The Man who would be King

Yes, I`d like to look at it. 512 K, what format? Ideally send it as an in-line text with email, not as an attachment. As a rule, I never ever download any self-extracting attachments or executable files. sohail@worldnet.att.net

...SR

Re: SR

First of all, I think the Pak Armed Forces are at around 500K.

On the question of western interests, I think you`re right and as long as no one rocks the boat, things should work out fine.

If you are interested, I just got the Economist`s analysis on India and Pakistan that was banned in Pakistan! If you can send me an e-mail, I will be more than happy to send it to you; it is around 512K. Makes for interesting speculation!

FerozK (re: International reaction to army rule)

There is little risk of any reaction if a `fig leaf` is employed. A senior employee of Citicorp or World Bank or UNO who is a `Pakistani` (a la Moeen Qureshi) will fit the bill.

There is much too much at stake here to allow the fine print of our Mickey Mouse Constitution to stand in the way of `getting results`. There are too many countries where the West does not worry about the `fine print` as long as those who are running the show don`t become too big for their own pants. (Let`s not forget that even Idi Amin, Noreiga and Saddam Hussain were initially favoured.) The society has to be saved from fragmenting into total anarchy (to prevent nukes for sale to `terrorists`) and CTBT and the NPT have to be signed. The political establishment has certainly proved itself inept so there are few who will shed tears at a `figleaf` arrangement. The generals will be kept in the background and they will happily do that as long as they are given their toys (not tanks and planes but Mercedes and golf clubs).

Then the question is how do you support a 400,000 man army (or is it more by now?) on an exchequer that is running on empty? Especially when they don`t have anything to do? Well, you put them in other organizations that need to get rid of over bloated civilian staff. Kill two birds with one stone. Get rid of the 1300 government departments. Deregulate and privatize the economy and give carte de blanc hunting license to ``Gobble and Engluf International, Inc.`` Turn the blood hungery into the money hungry and jump start the whole financial economy.

None of this can be done in a three month long `interim government`. A much longer term arrangement is needed. In order to justify this change, however, something significant will need to happen first. What that `trigger event` is I can`t say, but something will come along soon enough to be sure. There are way too many automatic weapons floating around for things to stay quite for too much longer. Raiwind zindabad.

...SR

Re: SR # 21

Interesting predictions!

Agree with most of your comments, but disagree on the time frame.

Pak Army certainly has the institutional capacity to form an effective shadow government. The unknown to the boys in khaki governing Pakistan is what the international reaction will be and if the khaki gentry can solve this problem, then I can see it happening.

FerozK [``...how long will...Nawaz Sharif...abuse Pakistan?...``]

I venture to say, 18 months on the very outside. More likely less than a year and perhaps even as little as six months.

The corruption and ineptitude of the political elite has ensured that Pak Fauj will once again (its been long enough, after all) conquer the whole country, but this time in disguise. The WAPDA experiment, it appears, is a `pilot project` for the rest of the country. The other public corporations (T&T, Railway, Steel, Gas & Oil, PIA, etc.) will follow, if WAPDA appears to work. What we have here, already, is a `creeping martial law`. Since the institutions in Pakiland were never allowed to florish, all that holds it together, ultimately, is Pak Fauj. Sad, but true. Naturally, as long as the rot does not reach the very core of the army (not just the top) that institution will quasi-function. In the country of the blind, the one-eyed is king.

...SR

Re: SR

Danke schon mein Herr!

Your point is well taken, but the question still remains how long will Pakistanis allow Nawaz Sharif to abuse Pakistan?

Ferozk #: 18 (Another Tangent, but interesting)

[``…In ancient Rome when…Cataline was charged with treason, the Roman senate …asked him, ``O` Cataline, how long will you abuse our patience?`` …``]


Your point is well taken, however, I wouldn`t use Cataline`s example here. Instead I`d invoke the example of Boniface VIII who, even by the standards of that age of great corruption, when the Papacy ruled supreme and there were no checks on the abuse of power (as is the case in Pakiland today), turned out to be the biggest robber of all them all. Not unlike our current nemesis, he concentrated in himself absolute power by undermining all opponents and all the while tried to steal the entire treasury.

