Famous Last Words or a Messiah in Khakis?

Sadhna #78

To give you a more clear picture.

13th amendment takes away the right of a member to vote against any decision by his party leader.

That was good for Benazir Bhutto, who put away all shame and supported this so that his few members in parliament could not desert her. It was good for Nawaz Sharif which gives him absolute control over his elected partymen and since he was elected with 2/3rd majority (although real estimate is around 18-20 percent voting in election) he could do anything.

The people had redress in the form of Supreme Court,and a hearing was underway when supreme court was stormed by Nawaz and his cronies. And an alternative Supreme court with Nawas Sharif`s cronies was created which sacked the Chief Justice of sitting Supreme Court.

The president had power to sack the Government, so it had introduced another amendment which approved by two third majority to take away all the powers of president.

When the Government stopped the Newsreel of Jang Newspaper and making fake cases against ``Jang Newspaper`` Jang fought it.

What alternative the people had.

Muslim League cannot rebel against its leader.

Alternative was peoples Party which itself was trying to save its leader and so were reluctant to take any stand.

There was a problem in Sind. So Governor rule was imposed and Anti terrorist Courts were put in for summary punishment.

sadna

post#80

So,what`s youre point?

The ISI has been regularly been blamed by India as the main culprit for causing trouble for India. Similarly, Pakistanis blame RAW for any trouble within their country. I guess we substitute RAW & ISI depending on what side of the border we belong.

Is that the reason we should stop talking to each other? The only way out of the deadlock is to keep talking to each other.

The Pak govt has repeatedly proclaimed their intention to resume talks. India uses the excuse of terrorism to refuse talks. I think thats fundamentally stupid. Refusing to talk only makes terrorism stronger. Its time to put that ``betrayal`` syndrome of Kargil to rest. India has milked it to the max.

Why is India refusing 3rd party mediation? The real answer (IMHO) is because they will then have to concede to give up Kashmir eventually.

Someone rightly said that now is the time to ``buy stock``, when Pakistan`s stock is low. Refusing to talk is stupid.

INDIAN PROPAGANDA PRIVATIZED

The ZEE TV commercial with a Pakistani general with the green and white sash is pretty nasty and funny as well. The humour of it is undeniable. More Pakistanis are probably amused than Indians.

krashid #82

Thanks for the clarification. However, staying with the 13th Amendment example, again I must ask, is there unanimity in Pakistan that it is better for Pakistan if the utility of its provisions are re-examined?

BB,NS misused it. Will not someone in future misuse it too? Its realistic to expect rulers, civilian or military to be self-serving, why would anyone venture into such a miserable business of bearing responsibility for millions of people otherwise?

There is an Anti-Defection law in India, too, which was introduced in the 1980s` to solve various identified problems, and now is being reviewed for fine-tuning/scrapping for solving of various other problems. Now if the Indian public or media are not vigilant, measures may be passed that only promote the interests of legislators.

Again, what I want to point out is :

1. A provision or law must be examined in light of the longterm national interest. Is it so difficult to identify longterm national interest in this case at least? Suspending all laws will not work beyond a point in time after which new problems will arise.

2. The best way to avoid self-serving collusion between vested interests whether civilian or military against overall national interest is have open debate to bring out all aspects of any matter.

Sadhana

Sadhna #85

BB was more democratic than NS.

The 13th and 14th amendment was passed by Nawaz Sharif to consolidate his grip on power in his second stint in power.

To give you more insight into politics of Pakistan, the same faces in different parties are there to not only protect their interest, but to loot the exchequer and this loot does not trickle down to common man but is rotten in Foreign banks.

After the Atomic Bomb blast, when there was a risk of flight of foreign exchange to foreign countries, the Government freezed the foreign currency account. But it made sure that foreign exchange of decision makers are already out of country at the time of freezing of foreign currency account.

That is why it is surprising for most people that even diehard democratic people want a new form of democracy in which the interest of common man is safe guarded.

The following is an excert from BBC News, S.Asia:

{{Pakistan`s military ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, has concluded talks in Tripoli with the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

The Pakistani leader arrived in Libya earlier this week on the last leg of an exhaustive foreign travel itinerary.

