Open Letter to Prime Minister Jamali

Malik99,

You are either really naive or one major drama...

The reason why Mullahs don`t drive jaguars is because `GRAND CRUISERS` and `LAND CRUISERS` suit them better.... Each major Mullah leader has multiple grand cruisers and Land cruisers...Where did these Mullahs get all this money?? How does MMA a party of the religious clerics own such amazing party head quarters and WHY the hell is Fazlurrahman so fat?


And you have a problem with the family sedan I drive that I have on HIRE PURCHASE ?? or the house I am going to buy through a bank loan? I don`t drive Jaguars or Mercedes either... but if I ever will own one it will be from my own blood and sweat... And as far as Foreign education goes... my parents toiled hard for my education... but did Qazi Hussain Ahmed have to toil for his Son`s American education? Where did he get all the money for his houses in America and Pakistan? To my knowledge he is not a famous business man or a professional of any repute



Mullahs are hypocrites...

God save Pakistan and Islam from the Mullah B@stards...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Pakistan has been effectively run under a presidential system since 1958 except for the period when army backed presidents against prime ministers. Both Z. A. Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, though called primeministers, were in effect presidents with all the powers and nominal presidents. So, the supporters of Musharraf and presidential system need not to make excuses for supporting a traitor, Musharraf, against corrupt effectively presidential system primeministers. It is sad to see intelligent people making such lame excuses to award more and more powers to Musharraf, which he has and can have without any hurdle. The charges leveled against NS are often corruption and accumulating all powers in his hand like a president. Why hide behind such thin transparent veils to support Musharraf so as not to look an outright idiot like those who have put their faith in him, blindly and cheer, celebrate and possibly distribute sweets no matter who he hires or fires? It does no good to hide behind such transparent thin veils when all can see and understand the reason behind such superficial suggestions - gimmicks. Boy O` boy, people are so hard at work and perspiring for face-lifting of one particular from a group of ``F`` grade performers. What makes this one particular ``F`` grader different than all th ``F`` grade performers before him - politicians and generals alike?

It is upto the fairly elected representatives of the people to decide between presidential, parliamentary, tribal or feudal systems. Given the freedom, fairly elected representatives will go the other way than presidential/ strong center system.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#91 by ferozk on June 28, 2004 9:21am PT
re: rozaiba # 64

Well, your post is addressed to Roz but I thought it wont hurt to take a shot.
Your post mostly is factual and you draw correct conclusions. From a legal, constitutional and moral standpoint, Pakistan is a Joke and once you accept this reality, you have a better chance of analyzing what could be done to make things right. I know we don’t have enough muscle to change any thing in Pakistan. For Non residents like me, it doesn’t really matter as in another 20-25 years, we will probably lose our last contacts with the land anyway.
Once you know your limitations, it all becomes an intellectual exercise.
Frustrations with what happened in the last 57 years are acceptable. 57 years is not a long time in a country’s history though. I would try to draw a parallel with Israel here. These two countries came into existence at about the same time on kind of more emotional than practical aspirations of nationhood. Israel is still involved in a battle of life and death with less people and lots of uncertainty for the future. Pakistan, has not gone thru that kind of struggle for existence. Pakistan is in a neighborhood where, despite many issues, mostly people would rather live in peace than be in a mortal combat like we have between Israel and Palestine. That gives Pakistan a much better hope for future.

For the last 50 odd years Pakistan has been caught in Army generals ambitions. in Bill Clinton’s words “was there and something he could do”. Similarly, the Army in Pakistan could take power and it did. Mostly, it was immaturity on the part of Pakistan politicians but we understand that Pakistan leadership after the partition was basically a regional leadership that never had “national Leadership” aspirations in undivided India. In their limited scope and vision they made mistakes.
OTOH, you need to look at the progress Pakistanis have made politically to wrest power from the Army generals.
Up until 1990, it was inconceivable in Pakistan to even point to the army for Problems in Pakistan. I know in my student days, and a very short lived political life in Pakistan, People constantly considered me and people like me anti-Pakistan. We were often told to go to India. Still Sindh nationalists are considered traitors and pro-India in Punjabi ruling classes and specially in the army. But in Sindh, nobody calls us Indian agents anymore. People have come to recognize that we are presenting a viewpoint and have the right to do that.