Poor Cataline, by contrast, was the advocate for the common man`s rights against the aristocracy`s strangle hold on Roman political and economic life (though himself a wealthy man from Gaius Marius` days). Cataline, BTW, was not `charged with treason`. He is said to have been involved in a `conspiracy`. After the confrontation with the conservatives in the Senate he walked away from Rome, unmolested, and joined the forces of revolution which then died to the last man, Cataline included, at the hands of the Roman legions under Marcus Antonius (father of the famous `Mark Anthony`). It was the rhetorical eloquence and violent vituperation of the great orator Cicero that Cataline, the champion of the populist cause, was vilified and the upper classes united against the `threat` he represented to the status quo. It is said that years earlier Cataline had actually deflowered Cicero`s sister-in-law, a Vestal Virgin, and that it was this reason that Cicero, the prude, took revenge and he was made to pay with his life.

...SR

Re: SR

You`re welcome and yes, your point was clearly understood!

The recent example of the high court clearly suggests that Pakistan is now a land where the public should simply render unto Caesar is what is rightfully Caesar`s. The state has become a rubber stamp for Nawaz Sharif to imprint his diktat with and there is no independent thought in the country left save only Nawaz Sharif`s opinions.

In ancient Rome when a Roman by the name of Cataline was charged with treason, the Roman senate disgusted by his sophistry finally asked him, ``O` Cataline, how long will you abuse our patience?``

It is high time that Pakistanis should stand up and ask Nawaz Sharif the same question: How long will you abuse our patience? If they hear no answer from him, it should repeat to him the words once uttered to Oliver Cromwell by the English Long Parliament; you have sat here for too long and done no good. Leave! In the name of God go and be done with you!

All:

Please be aware that this Judge Saeeduzzman Siddiqui was reportedly bribed by the Sharifs to the tune of Rs 100 million in 1997 to give a judgement against CJ Sajjad Ali Shah`s proceedings against Sharif. He is poised to become the next Chief Justice of Supreme court in July.

ISI funding of political parties: SC reserves verdict


By Rafaqat Ali

ISLAMABAD, May 19: The Supreme Court bench seized of the human rights case regarding the distribution of funds by the country`s top intelligence agency, ISI, among the political parties in 1990 elections, on Wednesday reserved its judgment.

The court, however, made it clear that it would not touch the aspect of distribution of money among the politicians as it was not in its domain.

The court observed that it would confine itself to laying guidelines for the operation of the political cell of the ISI within the legal framework. About the distribution of funds by the ISI, justice Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, head of a three-judge bench, observed that it was ``history`` and the court was not concerned with it.

Justice Siddiqui observed that the existence of a political cell in an intelligence agency ``is a necessity in the present day environment.``

He further said that there were numerous examples that agents of the secret agencies penetrated so deep in the politic of the hostile county that they were elected to the highest posts. ``This is my personal view and also of the court,`` he said.

The case had originated from the letter of Air Marshal (retd) Asghar Khan to the then chief justice Sajjad Ali Shah for appropriate action after reading the statements of Gen (retd) Naseerullah Khan Babar.

Gen Babar had informed the National Assembly that the ISI had collected Rs140 million from Habib Bank which were distributed among different politicians before 1990 elections. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is one of those politicians who received money from the ISI in 1990 elections, it is alleged.

On Wednesday the Attorney General for Pakistan asked the court to drop the proceedings as the case did not fit in the category of cases which could be heard by the apex court under its original jurisdiction. He said it was mandatory for the court to take up only those cases under its human right jurisdiction (Article 184(3) of the Constitution) which were of ``public importance.``

He said only such cases could be heard by the court under its human rights jurisdiction which affected a large number of people. ``Public interest in a case should not necessarily meant that it was a case of public importance. There was distinction between public interest and public importance, the AG said. The SC bench consisted of designate Chief Justice Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, Justice Shaikh Ijaz Nisar and Justice Kamal Mansur Alam.

The court reserved the judgment after hearing Air Marshal (retd) Asghar Khan, Maj-Gen (retd) Naseerullah Khan Babar, Akram Sheikh, counsel for General (retd) Aslam Beg, General (retd) Asad Durrani, former director general of ISI, and the Attorney General.

Justice Siddiqui observed that if the court confined itself to the letter which was written by Air Marshall Asghar Khan to the Chief Justice, there was no a case before the court. He, however, added that during the course of proceedings a lot of evidence had come on record which showed that the case was of public importance.

When the proceedings started on Wednesday the AG contended that the petition was not maintainable and the proceedings should be dropped. He referred to the number of the judgment passed by the SC on the question of maintainability of the petition.