Last week he attended a meeting in Havana of the Group of 77 developing nations and then went on to Egypt.

Libya`s official news agency said that General Musharraf and Colonel Gaddafi discussed regional and international issues in addition to bilateral relations.

General Musharraf stressed during the meeting ``the feelings of friendship felt by the people of Pakistan for the Libyans and their leader,`` the news agency said.

Seeking support

In Cairo, General Musharraf had meetings with the Secretary general of the Arab League, Esmat Abdel Maguid, and President Hosni Mubarak.

General Musharraf at Cairo`s Al Azhar mosque



He also met leading Egyptian businessmen.

In recent weeks, the Pakistani leader has been touring a number of countries - many of them Muslim nations - in South East Asia and the Middle East.

In most of these meetings he is believed to have briefed his hosts on political developments in his country and tried to win recognition of his regime.

He is also believed to have tried to strengthen trade links and win support for Pakistan`s position on nuclear proliferation and the Kashmir question.

Arab line

So far, there is little indication that he has achieved any of these goals.

None of the countries he has visited has publicly backed the military takeover or his country`s stance over Kashmir.

However, Pakistani diplomats are no doubt pleased that in Cairo Mr Meguid said that Islamabad had a legitimate right to possess nuclear weapons, and that it could not be accused of having aggressive intentions.

As for Kashmir, Mr Meguid said that General Musharraf had explained his country`s position on the subject and that the Arab League understood this position.

Gone are the days when Pakistan enjoyed the automatic support of these countries, whether individually or within forums such as the Arab League or the Organisation of Islamic Conference.}}

A couple of questions/observations:

1)The good general is spending an awful amount of time & foreign exchange running all over the world. No matter how optimistic a spin his staff put on the results of the tours, he doesnt seem to be getting a bang for his buck.

2) I`m sure he`s telling his fellow muslim brothers how the evil Indians ( read hindus) are killing ,raping & pillaging innocent Kashmiri muslims. All he`s getting is polite murmurs of empathy.

I`ve asked this question repeatedly. This genuinely puzzles me. Logic dictates that the Arabs should respond with the same outrage that Pakistanis have about Kashmir. Nothing would scare the BJP more than an Arab oil embargo. Just what hold does India have over the Arabs? Indian diplomacy just cannot be that effective. On the other hand, Pakistani diplomacy cant be that ineffective.

Could somebody help me out with this?!

DIALECTICAL CASTE

War of words over caste

By Our Special Correspondent

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, APRIL 19. The inclusion of a new column on caste in the membership form by the Ernakulam district unit of the Communist Party of India CPI(M) has led to a war of words between the party and the BJP in Kerala.

While the State secretariat of the CPI(M) dismissed it as a faux pas, announced a probe into it and vowed to take action against those responsible for it, the BJP characterised it as the nadir of ideological bankruptcy of the CPI(M).

The State secretariat dismissed reports that the party had decided to seek the caste of its members as baseless and for propaganda purposes. It pointed out that according to the reports, the scrutiny form which the members had to fill while renewing membership sought the community in which they were born. It asserted that the CPI(M) had not taken any decision to find out the caste of its members. It was the State committee which prepared the membership scrutiny form and distributed it to the district committees for printing. There was no column on caste anywhere in it. No change was made in the scrutiny form which was in force since the birth of the party.

It said the workers viewed the membership records very seriously. The questions in the form related to name, address, age, educational qualifications, class of birth, year of joining the party, mass organisation, sex, profession and monthly income. It should also say whether the person was a full-time worker. No decision had been taken to include any other question in the form. It deplored the bid to misinterpret the issue and tarnish the party over it.

The State secretary of the BJP, Mr. M. S. Kumar, however, viewed the development as the nadir of ideological bankruptcy to which the CPI(M) had plummeted. He said that Marxism which was hailed as the vision of fraternity devoid of caste and religion had progressed to the level of Mr. Pinarayi Vijayan (State secretary of the CPI-M) asking the caste of its members. He wondered what the DYFI workers who sang the refrain ``there is no Hindu blood in us, there is no Muslim blood in us, there is no Christian blood in us, there is only human blood in us`` had to say about the development. ( Chowk is full of this type of people, striving for indo-pak peace, the accidental theory adherants: are welcome to join the marxists of kerala. )

shankar #83

If the point of Dilip D`Souza`s article was to underline the futility of showing attitude when the fate of ``1/5th of humanity`` is on the line, the point of my posting was that it is equally futile to trivialise the current Indo-Pak impasse as a question merely of personalities and childish behaviour of the current leaders.

