THE

CRUSADES
OF

21ST CENTURY

BY RIAZ AMIN
Vol-VII

CONTENTS
PREVALENT SCENARIO..............................................4
HELMET vs WIG: AFTERSHOCKS - IV.............................................8
PEACEMAKER MERCENARY...........................................48
HELMET vs WIG: AFTERSHOCKS - V............................................80
HELMET vs WIG: AFTERSHOCKS - VI............................................154
PEACEMAKER MERCENARY - II..........................................200
HELMET vs WIG: AFTERSHOCKS - VII...........................................217
BEYOND THE INFERNO...252
AFTER SIX YEARS.....279
HELMET vs WIG: AFTERSHOCKS - VIII..........................................307
HELMET vs WIG: AFTERSHOCKS - IX.............................................340
NO END IN SIGHT..............................................380
KNOCK-OUT PUNCH.............................................405
PEACEMAKER MERCENARY - III............................................455
KNOCK-OUT PUNCH - II..............................................482
KNOCK-OUT PUNCH - III.............................................546
KNOCK-OUT PUNCH IV........................................605
KNOCK-OUT PUNCH V .661
BOYCOTT OR NOT....710
BIGS FOR BALLOT747
SHE ASKED FOR IT...778
EVER-ESCALATING WAR...828
SHE ASKED FOR IT II857
SHE ASKED FOR IT III...918

TO BEAUTY PARLOR957
FATIGUED FRONTLINER..1005
UNENDING WAR..1038
CONSOLIDATION AND MORE.1057
TOWARDS POLLS....1090

PREVALENT SCENARIO
The Crusades, referred to as war on terror, have been going on for
little less than a month short of six years. The aim and objectives of this war,
3

though not expressed explicitly by the Crusaders, have been made clear by
its conduct. The ruling elite in the targeted lands and peoples, somehow,
refuse to read the horrifying inevitable.
Last year, some documents containing intelligence on Global
Terrorism were made public. These documents entitled National Intelligence
Estimates, though contained tempered information, yet were used by their
authors to establish trends of global terrorism with a view to set the priorities
of the holy war.
It was no surprise that they talked only of Islamic militancy. That also
implied that the element of exaggeration of the threats was in-built. The
conclusions drawn by the intelligence wizards serve as an authentic proof of
the future intentions of the Crusaders. Some excerpts from NIE are
reproduced.
We assess that the global jihadist movement which includes alQaida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks
as well is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts.
New jihadist networks and cells, with anti-American agendas, are
increasingly likely to emerge. The confluence of shared purpose and
dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups.
The Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and
operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to
continue the struggle elsewhere Al-Qaida, now merged with Abu
Musaab al-Zarqawis network, is exploiting the situation in Iraq to attract
new recruits and donors and to maintain its leadership role.
Other affiliated Sunni extremist organizations, such as Jemaah
Islamiya, Ansar al-Sunnah, and several North African groups, unless
countered, are likely to expand their reach and become more capable of
multiple and/or mass-casualty attacks outside their traditional areas of
operation.
We judge that most jihadist groups both well-known and newly
formed will use improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks focused
primarily on soft targets to implement their asymmetric warfare strategy, and
that they will attempt to conduct sustained terrorist attacks in urban

environments. Fighters with experience in Iraq are a potential source of

leadership for jihadists pursuing these tactics.
Concomitant vulnerabilities in the jihadist movement have emerged
that, if fully exposed and exploited, could begin to slow the spread of the
movement. They include dependence on the continuation of Muslim-related
conflicts, the limited appeal of the jihadists radical ideology, the emergence
of respected voices of moderation, and criticism of the violent tactics
employed against mostly Muslim citizens.
While Iran, and to lesser extent Syria, remain the most active state
sponsors of terrorism, many other states will be unable to prevent territory or
resources from being exploited by terrorists The radicalization process is
occurring more quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet
age, raising the likelihood of surprise attacks by unknown groups whose
members and supporters may be difficult to pinpoint.
The repeated use of words like jihadists, in few lines quoted from
bulky documents, make it clear that the ongoing war (Crusades) is only
against those states and non-state forces in Islamic World which oppose
American imperialism and thus a threat to American interests. The
assessments spelled out also indicate that the Crusaders seemed determined
to continue the war for indefinite period.
This holy war has only one noble aim; taking control of the
resources of Muslim World with a view to pushing the Muslims to the brink
of Stone Age. In the process annihilate all those forces, state or non-state,
which dare resisting or opposing the Crusaders.
Another goal of the ongoing war, repeatedly reiterated by Bush, is to
restrict the bloodshed to Islamic World to make America safe. That is why it
has been and continued to be fought fiercely in Afghanistan and Iraq and
with lesser intensity in Palestine, Lebanon, Kashmir and in many other
places across Afro-Asia.
Pakistans military dictator had joined the Crusades voluntarily right
at the outset. He preferred to become front-line state hoping to save his
country from the wrath of the United States. After serving the Crusaders as
mercenary for more than half a decade, he now finds his Pakistan not as a
front-line state but prime target of the United States and its Western allies.

The war fronts have been completely reversed. Pakistan is now treated
as heaven of Islamic militancy rather than a country at war against
terrorism. Pakistan has become a battleground for an all-encompassing war
on terror. This war is being fought on military, political, ideological,
religious and economic fronts.
On military front, Pakistans armed forces have been turned on to its
own civilian brethrens and in the process killing each other not in tens but in
hundreds in one encounter after another. In this context, Pakistan now
matches Iraq and Afghanistan, the two Islamic countries that have been
physically occupied by the Crusaders. In case of Pakistan, the brave
commando dictator has saved the Crusaders from all the hazards of
occupation and yet doing all what the Crusaders would have wanted to do.
On political front the man who illegally grabbed the power in Pakistan
under the pretext of Nazria-e-Zaroorat, has obviously become indispensable
for the Crusaders. They want to keep him at the helm by providing him the
popular support which he has been losing rapidly since March, 9, 2007.
This has been arranged by enticing him to embrace the most corrupt
politician, Benazir Bhutto. He and she have tied themselves politically
through a marriage of convenience arranged by the marriage bureau of
White House in pursuance of their Nazria-e-Hajit.
Musharraf, scared and worried about his personal security/safety, has
been shamelessly sticking to the dual office of COAS and Presidency despite
plunging into the lowest of his popularity. Even a LDC/UDC after having
earned similar reputation in his department would have preferred to call it a
day, but the brave commando did not seem perturbed at all.
On ideological front, the Crusaders have dented Pakistans Islamic
identity, the very basis of its creation, by backing the secular forces.
Religious forces have been demonized through persistent propaganda and
physically mauled by crackdowns like Operation Silence. The war on this
front, however, continues raging in one form or the other in various parts of
the country.
Pakistan being an ally of the Crusaders stands as an enemy in the eyes
of those who dare fighting against the holy warriors of the Christian
fundamentalists. No doubt, they utterly lack the capability to defeat the
secular forces and their foreign backers, yet they are motivated enough to

deny an outright victory to their adversaries; thus, an unending conflict and

resultant bloodshed.
9th September 2007

HELMET vs WIG
AFTERSHOCKS - IV

The Supreme Court continued treating the ailments of the nation.

Qazi Hussains petition on the issue of Musharrafs dual office was admitted
for hearing. The court proceedings on missing persons case lingered on and
during one of the hearings, the CJP said it has been established that
missing persons were/are being held by agencies and ordered the
government to free them.
The government attempted to skip SHC proceedings on Karachi
carnage by objecting to the presence of complainant judges on the bench.
Altaf Hussain threatened SHC over Karachi carnage hearing by saying that
biased decision could lead to popular resentment/accountability.
The secret talks to finalize Mushy-Pinky deal continued with
urgency. Benazir claimed that the deal was 90 percent complete. Qazi said
that the agreement between Musharraf and Benazir has been reached but it
has been kept secret to avert untimely political fallout.
Musharraf regime seemed determined to stop Nawaz Sharif from
returning to Pakistan despite the decision of the apex court. He told Sharif
Brothers to abide by the undertaking with Saudi Arabia and planned to talk
to Saudi King. The CJP said 160 million people would act as custodians of
judiciarys verdicts.
Hariri met Nawaz Sharif in London and then headed to Pakistan to
meet Musharraf. Saudi Intelligence chief and Saad Hariri arrived in
Islamabad, met Musharraf and held a press conference on 8 th September
telling Nawaz Sharif to abide by the holy undertaking and not be lured by
the verdict of the Supreme Court.

EVENTS
On 29th August, the Supreme Court admitted Qazi Hussains petition
for hearing. The petitioner has challenged Musharraf for not relinquishing
the office of army chief after attaining the age of superannuation at 60. The
CJP stressed upon implementation of Constitution for prosperous and
progressive Pakistan. The decision on maintainability of the reference
against Imran Khan reserved till September 5.
Musharraf told Sharif Brothers to abide by the undertaking with Saudi
Arabia and said eminent personality was against Nawazs return. Chaudhry
8

Shujaat said Sharif Brothers could return to Pakistan

Announcement of date of Nawazs return was postponed.

anytime.

Benazir said the deal was 90 percent complete in which Musharraf

would doff his uniform; corruption cases against her would be dropped; and
local governments during general elections would remain suspended. She
also said that anyone who has objections to talks could leave the party.
Faisal alleged that Benazir accepted the terms she had rejected in 2002.
The right to take suo moto notice is being exercised to benefit the
poor, said the CJP on 30th August. The Supreme Court asked for a detailed
report from CDA on allotment of plots to bureaucrats. Human rights
organization submitted its report on May 12 to Sindh High Court.
PML-N leadership held a marathon meeting in London and decided
that Nawaz Sharif would return on 10th September. Nawaz will land at
Islamabad in a charted plane and then travel to Lahore by road. He wanted a
decisive battle against Musharraf. Presidency sources insisted that Nawaz
wont return. APDM moot was put off due to return plan of Nawaz.
Musharrafs COS briefed his boss on talks with Benazir. He rejected
reports about deadline set by Benazir. He quoted President saying
emergency and martial law no solution to the present crisis. Decision on
doffing of uniform had not yet been taken. But some issues remained
unresolved. Some analysts observed that the deal seemed doomed.
Shujaat conveyed to Musharraf his partys reservations on the deal.
He said MPL-Q will not vote for constitutional amendment which allows
third term for prime minister, but assured Musharraf of his re-election in
uniform. Pervaiz Elahi said nothing substantial would happen if Sharifs
return.
Next day, Musharraf held discussions with his top aides over
launching of plan-B after Musharraf refused to show flexibility on Article 58
(2) b. The government planned to for London on 1 st September for further
bargaining with Benazir and Musharraf planned to talk to Saudi King on
Sharifs return.
PPP leaders assembled in London and Benazir took them into
confidence over the dialogue with Musharraf. Senior party leaders opposed

bargaining with Musharraf. Benazirs return plan was also discussed.

Reportedly, PPP asked Musharraf to doff uniform by September 8.
PML-N planned a million people reception for Nawaz Sharif.
Meanwhile, the party brass directed its second and third party command to
go underground to avert arrests in a likely crackdown by the government.
SCBA vowed to resist Musharrafs election with or without uniform. Dr
Anwar-ul-Haq of PIMS, who recently lost his posting after vowing to
contest the next presidential election, filed a constitutional petition against
the 17th Amendment.
On 1st September, the CJP said 160 million people would act as
custodians of judiciarys verdicts. Lawyers vowed to resist any attempt at
changing the structure of the judiciary. In Lahore lawyers rallied against reelection of Musharraf.
Benazir announced that the dialogue for deal has been stalled and
blamed PML-Q for alleged that they were supporters of Lal Masjid and
Taliban. She continued playing the US card. She also said that the date of
her return would be announced on 14th September, thereby, allowing
Musharraf 14 more days to reconsider her stand.
Tariq Aziz denied any deadlock in talks with Benazir. Analysts
observed Chaudhrys have made themselves felt in ongoing political
bargaining. Shujaat talked to Babar Ghori on telephone and assured him of
taking MQM along. Nawaz urged the West not to back Musharraf.
Next day, Benazir arrived in Dubai for another round of talks. Qazi
said the agreement between Musharraf and Benazir has been reached but
was being kept secret by feigning the failure of dialogue. SCBA decided to
launch drive against re-election of Musharraf from 6th September.
On 3rd September, the Supreme Court rejected Bijranis bail plea. The
court directed the law enforcers to strictly deal with Vani and Swara
practices. Sher Afgan said he meant no disrespect to judiciary. He seemed to
have different definition of disrespect. MMA sought debate in NA on
Shujaats remarks that steps were being taken concerning the CJP.
Musharraf aides again met Benazir in Dubai on 3 rd September. Aitzaz
denied the report that he had suggested Benazir to strike deal with Musharraf
on certain terms. He was against the deal on any terms. MMA opposed

10

dialogue with the government at individual level. Shaikh Rashid said Nawaz
Sharif would get another reminder from Saudis about not to return to
Pakistan. Dozens of PML-N leaders were arrested in Rawalpindi area.
On 4th September, the Supreme Court said that it has been established
that missing persons were/are being held by agencies; the court ordered the
government to free them all by 21st September. The court should have sent a
copy of the order for information of Musharraf who had repeatedly claimed
that these people had gone for jihad; what a shame! Another bench of SC
ordered Sui Southern to reinstate 744 employees within two days.
Musharraf and Benazir moved close to striking a deal during talks
between their teams in Dubai. Shujaat still saw ten percent progress.
Reportedly, Fazl sought prime ministers slot in secret talks with
government. Un-named Saudi spokesman advised Nawaz Sharif not to
return to Pakistan and stay away from politics. Nawaz decided to return on
routine flight. Police, CIA and Elite Force continued raids against PML-N
activists in Rawalpindi area.
Next day, a Supreme Court bench headed by the CJP turned down two
identical petitions seeking an order to stop Musharraf from contesting
presidential election. In another case the Supreme Court directed
Sharifuddin Pirzada to enquire and inform the court about the expiry date of
presidential term.
Benazir wanted to see Musharraf face to face. Aides came back and
briefed Musharraf on talks. PML-Q ministers and MPs opposed the deal
with PPP, but vowed to re-elect Musharraf. Nawaz Sharif said he was in
contact with Saudi rulers and was determined to return to Pakistan as per
plan. Authorities ordered renovation of Attock jail for Nawaz Sharif. Raja
Zafar urged the government to respect verdict of the Supreme Court. Two
identical references against Imran Khan were dismissed by Election
Commission. MQM and Afgan termed the decision unfair.
On 6th September, the Supreme Court accepted JI petition on uniform
issue for hearing from 17th September. The court was told that Presidents
term of office would end on 15th November. The court sought help from
Aitzaz Ahsan, S M Zafar and Hafiz Pirzada to assist in the case.
Lawyers launched their campaign against Musharrafs re-election.
They boycotted courts and held rallies across the country. High Court

11

Rawalpindi ordered police not to harass/arrest workers of PML-N. Sui

Southern informed the court that 744 employees have been reinstated.
Ansar Abbasi reported that Musharraf was trying to stop Nawaz Sharif
in Dubai with the help of United States. A court issued arrest warrant of
Shahbaz Sharif in a murder case. PML-N said plan was in place to resist
Sharifs arrest.
Saudi Ambassador to Britain said the Saudi statement was against
nobody; it was issued because the Saudi government was asked to make its
stand clear. PML-N is not against Nawazs return, said Mushahid. Shujaat
was unhappy over giving clean chit to Benazir. The deal would yield
positive results, claimed Shaikh Rashid.
Next day, the government attempted to skip SHC proceedings on
Karachi carnage by objecting to the presence of complainant judges on the
seven-member bench, but the court turned down the objection. ATC issued
arrest warrants of Shahbaz Sharif and ordered strict compliance. Hundreds
of PML-N leaders and activists were held across Punjab and in NWFP. In an
interview to The Times, Nawaz evaded questions about the trial of
Musharraf.
Hariri having met Nawaz Sharif in London was heading to Pakistan to
meet Musharraf. Boucher arrived in Islamabad on an unannounced visit and
discussed the issues related to the deal with Musharraf. Khar said he wont
let the deal to succeed.
Shaukat and Shujaat discussed ways to save the party from split as
about 50 MPs disagreed with efforts to strike a deal with Benazir and other
related issues. Minister Durrani claimed that some MPs were quitting PMLQ over fears of not getting the party ticket.
On 8th September, the reports that some foreigners had sought a
meeting with the CJP were denied. It was reported that Saudi Kings
message could not be conveyed to the CJP. The reports about curtailment of
higher courts judges were also denied. Altaf Hussain threatened SHC over
Karachi carnage hearing saying that biased decision could lead to popular
resentment/accountability.
Saudi Intelligence chief and Saad Hariri arrived in Islamabad on the
request of Musharraf and held a press conference after a lengthy meeting

12

with the host. The guests obliged the host by advising Nawaz Sharif to abide
by the deal and stay away from Pakistan. Saudi Intelligence chief even
hurled a concealed threat to Nawaz of the possible consequences saying that
the Saudi Government would accept Nawaz if he was once again exiled.
Nawaz Sharif held a press conference after the issue had been
formally Arabanized. He alleged that Hariri could not keep his word on
understanding that his exile was for five years. Nawaz brothers vowed to
return to Pakistan as per already announced plan.
Americans stood behind Benazir and urged Musharraf to concede to
her minor demands, reported Ansar Abbasi. Benazir for the first time after
the deal talks targeted Nawaz and termed him as political son of Gen
Ziaul Haq. Her outburst indicated that her understanding with Musharraf
was complete.
Musharraf thanked Saudi King. Minister Durrani castigated Nawaz
for changing his stance. PML-Q parliamentarians opposed deal with Benazir
and urged dialogue with Nawaz Sharif. Thousands of PML-N leaders and
workers were arrested and Section 144 was imposed in Rawalpindi. A judge
in Gujar Khan issued arrest warrants of senior PML-N leaders, including
two ex-chief ministers.

VIEWS
The decisions and activism of the judiciary continued to be
commented upon. Wajahat Latif wrote: On August 23, 2007 the Supreme
Court gave another landmark decision against the governments resolve to
keep the Sharif brothers out of the country. It has allowed Mian Nawaz
Sharif and Mian Shahbaz to return to their country unhindered.
After the Attorney General finished his argument, the Chief Justice
asked Mr Fakharuddin Ibrahim to comment on the national interest issue
that the Attorney General had used to defend the so-called agreement with
Saudi Arabia under which the Sharif family had been sent into exile eight
years ago. Fakharuddin, an icon of integrity in the legal community, replied
succinctly that the Constitution and law were our supreme national
interest.

