attorney General, took a most dishonorable but telling approach. Each one, in turn, stood before the Supreme Court and disowned the Government’s Reference, and stated they had not reviewed the evidence against me before filing it with Court. They then filed a formal request to the Court to withdraw the purported evidence, and tendered an unconditional apology for filing such a scandalous and false documents. So baseless and egregious were the claims made by General Musharraf that on July 20th, 2007, the full Supreme Court for the first time in Pakistan’s history, ruled unanimously against a sitting military ruler and reinstated me honorably to my post.
Despite having faced these charges in open court, must I now be slandered with those same charges by General Musharraf in world capitals, while I remain a prisoner and unable to speak in my defense?
There are, of course, a second set of charges. These were not contained in the Reference and are now being bandied around by the General at every opportunity.
I forcefully and vigorously deny every single one of them. The truth of these “new†allegations can be judged from the fact that they all ostensibly date to the period before the reference was filed against me last March, yet none of them was listed in the already bogus charge sheet.
If there were any truth to these manufactured charges, the Government should have included them in the reference against me. God knows they threw in everything including the kitchen sink into that scurrilous 450 page document, only to have it thrown out by the entire Supreme Court after a 3 month open trial.
The charges against me are so transparently baseless that General Musharraf’s regime has banned the discussion of my situation and the charges in the broadcast media. This is because the ridiculous and flimsy nature of the charges is self-evident whenever an opportunity is provided to actually refute them.
Instead, the General only likes to recite his libel list from a rostrum or in gathering where there is no opportunity for anyone to respond. Incidentally, the General maligns me in the worst possible way at every opportunity. That is the basis for the Document he has distributed. But he has not just deposed me from the Judiciary. He has also fired more than half of the Superior Judiciary of Pakistan – nearly 50 judges in all -- together with me. They have also been arrested and detained.
What are the charges against them? Why should they be fired and arrested if I am the corrupt judge? Moreover even my attorneys Aitzaz Ahsan, Munir Malik, Tariq Mahmood and Ali Ahmed Kurd were also arrested on November 3. Malik alone has been released but only because both his kidneys collapsed as a result of prison torture.
Finally, as to the Document, it also contains some further allegations described as “Post-Reference Conduct†that is attributed to me under various heads. This would mean only those allegedly ‘illegal’ actions claimed to have been taken by me after March 9, 2007. These are under the heads given below and replied to as under:
1. “Participation in SJC (Supreme Judicial Council) Proceedingsâ€Â:
(a) Retaining ‘political lawyers’: Aitzaz Ahsan and Zammurrad Khan:
It is alleged that I gave a political colour to my defence by engaging political lawyers Aitzaz Ahsan and Zamurrad Khan both Pakistan Peoples’ Party Members of the National Assembly. The answer is simple.
I sought to engage the best legal team in the country. Mr. Ahsan is of course an MNA (MP), but he is also the top lawyer in Pakistan . For that reference may be made simply to the ranking of Chambers and Partners Global. Such is his respect in Pakistan’s legal landscape that he was elected President of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan by one of the widest margins in the Association’s history.
All high profile personalities have placed their trust in his talents. He has thus been the attorney for Prime Ministers Bhutto and Sharif, (even though he was an opponent of the latter) Presidential candidate (against Musharraf) Justice Wajihuddin, sports star and politician Imran Khan, former Speakers, Ministers, Governors, victims of political vendetta, and also the internationally acclaimed gang-rape victim Mukhtar Mai, to mention only a few.
Equally important, Barrister Ahsan is a man of integrity who is known to withstand all pressures and enticements. That is a crucial factor in enaging an attorney when one’s prosecutor is the sitting military ruler, with enourmous monetary and coercive resources at his disposal.
Mr. Zamurrad Khan is also a recognized professional lawyer, a former Secretary of the District Bar Rawalpindi, and was retained by Mr. Aitzaz Ahsan to assist him in the case. Mr. Khan has been a leading light of the Lawyers’ Movement for the restoration of the deposed judiciary and has bravely faced all threats and vilification.
Finally, surely I am entitled to my choice of lawyers and not that of the General.
(b) “Riding in Mr. Zafarullah Jamali (former Prime Minister)’s carâ€Â:
How much the Document tries to deceive is apparent from the allegation that I willingly rode in Mr. Jamali’s car for the first hearing of the case against me on March 13 (as if that alone is an offence). Actually the Government should have been ashamed of itself for creating the circumstances that forced me to take that ride.
Having been stripped of official transport on the 9th March (my vehicles were removed from my house by the use of fork lifters), I decided to walk the one-mile to the Supreme Court. Along the way I was molested and manhandled, my hair was pulled and neck craned in the full blaze of the media, by a posse of policemen under the supervision of the Inspector General of Police. (A judicial inquiry, while I was still deposed, established this fact). In order to escape the physical assault I took refuge with Mr. Jamali and went the rest of the journey on his car. Instead of taking action against the police officials for manhandling the Chief Justice it is complained that I was on the wrong!
(c) Creating a political atmosphere:
Never did I instigate or invite any “political atmosphere. I never addressed the press or any political rally. I kept my lips sealed even under extreme provocation from the General and his ministers who were reviling me on a daily basis. I maintained a strict judicial silence. I petitioned the Supreme Court and won. That was my vindication.
2. “Country wide touring and Politicising the Issue:
The Constitution guarantees to all citizens free movement throughout Pakistan . How can this then be a complaint?