There is no percentage in continuing to provide cover for what may be others` true agendas. We must definately talk, but with eyes open, not eyes shut.

According to me, there seems to be no limit to which military planners in Pakistan will not go to, even denuding their own nation, to achieve their true purpose: total accession. It may not be so, but what is gained in the interests of eventual peace by wilfully discounting the possibility?

Here is an excerpt from yesterday`s The Nation. I may be wrong, but I think the author sits in the National Security Council.

Apr 19 The Nation (www.nation.com.pk)

Tight-rope walking

Inayatullah

``...The international community has more or less, defacto, accepted the Indian occupied Kashmir as Indian territory as if the Line of Control is the international border between the two countries. We were dubbed as ``intruders`` during the Kargil conflict.

There are voices already within Pakistan for putting a halt on our supporting the Kashmiris` struggle and letting them carry on their efforts for freedom on their own. These so-called peaceniks advance the argument that Pakistan cannot afford to remain engaged with Kashmir. It must, they advise, cut down its defence expenditure, divert resources to development, and normalise relations with India. However plausible their points appear to be, the question is: Can Pakistan afford to delink itself with what India is doing in the occupied state and abdicate its historic obligations?

Are all the heart-rending sacrifices of the hapless Kashmiris to go waste? Will the people of Pakistan (and there are hundreds of thousands amongst them who have come from Kashmir) accept such abdication of responsibilities? Apart from the fact that the cause of the Kashmiris is just and that Pakistan has a strong case will any such decision not result in the weakening of Pakistan psychologically and materially? Can Pakistan survive if India gains total control of the very life line of Pakistan - the rivers that provide water to our arid areas? (Most of Pakistan is an arid zone dependent upon the water of the rivers). Will this not mean, in due course, Pakistan`s economic strangulation? And who will stop an emboldened India to crush the helpless Kashmiris with impunity as also to nibble away parts of Northern Areas and Azad Kashmir, after some time?...``

``...We cannot disown our friendship with our western neighbour. We have to stand with it and help it address its problems which include taking steps to improve its image and standing.

We have to avoid rash initiatives which may land us into trouble with powerful organised groups within Pakistan. Utmost care is needed in dealing with well-meaning Kashmir supporters. Handling of these matters - Kashmir, the jehadi elements, and relations with Afghanistan - is more important than even the accountability operations and grass-roots devolution....``

(end excerpts)

As far as third party mediation goes, realistically, I don`t think Pakistan has ever been happy with any third party who interceded in any Indo-Pak issue. I see so many articles and letters even today about the duplicity and self-serving nature of third parties. After Clinton`s visit, I thought I saw a report that the Pakistani govt is letting up slightly on its insistence on third party mediation.

Finally: When we want to talk, they want to fight. When they claim to want to talk, we claim to want to fight. May the day come when we are truly `in phase`.

Sadhana

krashid #86

I don`t know enough about corruption in India to draw parallels(can someone else oblige?). I have heard that very often when the Congress PM needed money, he/she would threaten to dismiss a state government. Then the Chief Minister would travel to NDelhi with a suitcase(of money). I remember there was a big media uproar on one occasion when a Chief Minister in a similar position travelled to N.Delhi with a suitcase and the press even carried out public experiments to see if the alleged bribe amount would actually fit in a suitcase of that size. There was a lot of speculation about denomination of notes, weight of the suitcase etc etc.

Such an activity is likely to be continuing in some form or other and always will. The thing is how to keep it within limits and what limits? Most importantly, whose limits?

Would it not be better if public opinion and cover of law enabled institutions and a few honest people in them to go after the stolen wealth? Has the Army intervening and defining its own priorities in `accountability` been more of the same thing as those `dishonest` politicians? Is the NAB doing its job right or is it partisan? Who will police the Army or hold it accountable?