13

Still in denial, the government reacted to the news with an angry

federal minister who appeared on television the same evening deriding the
Supreme Courts decision. He said that it was not an independent decision.
The arrogance of power prevented him to see they had no case at all; even
the man in the street could guess they were going to lose.
Adding to the problem of an independent judiciary, the president
has a breaking Q League. His cabinet ministers and parliamentary
secretaries are resigning because they see his ship sinking. In spite of the
presidents full support and assistance and the moral flak, this party has
failed to provide him with the political strength he needs for another term in
office.
More likely though, depending on what the courts decide about
the contentious issues, things will come to a head in the streets. Sharif
brothers will be back shortly, leading a rejuvenated Muslim League. The
lawyers and civil society are all geared up. APDM, a formidable group of
moderate, religious and secular parties, some elements of PPP and Q League
included, will not allow years of struggle to be sabotaged by a secret deal,
now that the goal is near.
The News commented on the case of missing persons. The Supreme
Courts unequivocal instruction to the government to ensure the release of all
missing persons is a courageous and bold stance. Finally, an institution
with some authority and influence has come to the aid of the distressed
families of these missing individuals. Ironically, the court has intervened at
a time when both houses of parliament have been in existence which
makes it clear that for parliament this issue has not been of much importance
or that those MPs who did speak about it could not direct those entities
holding the individuals to release them.
This is a stinging indictment of the misconduct of the intelligence
apparatus and the federal governments policy of detaining certain people
incommunicado and flagrantly violating their constitutional right to due
process of law.
In fact it would be fair to extrapolate from what the court has
observed and suggest that the ministries of defence and interior have
more or less been told that they had been lying all along with respect to
their replies given to the apex court during the hearing of petitions to locate
the missing individuals.
14

Most of the missing persons were detained without charge and the
interior ministry usually told the court that the individuals were not in its
custody. Then, pressure was put on the federal government and eventually
some of the individuals began to find their freedom, albeit in strange enough
fashion. The mode of release too will make it clear tell even to a lay
observer that they were being detained not by police but by some secret
government organization.
Many of those missing are alleged to be involved with or sympathetic
to some or other terrorist network, but the fact is that none of them were
charged with any crime, nor were they produced before a court. This is
nothing but criminal and contravenes the norms of justice because even
a person accused of being, or harbouring, a terrorist needs to be charged
under the relevant law and allowed a fair trial.
Who will protect the missing then? Parliament didnt come to their
aid this time around, and their best protection really is if the government
itself restrains its own intelligence and security outfits and directs them not
to indulge in activities that violate the laws of the land. As things stand
currently, the intelligence agencies seem to operate without any concern
for the law. The government should put them to better use. Also, for now it
should order the release of all the missing without further delay.
Rahimullah Yusufzai was of the view that one issue that is a source
of constant embarrassment for the government of President General
Pervez Musharraf concerns the missing persons. Though it was generally
known that intelligence agencies were behind the disappearance of most of
these people, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has now in very clear terms
blamed the very powerful services for holding them in illegal custody and
ordered their release by September 21.
Respect for human rights has never been a priority for
governments in Pakistan. However, the present regime must go down in the
history as the one that was least bothered about the rights of citizens. In fact,
the post-9/11 situation and Americas war on terror has largely made human
rights irrelevant in many countries, particularly those ruled by authoritarian
regimes.
But for the Supreme Court and Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad
Chaudhry, some of the missing people would still be languishing in secret
cells run by the intelligence agencies. Sometimes referred to as safe houses,
15

these detention centres are beyond the reach of law. No judge, human rights
activist or journalist has gained access to these cells where those suspected
of involvement in acts of terrorism or other crimes are dumped and then
more or less forgotten.
Those who hold them and decide their fate arent answerable to
anyone except their own bosses, though Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry has
threatened to summon them to his court if the missing persons were not
recovered he is unlikely to take this extreme step because such a move on
his part would be like crossing the red line and provoking the powerful
intelligence agencies and the military establishment to consider striking
back. Neither the judiciary nor elected civilian governments in Pakistan
have been able to date to make the military-run secret agencies
accountable. Even the strengthened judiciary, presently riding on the crest
of popular support, would tread cautiously while tackling court cases
pertaining to the role of the armed forces and the intelligence organizations
run by the military.
It goes to the credit of determined campaigners such as Amna
Masood Janjua, Javed Ibrahim Paracha, Khalid Khwaja and others to
highlight the issue of the missing persons and prompt the superior courts,
human rights organizations and the media to take notice of the plight of
those made to disappear without trace.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry took notice of the issue of missing
persons before he was rendered ineffective through an ill-advised
presidential reference. Families of the missing people and many concerned
Pakistanis were worried that the Supreme Court may stop taking cognizance
of this issue once he is gone. But it goes to the credit of the Supreme
Court and the acting Chief Justice Javed Iqbal that the case of missing
persons was not abandoned and hearings were held even in Chief Justice
Iftikhar Chaudhrys absence.
Hafiz Abdul Basit, Aleem Nasir and Hafiz Mohammad Tahir have
been recovered through orders issued by the seven-member bench of the
Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and more missing
people could win freedom in the coming days. As the Supreme Court
observed, incriminating evidence was now available to establish that
intelligence agencies were holding the missing persons on whose behalf
petitions were moved by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and 48
other complainants.
16

The government should realize that it is earning a bad name by

making people disappear and keeping them in secret detention cells. Some
of those who were freed through the intervention of superior courts or were
lucky to win freedom because they didnt have any intelligence value are
now telling the stories of their detention. Judicial activism has emboldened
the people and a free media have given them voice.
Mian Syed Laiq, a 70-year old man from Pewchar village in Swats
Matta tehsilwas freed after spending nine months in captivity in an
underground detention cell maintained by an army intelligence agency but
the others are still in custody. The old man say he counted about 25 people
being brought to that cell somewhere in Islamabad and kept under horrible
conditions.
A British Muslim of Pakistani origin, Muzammil Beg, wrote about
his detention in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. His description
of the helplessness of the Pakistani government functionaries before the
US makes one sad at the loss of our countrys sovereignty. Abdul Salam
Zaeef, the last Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, has also penned a book in
which he describes how he was handed over to American soldiers and beaten
up and stripped naked at the Peshawar Airport in the presence of Pakistani
intelligence agents.
Another Afghan, Abdur Rahim Muslimdost, too wrote after spending
time in US custody in Guantanamo Bay and it also presents depressing
account of the way Pakistani authorities handled his case. No wonder then
that he was arrested again in Peshawar after he wrote the book and is still
behind the bars. But Muslimdost in a recent interview said he would write
another book describing his second imprisonment in Pakistan.
Arresting people and making them disappear isnt the proper way
to fight the war on terror. As more books about illegal detentions are
written and detainees no longer scared of telling the stories, governments in
Pakistan and elsewhere would continue to earn a bad image. It is time more
open and ethical methods were used to gather intelligence to prevent acts of
terrorism and policy changes were made to stop people from committing
terrorist attacks.

Mushy-Pinky affair remained the talk of the town. Dr Ijaz Ahsan

asked: Why do you think Benazir has done a separate deal with Musharraf?
Its simple, really! If she had gone along with all the parties, no party would
17

have been too keen about forgiveness for her court cases. It is only through a
separate deal that she could get that. And to make it look like a principled
act, she is getting Musharraf to pardon all wrongdoers.
If Benazir had lent her voice to the declaration of the London APC,
any deal would have been with the whole united opposition. There would
have been no need to remove the two-year disability clause for retiring
government servants. However, when deals are cut to benefit individuals,
such aberrations are often introduced.
Incidentally, Mr Amin Faheem has finally stated that they have been
in contact with Musharraf since 2002. This is confirmation of the general
impression that Benazir has been in surreptitious contact with the
General both before and after signing the Charter of Democracy in May
2006 in which she declared that they would not have anything to do with a
military ruler.
The president has urged Mian Nawaz Sharif to abide by his
agreement not to return to Pakistan before 10 years as he had eligibly
agreed. Now, the question is how can a person who himself broke his
public promise to 16 crore people, to remove his uniform by December 31,
2004, ask another to abide by an agreement even the documents of which
are controversial.
The Nation wrote: It remains to be seen how well the PPP is able to
play its cards. By agreeing to work with President Musharraf once he has
doffed the uniform, and scrapped Article 58-2(b), the party has separated its
ways from the rest of the opposition. The ARD, which would have been a
formidable force in the upcoming elections, is virtually dead leaving the PPP
without an ally. Despite their mutual differences the rest of the opposition
parties have joined the APDM. What is more, there is unprecedented
dissatisfaction in the PPP ranks about the decisions by the party
leadership. In case the PPP fails to reach an understanding with the
government, it will face isolation or be obliged to join the APDM. And if the
compromise it makes with the General is not liked by the electorate, its
hopes to attain power would be compromised.
In another editorial, the newspaper added: Ms Bhutto in the
meanwhile is facing a dilemma. On the one hand General Musharraf has
shrugged off pressure from her to shed his uniform before standing for reelection while on the other she is being subjected to scathing criticism by her
18

own party for holding talks with a military ruler. Mian Nawaz has rightly
observed that if Ms Bhutto calls herself a democrat, she cant get into any
deal with a military ruler. PPP leader Aitzaz Ahsan has put his own spin on
the issue by saying that she is a genius politician who knows that a deal
with General Musharraf would be a high-cost venture for a party. Ms Bhutto
will now have to decide whether to support the present regime for personal
benefits or whether to join hands with the opposition to ensure the countrys
return to civilian rule.
Azhar Mukhtar Sindhu from Bahawalpur observed: The General is at
his weakest now. He cannot survive without a deal with Benazir. A deal
between them would be mutual commensalisms, a biological concept
suggesting two parasites living of one another. The deal suits Musharraf
because it provides sustenance to him and favours BB because through this
she will be absolved of all her corruptions.
Kamal Siddiqi opined: Chances are that Ms Bhutto, who has been
quite vocal and high profile in the past month or so, will finally reach an
agreement with General Musharraf over some sort of power-sharing
arrangement. Possibly she has done so already. There are great misgivings
about this. Party workers are at a loss as to why Ms Bhutto has to shake
hands with a military dictator and that too at a time when the upper hand is
that of Ms Bhutto.
However, there are some issues and compulsions that even we are not
aware of. What we do know is that every major political party needs to come
to power at some point or another. If this is not done, the party will
eventually wither and decay. In a democratic dispensation, parties are voted
in an out. But in our system, sometimes deals seem to be the accepted
alternate.
If present indications are anything to go by, Ms Bhuttos party does
have a good chance to come to power under some arrangement At this
point, it is a good idea to offer Ms Bhutto some advice. This advice comes
from a well-meaning Pakistani. First of all, many would agree that Ms
Bhutto should not insist on being the PM. Instead, one of her most trusted
and able lieutenants should be given the task.
It is time for Ms Bhutto to become the kingmaker, not the king.
She should concentrate on setting things right within her own party The
party leader and the main office-bearers need to be elected. It is time to lead
19

by example. The partys leadership cannot be forgotten either. The fact that
her most able party members were not present at the Dubai meeting with
General Musharraf indicates that either she has no faith in them or that they
do not matter. This perception needs to be corrected.
Ms Bhutto should make it a point to keep her family away from her
government. Even if he is elected, and the fact that he has suffered a lot in
the cause of his party without giving in, Mr Zardari would be better off
staying out of government.
Ms Bhutto should also not sweep into Islamabad and reverse all
the things that have been achieved by the government in the past several
years. If there have been dubious sales of privatization process, this should
be done through the judicial system. Jobs should not be given on the basis of
party loyalty. And loyalists should not be rewarded at the expense of
taxpayer.
As things stand, there are fears that the two major opponents of any
government that Ms Bhutto establishes would be the PML-N, supported by
the rightwing parties, and the MQM. It would be shame if relations between
these parties deteriorate to such an extent that once again people look to
outside forces to ensure sanity. This has been the story which is oft repeated
in Pakistan. Mere rhetoric will not do There is need to address these
issues on a priority basis.
Dr Tariq Hassan wrote: The absence of the leaders of Pakistans
two mainstream political parties will destroy any hope of a free, fair and
transparent election. The General will have a free hand in rigging the
election on the strength of his army uniform to ensure the return of his
pliable, rubber-stamping parliamentarians to secure his position at the helm
of affairs for the next five years.
While Benazir is trying to re-enter the country and the political
arena through the back door by making a political deal with the General,
the Sharif brothers have knocked at the doors of the judiciary to come in
defiantly through the front door, even though it may mean breaking their
alleged deal with the General.
The disparity in the manner in which Benazir and the Sharif
brothers are seeking to return is commensurate with the difference in the
status of their exile. While Benazir lives abroad in a self-imposed exile to

20

avoid prosecution for corruption as much as political persecution, the Sharif

brothers were deported from the country by way of punishment, ironically
for preventing General Musharraf from returning to Pakistan in 1999.
Whatever the reason for living in external exile, Benazir and the Sharif
brothers are anxious to return before the impending elections but are not
being allowed to do so by an explicit threat of imprisonment.
It is evident that both national and international law forbid forcible
exile. For whatever reason, a government cannot force individuals to
leave their own country or prohibit their return. The international
community has repeatedly called for the recognition of the right of the
forcibly exiled to return to their own country, and thereby provides an
effective remedy to those in exile.
The Supreme Court has allowed the Government until the 23 rd of this
month to produce the alleged deal with the Sharif brothers. The nation
watches with interest to see whether the Attorney General, who in a different
role had advocated the Sharif brothers right to return to Pakistan, is now able
to conjure up a deal, with the help of General Musharrafs cohorts, in a vain
attempt to save the day. The Generals loyalists may however better serve
their leader by reminding him of the age-old adage that one reaps what
one sows: having exiled the Sharif brothers, the General is likely to suffer
the same fate. Allowing the return of the Sharif brothers and holding free,
fair and transparent elections might be his only chance to saviour.
Burhanuddin Hassan said: The gut feeling of the president may have
been against any deal with Ms Bhutto whom he has been calling plunderer
and looter of the national wealth, but due to his temptation to remain in
power for another five years and Americas insistence on a broad-based
coalition with the PPP, which is a popular liberal party, he was forced to
enter into these negotiations.
In the meantime, Mian Nawaz Sharif has suddenly emerged as a
major player in Pakistans politics and intends to return to the country
before the elections. To come to grips with this unexpected situation,
President Musharraf is now emphasizing the need for broad-based
reconciliation among all political elements. This is a desperate move, which
is not likely to succeed due to the lack of consensus in political parties on
national and foreign policies.

21

As regards the deal with Ms Benazir Bhutto, it is bound to be a

give and take arrangement based on selfish interests of both the leaders to
share power, rather than the principled arrangement to govern the country.
Both President Musharraf and Ms Benazir Bhutto might lose their credibility
and popularity in this process. If Mian Nawaz Sharif joins the election battle,
he may ultimately emerge as the beneficiary by default.
Despite all sorts of rumour-mongering it seems that the deal is on
the verge of collapse as both Musharraf and Benazir are sticking to their
guns. How things shape up in the present murky political situation, only
time will tell.
The Washington Post wrote: While professing commitment to the
war against terrorism, Mr Musharraf has allowed al-Qaeda and the Taliban
to re-establish themselves in Pakistans unruly tribal areas bordering
Afghanistan. He has been an unfaithful ally of the United States, even
while accepting some $10 billion in American aid. Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif
both are two-time failures as Pakistani prime minister. Both have been
credibly accused of breathtaking acts of corruption; both have been
unscrupulous in pursuing their personal ambitions.
The three Pakistani leaders nevertheless are committed to a secular
state in Pakistan and to cooperation with the United States, in contrast to the
extremist Muslim parties rapidly gaining influence in the country. All three
leaders claim to be committed to Western-style democracy and freedoms,
including rights for women
Though their mutual loathing would seem to rule out any
bargain, they need each other. Mr Musharrafs plan to arrange his reelection as president next month without stepping down as chief of the army
staff faces mounting legal and political obstacles. To its credit, the Bush
Administration stopped him from declaring a state of emergency or martial
law last month.
At best, Mr Musharraf would step down as army commander,
oversee constitutional reforms and a free and fair election for parliament,
and then present himself to the national and provincial legislatures, which
choose the president, as a candidate. If he were elected, he would gain some
of the legitimacy he now lacks. If not, he could retire with his reputation
and Pakistans stability in better shape than it is now. Either way, it is
time for the general to make a deal.
22

Qazi Hussain Ahmad was of the view that Washington desperately

wants the Benazir Bhutto-led PPP to join the ruling alliance in Islamabad
since she is the only political leader of Pakistan who enjoys the greatest
confidence in Washington. She is ready to undo the military dictator,
Musharraf, in carrying forward the agenda of enlightened moderation, even
if that requires antagonizing the whole nation. Benazirs desperation was
confirmed by her lengthy meeting with the UN ambassador of Israel, a
country whose lobby is the most influential in US policy-making.
Washington wants to have the results it desires from the coming
elections in Pakistan through Gen Musharraf, ensuring one-third seats for
Benazirs PPP, one-third for the ruling alliance and the remaining one-third
to be shared by the rest of the opposition parties. The US diplomats and
officials in their meetings with Pakistani politicians and opinion leaders have
been preparing their minds for the acceptance of those election results.
The desire to keep Musharraf-Benazir deal in low key during the
polls to minimize the anti-US factor, and allow the ruling alliance and the
PPP to join hands after the elections in order to amend the Constitution with
a two-third majority.
Recently, the IRI conducted an opinion poll in the Peshawar Valley
(comprising the districts of Peshawar, Nowshera, Charsada, Mardan and
Swabi), declaring that the PPP was the most popular party in those areas,
while the next popular party was the PML-Q. The poll also declared that
people were dissatisfied with the performance of the MMA government
which was losing its popularity.
The aim of this survey seems to be to prepare public opinion for
the acceptance of the PPP and the Q League as winning parties in the
engineered results of the coming polls, and avoid a likely public reaction
against such a result. Another aim is to make the public consider those
parties as the likely winners and consequently vote for them. The opinion
polls conducted by other institutes in those areas show that public opinion
still favours the MMA government despite having some complaints against
it, but the masses have no close alternative to the MMA.
The need of the hour is to keep a strict vigil over the activities of
the US agencies. Due consideration should be given to the naked threats of
US presidential candidates and Bush administration officials that they want
direct US military strikes in Pakistan. Such naked threats made it all the
23

more necessary that Islamabad should avoid lip service to the protection of
our liberty and sovereignty, and evolve a solid strategy for the vital objective
making the counter-espionage against US intelligence agencies and under
cover agents as its most important part.
It is no secret that Washington considers Islamabads nuclear
assets a potential danger and the father of our nuclear programme, Dr
Qadeer Khan, has been detained at its behest. There are stark dangers of a
possible commando action on our nuclear installations In order to
neutralize Islamabads nuclear assets Washington puts forward the theory of
the likelihood of Islamic extremists taking over Pakistans nuclear
programme.
Dr Masooda Bano observed: Benazirs increasing appearances on the
Pakistani electronic channels and the statements of various party members
have failed to provide a solid justification for the partys dramatic switch in
its identity from being a party with a revolutionary spirit, we are now
hearing the talk of appeasement as the best political strategy. If that is
the case then the likes of the PML-Q and the MQM that joined Musharraf
right from the start were clearly wiser as they talked of appeasement and
negotiation with the military and recognition of its might from the start. The
only difference is that they were more crude and less subtle about having no
political agenda of their own, while Benazir is a bit better in claiming to be
doing it all for democracy. But, the hollowness of this claim has been visible
in some of the TV interviews, where she has been very edgy and snappy in
response to very legitimate question of what the issues are that the PPP is
negotiating with Musharraf.
What makes Benazirs justification very weak from the beginning is
that if she is not personally vulnerable due to the corruption cases against
her and is not trying to please America, there is little reason one can see for
her to enter with negotiation with the General. Benazir has tried to give
him a new lease of life at a time when Musharraf was at his weakest.
Also, she has failed to justify her claim that negotiations are always to be
carried out with all parties. The negotiations even if they dont result in a
deal have already damaged the political party as it has convinced the public
once again that politicians are opportunistic and dont stand for any core
principles.
Even if there is eventually no deal, by virtue of the negotiations,
Benazir has told her followers that Musharraf should be acceptable to them.
24

There is a big psychological difference in this message and the one that says
that military intervention is not acceptable. PPPs position has demoralized
the politically involved Pakistani and that has clearly damaged the political
process not strengthened it. The worst is that right now it seems that Benazir
is more desperate for the deal to work out than Musharraf. Logic dictates
that there is definitely some great weakness on her part that is making her so
keen to be seeking this deal.
At the same time, the desperation of the government to keep Nawaz
Sharif out of the country is again a sign of its weakness. General Musharraf
has been involving the third party guarantors to exert pressure on the Sharif
brothers not to return home Imagine, General Musharraf removed the
same politician from power and sent him out of the country on claims that
the public has had enough of his corruption. Now his return promises a
public welcome that is a nightmare for General Musharraf. If General
Musharrafs politics was anything to do with national interest rather
than personal gain then this in itself should be a sign for him to go.
But, then this is not the first clear sign of the failure of General
Musharrafs policies. His tenure has turned Pakistan into a very volatile
state where now suicide bombing is increasingly becoming part of life. Plus
the targeting of military personnel is in itself a result of these policies.
During his rule, the public sentiment has risen not just against his personal
involvement in politics but also against the military as an institution. This is
a very dangerous development, but, the military generals that have
repeatedly moved into civilian arenas have brought this onto the country.
If national interest has any importance for General Musharraf then
he should seek an exit now. The longer he stays the more dangerous will
the military-civilian divide become in Pakistan. Benazir is wrong when she
proposes that she is entering into negotiations to ensure a peaceful transfer
from military government to democracy.
Exceptions have always been there and Mir Jamillur Rahman was
always amongst them. The options so enumerated are based on the
premise that Musharraf would go to any length to retain his presidential
office. For instance, his ongoing dialogue with Benazir Bhutto is put forth as
an example of stark opportunism. President Musharraf and Benazir
Bhutto are both being malignantly accused of overriding national interest
for their personal interest.