Justice Siddiqui observed that when the letter of Air Marshal Asghar Khan was taken up by the court under its original jurisdiction, he had given his opinion to the then chief justice that no case could be made out of the letter. ``After the proceedings started so many things have come up,`` Justice Siddiqui observed.

He observed that two issues had emerged from the proceedings so far. ``One issue before the court is the conduct of two former officers of the army and second, what are the parameters of the political cell of ISI``, it was observed.

The AG said that two affidavits submitted by Gen Asad Durrani were contradictory. He further said that the affidavit submitted by Gen Babar regarding those who received money from ISI was different from what Asad Durrani had stated in his two affidavits.


While referring to the affidavits of Asad Durrani and Gen Babar, the AG avoided reading the names. He also asked the court to keep the names secret.

When the court was perusing the record, it came to its knowledge that the record regarding the arrest of Gen (retd) Zaheerul Islam Abbasi was also put on the file. Gen Babar informed the court that it was done by Habib Wahabul Kheiri, counsel for Asghar Khan. He also informed the court that due to this act of Mr Kheiri, his power of attorney as counsel had been revoked. Gen Babar requested the court not to treat it as part of record.

The court asked advocate Akram Sheikh, counsel for Gen Beg, that he should suggest the parameters of the case as the letter of Asghar Khan had become redundant.

Akram Sheikh asked the court that if it wanted to wind up the inquiry, it should adopt a dignified manner.

The suggestion by the counsel infuriated Justice Siddiqui who said in a loud voice: What you are trying to suggest. You need not to tell us what manner we should adopt.``

Akram Sheikh said he was only suggesting that the court should adopt such a way that it should not give wrong impression as people were seeing towards the court.

``That is my concern, not yours,`` Justice Siddiqui stated. Akram Sheikh replied that there was no need to take offence and whatever he said was in the interest of the institution whose dignity was most sacred to him.

Justice Siddiqui observed that he knew how much he (Akram Sheikh) worked for the dignity of the courts.`` At this stage Justice (retd) Gul Zarin Kiyani came up to Akram Shaikh and asked him to show restraint.

Akram Shaikh said that he was sorry that as he was misunderstood by the court and suggested that the court should examine two issues. i) Whether public money could be distributed to interfere with the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 17 of the Constitution. ii) Whether public money could be thrown away as bounty.

The court invited Asghar Khan to express his views as to how the court should proceed. He said the ISI was a vast organization and was doing a good job as counter intelligence agency but he was only concerned with the political cell of the organization which was trying to manage the politics of the country.

Justice Siddiqui observed that as far the political cell of the ISI was concerned, he was of the view that it was the necessity and added there were a number of examples when the agents of the agencies in hostile countries were elected to highest places.


Asghar Khan said if the court allowed to keep them a political cell it would be difficult to restrain them from mingling into the political affairs inside the country.

Gen Babar stated that political cell in ISI was created by an administrative order to give locus standi to the agency to appear before the Hyderabad Inquiry Tribunal. He said every thing was distorted during the period of Gen Zia-ul-Haq.

He said Gen Hamid Gull, the former ISI chief, was on record saying that he created Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI). The AG intervened at this stage and asked the court to stop Gen Babar from making a political speech.

Gen Babar said that money was not only supplied to political parties in 1990 elections but also in 1993. He produced a document to show that Farooq Lehgari received Rs30 million from ISI in 1993.

Justice Siddiqui observed: ``He was your president.``

``But fact is a fact,`` replied Gen Babar.

On his turn, Gen Durrani stated that there was no existence of political cell in the ISI. He said that as an institution the ISI had no role in the distribution of money. He was pointed out by the court that Gen Beg, the former chief of army staff, had stated that the political cell was in existence. Aslam Beg in his written statement, which he had submitted before the court, had suggested the court to order the closure of ISI`s political cell.

Gen Durrani said it was correct that he had given an affidavit when he was ambassador in Germany and in the second affidavit he explained the circumstances in which he had given that.

Advocate Ahmed Raza Qasuri said that he, on behalf of the public, would state that no agency should be allowed to change the will of the political sovereign.

While winding up the proceedings Justice Siddiqui observed that the court would lay guidelines as was done in a number of cases in the recent past.

Feroz #14

Thanks for the factual correction. I was clearly mistaken in those details. However, I hope my point was understood. It was late at night and I was trying to make a point, but should have been more careful. It is important that we keep our facts straight. Thanks again.