Sadhana

Shanker #87

No, I tried but cannot seem to come up with an explanation. The way you have stated the situation, it would seem that given your premises, India just has the credibility whereas the Pakistanis and Pakistan lack it, or else, you know the answer but wish to see how miserably the rest of us, plebians and pedestrians, fail. Well, I have failed. Now out with the explanation, you tease!

May an Arab`s camel give you milk, and other good wishes to you.

Sincerely.

Sadhana.

You are right in pointing the corruption in Indian Politics like Bofors scandal. I thnk RamaRao Government was involved in too much corruption (and may be one reason For Vajpayee to be elected).

But situation in Pakistan was much different. Corruption was not the reason for Government ouster. Although people were very much in favor of accountability, and before NAB the accountability bureau at the time of Nawaz Sharif was manipulated to crush People`s party of BB.

But still that was not the reason.

Then 13th amendment giving Nawaz Sharif absolute power over MP`s.

But still that was not the reason.

Then supreme court was stormed and chief justice of Supreme court sacked.

But still that was not the reason.

Then Governor rule was imposed in Sind to prevent two large parties from forming the Government.

But still that was not the reason.

Then press was subjugated when Nawaz Sharif stopped the Newsreel of largest Newspaper in Pakistan.

But still that was not the reason.

Then Nawaz Sharif tried to put his own man on Army, which is the most organized institution and Army revolted.

People saw all these, and gladly accepted the sacking of Nawaz Sharif Government.

What would happen if Army did not intervene? Nothing. People will continue to be subdued and suppressed and in a couple of months when the Nawaz Sharif Government would pass 15th amendment of Shariah law, all the interest of loans would have been pardoned and possibly Loan itself pardoned in the name of ``Qarze-Hasna`` (Good loan).

The Islamist would be free to have their day and Pakistan would be a second Afghanistan.

You can see why Pakistanis are politically conscious and silent majority at least sees a ray of hope.

I remember a film made at the time of ZA Bhutto made by Americans on Islamic Bomb. When a farmer from Punjab was asked about anti-Islam tilt of Bhutto and pro Islamic PNA movement, he retorted ``Islam Naal Ki Lena Hai`` meaning what I have to do with Islam, if Bhutto is giving us benefit.

The same most Pakistani can say ``Jumhuraiat Nal Ki Lena Hai``

It does not mean we are not aware of dangers of autocratic rule, but we are struggling for a new form of democracy where we can redress our problems, rather than some slogan which has only

given us more poverty, taken away the rights from us and put our money at the mercy of looters.

Observer #91

((The way you have stated the situation, it would seem that given your premises, India just has the credibility whereas the Pakistanis and Pakistan lack it, or else, you know the answer but wish to see how miserably the rest of us, plebians and pedestrians, fail. Well, I have failed. Now out with the explanation, you tease!))

I regret if the tone of my post seemed sarcastic. It was`nt meant to be. Actually, I dont blame you for feeling that way. Unfortunately, I`m seeing some of us Indians have been particularly nasty with their anti-Pak tirades. Its resulting in very unproductive shouting matches. We are acting just like our politicians:)

Pakistan has traditionally gone out of her way to support & help the Arabs (particularly S Arabia).Even though there was quite a lot of sympathy for Saddam Hussein, Pakistan sent troops to S Arabia`s aid during the gulf war. They have supported the Arabs vociferously in every diplomatic venture against Israel, even sent their pilots during the Arab Israeli war. The Palestinians stabbed S Arabia & Kuwait in the back & supported Saddam. I mean, what more can Pakistan do to demonstrate solidarity!?

Despite all that, its pretty pathetic that the wealthy Arab states can only give polite murmurs of empathy to Pakistan on Kashmir. Isnt Kashmir one of the prime foreign policy issues of Pakistan--ever since independance?

India is heavily dependant on Arab oil, trade & jobs in the gulf. Potentially, the rich Arabs states have much more clout & arm twisting power than the US--in that respect.

If the Arabs threaten an embargo, what can India do? The Arabs can easily trade & import workers from other countries. India just doesnt have the muscle to threaten them militarily.