Pakistani left and liberals have been in struggle with the Army for a long time now with no rewards at all. We also recognize that despite our opposition to the Army, we still have to work with them for our rights.
After Zia’s death, for sometime, it looked that we had the army beat and it will not come back to the power in a blatant way. That was a mistake in judgment. Pakistani politicians made the same mistake. For a little while, they thought that people are ready to stand up to the army.
The army probably would have gone by now, but for the change in the international situation. The non-existent international recognition for the Army in 1999, has now turned into an overwhelming support after 911. Pakistanis are still not enough powerful to stand up to it. Lots of distractions have emerged and the army has unleashed religious goons on people of Pakistan and it is taking advantage of the situation but there is no way this situation would last a long time.
We cannot compare our situation with India. Indians mostly don’t have a clue about the intense political struggle that is going on in Pakistan. We certainly can learn a whole lot from India and Indian politics but Pakistani will have to fight their own battles with occasional help from India. We give up our right to fight for our country, when we give up the hope.

I may sound condescending, but I also feel that you have a very good understanding of what goes on in Pakistan. So cheer up. Since you still live in Pakistan, someday you may end up sharing the booty in a democratic country.

Yasser, dear boy,

I just thought I would give you the latest info on IAF. Actually, back in March when the air exercises ended, the Indian pilot interviewed by NDTV said pretty much the same thing and the US pilot didn`t have anything to say. I ignored it at that time but now a USAF general is saying the same thing.

Wonder what Chuck Yeager would have to say about the IAF now.

Air exercise with India a ``wake-up call`` for US air force

Wed Jun 23,11:46 PM ET


WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US Air Force got a ``wake-up call`` in air-to-air training exercises with India earlier this year that showed the United States can no longer take air superiority for granted in a conflict, a top US general has said.

A study of the ``Cope India`` air exercise, conducted by the US and Indian air forces in Gwalior, India last February, is secret, said General Hal Hornburg, head of the air force`s Air Combat Command, on Wednesday.

``But we have to learn a lot of things from that,`` he told defense reporters here. ``We have to learn if we want air superiority it doesn`t come cheap and it`s not automatic.``

The Russian-made SU-30s are reported to have bested the F-15s in a majority of their engagements, much to the surprise of the organizers.

It was the first time the two top-of-the-line US and Russian-made fighters have flown against each other in an exercise, an air force spokeswoman said.

It pitted F-15Cs from the air force`s 3rd Wing out of Elmendorf Air Force Base in Alaska against a variety of Indian fighters, not just the SU-30s. They included Russian-built MiG-21s, MiG-29s and French-made Mirage 2000s.

Although the US fighters flew with certain restrictions that handicapped their effectiveness, the performance of the Indian fighters exceeded expectations.

``In general, we may have learned some things that suggest we may not be as far ahead of the rest of the world as we once thought we were,`` Hornburg said.

He said the results of the exercise showed the need for the F/A-22 Raptor and the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). Both aircraft are stealthier than the F-15, but the F/A-18 also has greater range and speed than the air force`s existing fighters.

The air force has been battling the perception that the costly new fighters are a luxury at a time when the United States has dominance in the air.

``I thought it was a wake-up call for some things that we`ve been talking about before, and it provided validation,`` Hornburg said.

The trade journal Aviation Week and Space Technology reported last month that the exercises showed the SU-30s had a clear advantage over the F-15C in a long-range fight.

The US and Indian aircraft were seeing each other at the same time with their radars but the SU-30 pilots were able to simulate-fire their Russian-made AA-10 ``fire-and-forget`` Alamo missiles first, the weekly said.