...SR

Re: Ibne Sina`s ittefaqnama

This is the best commic releif...just great. I couldn`t control my eyes watering, that`s how hard it made me laugh! Have sent copies of it to many people. Thank you.

...SR

A short dialogue between Choti Tind (Mian N`waz Saab) and Barri Tind (Mian Shbazz Saab) --with thanks and apologies to Ittefaqnama.

CT: Shbazz saab, mein sari ratti sochi piya kay es ullu day pathay Sethi nal ki keeta jaway. Einay tay sahdi suthan hi lah ditti ay. Sahnu gallian ich nanga kar ditta ay. Menu kuch samajh nahi andi, ki kariyay?

BT: N`waz ji, tussi fikar keun karday-o. Einu jail ich thori der rakho tay khoob chitroal karo, apay-ee sari gallan bhul jaway ga. Aidi chitrol hoi tay eidi gallan sunan walay vi jhag ho jan gay.

CT: Par ainun ander keewain rakhiyay? Loki gallan karan dayay nay, tey eidi woti cheekan mar mar kay sahdi neendar haram kar rai ay. Meri samajh ich kuch nai anda. Hun tay ay akhbaran walay vi kalam likhday payay nay tey gal bari dur tikar puhanchdi payi ay. Menu Clint saab tay Tony Dlair saab day loki vi adhi adhi raat nu phone karday nay. Twadhi bhabhi nu ajj kai din hoay suti nai. Asan Sethi nu do char la kay chad kew nahi dainday?

BT: Chad kay hor gallan khao gay? Tussi einu chaddya tey hor vi dalair ho jan gay. Tay fir saray press alay rajj kay sadhi chitroal karan gay. O gallan karan gay kay twanuh roti hazam nahi howay gi. Eidah koi hor hall socho. Chad kay sahdi nakk waddi jayay gi. Ya tay assi einu andero andri ghaib kara daiyay ya fir eidhi zaban nu rokiyay. Tussi einu koi changa jaya plat deo, ais shart tay key ey hun koi gall na karay. Jay ey na mannay tey fir einu ghaib kara deo. Jail ich hangama karwa deo te einu wichon-i muka deo. Ik do mahinay ich loki sabb kuch bhul bhulla jan gay.

Re: SR #13

Just a friendly reminder:

Begin did not go to Cario till Sadat had been to Tel Aviv in 1978; Nutty-yahoo did not talk with Arafat first, it was Rabin who did!

Ibne Sina,

Very well written and witty. Enjoyed the read. However, I don`t share your bleak view that this illicit product of rape (i.e., NS, who was `born` when Zia `raped` democracy) shall be `crowned`, i.e, he`ll rule for long.

I beleive his days are numbered. This (assault on journalists) is a desperate act. It brought to mind the last days of Mr. Bhutto, when the man had almost lost his mind. These people have also lost their minds and have, in addition to ruining the country, shot themselves in the foot.

True, they have closed all legitimte channels of change. But, legal niceties have never stood in the way of necessary change. Their monopoly of power has only raised the probability of a `bloodbath` as an agent of change. Following is set of future possibilities as I see them. My crystal ball is as opaque as the next person`s, but I`m forwarding a set of possibilities that could unfold in the next few months. If per chance something like this does happen, then there MAY be SOMEEEE hope still left. If things remain as they are, I just don`t see how this sytem could last too much longer.


Both BB and NS have lost the trust of the people. They may both get black listed. The army will, of necessity, be the catalyst of change, but in response to some trigger event. The trigger even could be the BBC film, some other case, riots, or whatever. I don`t think the soldiers will come forward and seize power directly. A state of national emergency will quite likely be imposed though, and that will provide the grounds to bring other changes. Someone will be brought in from outside the main stream political system (like they brought Moeen Qureshi) to form a national unity government,i.e, both PPP and PML will endorse this arrangement, because they will have little choice. (Ghulam Ishaq Khan said yesterday that the Sherpow should be brought to lead the govt. Senile idiot!) Elections may well be held off for a couple of years.

Three things will need to be done if the country is to survive at all.

1) Economic recovery
2) Restoration of law and order by disarming society.
3) Abolution of the state`s role as a player in the economy.
4) Permanent peace and economic cooperation with Bharat and massive down-sizing of the defense establishment.