25

The impending deal between Musharraf and Benazir has unnerved

the PML-Q and its allies. The opponents of the deal cite the wide
ideological gulf that exists between the PPP and the PML-Q as the
stumbling block to reconciliation between the two parties. Minister Ejazul
Haq has declared to resign from the cabinet if such a deal ever saw the light
of day.
It seems that the PML-Q leadership does not comprehend the issue
fully. President Musharraf is negotiating with Benazir Bhutto not out of
love for the PPP but for securing his re-election. He needs PPP votes in
parliament to amend the Constitution suitably so as to make him eligible to
contest the presidential office with or without uniform. The PML-Q should
have the good sense to understand that without Musharraf in the President
House its remains would be scattered in the wind.
The issue of presidents uniform has been blown out of proportion. In
fact, the uniform has usually served as a sobering influence on the
caustic politicians. Moreover, Pakistanis have great fascination with the
army uniform though it is true that they dont fancy it in the same degree as
before.
As for Benazir Bhutto, she has been subjected to insidious attacks
for talking to Gen Musharraf. Some of her opponents have indulged in
scurrilous distortions to defame her and to question her intentions. They
claim she is entering into a deal with President Musharraf to get the
corruption cases against her dropped. To be sure, she and her husband are
facing these cases for the last dozen years. Asif Zardari was incarcerated for
eight long years without ever being convicted for any crime.
There should be an end to this harassment which goes on not only
against her but other politicians; and, the Sharifs plan to land in Islamabad
soon, on Sept 10. The government has said that they may well be arrested.
Such an act will not diminish the popularity of Nawaz Sharif and would only
reduce the governments credibility.
The Mushy-Pinky affair could not be discussed without the mention
of the villain as is evident from the foregoing. The approach of the regime
toward the return of Nawaz Sharif was quite contrary to the much hyped
idea of political reconciliation.

26

Ghulam Asghar Khan wrote: People of Pakistan and the PML-N in

particular are jubilant over the Supreme Court decision that forbids the
executive to impose ban on any citizen of Pakistan to re-enter the homeland,
or keep him in exile in violation of Article 15 of the Constitution. The
executive does have the exit control subject to legal reasons, but has no
authority to stop a citizen from coming back to his country.
The SC verdict is being heralded as a sign of the judiciarys
independence. It is now time to realize that it is through judicial equity that
a nation comes into its own and not be enfeebling it with the doctrine of
necessity.
The apex court has cleared the decks for Sharif brothers return
home. If media reports are any guide, they might be hamstrung not just by a
slew of corruption cases and sleaze pending against them but also by some
undertaking they had given to the Saudis to avoid a similar fate that ZA
Bhutto had met. Against these odds, the court verdict has provided a level
playing field in the upcoming polls that Gen Musharraf was defiantly
unwilling to provide.
At the behest of US powerbrokers and their European allies, he has
enthusiastically come around to work out a power-sharing formula with
Benazir, a politico in self-imposed exile to escape the legal validity of cases
against her. Although she has a blemished record like the Sharifs,
Musharraf has shown a firm resolve to keep Sharif brothers out of the
political arena on untenable excuses. The argument that their return home
before the elections would bring instability does not cut any ice with the
people.
Instead of running around to the extent of involving the Saudis in our
political imbroglio, it is time for Gen Musharraf to call a ceasefire with
his two major political adversaries and steer the country out of the
prevalent mayhem. It is not the time for indulging in manipulations to divide
and rule.
Nawaz Sharif has exhibited political sagacity when he vowed to
forget the past, shun confrontation and eschew polity of vendetta. There is a
visible welcome change in his stance. He says that he is not averse to enter
into dialogue with Musharraf, provided he first declares that he would not be
a candidate for any political slot.

27

Benazir shows her impatience to grab power through behind the

scene negotiations with Musharraf. Violating the Charter of Democracy to
which she was a signatory and without taking the ARD into confidence, she
had a meeting with him in Abu Dhabi to work out a power sharing formula
that would absolve her of the graft charges, a ticket home and opportunity to
organize her PPP, and possible reversal of the law that forbids the third term
for prime ministers.
The country faces a grave crisis that needs a grand national
consensus of political forces but not under the patronage of a military
general. Gen Musharrafs half-hearted offer of consensus has come very late
and would not be welcomed by the masses and their leaders. Nawaz Sharif
has rightly pointed out that the politicians do have all the capabilities to
take decisions by themselves and carve out the future course of action. And
for that they do not need an army general.
However, the difference of approach of the two leaders is that
while Nawaz Sharif wants the revival of democracy without military
interference, Benazir is seeking Generals umbrella to stage a come back.
And the people, who are the deciding factor, are not going to vote for any
party that is colluding with Gen Musharraf. And in this political jigsaw
Nawaz Sharif has certainly come up as a leader who feels the pulse of the
people.
Ghazi Salahuddin said: The Sharif brothers have resolved to arrive on
September 10 and to land in Islamabad, the city of the bewafa wielders of
power. This has ended a lot of suspense about their plans. But we are now
becoming breathless with anticipation of fateful events. Voices are still
being raised from some quarters in the establishment that they (Sharifs)
will finally not come or at least Nawaz Sharif will not be on the plane. This
only shows how nervous they are.
Meanwhile, the story of the deal between President General Pervez
Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto has acquired the tension and uncertainty
of a thriller. Fresh developments have surfaced every day. It is becoming
obvious that Musharraf simply cannot sell to his alliance what he must
concede to Benazir and that Benazir would be unable to pay the political
price of bailing out Musharraf from his formidable predicaments.
The Nation wrote: Any recourse to strong-arm tactics by the
government would indicate a lack of self confidence on its part and
28

expose its claims that it can win the elections hands down on the basis of its
performance. Restrictions put on the former PM to mobilize public opinion
in his favour or attempts to hinder his party men from receiving him at
Islamabad airport or during his travel to Lahore would go against the
governments claims of adherence to democracy.
Mian Nawaz has opposed Ms Bhuttos line of action which he
considers an attempt at dealing with Gen Musharraf for personal gains. This
according to him would strengthen and prolong an unconstitutional
government and preserve an army-dominated system. He has declared that
he would change it by mobilizing public support. While he has talked about
fighting the battle in the courts also, his main emphasis is on creating a
mass movement.
The party leadership has to ensure that public gatherings and rallies
organized by it do not disturb peace so that they do not have a negative
impact on the ceremony. What is more, these have to remain non-violent.
Only a thoroughly peaceful struggle for the restoration of genuine
democracy can provide the PML-N a moral edge over its opponents. One
hopes the government too will avoid taking recourse to any provocative
move that could act as a spark that puts the prairie aflame.
Shahan Mufti wrote: So far, Musharrafs moves toward sharing
power have been tentative. But this weeks decision amplifies the political
pressure on Musharraf to compromise with one or both of Pakistans former
leaders and to eventually restore democracy. After this decision, Musharraf
must be tempted to forget about accountability and focus on political
survival, says Rasul Bakhsh Rais.
Musharrafs most likely survival hatch, analysts say, is to
cooperate with Bhutto, with whom Musharraf has been negotiating for
months. But while Musharraf has preferred dealing with the more flexible
Bhutto thus far any power equation that he engineers from now on is likely
to include Sharif, a political heavyweight from the crucial Punjab region
Pakistans largest province.
Eight years ago, few could have predicted this. Sharif, in his two
terms as prime minister, had earned a reputation as a corrupt and dull leader.
By the time the tanks rolled around he had become one of the most
unpopular leaders to rule the country. Even the most educated and politically

29

liberal in Pakistan publicly celebrated his fall from power at the hands of the
military.
Still, how the situation will unfold following their arrival is unclear.
Despite his overtures toward democracy and compromise with his two
potential rivals, Musharrafs government may still try to prevent Sharifs
return Analysts say that one of Musharrafs most important patrons, the
US government, is also circumspect about Sharifs reintroduction into
Pakistani politics.
Reports have surfaced in the Pakistani media that US-friendly Arab
leaders have met with Sharif to dissuade him from returning to his home
country. But the shockwaves of Sharifs re-entry would hit much closer
to home for President Musharraf.
The News urged: The government needs to understand that the
best thing it can do is to act in a mature fashion. Reactivation of old
dormant cases against Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharif and deciding to jail them
the minute the land in Pakistan is only going to further increase the
popularity of the brothers which already seems to be very much on the
ascendant. As it is, to his credit Nawaz Sharif is being perceived by many as
being one political leader who has stood up to the military. Trying to
incarcerate him or creating problems for him on his arrival in Pakistan is
only going to show the government in poor light and reinforce the public
perception that those in the corridors of power are quite scared of the
Sharifs returning.
Of course, this includes none more than the Chaudhrys of Gujrat
who would have most to lose if the Sharifs do actually return to their
political base in Lahore. That perhaps explains why every other day one
hears the ruling PML-Q chief or one of his lackeys saying that emergency
may be imposed At other times, the public has been told that martial law
has not been ruled out. All this is most regrettable given that it comes from
those who hold responsible positions in a political party which is in office
and which claims to uphold the ideals of democracy. However, one can
understand it as being one of many ploys being practiced by those in the
ruling party who want to extend their own stay in power by any means
possible.
Dr Farrukh Saleem observed: The government is hell-bent on
handling Nawaz the way it did the chief justice; hell-bent on repeating all the
30

mistakes all over again. Nawaz Sharif still wants to be prime minister.
Benazir still wants to be prime minister. Pervez Musharraf still wants to be
the top general plus president. On top of Sharif, Bhutto and Musharraf is the
phoenix and the phoenix is adamant that everyone plays by the book, the
book called the Constitution. The Supreme Court is pragmatic still; practical,
not idealistic. The Supreme Court bent upon closing the gap between de jure
and de facto but in no mood to derail the system. Our sixty-year-old lorry
has, in the meanwhile, limped to a dead-end. We either throw the
Constitution out of the window once again, and that means Martial Law. Or,
let the Supreme Court be the final arbiter. Who will be the final arbiter
the Supreme Court or the army?
Shafqat Mahmood wrote: The familiar yet pathetic circuit of
repression has started again as the date for Sharif brothers arrival comes
near. Hundreds have been arrested all over Punjab and more are being
hunted. There is little doubt that those trying to get to Islamabad Airport will
be stopped. A ring of steel is being put around it according to a government
official and anyone trying to come close would be severely dealt with.
Ever since the Supreme Court stood by the essentials of the
Constitution and ordered the unhindered arrival of the Sharif brothers, we
are witnessing one drama after another. They will not come back, said
Musharraf and it was faithfully echoed by Shujaat, Shaikh Rashid et al. Why
this would be so, no one was willing to spell out.
When Mr Nawaz Sharif firmly gave a date the talk turned, of all
things, to morality. Government spokesman started to invoke it because
they said he has given an undertaking to an eminent personality of the
Islamic World. This was not only sad but pathetic. Sad because a friendly
country and its head was being dragged into Pakistani politics and pathetic
because people who do not know the spelling of the word moral were trying
to dissuade Mr Sharif on that basis.
The problem is that like all military strongman, Musharraf does not
understand politics or its imperatives. Once Mr Sharif had announced that
he is coming back, any deviation from this decision would be his political
death. He has to come back whatever the consequences.
The essential condition in the country is Musharrafs
unpopularity. The people react spontaneously within its context to political
developments. Even the most die-hard PPP supporter recognizes that by
31

trying to cut a deal with Musharraf, the party and its leader Benazir Bhutto
has been severely hurt. Again this is not just a reaction to Benazirs cynical
attempt to get out of legal troubles and gain a foothold in the corridors of
power.
This should give pause to the foreign powers and particularly the
Americans, who are so single-minded in their support of the General.
Will their interests be served by aligning themselves with a ruler whose
fortunes have plummeted so dramatically? Isnt it time for them to realize
that cobbling together a Musharraf-Benazir alliance will make no difference
to this equation?
It shows on their part a lack of sophisticated political understanding
of the developments in Pakistan. It is obvious that the essentials of
Pakistans foreign policy will not change whoever is in power. Yes,
nuances will change and perhaps the rhetoric will be different and even the
tactical moves, but in essence Pakistan will not suddenly turn against the
West and become an adversary in the war against terror.
There is a broad consensus in the important institutions of this
country and I would go so far as to say that Pakistani national interests
does not dictate taking an adversarial position against the United States
or on the issue of terror. After all, Pakistan itself has suffered greatly from
terrorism. There are disagreements on tactics, but the Pakistani people buy in
to the broad strategy of fighting terror.
Mian Nawaz Sharif, who is seen by many western governments as
being on the other side of the political spectrum, has stated categorically
that he is against terror through conviction. He has also reminded the West
of his governments cooperation with the Clinton administration in its antiterror strategy during the late nineties. Why the western governments would
still believe that it is only General Musharraf who can fight terrorism in and
around Pakistan is difficult to understand.
It is about time sanity prevails all around. For our rulers it is
important they put the interests of the country ahead of their own. They
should forget whatever happened in the past and let normal politics proceed
without hindrance. Nawaz Sharif and Shahbaz Sharif should be allowed
back without violence, jails and deportation. Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and
Altaf Hussain should also come back. Let the people in a free and fair
election sort out this political mess.
32

The regime ought to come into focus whichever aspect of the

ongoing crisis is discussed. Some analysts, without being issue-specific,
viewed the entire situation in the context of the aims of the regime, its
strategy and prospects its success; bright or grim. Pir Shabbir Ahmad from
Islamabad wrote about regimes talk of hard option.
It is quite apparent now that the coalition of opportunists assembled
by the secret agencies after the last election, with the sole objective of
legitimizing and perpetuating the rule of one person, is coming apart at the
seams now. As their days in power are numbered, a whole lot of them
are busy running the rumour mill on overdrive about the hard option.
The objective is to scare the judiciary and the political opponents. It is
obvious that the sycophants surrounding the rulers can think of nothing else
but to perpetuate their rule.
They are desperate to avoid elections because they fear the wrath
of the common people. They know that in case of fair and free elections
without the usual manipulations by the secret agencies, they would have no
legs to stand on.
The masses are totally fed up with them, having been ripped by these
people who have virtually nothing to show for their five years in
government. But if one telephone call from Washington is enough to
shelve plans of emergency, its pointless to even talk about the hard
option. No one will be scared by these empty threats.
Inayatullah observed that Musharraf was fighting a rear-guard battle.
Will General Musharraf disregard the Supreme Courts verdict and try
to deport the two leaders as was done earlier when Shahbaz landed in
Lahore, a few years back? The chances are that he will desist from such an
action as after the mishandling of the Chief Justices case and the latters
reinstatement. He may not take the risk of defying the highest court of the
country. Feelers, however, have been let out that Sharifs will be arrested and
detained.
Benazir Bhuttos hobnobbing with General Musharraf continues. She
has the backing of the USA in entering into a bargain with him. She is
making good use of General Musharrafs weakened position and has
upped the ante by adding to her demands. She now also wants an indemnity
for all actions taken by the civilian governments in the nineties.

33

The once mighty Musharraf seems is now weak. Benazir wants the
deal to be finalized within the next few days. She says that he has agreed to
take off the uniform prior to his re-election to the office of the president;
also, to the withdrawal of corruption cases against her. The sticking points
are reported to include the question of the president ceasing to exercise
powers to dissolve the national assembly and dismiss the prime minister.
An interesting scenario is developing. The two major political
leaders are following different approaches to get rid of the military rule;
one choosing to enter into an arrangement under certain conditions, claiming
to bring about a transition to democracy. The other refusing to have any
truck with the General and totally rejecting holding any negotiation with him
unless he quits both the offices held by him and announces that he would not
seek election to the office of the president later.
Benazir Bhutto appears to have mixed motives in adopting her
strategy to regain power. She is dead set in getting the cases pending against
her withdrawn. In fact, her self-exile is entirely because of her fear to appear
before a number of courts in Pakistan where cases are pending before courts.
She is also keen that the case against her in a Swiss court is not pursued by
government. She further wants General Musharraf to legally arrange the
lifting of the ban against her becoming prime minister for the third time.
How long will the two General Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto (if
they succeed in forging a partnership) carry on amicably? Both are
headstrong and, therefore, their relationship is bound to be problematic
and even turbulent. Can General Musharraf stoop down to the level of Ch
Fazal Elahi? Can he afford to be remembered in history as a reckless
compromiser?
Nawaz Sharif who earlier had shown reluctance in criticizing Benazir
after she departed from her commitment to the Charter of Democracy
There is according to him only one choice for the political leadership in
Pakistan: to struggle to do away the militarys hold on the government, to
bring in real democracy, help establish the supremacy of the Constitution
and the rule of law. Benazir in his eyes by joining the Musharraf
bandwagon was betraying democracy and giving a lease of life to the
tottering military rule.
Musharraf is fighting a rear-guard battle. He is holding meetings
with representatives of different segments of the society to justify the need
34

for his continuing to remain at the helm of affairs. He is trying to firm up his
(kings) party members and is seeking to restore their confidence in him. He
is, however, witnessing desertions.
Musharraf and the Chaudhrys are bound to make life difficult
for Sharif brothers. Now that the die has been cast and the Rubicon is
about to be crossed, a lot will depend on how the people at large, the civil
society and the higher judiciary view the scene and throw their weight for
democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
Shakir Husain opined: To be fair to General Musharraf, Operation
Kursi Bachao is not something he invented; its a standard operation that
has been executed hundreds of times in Pakistan before him at different
levels. Ranging from managing directors at public corporations, bureaucrats,
generals, and pretty much anyone who has gotten used to the good life
without having really earned it, OKB has been implemented across the board
in Pakistans 60-year old history. So for the General to go ahead and do it is
neither surprising nor is it unusual.
The problem with saving the kursi is that while doing so state
institutions are the first ones to bear the brunt of all this wheeling and
dealing. Our Constitution today resembles a thirty year old model who has
had every imaginable form of plastic surgery to stay young. The only
difference is that unlike the model who has a certain plastic aesthetic to her,
our Constitution has started looking uglier than ever. The damage to
institutions is for all to see.
While we have survived for 60 years ambling along with all kinds of
shenanigans imposed on the people this country, our institutions have
degenerated beyond recognition all to save the kursi repeatedly for scores
of individuals who really havent delivered the goods. The political
scenario today is like the Karachi Stock Exchange nobody really knows
whats going to happen, and by the time people like us begin buying the real
players have already begun selling.
Prof Adil Najam saw the political scenario like a big-tent circus.
Anyone who has ever been to a big-tent circus will recognize the dynamics
that are now unfolding before us. Right before the grand finale whether it
be the human cannonball, the trapeze acrobats or vanishing trick by the
grand wizard there is usually a frenzy of activity as all the clowns, jugglers