Experts say the SU-30 has a more advanced radar than the F-15C.

Hornburg said the F-15Cs that took part in ``Cope India`` were not equipped with the latest US active electronically scanned array radar.

``We are going to put new radars, as much as we can afford, in the F-16s and the F-15Es, and my prediction is we will have to do for the F-15C as well in due course,`` the general said.

The exercise appears to hold lessons for the air force in east Asia, where China is acquiring SU-27 and SU-30 fighters and AA-12 air-to-air missiles.

``I see air forces across the spectrum and across the world becoming better and better as each year passes,`` Hornburg said.

``China is very formidable. It is a huge, collossal nation, and they are very technologically adept. Do I worry about the Chinese? I would say I worry about anyone who could be a possible threat, to include them and many others,`` he said.

roz:

...am late but here are my two bits
still people

rgds,

t

re: rozaiba # 64

First of all, you and I will disagree on this issue.

Pakistan is a joke! Once you accept that fact, you will realize that nothing will ever happen here on a populist level. Pakistan will always teeter and totter, but it will never stabilize. Hence, all the tinkering and engineering is only going to keep the rotten structure up for a little while more. Populism will die a quick death in Pakistan and not because of your paranoia of the military, but because the civilian politicans of Pakistan are dead set against populism. Incidently, whose populism did you have in mind? Who defines and implements this blessed term? Political theories do not work well in Pakistan and political theories, like yours on populism, will be stillborn. Pakistan will simply continue in its present form and shape and success, will measured not by achieving any accomplishments, but by simply existing as an instable, poor debt ridden and technologically backwards and illiterate nation.

Blaming the military is a popular pastime for the confused chatterati of Pakistani intellectuals, who think that the civilian politicans drop from heaven, as some sort of manna, and can do no wrong. Blaming the military and the blame game will not remove them from power and since the leading dimlights of Pakistani liberalism are more inclined to sound brave on the sets of GEO than face the bullets, the military treats them with utter disdain. The civilians will, when given the choice, accept the military willingly and not say a word in opposition, because to them their own selfish interests are more important than democracy.

The military has, indeed, denied populism but so has the elected civilian politicans of Pakistan. The most acclaimed populist leader of Pakistan ended up as a dictator, with his own police force called the FSF and would jail and torture his opponents. All leaders in Pakistan have one reason to come to power and that is to weild absolute power and if that means attacking the Supreme Court or denying debate in the parliament, they have willingly justified their tsarist diktats in the name of populalism. Military may deny plurality in Pakistan, but so have the so-called democratically elected leaders. Where was this heaven blessed plurality, when Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif gridlocked the nation due to their personal rivalry? Where was the plurality or populism, when Z. A. Bhutto was using the army to crush his political opposition in Baluchistan?

If institutions require freedom from being tampered, what were the civilian governments doing with the parliament and the courts? Crying over split milk, are we? Let us blame the big, bad cat, but let us not ask but forget, who let the cat into the piegon cage.

As to why the presidential system of government in Pakistan? Ask Jinnah, why he chose to ignore his own prime minister? Jinnah was so power crazed that he opted to keep all the powers unto himself and forgot that a governor-general is a figurehead in a parliamentary form of democracy. Since then, all the minnows who followed Jinnah have sought to act like he did and in the vice-regal tradition and precedent of Jinnah, made Pakistan into a presidential form of government where the parliament was habitually ignored. Pakistani politicans, elected or non-elected or the military, like the vice-regal tradition of absolute power and this is ample to kill any notions of populism or democracy originating in the minds of would be messiahs of Pakistan.

The systems under Zia-ul-Haq and Ayub Khan were not presidential, but you can think of them as presidential if you wish?