No political govt. can do any of this. Just like it took Nixon to go to China, or Begin to go to Cairo, or Nithinau to talk to Arafat, similarly, only a govt of `hired professionals` with military support will be able to do this IF ANYONE can do it AT ALL.

The first thing the new rulers will have to do is
to use draconian measures to recover unpaid loans from major defaulters in an attempt to ease the liquidity crunch the whole economy faces today. This is where NS will hang.

But then, I may just be dreaming.

...SR

Re: all

Thanks for the comments

It has been 10 days since the disappearance of Najam Sethi. No one knows where he is. This is unheard of in any democratic country.

CTBT (Choti Tind and Barri Tind --the two brothers) are neck deep in various illegitimate endeavours, yet they control the judiciary which makes it impossible to get a fair verdict. There is evidence of multiple wrong-doings by them, and their Chief Ehtasab Commissioner, which of course gets thrown out of court immediately.

I feel that most of the Pakistanis being what they are, accepting and fatigued, the Sharif family will succeed in establishing their kingdom. All the chips are in their hands.

Re: Amit # 9

Your comments were apt, but my problem with the style of government in Pakistan has more to do with public accountibility than its methodology. India has strong institutional character, which acts as a system of balances and evens out the worst excesses of its politicans. Pakistan has no such system and it still relies, more than a decade after Zia`s death, on the belief that the man on the horse back is still the answer to all of its problems. There is a very seductive desire in Pakistani politics to trust in the principle of autocracy.

I would be the first one to agree with you that governing Pakistan is a headache and not too easy a task, but just because it is so difficult should not suggest that Pakistanis should give up their basic political rights. In the case of India, India still has public accountibility of its officals despite being such a difficult country to forge a political consensus in. My comments directed against Nawaz Shairf were meant to highlight his government`s lack of accountibility to the Pakistani people. The right of the public to hold its officals to account for their actions is a requirement, not an option, of a democratic government.

Your comment suggests that you would be willing to accept such a government if it offers a sense of political security, but then the question becomes whose political security is being considered by such a course of action. I will tolerate, in a pragmatic sense, a slew of actions to reinforce the insitutional intergrity of Pakistani government, at a certain cost in basic political rights, but I will resist Nawaz Sharif`s or anyone else`s like minded efforts to save Pakistan by destroying it!

Your observations were absolutely acute in that in certain political instances, it is necessary to commit evil to in order to achieve good if the situation warrants such an utilitarian realism. In the case of Pakistan, the reality paints a very different picture. Nawaz Sharif is the most powerful prime minister in the history of Pakistan and he has, through an electoral mandate, secured his political power, but still he persits in hobbling the insitutions of Pakistan and has tried and succeed in undermining their political independence to butteress his own political power.

What is he so afraid of? Where does the threat to his power comes from? Who can confront him politically? Who is he accountiable to for his actions? Given his political security, why is he so anxious to curtail political critism of his actions at any and all costs? What is he trying to hide?

These are the questions we, Pakistanis, have to ask our duly elected leader and answer he must, because at stake is not only the creditability of Pakistani experiment in democracy, but Nawaz Sharif`s own persona as a politican committed to the ideals of democracy in Pakistan. No rational minded person ever believes the old lie that politics is for the timid, but those who trod upon its twisted paths should not be considered as above the law, because they happen to engage, in a profession; in a forum, which is thought of as something akin to a distasteful occupation.

Politics and those who participate in it are not doing it as a pro bono service to their consituents, but out of their own self-interests. Hence, instead of being thankful to them and as a sign of our admiration appeasing their intentions, we have moral duty to ask them to justify their personal interests, which are translated into public policy. It is this lack of a political justfication from Nawaz Sharif and his cohorts that dismays and angers me endlessly and is the reason why I decry his actions as being a slap in the face of Pakistani democracy.

Re: Amit

You were right about the China but in Pakistan case people are emotional, you know why, after 50 years of crap they need to be emotional. Look where we are heading. By making missiles and bombs you can boast your fake ego but can`t feed the hungry mass. Nawaz Sharif is only interested in getting more power and why not he would be. He is from the same elite class which is poisioning the whole coutry.

Pakistan was made becuase Muslims of India can exercise their power and be prosperous but its the same story with different faces. Until some Messiah comes in help the poor mass till then we need people like Najam Sethi and their blunt journalism.

God bless Pakistan