35

and dancing monkeys come out in a bedazzling spectacle that is low on

substance but totally consumes the attention of the onlookers.
It is not yet clear what the grand finale will be. It could be any of the
ones mentioned above (a human cannonball, trapeze acrobatics, vanishing
tricks), a combination of all three, or like in any good circus something
totally different that no one was anticipating. Or, maybe, the great surprise
will be that there will be no surprise at all.
The fact of the matter is that the circus will eventually end; and
probably soon. It has to. All circuses always do. Even if it is replaced by a
new political circus, the rest of Pakistan will have to return to the realities
and struggles of existence outside the circus tent whether the post-circus
Pakistan is defined by the politics of a President Musharraf in uniform, a
President Musharraf out of uniform, or a political dispensation that has no
General Musharraf on the scene, we will find that the problems have only
compounded and no one inside the circus ring is either interested in or has a
clue about how to solve these problems. None of this is to make light of the
grave political choices that face the country today in terms of the
presidential election and constitutional rule.
In fact, it sounds much too much like the racket made by the
clowns, the jugglers and the dancing monkeys when they all descend
upon the centre ring trying to gain everyones attention by making as much
din as they possibly can. Sometimes, and only for a moment, they will
succeed in getting the attention they crave, but never for long, and most
often not at all.
Rubina Saigol analyzed the argument that Pakistan needs policy
continuity for economic growth and to fight extremism. These are
rhetorical devices to instill among the population fears of change and a
reluctance to accept any alternative. All governments, states and ruling
elite globally manufacture ideas that are fashioned to keep the rulers in
power. The media and the official apparatus of information, the Information
Ministry in particular, are deployed to reiterate certain ideas until they
appear to be self-evident truths in other words, until they become
hegemonic.
Supreme national interests: This has been the oldest trick in the
governments bag. Every time an unpopular decision is to be taken, there is
resort to time-tested notion of supreme national interest. When elected
36

governments are dismissed by the military or by indirectly elected

presidents, it is for supreme national interests; when popular leaders are
forcibly kept out of the country, it is in the name of supreme national
interests; when the chief justice of the country is unceremoniously
suspended and manhandled by the police, supreme national interests are
invoked; when the government decides to lend unstinted support to a
superpower in its unholy wars, it is for supreme national interests; people
are made to disappear mysteriously for supreme national interests; and are
regularly murdered in Wana or Baluchistan or anywhere else for supreme
national interests. The list is far too long, but we are all too familiar with
this device used by our rulers with increasing frequency.
Fortunately, people are now beginning to ask questions: whose
interests are these Supreme national interests that keep recurring with
haunting frequency? Who has defined what supreme national interests are?
How has it been defined? There is never any explanation One would
presume that national means that of the nation and nation would include
everyone If so, then how are the killings in Waziristan national? How is
the selling of the countrys assets like the Pakistan Steel Mills national?
How are disappearances of citizens national?
How is the desire to re-elect one man in uniform from assemblies on
the verge of ending their term a supreme interest? Is it not the interest only
of that one man and those who derive power from his position as COAS and
president? How is the endeavour to keep out two of the most popular leaders
of the country a supreme interest? Is it not again only in the interest of one
man and his band of toadies, who cannot face the power of popular and
genuinely elected leaders?
Doctrine of necessity: This notoriously manipulative idea is
attributed to Justice Munir, but in fact goes back to colonial times. It has
helped to indemnify many a martial law. It is the cover for illegal takeovers
of government and a boon for all usurpers. Though it has been given the
rather respectful name of doctrine, it is in fact merely another trick used by
rulers The so-called doctrine of necessity cannot even lay claim to the
status of a doctrine. It is simply a device used by rulers to arm-twist a
malleable or weak judiciary into capitulating to their illegal demands.
The question never asked of rulers and the reply never given by them
is: who has decided that something, say martial law, is necessary? How has
its necessity been determined? What is the basis on which it has been
37

deemed necessary? How valid are those bases? The people are, of course,
never asked their opinion as it is assumed that the government knows what
is best for them.
In reality this is another farce. There was never any necessity to
impose martial law or emergency in the country. The only way, that illegal
rulers could sell it to gullible or helpless populations, was by inventing some
vague, ill-defined and meaningless notion like doctrine of necessity.
The myth of indispensability: The myth of indispensability is as old
as dictators themselves, but it has been reinvigorated in Pakistan in recent
times. Almost every dictator in history has presented his or her own
continuity in power as essential and inevitable for the country. Most
dictators believe that it is their destiny to lead the nation to prosperity and
well being, and they are chosen for this task by some divine intervention.
The main device used to engender the myth of indispensability is
fear. The usual refrain is: If I am removed, there will be dire consequences
for the country; the country needs me for stability and continuity. In case the
dictator is removed, goes the argument, something terrible will happen to
everyone. This myth is usually invoked when dictators are at their weakest
and most vulnerable.
A related and parallel argument employed in such circumstances is
that there is nobody else. This is repeated so often by the sycophants and
flatterers that some even come to wonder that if the present dictator goes,
who will come suddenly all the choices seem to disappear and one face
comes to the foreground as the only one. At such points, it becomes easy to
forget that out of 160 million people there surely must be someone who can
do a better job.
The myth of indispensability blocks imagination, as it forecloses all
possible options. The idea of one and only comes to pervade national
consciousness. Public political discourse centered on the inevitability and
indispensability of the dictator makes people forget that history does not
stop. The only thing that is permanent is change. Despite talk of the
inexorable march of history, people are made to believe that history would
stop if the current leader was removed.
There are many problems with this argument: One, stability can very
easily deteriorate intostagnation. Stability is an idea that is very popular

38

with dictators because a fixed and frozen reality (if any such thing were ever
possible) is more amenable to control and manipulation than a reality that is
in a flux and is fluid. In fact, society is always in a flux and paradoxically
change itself is necessary for continuity.
Two, the fear of instability upon the return of popular leaders is not
that something terrible will happen to the country; rather, the instability and
chaos would be only for the rulers. The return of Nawaz Sharif and Benazir
Bhutto would not be chaotic or create disorder for the country, but only for
General Musharraf and his PML-Q cronies. Yet, people are told that if the
two exiled politicians return, somehow Pakistan would be in turmoil. In
fact, the consequence of their return might be the exact opposite prosperity
and a vibrant civil society and general well being.
Three, it is premature to assume that the popular leaders would
reverse some of the good policies of the present government. It is much
more likely that they would continue the policies that they consider positive,
and undo only the most destructive and unpopular policies of the present
regime. So, it is completely facile to argue that there would be turmoil and
turbulence upon the return of popular leaders and good policies would be
replaced by bad ones.
Need for uniformed president: This mother of all myths is being
bandied about not only by the dictator himself and his sycophantic hangerson; it is reverberating across the major global capitals. The argument that
Musharraf as a uniformed president is necessary to fight the twin menace of
extremism and terrorism is seriously problematic at many levels: first, it
betrays a complete ignorance of the sources and dynamics of terrorism and
extremism; and second, it also reflects a total lack of understanding of the
principles of parliamentary democracy.
Let us take the first fallacy! According to the purveyors of this
theory, extremism and terrorism are committed only by non-state actors by
groups and individuals who destroy the life and property of innocent
civilians to further their group goals. This simplistic construction overlooks
the fact that major forms of terrorism and extremism in the recent past have
been committed by states, such as
The second major problem with the argument that Musharrafs
continuity in uniform is necessary to fight extremism, and therefore a deal
between him and Benazir must be brokered, is that it flies in the face of
39

democracy. The president in a parliamentary democracy is merely a figure

head representing the federation. It is a ceremonial post that signifies that the
head of the state is a non-partisan person who represents everybody. The
prime minister on the other hand is a party person who is expected to
forward the agenda of his own party. Both the president and the army chief
in the parliamentary form of democracy are expected to be neutral and nonpartisan, and the latter being paid servant of the state cannot take part in
politics as it compromises the neutrality of the state.
The desire to dominate, control and subjugate wears many
masks. It is about time that our populations, not nave and simple-minded
but shrewd and discerning, see through these masks of domination to finally
reveal what is hidden beneath these layers of homilies being delivers by our
leaders everyday.
Nasim Zehra wrote: As matters now stand, the government wants to
prevent their (Sharifs) return on September 10 at all costs. On the return
of the Sharifs the government is banking on the Saudi factor. There has been
talk of high-level telephonic intervention to convince the Saudis to stop
Nawaz Sharif from returning to Pakistan.
The presidential elections have become the pivotal issue around
which all of Pakistans political battles are revolving. As of now, determined
to be re-elected the president has shared his thinking with the public. He
believes his re-election is important to reinforce and in fact increase the
gains Pakistan has made during his period.
But the opposition to General Musharrafs re-election by this
assembly and in uniform is increasing by the day. The Supreme Court is
potentially the key bulwark against the re-election of the president. There are
various views on how to tackle the expected SC opposition. The options
being examined include dissolving of assembly and delaying the presidential
elections. The possibility of the president going ahead, in his uniform, with
his election during the September 15-October 15 period has also been
discussed.
The situation headed towards grave fallouts. The election has
become a polarizing matter. No stone has been left unturned to work out a
smooth and successful re-election of General Musharraf. But the prognosis
is not good. In such a situation pushing through the presidential election is
unwise. It will further undermine the security that the supporters of General
40

Musharraf argue his re-election will enhance. It will prove divisive and
destructive for the country. The priority now must be to end the polarization
and calm the situation.
What must then be done? In exercise of his constitutional authority,
the prime minister should dissolve the National Assembly. In the
increasingly chaotic and polarizing situation, the dissolution with a
simultaneous announcement of holding fresh elections within 90 days will
be a valid and well-intentioned move. The dissolution of assembly will
automatically mean the postponement of the presidential elections since the
National Assembly is the core component of the Electoral College for
presidential elections.
The president should call an all-parties conference at which the major
political parties must agree on specific steps for holding fair and free
elections. General Musharraf will have to be re-elected by the next
assembly. That would be in the spirit of the Constitution which seeks
presidential mandate from the peoples representatives. On November 15 he
will cease to become army chief at which point the General nominated as
vice chief on October 7 will take over as the new chief. After the new
assembly takes oath President Musharraf in mufti can present himself for reelection, if he then has sufficient support in parliament.
Roedad Khan was of the view that General Musharraf knows that the
party is almost over for him. We have arrived at the epilogue, at the greatest
turning point in our history. One feels in the air the sense of the inevitable
which comes from the wheel of destiny when it moves and of which men
are often the unconscious instruments. General Musharraf is losing political
capital by the hour. Today it is hard to find anyone who believes a word of
what he says. Today the only person willing to defend him is none other than
General Musharraf himself, so alone and so beleaguered.
The clearest lesson of history is that no military ruler gives up power
voluntarily or peacefully. Why should General Musharraf be an exception?
Eight years after he assumed power, the bottom line is inescapable: General
Musharraf has no intention of giving up power. Another five years of
military rule could easily become a life sentence for Pakistan.
So how will change ultimately occur in Pakistan? In a democracy,
political change is linked to a change of rulers, which occurs regularly and at
minimal social cost. The saving grace for America may be that, unlike
41

emperors, US presidents, including catastrophic ones like Bush, are limited

to years in office. We in Pakistan are not so lucky. Unless, Fate intervenes,
we are stuck with General Musharraf for an indefinite period.
The absence of democracy, however, does not prevent a change of
rulers. It happens anyway. It takes the form of revolution. Some are soft
like the velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia in 1989 or the orange
revolution in Ukraine in 2004. Some are bloody like the October revolution
in Russia or the Iranian revolution. Nobody denies the inevitability of
change of power in Pakistan. It will happen sooner or later. But when it does
happen, it may not be velvet.
Is Pakistan en route to choosing a president in accordance with the
spirit of the Constitution? My short answer is, No. After eight years of
absolute rule, General Musharraf wants the sitting parliament to elect him
president for another five years Unless he imposes martial law, his bid
for another five-year presidential term will almost certainly depend on the
decisions of the Supreme Court and its reinstated Chief Justice Iftikhar
Mohammad Chaudhry.
The court will be asked to decide whether General Musharraf can run
while still Chief of Army Staff, whether the Constitution bars him from
seeking what may be considered third term; and whether he can seek
election by the current parliament, as he wants, or must wait until the new
legislature is chosen this autumn. These are the questions that would be
decided by the Supreme Court.
Any attempt by the government to challenge the Supreme Court and
circumvent the Constitution will be resisted by the people of Pakistan and
the judiciary. That is for sure. People will stand up. They will dig in,
organize and connect. They will form networks of resistance throughout the
length and breadth of this country to protect the Constitution and the
Supreme Court. That is how they will alter the course of history.
This is the last chance, the last battle. If we shall not stand out into
the street and shout, the long polar night will descend on Pakistan. Now
or never is the moment when salvation from military rule is possible.
Despite all the fear, apprehension and uncertainty today, I sense the tide of
public opinion against General Musharraf is flooding in and that this regime
will find itself overwhelmed from within.

42

As we approach the endgame, General Musharraf knows the party

is almost over for him. And yet, for the distant horizon, foolish hopes still
flicker. So alone, General Musharraf is hanging on to office, hoping that a
miracle will somehow save him and his tottering regime. Where does
General Musharraf stand today? Authority he never had. All he had was raw
power. That too he is loosing by hour. Faith in his leadership is slipping. He
has lost the confidence of the people.
Today, Pakistan sits between hope and fear. Hope for a political
possibility that would lead to the supremacy of civilian rule and a free and
democratic Pakistan ready to regain its place among the democratic nations
of the world. Fear that General Musharraf will circumvent the Constitution
in an attempt to perpetuate his rule.
It is far easier for soldiers to topple an elected government than
to manage their safe exit from the front of the political stage. General
Musharrafs vacation from reality this summer should make us very afraid.
His apparent confidence is not reassuring. It is terrifying. It doesnt
demonstrate his strength of character; it shows that he has lost touch with
reality.
Imtiaz Alam thought that there may be need for an arbiter; judiciary or
army. The deadlock thus being created may consequently warrant an
arbiter who could either constitutionally and legitimately or by virtue of
force resolve it. Who is going to be the arbiter? Will it be the Supreme Court
of Pakistan or the Pakistan Army? Avoid entering the blind alley must be the
watchword, even if the lawyers have again decided to take to the streets
this time for the removal of Musharraf.
Developments are taking place too fast and at the same time. Not
a bad omen by itself. What is too bad about them is that they are directed
towards chaos and destabilization leaving little room for a smooth transition.
If we go by our history, no military dictator has ever opted for an exit
strategy.
To be fair to the critics of the deal, which wasnt there, Ms Bhutto
took a solitary flight in initiating negotiations with a military regime which
is not yet prepared to allow either both the two former prime ministers to
precipitate in the elections or an even playing field to all the contesting
parties in a free and fair election, not to mention a transfer of power to the
elected representatives of the people. She preferred to take an isolationist
43

course of reconciliation with an increasingly isolated regime instead of

joining a rejectionist front formed by the PML-N and the mullahs.
The only saving ground for her dialogue were the constitutional
and political demands she made to strengthen parliament and to ensure
free elections and restoration of democracy, such as the removal of 58-2(B),
the restriction on two-time former prime ministers to be elected for the third
time, cutting down some of the powers of the president previously held by
the prime minister, the suspension of local governments during the
electioneering period, an interim government of national consensus and an
independent election commission.
As these demands are not on which any opposition party could have
disagreed, a joint course was most needed and not cutting a separate
deal. It gave the impression that she was taking a separate course for her
own selfish ends while providing a way out to a general who had entered
into a dead end of his political career. Yet the strongest argument in favour
of a negotiated settlement of the current crisis is that if the return to
democracy is most important issue, then the democratic forces must not let
the situation get out of the control, even if it is getting out of the hands of a
military ruler at the fag end of his hegemonic rule.
A sustained movement of civil society can provide both the
necessary support and cover to the apex court to emerge as an arbiter
when the country is moving towards the gridlock. Although an agitating Bar
and pro-active judiciary can facilitate the job of a democratic opposition to
achieve some of its goals, it will be expecting too much from them to deliver
democracy to a still fragmented and unprepared class. If the situation gets
out of hand, then yet again the Pakistan Army might be forced to impose its
will through the barrel of the gun.
The time for a negotiated solution may be over for the time being,
even though this must remain the most preferred mode of change, after the
Bars have given the call for a black day on the 6 th and for successive protest
days. There is time for uniting a great majority of the people on a more
elaborate charter of democracy under the leadership of the republican bars.
The Bars must also ask the leading political parties to establish their
democratic credentials by introducing democracy, transparency and
accountability in their parties functioning

44

The time for negotiations may again come for a peaceful transition to
democracy and free and fair elections. It, however, depends upon the
combined efforts of the united bars and civil society and a pro-active
judiciary, backed by all opposition parties, not to let the situation end up in
a blind alley that we are moving towards at a brisk pace, entering the dead
end means yet another martial law. And, it must not happen.
Kamila Hyat noted that public issues were completely missing from
the debate and argument. The discussion that currently rages centres on
several intriguing issues: Will the Musharraf-Benazir deal finally be signed
and sealed; will the PPP sell what remains of its conscience as a part of this
bargain; will Mian Nawaz Sharif and his family return on September tenth;
if so, will they be arrested or deported; will President Musharraf win a new
term in presidential office; how deep do the fissures surfacing within the
ruling PML-Q run, and many other questions along similar lines are asked
repeatedly.
Perhaps what is most significant about the ongoing process of
political debate and argument is the fact that public issues, which should
be of key importance ahead of any election campaign, especially one that
comes in a time of turmoil, are completely missing. None of the major
parties has, so far, issued anything that resembles a manifesto
This suggests that, far from writing out a manifesto of any kind, even
a more basic discussion on major matters of public concern has not taken
place within parties. The sole focus of attention seems to be the question
of getting into a position from where an ascent to power is possible
From all sides of the divide, virtually the same promises are heard. Even the
phraseology varies only in nuance. Pledges are made to reform the
healthcare system, to make education universally available and to end
poverty, as if it were possible to do so by waving a magic wand.
There has been no mention of how these issues would be tackled, or
what policies would be pursued to attain the noble ends promised by
politicians. The fundamental issue of land reforms, so crucial to any real
economic and social change in the lives of people, remains shelved as
indeed it has been for the past many decades Indeed, so far, the entire
pre-poll campaign appears to be centered around the matter of either
standing with President Musharraf, or condemning him, rather than
outlining issues that genuinely concern the people in whose name political
leaders claim to speak.
45

So far, major mainstream parties seem unclear even about the

issue of their future ties with Washington a question that will almost
certainly assume center stage once the poll campaign takes off in earnest
It is clear already that groups seen as being opposed to Washington have
made gains across the social spectrum, and many citizens will want to know
the stance of parties on this front before taking any decision regarding where
they place the stamp on their ballot sheets.
The matter of what will happen next on the political front has,
increasingly, become a topic to fill free time, to crack jokes about and to
lay bets on. Bookies across Lahore are reported to be repeating the benefits.
And religious parties too have profited from the failures of their mainstream
rivals, by sticking to their simplistic agendas that claim to solve all problems
with a single stroke.
In this environment, any party which realizes the need to involve
people in its campaign, to take them along and to plan out means to address
their concerns will quite obviously get a head start as polls approach. But
then perhaps these parties have realized that people are increasingly
irrelevant to politics in Pakistan, with decisions made outside polling
booths that have become little more than another prop in the theatre of
democracy.

REVIEW
Mushy-Pinky affair remained talk of the town. In this political
flirtation, Pinky constantly showed more impatience. Whenever the affair hit
a snag in finalization of the so-called marriage of convenience; Benazir
raised hue and cry with a view to drawing the attention of her US backers;
the brave commando always seemed yielding to the pressure.
As regards Nawaz Sharif, the Axis of American Agents were fully
activated in support of Musharraf to stop him from returning to Pakistan in
defiance of the decision of the Supreme Court. The Saudi intelligence chief
swirled the deal document like a lash and told Nawaz Sharif to forget about
the court verdict and his fundamental rights mentioned therein.
The threat of consequences by the intelligence chief and expression of
willingness to accept the re-extradited Nawaz were actions far graver than

46

the contempt of court. It was insult, not for the Supreme Court, but to the
entire nation on the behest of the regime. As for Arab Bedouins, who frisk
away hundreds of children for tying them on camel humps to seek pleasure
for few moments, re-exile of Nawaz would cause no burden on their
conscience.
Musharraf, by requesting the outsiders to interfere in the matter, has
gone too far to damage the image of Pakistan just to quench his vindictive
urge. He, who had been repeatedly crying the rhetoric of Pakistan First
risked the traditionally friendly ties with Saudi Arabia for his selfish interest.
Irrespective of the issue of morality, the regime has so far been quite
successful in keeping the opposition in disarray. It becomes even more
commendable in view the fact that Musharraf was at his weakest and pushed
into a tight spot, mainly because of his own mistakes. He pre-empted his
opponents from taking any advantage by outwitting them through wellcalculated moves.
9th September 2007

PEACEMAKER MERCENARY
Pakistan was kept under tremendous pressure to do more in the
context of war on terror or face the US strikes inside its territorial limits.
These threats were hurled despite the fact that Musharraf had inducted
additional troops into tribal areas and with complete disregard to the fact that
their faithful servant was deeply embroiled in internal crisis.
Pakistanis were annoyed by the US threats and criticized the regime
for its US-centric foreign policy. In a rare happe4ning, the Opposition and

47

the Treasury demanded review of foreign policy. The Musharraf regime,

however, continued suffering from the illusion that it was spilling the blood
of its own people for the cause of peace.
India relegated the peace process to the lowest priority and instead it
held massive joint naval drills in Indian Ocean along with the United States
and other allies. Pakistans loud-mouth Foreign Minister, Kasuri blamed the
CJPs case for shifting of focus off the Kashmir issue.
On home front, Swedish Ambassador was summoned to Foreign
Office on 30th August to protest publication of blasphemous material in
Swedish paper. He must have told that newspapers act was not more
blasphemous that ransacking a mosque and a madrassa.