As to the mullahs wishing to take Pakistan back to the seventh century, atleast they have an idea where they wish to head, which is more than can be said for the so called secular civilian or military leadership of Pakistan. The non-mullah leadership of Pakistan is so directionless, that they have repeatedly confused the distinction. They imagine themselves to be on a threadmill, but in reality are sitting on ferris wheel and they have turned out the lights, so as to maintain the fantasy of their believes.

As to convincing you, you and I have interacted for a long time, to realize that once you climb on top your moral high horse, it is more fun to see you gallop and tilt at the windmills of populism than convince you! :) lol

Ciao

Jang #87

As soon as our PM is able to crawl out of under super Italian claws.

Omair & Feroz: I hope all is well, I would like to mention something, I have a disagreement with the concept of technocrats and supporting a Presidential system.

Technocrats maybe useful as part of any government but only to a point, while the Shaukat Aziz`s of the world can give (when left alone) Pakistan a decent growth rate. But remember I believe Ayub Khan`s finance Minister Shoaib Khan gave Pakistan double digit growth. The reality is like the India shining policy promoted by the NDA coalition in India, the people are not stupid, despite the increase in revenue and upsurge in economic activity people in both nations realise something very basic, if all the money is only being spent on pet projects and for the rich it is of little benefit to the average person. The average person is concerned about the cost of electricity and gas, the cost of petrol and diesal, law and order, educationa dn healthcare. Running a business or working in a dictatorship is very different from running a country, when you run a country you need to have the pulse of the people. That is something technocrats rarely have, and they are in normal democracies dependant on a leadership with political vision to be able to understand that...

The argument over feudalism is one I have made many times, feudalism in the old sense of the word has vanished in Pakistan, what we have now are Military and Industrial Feudals who have inter married with the old landed aristocracy.

My argument against the Presidential system is a bit different, normally a Presidential system in the US model has a form of electoral college to ensure all federating units are properly represented come election time. This is lacking in Musharrafs election, he was ``elected`` initially under a referendum that was and is a joke. This was followed by a indirect election done under a Parliamentry system vote of confidence!

Pakistan`s probelms have always come down to two issues, the centralisation of power in Islamabad and the corruption of power..not of money. To imagine a Presidential system will make things better or depending on technocrats solely...is to insult the intelligence of the people.

Omar/92 & nikki7777 - You were you two twins separated al to be born? I signify, of what you write, sounds as if you two treat desperately to obtain the post, if opens, of writer in chowk. It removed is a free forum. Interacts are free also, except the abusive matter. So it publishes please and says what you have a. You have given a very good idea for a poll.

OUTSOURCING THE PRIME-MINISTERSHIP

Why does not the milatary outsource prime-ministership to India? Manmohan singh can do the job just fine for a small fee.

Feroz,

Pakistan is more like France than a true presidential or parliamentary system. The French have made their system work reasonably well for a few decades, no reason why Pakistan can`t (in theory) do the same!

re: Sadna

Yes, I have read what the experts have to say and each is entitled to his/her opinions. As to Musharraf and his local/regional power base, you have raised a good question. I am not sure, what the end will be, but Musharraf is trying to create some power base. Local bodies or the devolution of government can be considered as one on a local level and on the regional level, he seems to have Punjab and Sindh, but not Baluchistan or NWFP. The jury is still out on his efforts.

re: HP

Pakistan is not a presidental system. It is still a mixture of the parliamentary and the presidental system. A presidential system, as I define it, resemembles the American model of goverance, with all the branches being seperate. There is no seperation of branches in Pakistan and each is subordinate to the executive.

The problem was that the presidential system was never allowed to take root and each civilian government regressed to the parliamentary mode. The only exception was Z. A. Bhutto, who governed Pakistan as president and then, as a prime minister with presidental powers. The result was that Pakistan was, and is, neither a presidential system or a parliamentary one. Pakistan is dysfunctional due to all the tussles, which it had to endure over the issue of power sharing.

As to Ayub Khan, I was simply stating where the nation is headed.

Ciao