By orders dated March 9 and 15 (both of which were found to be without lawful authority by the Court) I had been sent of on forced leave I could neither perform any judicial or administrative functions as the Chief Justice of Pakistan. I was prevented not only from sitting in court but also from access to my own chamber by the force of arms under orders of the General. (All my papers were removed, even private documents).
The only function as ‘a judge on forced leave that I could perform was to address and deliver lectures to various Bar Associations. I accepted their invitations. They are peppered all over Pakistan . I had to drive to these towns as all these are not linked by air. On the way the people of Pakistan did, indeed, turn out in their millions, often waiting from dawn to dusk or from dusk to dawn, to greet me. But I never addressed them even when they insisted that I do. I never spoke to the press. I sat quietly in my vehicle without uttering a word. All this is on the record as most journeys were covered by the media live and throughout.
I spoke only to deliver lectures on professional and constitutional issues to the Bar Associations. Transcripts of every single one of my addresses are available. Every single word uttered by me in those addresses conforms to the stature, conduct and non-political nature of the office of the Chief Justice. There was no politics in these whatsoever. I did not even mention my present status or the controversy or the proceedings before the Council or the Court, not even the Reference. Not even once.
All the persons named in the Document under this head are lawyers and were members of the reception committees in various towns and Bar Associations.
3. Political Leaders Calling on CJP residence:
It is alleged that I received political leaders while I was deposed. It is on the record of the Supreme Judicial Council itself that I was detained after being deposed on March 9. The only persons allowed to meet me were those cleared by the Government. One was a senior political leader. None else was allowed to see me, initially not even my lawyers. How can I be blamed for whomsoever comes to my residence?
Had I wanted to politicize the issue I would have gone to the Press or invited the media. I did not. I had recourse to the judicial process for my reinstatement and won. The General lost miserably in a fair and straight contest. That is my only fault.
4. “Conclusionâ€Â:
Hence the conclusion drawn by the General that charges had been proved against me ‘beyond doubt’ is absolutely contrary to the facts and wide off the mark. It is a self-serving justification of the eminently illegal action of firing and arresting judges of superior courts under the garb of an Emergency (read Martial Law) when the Constitution was ‘suspended’ and then ‘restored’ later with drastic and illegal ‘amendments’ grafted into it.
The Constitution cannot be amended except by the two Houses of Parliament and by a two-thirds majority in each House. That is the letter of the law. How can one man presume or arrogate to himself that power?
Unfortunately the General is grievously economical with the truth (I refrain from using the word ‘lies’) when he says that the charges against me were ‘investigated and verified beyond doubt’. As explained above, these had in fact been rubbished by the Full Court Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan against which judgment the government filed no application for review.
What the General has done has serious implications for Pakistan and the world. In squashing the judiciary for his own personal advantage and nothing else he has usurped the space of civil and civilized society. If civilized norms of justice will not be allowed to operate then that space will, inevitably, be occupied by those who believe in more brutal and instant justice: the extremists in the wings. Those are the very elements the world seems to be pitted against. Those are the very elements the actions of the General are making way for.
Some western governments are emphasizing the unfolding of the democratic process in Pakistan . That is welcome, if it will be fair. But, and in any case, can there be democracy if there is no independent judiciary?
Remember, independent judges and judicial processes preceded full franchise by several hundred years. Moreover, which judge in Pakistan today can be independent who has before his eyes the fate and example of his own Chief Justice: detained for three months along with his young children. What is the children’s crime, after all?
There can be no democracy without an independent judiciary, and there can be no independent judge in Pakistan until the action of November 3 is reversed. Whatever the will of some desperate men the struggle of the valiant lawyers and civil society of Pakistan will bear fruit. They are not giving up. Let me also assure you that I would not have written this letter without the General’s unbecoming onslaught. That has compelled me to clarify although, as my past will testify, I am not given into entering into public, even private, disputes. But the allegations against me have been so wild, so wrong and so contrary to judicial record, that I have been left with no option but to put the record straight. After all, a prisoner must also have his say. And if the General’s hand-picked judges, some living next door to my prison home, have not had the courage to invoke the power of ‘habeas corpus’ these last three months, what other option do I have? Many leaders of the world and the media may choose to brush the situation under the carpet out of love of the General. But that will not be.
Nevertheless, let me also reassure you that I continue in my resolve not to preside any Bench which will be seized of matters pertaining to the personal interests of General Musharraf after the restoration of the Constitution and the judges, which, God willing, will be soon. Finally, I leave you with the question: Is there a precedent in history, all history, of 60 judges, including three Chief Justices (of the Supreme Court and two of Pakistan’s four High Courts), being dismissed, arrested and detained at the whim of one man? I have failed to discover any such even in medieval times under any emperor, king, or sultan, or even when a dictator has had full military sway over any country in more recent times. But this incredible outrage has happened in the 21st century at the hands of an extremist General out on a ‘charm offensive’ of western capitals and one whom the west supports.
I am grateful for your attention. I have no other purpose than to clear my name and to save the country (and perhaps others as well) from the calamity that stares us in the face. We can still rescue it from all kinds of extremism: praetorian and dogmatic. After all, the edifice of an independent judicial system alone stands on the middle ground between these two extremes. If the edifice is destroyed by the one, the ground may be taken over by the other. That is what is happening in Pakistan . Practitioners of rough and brutal justice will be welcomed in spaces from where the practitioners of more refined norms of justice and balance have been made to abdicate.
I have enormous faith that the Constitution and justice will soon prevail.
Yours truly,
Iftikhar Mohammad Choudhry, Chief Justice of Pakistan,
Presently: imprisoned in the Chief Justices House, Islamabad .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)