WESTERN FRONT
The fighting and killing of Pakistanis for peace in Afghanistan for the
comfort of the occupation forces continued. Five soldiers were wounded in
roadside bombing in North Waziristan on 9th August; the army gunship
helicopters retaliated and struck two trucks killing ten suspected militants.
In South Waziristan, 16 FC men went missing. One person was killed in a
blast in Peshawar.
Cobra helicopters struck militants in North Waziristan on 11 th August
and killed three of them. Two days later, 30 security personnel were
wounded in two roadside bombings in North Waziristan; army used gunship
helicopters and killed 3 suspected militants. In Swat, 4 people were killed
and 8 wounded in roadside bombing.
Headless dead body of a kidnapped FC soldier was found near
Jandola on 14th August. One civilian was killed in cross-fire near Miranshah.
NATO forces violated Pakistani air space on third consecutive day as they
carried out intensive bombings opposite Kurram Agency.
Security forces using gunship helicopters killed ten militants in North
Waziristan on 16th August; two FC soldiers and a driver were killed and six
others wounded in a separate incident. A pro-government elder was shot
dead in Bajaur Agency. More troops were deployed along border in Kurram
Agency.

48

At least 22 people, including 7 soldiers, were killed an encounter on

17 August in Chaghmalai area of South Waziristan. Five soldiers were
injured in suicide attack near Tank. Tribes of Khyber Agency banned CDs
shops.
th

Two soldiers were killed and another wounded in suicide attack on a

post near Mirali on 18th August; 20 rockets were also fired on another post.
Two FC men were killed in another attack. Yet another bomber blew himself
in Bannu killing a policeman. A beheaded body of a religious scholar was
found in Jandola area of South Waziristan. Reportedly, the militants in South
Waziristan announced scrapping of peace accord; ISPR denied.
Gunship helicopters attacked Hurmuz village near Mirali on 19 th
August killed 15 militants. In South Waziristan, the kidnappers agreed to
release 15 FC men unconditionally. Next day, five people including three
soldiers were killed in suicide attack in Hangu. Rockets were fired at FC
Fort in Tank on 21st August. Next day, four soldiers, a woman and four
militants were killed in two attacks on a camp and a check post in Bannu
district.
One miscreant was killed during attack on FC Fort at Tall on 23 rd
August. Next day, 7 soldiers were killed and 24 wounded in three different
incidents, including two suicide attacks in North Waziristan. In the period of
last one month, 250 militants and 60 soldiers had been killed. Musharraf said
no disruption in tribal peace would be allowed.
A Colonel along with four persons was abducted in South Waziristan
on 25 August. Next day, the US-led forces attacked militants positions
inside Pakistan killing 30 people including civilians. Afghan official sources
said strike was carried out after permission from Pakistan; Islamabad denied
giving any permission. Seven people including four policemen were killed
and several others wounded in a suicide attack in Shangla district and
violence in Datta Khel area of North Waziristan. In South Waziristan, the
administration accepted the demand of militants for release of ten FC men.
th

On 27th August, two terrorists were arrested in Mingora and

Chakdara along with bomb-making material. ISPR denied NATO attack
inside Pakistan. MNA Noorul Haq Qadri said the tribesmen were being
maltreated to please the infidels.

49

Next day, militants released 19 soldiers in South Waziristan as result

of hectic efforts on JUI-F leaders. The US-led coalition admitted that no
permission was granted for strike inside Pakistan. The junior partner must
have told the senior: do what you like, but please dont talk about
permission.
On 30th August, a convoy of 18 vehicles carrying more than two
hundred soldiers went missing. Six drivers were abducted and containers
were set on fire in Kurram Agency. Explosives were recovered from a
suspect arrested in Bannu.
Next day, Mahsud tribe was held responsible for abducting more than
two hundred soldiers. A jirga was sent to secure release of the soldiers and
action was initiated against the tribe in which about eighty tribesmen were
held. In Swat, two FC soldiers, a policeman and a civilian were killed and
six others wounded in two attacks.
At least seven persons, including three FC men, were killed and nine
wounded in two suicide bombings in Bajaur Agency on 1st September. Ten
more soldiers, including an officer, were kidnapped in Mohmand Agency.
Efforts continued for release of about two hundred soldiers. A blast in Wana
killed 4 persons and wounded 13 others on 2nd September. The militants
holding about 200 soldiers demanded pullout of troops from the area.
On 3rd September, a woman was killed and another along with a child
wounded when an artillery shell fired by troops landed at their house near
Miranshah. Militants withdrew their threat of killing five soldiers a day. The
government released 80 tribesmen rounded up after the kidnapping of the
soldiers. Four people were killed and nine injured in a tribal clash in Kurram
Agency. Gunmen kidnapped four officials and a driver in Peshawar, a
kidnapper was killed and 3 abductees were freed after the chase.
Thirty people were killed and 70 wounded in two suicide attacks in
Rawalpindi Cantonment on 4th September. Three bombs were recovered
around PC Hotel. A young man was kidnapped in Bannu. Troops destroyed
an explosive-packed vehicle near Miranshah. Militants released ten FC men
in Mohmand Agency and in Bajaur four soldiers were swapped with
militants. Four more persons were killed in clash in Kurram Agency.

50

Tribal militants of South Waziristan freed six sick soldiers on 5 th

September. Militants fired at a post near Miranshah and an official was
abducted from Mirali. An official was wounded in a blast in Bajaur Agency.
Six persons including a foreigner were killed on 6 th September when a
gunship helicopter attacked a car near Mirali. More than a week after the
kidnapping, Army released the exact figures on Defence Day. Sevenmember jirga left for Ladha to negotiate release of 249 soldiers. A tailor
shop in Khar was blown up for making Western clothes.
Two FC men were wounded in an attack in North Waziristan on 7 th
September. Two women were beheaded in Bannu for prostitution. Forty
video shops were destroyed in blasts in Mingora. Jirga for release of captive
soldiers failed to make any headway. A British national detained in Adiala
Jail was sent back to the UK.
Four army men were killed in an ambush in Kohistan on 8 th
September. At least 26 people were injured in a car blast in Peshawar
Cantonment. Two levies men were injured in missile attack in Bajaur
Agency. New tribal jirga was named for release of 249 soldiers.
Joint Pak-Afghan Jirga opened in Kabul on 9th August with a call of
unity against al-Qaeda. Next day the magic midnight telephone call worked
in the context of joint jirga; Musharraf agreed to go to Kabul where some
delegates attending the jirga had sought pullout of NATO forces.
Mujaddedi, who had been quite harsh towards Pakistan, regretted his
anti-Pakistan remarks on 11th August. The delegates said they had no
objection to forces from Islamic countries if NATO and US agreed to
withdraw their forces from Afghanistan.
On 12th August, the peace jirga pledged to end terrorism. Delegates
urged reconciliation with Taliban. Musharraf asked Afghanistan to trust
Pakistan. Obviously, there was no mention of an end to the occupation of
Afghanistan. Two days later, Bush congratulated Musharraf on peace jirga.
The pressure on Pakistan to do more was increased as could be
ascertained from the events of the last one month. On 9 th August, its time to
review foreign policy, said S M Zafar. Kasuri claimed that Pakistans foreign
policy is not US-centric. Next day, it was reported that the US was

51

reassessing plans to cope with the issue of Pakistans nuclear assets if

Musharraf falls.
Musharraf asked the US to recognize Pakistans successes in war on
terror and warned of damage to the ties in the wake of statements showing
lack of trust in his regime. He boasted of his achievements only two days
before the US Senate body asked NATO to change its Afghanistan policy in
which civilians are killed due to indiscriminate use of excessive force.
Addressing a gathering in connection with Independence Day
celebrations; Justice Ramday said Pakistan still has to feel ashamed although
it has been fighting for the vested interests of the West. The friends, for
whom we have been doing all this, term us as terrorists. ANP vowed to
resist US attacks. Fazl blamed US for escalating terrorism.
On 19th August, Benazir once again linked terror to Musharraf regime.
Obama again vowed to hit al-Qaeda inside Pakistan; Hillary cautioned him
against such statements about a country that is already on knifes edge. Two
days later, Opposition and Treasury benches in Senate asked the government
to review foreign policy.
On 22nd August, the visiting Japanese Defence Minister asked
Pakistan to join NPT. Next day, United States said it had no plans for
operations inside Pakistan. It meant satisfaction over what Musharraf had
done in recent days.
On 4th September, the Chief Minister of NWFP urged withdrawal of
support to war on terror. Three days later, Robert Gates hailed the sacrifices
made by the Pakistani soldiers in serving the US interests. The very next
day, the UN alleged that Afghan suicide bombers were trained in Pakistan.
The Nation wrote on the Grand peace jirga in the context of
Musharrafs presence. The presidents sudden decision to stay away from
the 3-day Pak-Afghan peace jirga at Kabul must have come as a great
surprise to the US administration notwithstanding the argument that his
presence in the country was essential in view of the likely imposition of
extraordinary measures here
In her telephonic call Secretary Condoleezza Rice, as confirmed by
official circles, discussed not only the emergency proposal but also his

52

participation in the jirga. Finally, the President also received a call from
the Afghan leader and agreed to attend the last session.
Evidently, the two sides have not over the years come any closer in
their understanding of the very source of violence. In this pessimistic
scenario, how far the several committees that the jirga constituted would be
able to come up with fruitful suggestions and how far the Presidents
presence at Kabul would make the difference and moot propositions.
In another editorial the newspaper added: Few commentators would
disagree President General Pervez Musharrafs call for the promotion of
mutual trust between Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is a prudent thought but
insubstantial and vague; the sort one would expect at the end of a wishy
washy seminar, not a gritty, no-nonsense jirga. But perhaps a mere
conference was what the jirga was. The institution of the jirga, a
delightfully useful instrument of governance used for centuries to solve the
prickliest of problems, comes with its imposing set of conditions; one of
them being the effective representation of leaders who have genuine backing
and influence in their respective areas.
The governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan, however, have been
accused of screening their own particular contingents for undesirable
elements, particularly those who have affiliations with the Taliban;
consequently including those members who do not have much of a say in the
affairs of the tribal areas at all, killing the whole point.
Moving on from the composition of the jirga, one also has to evaluate
the sanctity of its decrees. Who enforces them; the government of
Afghanistan or Pakistan? If these governments could effectively enforce
what they want, they wouldnt have needed to call a jirga in the first place.
Things are wrong on more levels than one.
Syed Saleem Shahzad opined: The ongoing peace jirga involving
hundreds of tribal leaders from Pakistan and Afghanistan is aimed at
identifying and rooting out Taliban and al-Qaeda militancy on both sides
of the border.
This was to be followed up with military strikes at militant bases
in Pakistan, either by the Pakistani armed forces in conjunction with the
United States, or even by US forces alone. The trouble is the bases the US
had meticulously identified no longer exist. The nave, rustic but battle-

53

hardened Taliban still want a fight, but it will be fought on the Talibans
chosen battlegrounds.
The US had presented Islamabad with a dossier detailing the location
of bases as advance information on likely US targets. But Asia Times Online
has learnt that since early this month, neither the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization-led coalition in Afghanistan nor Pakistan intelligence has
detected any movement in the camps.
The al-Qaeda leadership (shura) has apparently now installed
itself in Jani Khel village in the Bannu district of NWFP. This includes
Osama bin Ladens deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri. The Taliban leadership,
most prominently Haqqani, is concentrated in the Afghan provinces of Khost
and Gardez, where much fighting is expected to take place.
A spillover of al-Qaedas presence in Jani Khel is likely to spread to
Karak, Kohat, Tank, Laki Marwat and Dera Ismail Khan in Pakistan. Kohat
in NWFP is tipped to become a central city in the upcoming battle, as
the office of the Pakistani Garrison commanding officer is there and all
operations will be directed through this area. In addition, Kohat is directly
linked with a US airfield in Khost for supplies and logistics.
A second war corridor is expected to be in the Waziristan, the
Khyber Agency, the Kurram Agency, Bajaur Agency, Dir, Mohmand Agency
and Chitral in Pakistan and Nangarhar, Kunar and Nooristan in Afghanistan.
The fiercest battleground, however, will be in Khost and Gardez, making the
previous Taliban successes in Helmand and Kandahar during the spring
offensive of 2006 a distant memory.
The death in May of Taliban commander Mullah Dadullah in
Afghanistan during a coalition raid set in motion a major change within the
Talibans command structure. The loss of the heroic commander was a huge
blow for the Taliban in southwestern Afghanistan as a major symbol of
success had been killed and there was no one of his stature to replace him,
as another top Taliban commander, Mullah Akhtar Osmani, had earlier been
killed in Helmand.
Amid the demoralization, the entire Taliban leadership left Helmand,
Uruzgan, Zabul and Kandahar and sat idle in Satellite Town in Quetta,
Pakistan, for several weeks. Finally, in June, Taliban leader Mullah Omar
outlined new guidelines, which included:

54

 No member of the central military command would work in

southwestern Afghanistan.
Group commanders would be given control of specific districts and be
allowed to develop their own strategy.
This strategy would be passed on only to the Taliban-appointed
governor of the area, who in turn would relay it to the Talibans
central command council. From these various inputs, the council
would develop a broader strategy for particular regions.
The Taliban would discourage personality cults like Dadullahs, as the
death of a hero demoralized his followers.
Four spokesmen were appointed to decentralize the Talibans mediainformation wing. Each spokesman would look after only a specific
zone so that in case of his arrest, only information about that zone
could be leaked
Pakistans stance throughout the war on terror has been
problematical, especially with regards to the Taliban. Certainly Islamabad
distanced itself from the Taliban after their fall in 2001, and has periodically
cracked down on them in Pakistan, but sections in the general public and
some government institutions remain sympathetic.
But once the peace jirga concludes this weekend, a war has to be
fought: the US is simply running out of patience. Pakistan has said it is
committed to such a battle against Taliban and al-Qaeda elements on its soil.
Interestingly, though, of late the military establishment has activated its antiAmerican segment in the ruling coalition One can dismiss this as rhetoric.
Washington might consider, though, that Pakistan has changed horses in
midstream many times before.
S Rahman was of the view that Pakistans duty becomes all the
more difficult due to the presence, next door, of another mimical element
that has remained hanging on our necks like the sword of Damocles
primarily on the basis of ideological differences, shockingly, despite
confidence-building measures taken on many occasions to lessen this
animosity, the pique has never waned, let alone vanish. And the end result is
that proxy fights are still being fought albeit sporadically and quite too
surreptitiously. This element has continued to foment trouble by employing
55

different tactics including diplomatic overtures that have of late been

exposed to the whole world.
Simultaneously, however, Pakistan has remained steadfast in
maintaining its sovereign posture even while faced with enormous pressure
with specific reference to war on terror from a demanding world including
the highly demanding West or plainly speaking the United States.
Musharraf has used the forum of peace jirga to consolidate his
gains in the war on terror. As for his late arrival in Kabul, the quarters which
are trying to paint it as a move taken under pressure from US Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice, things are otherwise. In a way, it rather highlights
the importance of Pakistan and its top leadership in the peace process.
The peace jirga has taken into account all possible and thinkable
options including the option of reconciliation. More appreciable is the
jirgas declaration which says that the participants pledged that they would
not allow sanctuaries/training centres for terrorists in their respective
countries. The participants also acknowledged the nexus between narcotics
and terrorism. What spells greater hope is the move at the continuity of
peace process through establishment of a council, comprising 25 delegates
from each country. The council will promote reconciliation with the
opposition and cooperation between the neighbours.
Dennis Ross observed that Pakistan seemed hesitant to act against alQaeda and if it does not act the more threats should be hurled. One would
think the Bush Administration would hold some sway over President Pervez
Musharraf, given the $10 billion in aid it has provided his government since
9/11 for its assistance in the war on terrorism. And yetMusharraf has
permitted radical Islamists to strengthen their positions in the areas along
Pakistans border with Afghanistan.
Musharraf has portrayed himself as a bulwark against the Islamists
but also one who must respect the political realities of his country. He has
publicly declared his opposition to radical Islamist teachings and terrorism,
and he has cooperated with the United States and others in arresting leading
al-Qaeda operatives like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad. But he has also
implied that he must avoid actions against Islamists that might tear his
country apart, given the weight of the Islamic political parties and tribal
loyalties in the provinces where military actions might be most necessary.

56

But while it would be foolhardy to dismiss Musharrafs concerns,

it is his own actions not those of the United States that seem to be
creating a coalition of secular and religious opposition Musharrafs
readiness to contemplate two completely different options a power-sharing
with a former prime minister and one of his leading political opponents,
Benazir Bhutto, and alternatively the declaration of a state of emergency
indicates his own awareness of the pressures building on him.
Furthermore, truth be told, while the United States today is
unpopular in Pakistan at least in part because it seems to prop up
Musharraf with assistance that goes largely to the military, with only
relatively small amounts devoted to social and economic development
Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorist attacks on the military and government
officials are also generating increasing sentiment against them.
This should be heartening to US officials, for it suggests that the
threat of the United States destabilizing Pakistan is not as great as many fear.
But the threat of an al-Qaeda attack originating from within Pakistan is
certainly great, and it cannot be ignored or tolerated. Musharraf, the
Pakistani military, and the public needs to know this We do have an
interest in conditioning the Pakistani public to a reality that if Pakistan
does not act against a threat we may have no choice but to do so.
Before going public in such a manner, however, the administration
would be wise to try to hold quiet military-to-military discussions about
how both the United States and Pakistan can act to combat the threat posed
by the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
Such talks might sensitize both sides to the actual nature of the threat
and the steps we might take that would make it easier for the Pakistani
military to act. But if private diplomacy and communication continue to
prove ineffective, more public statements are also part of statecraft. It is
appropriate for us to call attention to the growth of al-Qaeda and the Taliban
as forces that are threatening to the well-being of Pakistan, its neighbours,
and to us and ultimately to the fact that someone is going to have to deal
with this threat.
Michael Hirsh and Ron Moreau analyzed the divergent views of US
and Pakistan on resurgence of al-Qaeda. Mahmud Ali Durrani, Pakistans
Ambassador to the United States, told Newsweek, saying the NIE is
absolutely incorrect Still Durrani confirmed that the government is
57

very concerned about the extremists creeping outside the tribal areas and
said Musharraf had launched a new push that includes adding 20,000 more
paramilitaries to the 100,000 troops already bordering those areas. That, and
additional training, will take about six months, Durrani says.
Whether Musharraf has that much time is another question.
Since he faced down an Islamist rebellion at a mosque in the heart of his
capital city, Islamabad, he has appeared to lose control of his countrys
security. Al-Qaeda affiliated armed militants have retaliated stronglyin the
lawless tribal region along the Afghan frontier, as well as two suicide attacks
in Islamabad.
In response, the Pakistani leader has flirted with the idea of
declaring a state of emergency that would extend his rule for at least one
year, postponing both the presidential election, scheduled for late next
month, and the general election, due early next year. The state of emergency
would give him sweeping powers and allow him to curb civil liberties
sharply.
Yet another measure of Musharrafs waning power is the
eagerness with which he has politically courted a woman he once
publicly called a thief for alleged corruption during her two terms as prime
minister Benazir Bhutto Musharraf had been reaching out to Bhutto
halfheartedly for a year, but after he summarily ousted the nations Supreme
Court justice in March, provoking widespread demonstrations, his popularity
plummeted. Now he seems desperate to bring her into a coalition
government that will blunt the calls for his resignation.
For the United States, the No 1 concern is figuring out a way to
crush the resurgence of al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Waziristan and Bajaur,
without doing fatal damage to Musharraf. Pakistani officials point to the
successes theyve had inside their cities in arresting Qaeda bigwigs like
Khalid Shaikh Mohammad.
Ambassador Durrani says the real fault lies with Washington. After
KSM was captured in Rawalpindi in March 2003 just as Bush was
invading Iraq I think al-Qaeda was almost destroyed in an operational
sense. But then al-Qaeda got a vacuum in Afghanistan. And they got a
motivational area in Iraq. Al-Qaeda rejuvenated. And what Pakistan is
getting now is the blowback from that, rather than the other way around. The