I am genuinely puzzled at the lack of Arab reciprocity to Pakistan. I dont believe India has more credibility. Personally, I think Pakistan is getting a raw deal from them. I would have expected more from friends.

Any comments? --anybody?

Corruption in India,

Kerala being the most `literate` state in India has the most sophisticated and `above board` system of corruption. This was perfected by the marxist govt., legendary for the non-corrupt and gandhian leaders like EMS Namboodirirad and Nayanar.

The entire corruption is handled as party donations, in small denominations, Rs 10 these days. To have a meeting with the minister, you have to meet the local party man. He will give a book of donations and you pay for it. Later you meet the minister who in turn will direct you to his close party man. He will give another set of donation books and if you are lucky, you get the favours.

The marxists created the system of collecting bribes from all competing parties, say for a contract. but finally gave it to the party sympethiser, that is one with a long history of donations.

By this elaborate process of network, every one gets a share of the pie, not the minister alone. Even a local party man has access to `corrupt` money.

Because the governments change so much in kerala, even the opposition parties have influence over award of contracts.

Corruption in pakistan is of another `order`. Govt is proposing legitemisation of smugling by asking the traders to pay a sales tax at Bura markets, traders are telling no...no.. we want to be illegal. Great, the country is joke, what does islam say about Bura market.

Dragon Slayer #92

I didnot quite get your point. India doesnot have a much better ranking than Pakistan as far as corruption goes. I personally don`t have enough specific information.

Recently there have been a number of articles on how the Central Vigilance Commissioner in N.Delhi is finding it impossible to obtain any legal action against proven corrupt officials. In the political arena, the CBI is currently going after Laloo Yadav(with the timing being a little questionable), but many other seemingly open-and-shut cases against even former Central govt ministers have been tough to carry through the courts.

Not to speak of the hawala racket, illegal commissions in Bofors and other defence deals, and other local scams involving crores of rupees. If you look at bank defaults, I suspect the figure might be pretty shocking. Again, can anyone comment on this?

I think a trader named Harshad Mehta allegedly owes/owed the Govt of India a few thousand crore rupees(and was mentioned in the Union budget)and still trades? Does anyone know any more about this?

Sadhana

krashid #93

It depends on how you look at it.

If Pakistan`s history began with advent of NS and ended with removal of NS, you are on the mark. If not, perhaps you might see many years of military rule and many years of setting national priorities by the military as part of the problem. Leaders in the military setting the national priorities for the future also maynot seem like the absolute best solution.

You say ``Nawaz Sharif tried to put his own man on Army``. Again: cart and horse in proper sequence, please. Wasn`t someone saying NS was the Army`s man? Will the next man they choose to impose on the Pakistani people(after splitting the PML, maybe )be another NS? How will Pakistanis keep control over the next leader?

Anyway, you say under NS, ``people will continue to be subdued and suppressed``

Are people able to influence Gen PM`s policies now? Do he or his functionaries have hearings or audiences or frequent exchange of ideas with the public? Will future leaders feel the need to be different?

You say `` Islamists would be free to have their day and Pakistan would be a second Afghanistan``

Is the fear any less now?

I can understand the need for trusted leaders. However, is the issue so black and white? Anyway, the point is that the current `fluid` situation may allow many things to happen. Laying the right groundwork for future is part of it, surely? Examining how the various provisions in the Constitution have played out could well be one of them.

macgupta referred to an article on the PH board, what do you think of it?

Sadhana

Sadhana!

The policies of Pervez Musharraf are pragmatic, possibly in right direction and are appeasing to people.

You have to judge from the fact, that inspite of all international pressures, this Government is able to sustain and to have its recognition.

That may be bad in long run, particularly if army consolidates its grip on power and is accepted internationally. In that case prssure on Pervez Musharraf Government will be much reduced.

The best Pervez Musharraf can do is give constitutional rights to people, which cannot be taken back in future Feudal-Industrialist alliance which is a necessity of Parliamentary system of democracy as practiced in Pakistan.

I think, the plan of democracy at local level will effectively shatter the power of Industrialist-feudal lobby and will be a great administrative step in solving the local problems, which the people want and need most.