58

worry now is that the blowback will some day cross the Atlantic and no
one is effectively stopping it.
Wajahat Latif opined: Presidents credibility in his own country is
low, but hes readily conceded the unenviable distinction of having obliged
the Americans on all their demands. Since 9/11 he has said no to nothing
they have asked for.
The reaction among the people to all this is obviously negative, to the
extent that a member of Musharrafs cabinet shouted slogans of jihad in the
parliament last Tuesday. Never in living memory has the US been more
unpopular in Pakistan.
The official response of the regime to the strike talk is meek.
Hiding behind diplomatic jargon, they advise the US to stay within the
accepted parameters of cooperation, reasserting that there are no al-Qaeda
or Taliban safe havens in Pakistan. Americans reject that position
outright
In pursuit of the American agenda or not, the governments policy
on extremism is spreading violence at an alarming rate, terror now
hitting the capital. It has so far caused thousands of casualties in the security
forces, even more of civilian men, women and children. His domestic policy
failing on all counts, the federal governments writ in the tribal area all but
ignored, complete break down of law and order, a crumbling Q League
faade: the General is in a political cul de sac.
The Nation criticized the cross-border attack in Waziristan. The
US-led coalition forces and Afghan troops struck militant positions in
Pakistans tribal region on Sunday, killing 19, including insurgents as well as
women and children. The cross-border attack came in less than a week after
Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri held out an assurance on the floor of the
National Assembly that Pakistan would not accept any American action
inside its territory.
After the attack, American military spokesperson Captain Vanessa
Bowman told a foreign news agency that this was fully coordinated with
Pakistan and agreed on. It was met with a firm rebuttal by DG ISPRwho
denied that any permission was given. General Arshad did what he was
expected to do. Such statements cannot convince the tribesmen since they
have seen the government even providing a cover to US drone attacks on a

59

Bajaur Madrassa in the past, which led to the death of 80 persons, including
children.
The authorities need to realize that the cross-border strikes will add
fuel to the fire in the region. The perception that the recent attack on the socalled militant hideouts with a prior permission from the Pakistan authorities
will exacerbate the domestic security problem as the country is already
facing the fallout of extremism.
H D S Greenway warned against the armed intervention in Pakistan.
There have been hints of military action against al-Qaeda in Pakistan, some
of them clandestine to avoid embarrassing Musharraf who has forbidden
American troops on Pakistani soil The American way of war depends on
massive firepower from the air, not the determined, loss-inflicting, villageto-village way that is necessary in irregular warfare.
The number of civilian deaths being inflicted in neighbouring
Afghanistan by American and NATO forces has caused President Hamid
Karzai to protest time and time again the reason being that these civilian
deaths are turning the local population against the government. When the
tipping point arrives, all our efforts in Afghanistan are doomed. To repeat
this in Pakistan would be a strategic blunder on the scale of Iraq.
A result of American armed intervention in Pakistan could be the
dissolution of Pakistan itself. The border lands with Afghanistan,
Baluchistan, and the Northwest Frontier Province never mind the tribal
territories are a major problem for Pakistan. Costly and nation threatening
revolts have plagued the government since Pakistan was formed.
I believe Musharraf is sincere when he says he wants to get rid the
country of Islamic extremists. But he has to tread carefully, as the tribal
nationalism of the frontier is interwoven with Islamism, much of it extreme.
His previous attempts at military intervention have been even less successful
than his try for a truce. The political ramifications of a full scale revolt on
the frontier would be, for Pakistan, far worse than al-Qaedas presence. Such
an event would be worse for America too. Unfortunately not everybody in
Pakistan thinks it a bad thing to have a Taliban card to play just in case
Afghanistan turns against Pakistan at some future date.
Fakir S Ayazuddin condemned the regimes empty rhetoric against US
threats. While we are all loudly proclaiming our sovereignty and rightly

60

so And our Foreign Minister thunders dire warnings to anyone who would
challenge this sovereignty. His loud threats embarrass our citizenry for
we know and recognize empty bombast, for what it is. We only wish that
these remarks were made by someone less educated, more realistic, and in a
less responsible position. These threats fool nobody, especially as the targets
of these threats, are vague, not unlike Quixotes windmills.
The bigger dangers are that the threats are being taken seriously
by sensible Pakistanis who should know better, and youngsters, who being
in the fanatic fundo mode, are exhorted to join the Suicide Brigade. This
would then be used as a weapon aimed at whoever is targeted by their
handlers.
The other dangerous aspect is the voices in the assembly echoing the
same threats. This is as dangerous as the threats by the US presidential
candidates to attack our Holy cities. Now whereas Bush led a chorus of
voices against Obamas remarks, and the American press immediately also
reacted forcing a retraction our press, our government, and our politicians
are strangely silent on the rhetoric of our Mullahs, and that, by their very
silence are taken careful note of by the foreign media; thus reinforcing the
perception of the Fundamentalist State.
We must be very careful, for this perception is in itself a cause for
concern, as coupled with the nuclear capability, we are now not just a cause
of concern, but will be targeted accordingly, before we can even think of
using them (God forbid). And on whom? For Kasuri to brandish the
nuclear ability is not only foolish but also very dangerous The
president would do well to rein him in quickly.
While Musharraf is being besieged by the Americans for not doing
enough, he should start by cleaning up the Assemblies, and the Senate from
such dangerous elements which by their utterances, and their cover actions
would be giving tacit, and not so tacit support to the extremists in our midst
who are the true enemies of Pakistan. Before they can damage any
external enemies, they are not only damaging Pakistan, but also
hindering any development that would be possible.
Col Ahmed observed: A few days ago I watched an interview of
our worthy foreign minister Mr Kasuri on a channel. As usual he was
extremely aggressive and abrasive, driving home his points in thundering

61

fashion. However, the sad part is that this aggression is reserved for only
dealing with our own people.
When it came to defending our interests in front of Mr Collin
Powells famous you are with us or against us. Our rulers turned into
pussycat. Seems like our government is tough and brave against its own
people and meek and humble against our enemies.
If the Americans do bomb our territories, what will the present
government do? Do they have any strategy or plan or even the will to stand
up to such aggression? Perhaps the only thing they can do is to lodge a
sheepish protest. Muslims are supposed to be soft and compassionate
amongst themselves and tough and hard against the enemies of Islam. The
present government and the foreign office have got it all the other way
around.
Z A Kazmi from Karachi wrote: US planning aggressive measures in
Pakistan, says a headline in the papers of July 19. the President of Pakistan
had recently told his people that if any of their compatriots were killed
because they were terrorist, it did not matter who killed them, our troops or
foreign forces. In the end, we will remember not the words of America
but the silent complicity of our rulers.
The Nation was of the view that it seems apparent that the US
would strike targets within our territory if it could get away with it.
Aggressive statements of US presidential candidates were merely
diplomatically dealt with by Pakistan but no real action was taken to press
the US government to emphatically deny any intention of aggression.
This situation is disheartening for any Pakistani with even an
ounce of patriotism. The situation in our tribal areas must be dealt with
independently through deals with tribal elders that weed out militants. There
should be a simultaneous initiative to exert soft power over people to
prevent terrorism and this must be accompanied by US abstinence from
blabbing out statements that create more militants.
The News wrote on another incident of hostage taking. Though
the government has officially not confirmed the hostage-taking and is in fact
denying that any such thing has happened, it is said to be working behindthe-scenes to secure the release of the soldiers that so many regular army
soldiers and FC personnel could be disarmed and taken hostage by a smaller

62

band of militants is something that will have to be investigated closely by

the government in due course of time.
A closer look at the reports surrounding the act suggests that there
may be any number of reasons why the kidnapping became possible.
One of them seems to be lack of communication with the locals. There are
reports that the militants stopped the soldiers because they suspected that
such a large body of troops could only be advancing to launch an attack,
even though this looks more like a motivating excuse.
The incident comes at a delicate time for the beleaguered government
of President Musharraf not to mention the international embarrassment in
the midst of unceasing complaints from Washington that the Pakistani
government is not dealing with terrorism well enough. Regardless of such
charges, its clear from the incident that the government could have been
doing this job more single-mindedly if it had not been mired in political
crises of its own making. The dialogue in which the government is trying
to engage the militants is the best option available to the government.
The capture of nearly 250 soldiers in one incident was quite an
alarming incident for reasons other than routinely put forward by the
analysts and politicians. It was unique that not a single man was killed or
wounded in the incident, which meant that neither the soldiers resisted nor
the militants resorted to their killer instincts. It was clear indication that
either side did not like to kill each other simply because they disliked this
war waged by Musharraf at the behest of the Crusaders.
Dr S M Rahman warned Pakistan not to be party to war on terror
because of the savagery of occupation forces. Musharraf rightly pointed out
in the recently held jirga that Taliban and Talibanization are not
synonymous. USA could not subdue the Iraqis, where they had thought that
it will be an easy walkover and that the allied combatants would be
garlanded The resurgence of Taliban will lead to humiliating defeat for the
US and NATO forces. It is an inevitable fate that they will have to encounter.
Savage destruction of Afghanistan and ruthless bombing has led to the
massacre of innocent men, women and children.
The magnitude of atrocities through state terrorism is indeed
colossal and the providence has its own way of retribution. Pakistan is
expected to do what they have miserably failed in achieving. Why should
Pakistan be a party to the uncivilized savagery? Terrorism attributed to
63

Taliban is essentially a posture of defiance to protect their honour and

independence. Why should Pakistan be a party to eliminating them? Sooner
or later USA and NATO forces will have to quit from Afghanistan and also
withdraw from Iraq. The Islamic Resistance has established that sheer
military power cannot stand against the indomitable will of the people.
Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
Pakistan should review its Afghan policy and through dialogue and
understanding with Taliban it can ensure their cooperation for building up
the war-ravaged Afghanistan. Do more Syndrome is a mischievous ploy to
render Pakistan weak on its north western frontier so that it loses the
strategic depth, a concept very aptly propounded by General Beg, but
unfortunately not understood or appreciated in its proper perspective. It was
not physical depth that he had implied but a historic depth built on
perpetual sense of togetherness and common destiny. It is time to seriously
ponder particularly, viewing the hegemonistic aspirations of our big
neighbour in the east. Do more peace with Taliban is in Pakistans as
well as US interest.
Chris Floyd opined: The curse of Bushs friendship has
weakened Musharrafs standing as a strong, independent leader in the
eyes of his people, which in turn has forced him into increasingly hard-line
measures to bolster his faltering authority. As a military ruler, Musharraf has
no institutional legitimacy as the ruler of Pakistan; everything depends on
his personal stature, and the willingness of various powerful factions to
acquiesce to his leadership. One by one, these factions, both religious and
secular, are withdrawing that acquiescence, and Musharraf is watching his
authority bleed away.
As always with our Terror Warriors, its a win-win situation: you get
either an obedient client state with sweetheart deals for your Homeland
cronies and military bases for projecting dominance, or else a nice little
hellhole spawning profitable instability and imminent threats that must
be met with, well, sweetheart deals for your Homeland cronies and military
bases for projecting dominance. This dynamic is operating with wild success
in Iraq and to a lesser extent in Afghanistan.
As long as the Bush gangsters remain out of jail, free to enjoy their
ill-gotten gains and use them to further their rapacious agenda (either in or
out of office), then they will have won the Terror War no matter what

64

actually happens in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan or Iran or in a

blowback-battered America, for that matter.
We cant really put it any plainer than this: they literally do not care
how many people die and suffer as a result of their policies. The only
restraint the only one on their actions is the need to preserve the
acquiescence of various American factions to their own illegitimate,
authoritarian rule. They have continuously, relentlessly pushed the
boundaries to see how far they can go and still retain this acquiescence and
at every step, no matter how outrageous, they have found that it still holds.
Killing a million innocent Iraqis is obviously OK but would two
million, or six million, cause uproar? Dropping bombs in residential areas is
fine with the folks but would carpet bombing Sadr City be a bit too much?
But these restraints, such as they are, are merely political; moral, legal, and
ethical concerns play no part in the Bushists calculations.
In fact, the whole adventure in Iraq has been a win-win scenario for
the Bushists from the start, no matter how it ends up. This is what many of
the opponents of the war and even most of its now-fretful supporters
have failed to grasp, because they dont understand what the Bush Family is
about.
Put simply, the Bushes represent the confluence of three longestablished power factions in the American elite: oil, arms and
investments. These groups equate their own interests, their own wealth and
privilege, with the interests of the nation indeed, the world as a whole.
And they pursue these interests with every weapon at their command,
including war, torture, deceit and corruption. Democracy means nothing to
them not even in their own country, as we saw in the 2000 election.
Musharraf happens to be front-line mercenary in this unholy war.
Babar Sattar discussed the negative effects of fighting Americas war
as its ally. This year probably saw the most lack-luster Defence Day
celebrations in Pakistans recent history. It came within days of the
deadly bombings in Rawalpindi that claimed 29 lives. Meanwhile almost
300 soldiers are being held hostage by tribal insurgents in Waziristan. With
every passing day the number of servicemen being killed in the ill-conceived
military operation being carried out in the NWFP is rising. What kind of war
is Pakistan Army fighting against insurgents in the tribal areas and is it
distinguishable from Americas war on terror? Is this military operation not
65

creating a larger national security crisis for the country by pitting Pakistanis
against Pakistanis and turning our urban centres into battlegrounds? Who is
keeping count of the casualties of our soldiers and is such a loss acceptable?
Can territories be ruled by force once the local population turns hostile?
While the Taliban can be criticized for introducing an obscurantist
and brutal regime in Afghanistan, they were not the architects of 9/11
Even if misguided, Taliban are sons of the soil and their ambition is not
geo-strategic but limited to preserving control over their territory and
culture. Likewise, notwithstanding their rhetoric, the tribal insurgents in
Pakistan are not waging a jihad to conquer the US but only against foreign
invasion. Unfortunately, Pakistan Army is now seen as the agent of the
foreign invaders making it the prime target in its own country.
The US-led NATO forces fighting in Afghanistan and their sponsors
in the West wish to believe that an overwhelming majority of Afghans
welcome their presence and see them as agents of the much desired change.
It is true that the Afghans crave change, but one that is homegrown and
not imposed from abroad.
The strategic thinking behind Pakistan Armys operation in the
tribal areas is unclear. Other than proving that Pakistan is committed to
proving unequivocal support to the US war on terror even at the expense of
its own security interests, what are the goals of this operation, what are the
measures of success and what is the probability of victory? Do the people of
Pakistan support this operation? Is the army itself convinced of its rational
for psychological and military reasons, an army needs a well-defined and
hated enemy to wage a war. And there is none in the tribal areas. There is a
lot of anger against suicide bombers indiscriminately killing civilians in the
cities and armed militants killing Pakistani soldiers in the tribal areas. But
there is an equal amount of resentment against military operation against
Pakistanis and the avoidable loss of life such as that in Bajaur and
elsewhere.
From the psychological perspective, the insurgents are viewed by
many in the army as well in Pakistan more generally as misguided but not
evil. Being Pakistanis and also allies of the military in the pre-9/11 world,
they do not fall squarely within the definition of the enemy. From a
military strategy perspective, it is impossible to wage a war where one
cannot identify the enemy. Thus in the tribal areas it only becomes apparent
who the enemy really is once they shoot at you. The capture of 300 soldiers
66

in Waziristan illustrates the conundrum Pakistan has got itself into.

Reportedly not a bullet was fired or any resistance put up by the soldiers
while being taken as hostage by the insurgents. Was a similar response of
soldiers conceivable if this was a battle between India and Pakistan for
example?
The military operation in the tribal areas is jeopardizing
Pakistans security interests. On the one hand it is demoralizing the army,
undermining its credibility as an effective fighting machine and causing loss
of precious lives of soldiers. On the other, it is alienating the tribes in the
frontier, turning our cities into battle grounds, causing unnecessary loss of
civilian lives in the tribal areas and the cities and threatening to wipe out the
sensible centre of Pakistan by creating more ideological polarization within
the society. It does not bode well for the health of a nation when the
protectors of its frontiers become the primary targets of security threats from
within the country. It is even more disconcerting when members of a society
feel no qualms about using fellow civilians as legitimate military targets to
make political and ideological statements. Such a society needs to heal and
rehabilitate and that process can only begin once violence is shunned as
policy instrument.
As a first step Pakistan needs to set its priorities straight. In
unconditionally supporting the war on terror as well as the US strategy in
fighting that war, there is much more at stake for Pakistan than losing
generous military assistance and an opportunity to win accolades. The
Musharraf regimes support for an unpopular war, apart from igniting fires
of hate against the US, has created a security situation within the country
that is out of control and is threatening to tear apart our social fabric. Instead
of focusing on assisting the US in its war all over the world, we need to
focus on our differences within.
General Mirza Aslam Beg wrote on the global conspiracies against
the ally called Pakistan and others in the region. US and India signed the
Strategic Partnership deal in 2003, with declared objectives, to contain
and curb the rising military and economic power of China and the increasing
threat of Islamic extremism in the region. In this respect, both found
harmony and commonality of interests in pursuit of these objectives.
However, as the military situation worsened, attention got focused on
the larger objective of the occupation forces, to establish an intelligence
network in Afghanistan, to destabilize Pakistan and other neighbouring
67

countries such as, China, Russia, Central Asian States and Iran. It was the
time that the US State Department declared that Afghanistan, which has
been part of Central Asia geo-politically, henceforth, will be considered as
part of South Asia. The implicit purpose was to bring Afghanistan, within
easy reach of India, to use it as the base for intelligence network against the
neighbouring countries. For this purpose, the intelligence network which has
since been established and is fully operational.
The nerve centre is at Jabal-us-Siraj, manned and operated by
CIA, RAW, Mossad, MI6 and BND (German Intelligence). Its a huge setup with concrete buildings, antennas and all the modern electronic gadgetry
one can conceive of. General went on to describe the dispersal of the
network across Afghanistan.
Against Pakistan: Sarobi is the nerve centre headed by an Indian
General Officer, who also commands the Border Road Organization (BRO).
its forward bases are, Ghazni, Khost, Gardez, Jalalabad, Asadabad, Wakhan
and Faizabad Sarobi network, targets the province of NWFP. Dissidents
from Pakistan are trained at Sarobi for missions inside NWFP. Wakhan
Salient has been infested with dozens of electronic outposts covering
Pakistan, China, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.
Kandahar has its forward bases at Lashkargah and Nawah. Their
target area is the province of Baluchistan. The dissidents from Baluchistan
are trained at Lashkargah for undertaking missions in Baluchistan as well as
in support of the BLA. One of their tasks is to target Chinese working in the
province, particularly at Gwadar, Sandak and Hab. The American
anchorages, on the Pakistani coast at Jiwani and Kalamat, jointly plan
operations with BLA inside Baluchistan. They also use the Pakistani
outposts at Mand, for operations inside Iran. The American warships in the
Arabian Sea and their intelligence base in Muscat, provide the back-up
support. The facilities at Jiwani and Kalamat were provided by Pakistan, as
logistic support bases to the Americans for operation in Afghanistan, but the
same are now being used, to destabilize Baluchistan and Iran.
Against China: The set-up at Faizabad (Badakhshan) holds over 350
personnel mainly Muslim soldiers, engineers and workers from India. It
serves as the training camp for the Chinese dissidents from the Xingjian
province. Indian Ulema impart motivational education, giving the
impression that the entire outfit at Faizabad was run by Pakistanis. The
recently acquired facility for military deployment by India, across the border
68

in Tajikistan at Kalai Kumli, adds a meaningful capability to India to operate

inside Tajikistan, as well as Uzbekistan.
Against Russia: The intelligence base at Mazar-e-Sharif is run
jointly by CIA, RAW, Mossad and BND. Chechnyan dissidents and agents
from Turkmenistan are trained for operations in these countries. Rasheed
Dostam and Ahmad Zia Masood are very active supporters of such activities
in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
Against Iran: The forward base at Herat and Farah are manned by
CIA, RAW, and Mossad for subversive activities inside Iran. Jointly
operating from these bases and the bases inside Pakistan, such as Karamat,
Jiwani and Mand, they have been able to undertake actions inside Iran,
killing a number of security forces personnel in the last few years. The
terrorist organization named Jandola has been used for conduct of such
operations inside Iran.
Pakistan and Iran are being blamed for supporting terrorists in
Afghanistan, whereas Afghan territory is being violated so blatantly to
destabilize the neighbouring countries of Afghanistan, by nations, who
claim to be the flag bearers of the ideals of international norms of justice and
fairplay. This is the worst kind of Terrorism Through Consensus, by the socalled civilized nations in occupation of Afghanistan. The brutal violation of
Afghanistans sovereignty for the shameful purpose of destabilization of
Pakistan and the regional countries is condemnable. Was this the purpose of
the strategic partnership deal between India United States and NATO?
My argument is based on the research and study, which may not be as
accurate as the information held by the government of Pakistan. Yet it is
surprising that after so much of suffering at the hands of foreign saboteurs,
the Government of Pakistan has woken-up now, to say that foreign hands
are involved in the recent killing of the Chinese. And on the floor of the
assembly, the finger was pointed also to CIA. Why this announcement has
come so late? Why such culpable lack of responsibility to protect our
national interests, while our enemies have spun a web of espionage and
conspiracies, which undermines our national security.
Uzma Munshi from Rawalpindi urged: Knowing that the defeat of
the invaders in Afghanistan is inevitable, it would be foolish on the part of
Pakistan to use its military force against the Afghan resistance It is time
to rethink about our support for the so-called war on terrorism. Pakistan
69

army must be saved from being caught in this quagmire. Already we have
lost a number of our professional soldiers. Further involvement could cause
much greater tragedy which we must avoid.

EASTERN FRONT
The composite dialogue could be seen creeping only by the very
observant eye. The creeping has been so slow the direction of its movement
cannot be undetermined. On 30th August, Pakistan in meeting held in New
Delhi asked India to abandon Wullar Project, but Indo-Pak meeting failed to
settle dispute over the dam. Meanwhile, India released 72 Pakistanis instead
of the promised release of 150 prisoners.
The acts and statements negative to confidence building were in
plenty. On 16th August, India tested flying of a combat helicopter. Next day,
Indian Army Chief said there would be no withdrawal from Occupied
Kashmir as the time was not ripe.
On 20th August, Pakistan warned India against nuclear tests. Five days
later, Pakistan tested an air-launched cruise missile. The same day, at least
37 people were killed and 60 wounded in two blasts in Hyderabad; as usual
fingers were pointed towards Pakistan and this time also at Bangladesh
though the explosives used were produced by a factory in Nagpur.
Next day, Indian politicians blamed Pakistan for Hyderabad
bombings. They waited to do so for 24 hours which was quite unusual.
Pakistans Foreign Office told India to stop blame game. On 28 th August five
RAW agents were arrested near Landi Kotal.
On 29th August, riots erupted in Agra after four Muslims were crushed
by a truck; Taj Mahal was closed for tourists. Next day, Pakistan rejected
anti-India propaganda charge and instead alleged that Indian missions
abroad were involved in anti-Pakistan propaganda. On 5th September, India
rejected a Pakistani proposal on release of prisoners.
Perpetration of state terrorism by Indian troops and retaliatory
actions by Kashmiri freedom fighters continued in IHK:

70

 Geelani condemned custodial killing of Showkat Bhat. High Court

served notice to the government over killings in fake encounters.
Protest rally was held in Jammu against human rights violations.
Four policemen and nine civilians were wounded on 9th July when two
grenades were hurled at the residence of Umar Abdullah. Next day,
Indian troops martyred two Kashmiris. One Indian soldier committed
suicide.
On 11th August, Indias biggest ammunition depot in IHK was
destroyed in fire; four people including three soldiers were killed and
41 including 23 soldiers were wounded. Next day, Indian troops killed
a Kashmiri youth in Sopore.
Three more people were reported killed on 13 th August as a result of
depot blast; one army officer was shot dead. Next day, Indian troops
killed two Kashmiris. Death toll in ammunition depot fire rose to 20.
Kashmiris observed Indias Independence Day as Black Day. On 18th
August, seven soldiers were killed and six wounded in roadside
bombing. Troops killed a Kashmiri in another incident. Indian army
planned to introduce laser weapons in IHK.
Mirwaiz asked India to close ammunition depots in IHK. Three
Kashmiris were martyred by Indian troops on 20 th August. Three days
later, Indian troops martyred two more Kashmiris.
Two Kashmiris were martyred by Indian troops on 24th August. Next
day, violent demonstrations were held over disgracing and killing of
ten-year old girl student.
One Kashmiri was killed on 27th August. Many were injured when
police used force against people protesting against mistreatment
meted out to women in an army camp. Next day, seven Kashmiris
were killed in two incidents of state terrorism.
Mirwaiz said three-year-old talks with India have failed. Indian troops
had killed 61 Kashmiris during the month of August.

71

 On 2nd September, Education Minister of IHK survived an

assassination attempt near Srinagar. Three Kashmiris were martyred
by Indian troops on 5th September.
Birjees Nagi from Lahore urged that Pakistan must remain firm on its
stand on Kashmir. Indian PM Manmohan Singhs statement that the Line of
Control can now become a symbol of peace between India and Pakistan
he wants a public relinquishment of Pakistans commitment to the disputed
line so that we are moved away from our longstanding stance on Kashmir. If
the multilateral Indus Basin Treaty could not restrain Indian from aggressive
encroachment on Pakistans secure riparian rights, what guarantee there is
now that India would desist from future aggression?
More so because a supine surrender to American diktat by our rulers
and withdrawal of support of the Kashmiri freedom fighters whom we now
term militants and jihadis has not brought any benefit, not even the
goodwill of the Indian leaders. They remain as hostile as ever. Hence
goodwill or not we must remain firm on our longstanding stand.
Yasser Rizwan from Lahore cautioned that RAWs hand couldnt be
ignored behind the recent series of bombings. In the ongoing state of hype
created by the Lal Masjid incident, the judicial crisis, the American threats
and the sensationalized media have diverted our attention from the ever
lurking threat of India Indias defence budget is $18.63 billion, more
than six times that of Pakistan. It is highly probable that most of it is being
used in covert missions. It is an irrefutable fact that India has been feeding
anti-Pakistan elements in Baluchistan.
Other terror incident that have claimed hundreds of lives in different
cities of Pakistan, were also ostensibly plotted by the Indian agencies. The
RAWs hand cant be ignored behind the recent series of bombings in
Pakistan. Remember, whenever there is internal instability in the country, the
enemy exploits it through covert operations and funding.
The Nation wrote about the blame game after Hyderabad blasts. For
the advocates of Indo-Pakistan amity on both sides of the border as well as
in the world, it would be disheartening news that the Home Minister of
Andhra Pardesh should have found it appropriate and consistent with
reason to blame Pakistans ISI for the bomb blasts, which occurred in
Indias Hyderabad City last Saturday, hardly waiting for the noise of
explosions to die down.
72

Commonsense would have demanded a dispassionate probe into the

tragedy before pinpointing the culprit, not a knee jerk reaction of leveling
charges against another country, howsoever hostile towards it one might be.
The fact that the State Minister concerned with internal security drew a
sudden conclusion, undoubtedly biased at first glance unless proven through
a proper investigation, only brings out an undercurrent of the feeling in
India that Islamabad has a besetting failing for creating trouble in
India.
S M Hali discussed Indian refusal to pullout its troops from Occupied
Kashmir. Indian Army Chief General Jogindar Jaswant Singh has ruled
out a withdrawal or reduction of troops deployed in Occupied Kashmir
as long as the Valley remained under threat from separatist guerrillas. He
said the army had been called into Kashmirs hinterland to perform
constitutional duty of helping restore law and order, safeguard lives and
allow the state administration to carry out its tasks.
This statement comes as a rude shock in the face of Pakistans peace
overtures and demands of Indian withdrawal, at least, part of troops from
Occupied Kashmir as an element of CBM Indian Army command as well
as its political leaders has admitted on numerous occasions that the alleged
infiltration has almost ceased and there is significant reduction in the
activities of the (legitimate) freedom struggle. However, the latest statement
of the Indian Army Chief clearly shows that New Delhi has no intention
of lowering its repression in Occupied Kashmir.
On the contrary, there are reports that the intensity of military
operation has increased and the opportunity afforded by the freedom
fighters for peaceful resolution of the conflict is being misused by Indian
occupation forces to totally wipe out the Kashmiri resistance.
This state terrorism is being perpetrated because the Kashmiris
want an end to the military occupation of their land by India and demand
the fulfillment of the pledge given by Indias first Prime Minister Pandit
Jawaharlal Nehru and guaranteed by the United Nations Security Council
that the people of Kashmir will determine their future through a plebiscite
organized impartially.
The News wrote an editorial on AI report on Kashmir. Accusations
leveled this week in a new report by Amnesty International that Indian
troops in Occupied Jammu and Kashmir are resorting to brutal
73

torture in their fight against insurgency in the area are disconcerting and
unfortunate evidence of the failure of the Indian of the Indian lawenforcement agencies to move away from the policies that have contributed
to conflict in the region. It is worth reiterating that calls and efforts to
promote peace in Kashmir, which, in turn, are intrinsically linked to the
stability in the Subcontinent, are rendered redundant if such practices are not
renounced.
The decades-old atrocities of the Indian military, which are welldocumented, are not only the result but also the cause of the violent
uprising in Kashmir which began in the late 80s. By torturing suspects and,
as the report suggests, raping women of troublesome villages, the Indian
forces are perpetuating the very problem they are allegedly trying to combat.
Consequently, such acts also sabotage the peace process between India and
Pakistan. More worrying is the fact that by continuing to ignore such
realities, the people are playing right into the hands of hawks on both sides.
There is an urgent need to break this cycle of violence.
The Nation wrote on Indo-US nuclear deal. Both India and the US
have been giving different interpretations of the controversial deal approved
by them after talks spanning two years. The perception that this deal would
create a strategic imbalance in the region is strengthened with the recently
adopted operative agreement not explicitly stating that the New Delhi
conducts nuclear tests, Washington has the right to terminate nuclear
cooperation and demand the return of equipment and technology. Many US
weapons experts have pointed out that the termination clause only indicates
that the party seeking termination has the right to cease further cooperation
if it feels that a mutually acceptable resolution of outstanding issues cannot
be achieved through consultations.
Pakistan is well within its right to ask the Nuclear Suppliers Group to
adopt a balanced approach rather than providing India with nuclear fuel,
including uranium, especially when it is not signatory to the NPT.
Islamabad must tell Washington in no uncertain terms that its
discriminatory approach would prove a destabilizing factor for South
Asia.

HOME FRONT

74

Insurgency in Baluchistan persisted at low key. Following incidents

were reported during the period:
One person was killed and 8 wounded in a bomb blast in Hub on 12 th
August. Two days later, blasts in D G Khan and Fort Manro injured
four people.
Two soldiers were shot dead in Dera Bugti on 15 th August. Four days
later, militants abducted 50 Iranians after setting their vehicles on fire
and brought them to Baluchistan.
On 20th August, FC forces got the Iranians freed from the kidnappers
from Mand area; 17 kidnappers were captured and one was killed
during the operation.
Thirteen blasts were reported across Baluchistan on the eve of first
anniversary of Akbar Bugti; three soldiers were injured, gas to Dera
Bugti, and electricity to Kohlu and Dera Bugti were disrupted.
Strike on first anniversary of Akbar Bugti paralyzed Baluchistan on
26th August. A Bugti militant along with 20 companions surrendered
to authorities in Dera Bugti.
Gas pipeline was blown up in Sui gas field on 31 st August and a blast
took place in Khuzdar cantonment.
On 2nd September, one FC soldier was killed and four wounded when
their vehicle hit a landmine near Dera Bugti. Next day, Musharraf
urged Baluch people to help fight saboteurs.
Three people, including 2 FC soldiers, were killed by gunmen in
Quetta on 5th September.

Ideological struggle has become multi-faceted due to varying

interests of the belligerent forces. After the fall of Lal Masjid and Jamia
Hafsa, the venue of battle between obscurantist mullahs and the enlightened
regime shifted to the courts. On 10 th August, the Supreme Court instructed
the administration to expedite identification of the students killed in
Operation Silence. Additional forces were deployed around Lal Masjid after

75

some people tried to offer Juma prayers. MNA Shah Abdul Aziz vowed to
carry out Ghazi Brothers mission.
Next day, Musharraf blamed media for projecting Lal Masjid issue
and showed willingness to talk with Wafaqul Madaris. On 13th August,
Senators belonging to MMA vowed probing Lal Masjid operation. Two days
later and more than six weeks after the Operation Silence the banker prime
minister promised to locate all the missing persons.
On 16th August, leadership of Wafaqul Madaris apologized to whole
nation for committing mistakes over Lal Masjid episode Haif ous zood
peshimam ka peshiman hona). And asked the media to do the same thing for
not showing hard facts (but media wont do that being party to the
massacre). Musharraf sought moderates help against extremism. Sherpao
denied that Lal Masjid operation was carried out under US pressure.
Two more petitions against Operation Silence for use of excessive
force and extra-judicial killings were filed in the Supreme Court on 17 th
August. Next day, Maulana Abdul Aziz expressed full trust in the Supreme
Court for justice. A delegation of Ulema of Wafaqul Madaris met Maulana
Abdul Aziz in Simili Rest House. Twenty-one students of Lal Masjid
seminary were freed on courts order.
On 21st August, Jamia Hafsa students demanded release of Maulana
Abdul Aziz. Police claimed arresting two masterminds of Abpara bomb
blast. Next day, law enforcement agencies claimed arresting two more
masterminds of Islamabad blasts. Al-Nahyan Group donated a school on
international standard for Jamia Hafsa students.
On 24th August, students of madaris demanded reopening of Lal
Masjid. Next day, Musharraf urged artists to help counter extremism. On
27th August, ATC Rawalpindi accepted the bail applications of Umme
Hassan, her daughter, Khalid Khwaja and 17 others in three cases. The
students of Jamia Hafsa were stopped from going to the site of their
madrassa to offer fateha on the eve of Shab-i-Barat.
Umme Hassan and 21 others were released on 28th August. The
students of Jamia Hafsa warmly received their teacher outside Simili Dam
Rest House. Two days later, daughter of Maulana Abdul Aziz was released
on bail.

76

A large number of students, local residents and public assembled near

Lal Masjid to say Juma prayer in mosque on 31 st August. They said their
prayers on the road after they were not allowed to enter the mosque. They
protested and chanted anti-government slogans like Go Musharraf Go, AlJihad and Ghazi Zindabad. Meanwhile, MNA Shah Abdul Aziz said a new
Ameer has been appointed to carry on with the mission of Ghazi.
On 1st September, Ulema held a meeting in Rawalpindi and demanded
reopening of the Lal Masjid before Ramazan. Two days later, hearing of the
case of wife of Ghazi Rasheed was adjourned till September 8. Imran Khan
condemned Lal Masjid operation. During his exclusive TV show on Defence
Day, Musharraf claimed that Lal Masjid operation was a great success. Next
day, protesters urged the Supreme Court to take suo moto notice for not
reopening the Lal Masjid.
The case for tracing of missing persons was another battle that was
being fought on this front. On 10th August, Attorney General of Pakistan was
kind enough to inform Amina Janjua that her husband was alive. The Senate
Committee at last picked up the courage to discuss the issue of missing
persons.
On 15th August, a doctor was shot dead in D I Khan as result of
sectarian militancy. On 27th August, IJT organized a demonstration in
Peshawar to protest killings by MQM of a Jamiat student and then of Farhan
Butt of Punjab Students Association. In Karachi the students threatened to
besiege Governor House as on his orders to cleanse the college/hospital of
terrorists more than 60 students were arrested. Not a single student of
MQM, who had killed two students, was arrested.
Hurriat Mahmood from Rawalpindi wrote: Army is prone to resolve
problems in its own way and does not have the capability or competence to
analyze the problems in depth and seek remedy through consensus. It is just
one man wedded to the concept of unity of command. The problem here is
that decisions taken under this concept could turn out to be disastrous.
The Lal Masjid affair was badly handled because the major
objective was to seek appreciation from the USA. The government opted to
show its firepower which utterly failed when one sees in the context of the
public reaction. A reconciliation committee comprising a broad section of
the society that had been empowered to resolve the crisis by going into the
depth of the problem would have been more successful in this case.
77

Zain Bin Zubair from Lahore observed: The bloodbath unleashed by

Musharrafs forces at the Lal Masjid in Islamabad has shown just how far he
is prepared to go to stay in power. Amidst claim and counter claim from the
regime in the aftermath of Operation Silence, it is beginning to emerge that
hundreds, including women and children, may have been killed in the
massacre. It is rumoured that Musharraf himself rejected a possible deal at
the last moment that could have led to a peaceful outcome and instead
ordered attack.
Nayab Khan from Fateh Jang opined: The emergence of the Hafsa
crisis is a clear indication that when the blood of innocent people is
spilled, the nemesis takes its own course to determine that justice is done
to the people. The innocent female students who died in the operation had no
other home besides this institution. Most girls who found a shelter here had
lost their parents in the earthquake of October 2005. Any sensible and
democratic government could have chalked out a strategy to first evacuate
these innocents. Our government, though, showed no flexibility at all.
The blood of the innocents will not go in vain. Ultimately, those
responsible for this gruesome tragedy will have to face justice. They cant
get away by simply painting the bloodstained walls of the Red Mosque in
white. The propriety demands that a thorough inquiry be made by the
Supreme Court into the whole affair of the Red Mosque/Jamia Hafsa affair
so that the justice be done to the people who were responsible for the
bloodshed here. Any papering over the cracks will not do the nation any
good; it wants to know the whole truth.
Aisha Sana from Lahore wrote about missing persons. After reading
about the cases of missing persons one ponders about the statements given
by the president and other senior officials on various different occasions
categorically and unequivocally denying that any of those missing people
were in the custody of the government or its intelligence agencies. Who
comes first for our rulers, America or Pakistan? Why does the
government deny its citizens basic rights?

CONCLUSION
The much awaited Pak-Afghan Peace Jirga failed in making any
positive impact on security environments of the two countries which have
been ruined by Americas war on terror. However, the Jirga had two major
negatives: one, Musharraf accepted that part of the problem lies inside
78

Pakistan; secondly and more harmfully, Pashtun nationalism has been

revived.
The regime has been reiterating time and again that its operations in
tribal areas are in the interest of Pakistan. But, majority of the Pakistanis are
of the view that these operations are against the security interests of
Pakistan. In the same context, Interior Minister claimed with reference to an
attack that army wasnt the target. Only an optimist like him could hope,
even after kidnapping of 249 soldiers, that terrorists hold Pakistan Army in
high esteem.
Nothing extraordinary happened on the eastern front meriting any
concluding remarks. There was plenty that happened on home front and that
has been covered in other articles covering the period under review.
10th September 2007

HELMET vs WIG
AFTERSHOCKS - V
On the eve of Nawaz Sharifs return all roads leading to Islamabad
Airport were sealed using techniques applied by MQM on May 12. Nawaz
79

Sharif departed from London on PK-786 not realizing that 786fundamentalism is despised by the enlightened moderate secular regime in
Islamabad.
On arrival he was detained at airport for more than four hours and
then deported to Saudi Arabia. Aitzaz Ahsan said, Nawaz Sharif has been
kidnapped and his exile is not merely a contempt of court case. The United
States denied any hand in deportation of Nawaz. Having got rid of the
Qaido, Mushy-Pinky affair moved ahead unhindered. PPP announced that
She would be coming back on 18th October.
The regimes move was seen as clear-cut hand-on collusion with the
superior judiciary. The CJP vowed dispensing justice even if heavens fall
and the same day MQM activists mobbed SHC. On 13 th September, the CJP
constituted nine-member bench, headed by Justice Rana Bhagwandas to hear
the petition of Qazi Hussain Ahmed.

EVENTS
Nawaz Sharif departed from London for Islamabad on PK-786 on 9 th
September. At the last moment, he wisely told his brother to say back. All
approaches to Islamabad Airport were sealed on the eve of Nawaz Sharifs
return from River Indus to River Chenab. Airport was sealed by 20,000
security men; media was told to stay away.
Government wont spoil relations with Saudi Arabia, said Minister
Durrani. Overseas Pakistanis were demoralized over Hariris interference in
Pakistans internal affairs. Support our man in Pakistan, Gen Zinni urged
Americans.
Next day, Nawaz Sharif on arrival from London was detained at
airport for more than four hours and then sent to Saudi Arabia. Presidency
denied any role in the illegal act. Shujaat said the deportation was contrary
to his advice. Durrani Ghalatbiani said Nawaz had himself opted for Jeddah
as he wanted to avoid facing the cases against him.
Insiders said that Nawaz Sharif was given the option either to opt for
jail or go back to Saudi Arabia. He refused to be cowed down and wanted to
stay in the country in any case. He was later forced to go to Saudi Arabia, as

80

the rulers feared that putting him in jail might mobilize the people against
the government.
Police and Rangers kept the political leaders, workers and supporters
away from the airport. Scuffles between police and political activist took
place at various places in twin cities. Lawyers of District Court Rawalpindi
were tear-gassed due to which 7 lawyers were injured and 9 fell
unconscious.
PML-N moved the Supreme Court against deportation of Nawaz
Sharif. Kulsoom Nawaz vowed to return to Pakistan to challenge Musharraf.
After putting up a very poor show, the APDM announced observation of a
nationwide protest day on 11th September. Khar, who accompanied Nawaz
from London, mysteriously disappeared from Islamabad Airport.
Saudi rulers decided to exercise strict control over political activities
of Nawaz Sharif and directed him to tell his family members to abide by the
Royal decree. The role of Saudis was widely resented by politicians and
observers. The US and EU observed that deportation was violation of the
Supreme Court ruling; the former, however, approved it by saying that it was
an internal matter of Pakistan. Musharraf said he wanted long-term
partnership with the US.
The CJP vowed to dispense justice even if heavens fall. MQM
activists mobbed SHC to put off hearing of Karachi carnage; the party
denied its involvement. A senior lawyer was gunned down in Karachi and
his associate was kidnapped. Eight office bearers on SCBA announced that
they had suspended Munir A Malik; later the Bar Council denied it.
Three reports covering the days events are worth mentioning. Rauf
Klasra wrote: A lonely and depressed Nawaz was treated with total
contemptwhen low ranking police officers were sent to talk to him. If this
was not enough for the twice-elected prime ministerwas pushed inside an
old bus parked outside the VIP Rawal lounge to shift him to the plane to
send him into exile. As the bus headed towards the PIA plane, about 100
commandoes also started running after the bus laughing and cracking jokes.
Nawaz, who expected a warm reception from his party men, suffered
one of the biggest humiliations of his life when an army officer of the NAB
told him in the presence of media men that he was under arrest on charges of
money laundering.

81

The public announcement that Nawaz was under arrest initially gave
the impression that he was not being deported to Saudi Arabia and instead
would now be kept in jail in Pakistan. But this was not to be, and minutes
later the commandos surrounded him. And before he could realize what was
happening, ferocious-looking commandos wearing black uniform captured
bewildered Nawaz and made him follow their instructions, as they
aggressively started pushing him towards the immigration counter, which led
to a scuffle between Nawaz Sharifs party workers and commandos.
A visibly disturbed Nawaz Sharif told these commandos that he
should not be touched at all. He shouted furiously many times at these
commandos, after they tried to drag him, No one should dare touch me.
Nawaz and his supporters stood their ground for a few minutes but soon
their resistance was overpowered by these rude commandos who even
misbehaved with foreign and local journalists who tried to talk to Nawaz.
Many foreign journalists loudly protested over this treatment.
Soon loud shouts started coming from the Immigration Section after
Nawaz was once again whisked away towards the plane. It was then (clear)
that he was actually being sent to Saudi Arabia and NABs announcement of
his arrest was just a deception. This infuriated Nawaz even more and he
once again tried to resist but he was overpowered by commandos, who once
again pushed him towards an old bus to reach the plane.
Pervez Rasheed and Nadir Chaudhri who had come all the way from
London, were seen crying over the ill-treatment meted out to their leader on
returning to his country after seven years of exile. Many officials present at
the airport also looked saddened by the way Nawaz Sharif was sent back.
Ansar Abbasi reported another kind of humiliation. The Supreme
Court of Pakistan was never humiliated in this manner before. The
Constitution of Pakistan was rarely trampled; negating former Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharifs fundamental right to stay in his homeland, like
what we saw on yet another sorry day of Pakistan.
Nawaz Sharifs second exile, which is in complete violation of the
law of the land and the Constitution, is seen by many as a prelude to the
establishments possible attack on the recently found independent judiciary
and its Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. Fears of the imposition
of martial law are all time high now.

82

The governments shocking move is undoubtedly a clear-cut hand-on

collusion with the superior judiciary. It sounds and seems dangerous but at
the same time it is not possible for the Supreme Court to ignore Mondays
happenings. The PML-N and members of the civil society will immediately
knock the doors of the judiciary and the people do expect from the apex
court that justice would be done.
The greatest dilemma of the Mondays episode is that in the history
of Pakistan we have never seen any government daring to get involved into
such a blatant violation of the Constitution despite a clear decision of the
countrys top court. Mr President General Pervez Musharraf, what a great
service you have done to this country and the nation!
There are perhaps rare precedents of governments drooping to such
lows to perpetuate their rules. A bonafide citizen of the country and the
twice-elected prime minister of Pakistan has been sent on forced exile in
clear violation of Article 15 of the Constitution simply ignoring what the
Supreme Court of Pakistan had clearly said that Sharifs have the right to
enter and remain in the country.
There were clear indications from the government side even on the
day when the SC handed down its judgment on Sharifs that it was not ready
to honour the apex courts decision. Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Sher
Afgan Niazis contemptuous outburst against the Supreme Court on the very
day this SCs judgment was issued, was an uncouth defiance of the
government to the courts decision.
Now what are the choices left for the countrys civil society? Will
they swallow how the government attempted to ruin their hopes that they
had attached with the recently emerged judiciarys independence or would
revive the post-March 9 movement for rule of law? Only the days to come
would answer this question. But Nawaz Sharifs exile has saddened most
even including those who are not associated with his party.
Aitzaz Ahsan has rightly said that Nawaz Sharif has been kidnapped
and his exile is not merely a contempt of court case. Aitzaz charged that
Saudi Arabia has been turned Guantanamo Bay for Pakistanis. He added that
Riyadh is an accomplice of this brutal crime committed.
On the other hand, the government has hardly gained anything. This
action of the regime has angered the people in general and furthered their

83

contempt against the present regime. It will now be facing scathing criticism
from all and sundry. Although Nawaz Sharif has been bundled back to
Riyadh; full marks to him for showing a brave face and immense grace.
Apparently, threat for Musharraf is over. But how would the
government cope up with the fallouts of its blunder. Kalsoom Nawaz has
already announced to re-jump into the political arena and come to Pakistan
very soon. She will be a serious threat to the present regime at a time when
the presidential elections and the general polls are just around the corner.
Chaudhry Shujaat Hussains and Shaikh Rashids of this world are
saying that they were against the deportation of Nawaz Sharif. Most of the
ministers have also been expressing their complete ignorance of as to what
was going to happen with Nawaz Sharif. Then on whose advice the president
violated the Constitution and humiliated the apex court although violating
Constitution is nothing new for him.
Tariq Butt reported: Even when a standby PIA plane with Nawaz on
board took off from the Islamabad Airport after over four hours heightened
activity, no federal minister knew how the government has dealt with the
ex-premier. It is unbelievable that the cabinet knew it. Had any ministers any
clue about the ultimate decision deportation it would certainly have seen
the light of the day.
The whole episode was handled by a select few people, believably
belonging to a premier intelligence agency. The federal cabinet was totally
out of the loop as the decision makers and its implementers deemed it proper
to act single-handed, of course on directions from President General Pervez
Musharraf.
The governments common refrain that it respects the Supreme
Court ruling about Sharifs return and will follow it in letter and spirit
ultimately turned out to be a sham. It neither respected nor implemented the
court judgment.
Most nerve-wrecking for a majority of concerned Pakistanis is the
frightening scenario that is going to emerge after the Supreme Court looks
into and eventually punishes the violators of its verdict about Sharifs return.
Who will be prosecuted and who will be convicted are the questions
perturbing many minds.

84

What will happen if the executive refused to accept the Supreme

Court verdict on the contempt plea of Sharifs lawyer? Will next step be to
teach the apex court and Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry a
lesson to get rid of the irritant once and for all?
Nawazs deportation is not end of the story as the government would
like to believe. No doubt, the former premier would stay in Saudi Arabia till
the completion of the remaining period of the exile-agreement. But one
Sharif another would start bumping Pakistan to beef up the anti-Musharraf
campaign. This will be nightmarish for the president.
Nawazs decision to leave Shahbaz Sharif back in London at the last
minute was well considered and most apt. Perhaps, he had in the hindsight
that he would be deported from Pakistan. So, he decided to keep Shahbaz in
reserve to fly to Pakistan at a later stage and run the campaign on behalf of
his PML-N while sitting in the British capital.
On 11th September, Nawaz said he was dragged out of his country.
Ansar Abbasi reported that the destination and call-sign of the plane carrying
Nawaz were changed mid-air from domestic to international. Human Rights
Watch accused Pakistan and Saudi Arabia of flouting international law.
The US denied any hand in deportation of Nawaz; but a nod was
enough for the obedient Saudis. British press accused Saudis of kidnapping
Nawaz. Prime Minister vowed not to allow anyone to tarnish Saudi image.
PEMRA warned TV channels against criticizing the sacred cows ruling
Saudi Arabia.
APDM again put up a poor show as its strike call earned lukewarm
response. PML-N filed a contempt of court petition in the Supreme Court
over deportation of Nawaz in violation of court orders. Lord Nazir submitted
his statement as witness. Khar showed willingness to appear as witness to
Nawazs deportation. Lawyers boycotted courts across the country to protest
killing of a colleague in Karachi and deportation of Nawaz Sharif. Altaf
Hussain again threatened the courts.
Next day, the lawyers across the country lashed out at the terrorist-inchief harbored and financed in a London heaven. They vowed to cut the
finger pointed at judges and planned to get arms to defend themselves. The
cabinet decided to contest the plea against Nawazs deportation. Tariq Butt
reported the recent events relating to the government offensive against the

85

CJP which if led by the leader of Gujrat Mafia. The UK asked Islamabad to
respect the role of the Supreme Court, reported Rauf Klasra.
The cabinet endorsed Musharrafs re-election by present assemblies.
Pakistani students in UK planned to protest against the kidnappers of Saudi
Arabia. The rulers of Karachi state deported Imran Khan when he arrived at
Jinnah Terminal.
Negroponte met the high-ups in Islamabad to renew support for
Musharraf. He said Nawazs re-exile is Pakistans internal matter. How can
exile to a third country be an internal matter? Commonwealth expressed
concern over Nawazs forced deportation. Benazir assured India to extradite
Dawood to India when she comes to power. She has made lot many
promises to the outsiders as compared none to Pakistanis.
On 13th September, the CJP constituted nine-member bench, headed
by Justice Rana Bhagwandas to hear the petition of Qazi challenging
holding of two offices by Musharraf. The CJP wisely kept himself out of the
bench, but the regime would not be impressed if the bench decides against it.
The Attorney General said the government would move the Supreme Court
for transfer of Karachi carnage case. Lawyers in Peshawar protested
abduction of their colleague and blamed intelligence agencies for it.
Shujaat said Sehba would be the candidate for presidency if
Musharrafs candidature was objected to by the courts. Kulssom said Nawaz
would meet Saudi King in couple of days and she claimed that the meeting
could bring surprises for the military regime.
PPP again threatened Musharraf saying the time was running out for
finalization of the deal. This threat came after the reported secret BoucherBenazir meeting. Negroponte, a man from the country which claims to be
standard bearer of democracy and fundamental rights, did not bother even to
make a mention of Nawaz Sharifs exile; the reason behind was too obvious.
Afzal Bhatti became the latest victim of the secret agencies much
criticized strategy to make their opponents disappear. Bhatti had traveled
with Nawaz on 10th and had tried to save Nawaz from the high-handedness
of the commandos.
MQM terrorists targeted students of Islami Jamiat Talaba at Karachi
University on 23rd September and killed four students and three others.

86

Asfandyar said the MQM wanted to spark riots in Karachi. Quite cunningly,
the terrorist-in-chief was the first to condemn the killings.
Next day, another lawyer of Karachi Bar Association was seriously
wounded by operatives of MQM terrorist group. IJT held country-wide
protest over the killings of its students by MQM in Karachi.
Dr Muhammad Aslam Khaki filed a constitutional petition seeking
formation of grand jury to probe the facts about Nawaz Sharifs first and
second exile. He stated that the case of first and second exile of Nawaz was
a matter of national concern. The unlawful and unconstitutional intervention
of Saad Hariri was challenged as he was neither the representative of the
state nor an organization.
PPP announced that she would be coming back on 18 th October in
Karachi. The announcement was organized in manner familiar to marketing
of a new product; in this it was Americanized Bhuttoism. The deal has
been denied but the date of return seemed to be as per one of the clauses of
deal after presidential election.
Benazir boasted that she cannot be sent back like Nawaz. Minister
Durrani said she would be treated in accordance with the law of the land.
Shujaat said the option of dissolution of assemblies was still alive. Hamid
Gul said the US was plotting to destabilize Pakistan.
M Saleh Zaafir observed next few days were important in shaping
countrys political future. Tariq Aziz has halted, at least for the time being,
interaction with former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. The US assistant
secretary of state for South and Central Asian Affairs, Richard Boucher has
informally replaced Tariq Aziz because the parties failed to show the
desired results in their recent back-channel parleys.
The US Secretary of State Dr Condoleezza Rice has been personally
monitoring the developments and obtaining reports about the progress made
in the negotiations. Richard Boucher is directly reporting to the Secretary of
State and he held four meetings with former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto
in recent weeks, first in New York and then in London and Dubai and now
again in Dubai.
Negroponte, who visited the region, last week spent six days here,
and held an important meeting with the PPP leaders including its Central

87

Secretary Information Ms Sherri Rehman before returning home. He earlier

had lengthy discussions with some stalwarts of the Shujaat Muslim League.
Shujaat Muslim League threw a spanner in the works and created
hurdles in the way of further talks with active assistance from some invisible
faces in the establishment and leaders of MMA. As a result, there were no
talks between the two sides for about two weeks. The Americans were
concerned about the deadlock and they intervened through Richard
Boucher.
Tariq Aziz made it clear that right now no one from the government
is talking to Benazir Bhutto and no official has planned to go to Dubai for
the purpose. Negotiations are not taking place with Benazir Bhutto
currently but it does not essentially mean that any stumbling block has come
in the way of the dialogue, he said. Tariq Aziz parried a query about the
time schedule for the resumption of talks. He is unhappy with some leaders
of the Shujaat League for their opposition to the talks with PPP.
On 15th September, Chief of Staff to the President met the CJP to
discuss appointments of judges to fill the vacant slots. President inducted six
judges in SHC. Dilution of judiciarys independence through inductions has
begun. Justice Buttar was appointed as Chairman Central Zakat Council.
Ruling alliance assured Musharraf that it has 56 percent of strength
for his re-election. Shujaat claimed support of many opposition MPs.
Election Commission issued a notification under which Article 63 of the
Constitution was made inapplicable to the presidential election. The
notification was based on two rulings of the Supreme Court.
Next day, Nawaz Sharif met Saudi King and discussed the issue of his
exile. The King asked him to wait for a month. Musharraf had been insisting
on no return before his re-election. Shujaat accused PML-N of striving to
ruin Pak-Saudi ties.
APDM announced that its members would resign from assemblies if
nomination papers of Musharraf were accepted by the Election Commission.
Shaukat Aziz said the resignations wont serve the democracy. Minister
Durrani castigated the APDM for their irresponsible and undemocratic
behaviour of announcing the resignations.

88

The notification issued by EC was widely commented and criticized

by experts, especially in view of a petition on the issue was pending before
the Supreme Court. PPP also rejected the changes brought by the notification
and termed these illegal and unconstitutional. Qazi termed it as contempt of
court.
Rauf Klasra reported that Musharraf and Benazir have signed another
deal to keep the real deal a secret. General Abdul Majid Malik resigned from
PML-Q membership. The lawyers movement against re-election of
Musharraf may be sabotaged by PPP lawyers, reported Nadeem Shah.
On 17th September, Qazi, Benazir and Sherry criticized the EC
notification. CEC claimed the amendment notification was not personspecific. Reportedly none of the senior officials of Election Commission,
including the CEC, knew anything about any amendment in rules regarding
presidential election. However, CEC ignored the government plea to
announce election schedule immediately. Mushahid Hussain said Musharraf,
after having won the election in uniform, would take oath as civilian
president by 15th November. Aitzaz slammed the West for backing a
tottering Musharraf.
Hearing of the Qazis petition started on 17 th September after the
Supreme Court rejected the plea for full court hearing and governments
objection to Aitzazs nomination as amicus curiae. Objection was conveyed
by Ahmad Raza Kasuri using abusive and threatening language.
Lawyers in Karachi boycotted the courts after yet another lawyer was
murdered by the well-known unknown killers. Shaukat Aziz performed the
ground-breaking ceremony of Islamabad Bar Associations complex and said
the regime has no grudge against judiciary.
Next day, the counsel for Qazi, Akram Sheikh argued the Musharraf
had already held presidents office twice. Sharifuddin filed a written
statement before the court saying Musharraf would quit army if re-elected.
Minister Durrani asked the opposition to laud Musharrafs decision. APDM
and PPP rejected the decision.
Aitzaz Ahsan returned to the court to perform the duty as amicus
curiae only after lodging written protest against Raza Kasuri during which
Honourable Court failed to take appropriate notice of the threats and abuse

89

hurled at him. Meanwhile, Shahbaz said Nawaz would come back to

Pakistan soon.

VIEWS ON EXILE
The people expressed their feelings on the exile of Nawaz Sharif
during which the regime had replicated a true police state. A day before his
return Farooq Zaman from Lahore had written, Nawaz Sharifs
commitment to the Saudis that he will stay out of Pakistan for 10 years and
not indulge in any political activities was based on his understanding to the
Pakistani government to the same effect.
Now, when the Supreme Court has declared that the undertaking
was a nullity being contrary to the Constitution, the subsequent
commitment to the Saudis is consequently also rendered ineffective. This
flows from the long established legal principle that when the very
foundation of any contentious issue is found to be void by a court edifice
raised on it crumbles too. Thus, in the wake of Supreme Courts verdict in
the Sharif brothers case, Nawaz Sharifs understanding with the Saudis is
no longer binding on him.
In the circumstances, it is not lawful for our government, nor
appropriate for the Saudis to impede the return of Nawaz Sharif to
Pakistan, where along with Shahbaz Sharif they can together play an
important role in promoting democracy and stabilizing the prevailing chaotic
conditions.
After his exile, Aziz Narejo from Houston wrote: We strongly
condemn the governments action to disallow former Prime Minister Nawaz
Sharif to return to Pakistan and his arrest, mishandling, kidnapping and
deportation to Saudi Arabia. The government action is in clear violation of
the recent SC judgment and it is a denial of the basic and inalienable rights
of the citizens to return and remain in their country.
The harassment of the Sindh High Court on September 10 by
workers of a political party and the murder of a senior lawyer Raja Riaz also
deserve the strongest condemnation. We demand that an inquiry by a
judge of the superior courts be conducted into both these occurrences.

90

Gul Ghutal from Mardan observed: It is a shame that the chief of

Saudi intelligence, Prince Muqrin bin Abdul Aziz, and Lebanese politician
Saad al-Hariri openly interfered in our internal affairs. This amounts to
contempt of court, because the countrys apex court had already allowed
Sharifs unhindered return. Are we really a free nation? Being Muslims, we
respect Saudi and Lebanese people, but not at the cost of our own
sovereignty.
Dr Abdul Rauf Orakzai from Hangu opined: Pakistan has been made
a laughing stock around the world. A general who claims to have
established the writ of the law tore up the verdict of the Supreme Court
by deporting Nawaz Sharif. It is not only contempt of court but is also an
insult to the wishes of the Pakistani nation. If the Supreme Courts verdict
can be so blatantly violated, this country is surely lawless, not run by a
constitution. It is as if we were living in a jungle.
Majid Qazi from Toronto said: I would like to register my strong
protest against the abduction and deportation of former Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif. I feel very embarrassed and ashamed because of the
irresponsible actions of the law enforcement agencies at Islamabad Airport
in violation of the orders of the Supreme Court of Pakistan by using
public servants to deport Nawaz Sharif, General Pervez Musharraf has
once again proved that he has no regard for the laws and Constitution
of Pakistan.
Abdul Rauf from Fateh Jang wrote: It is encouraging to learn that the
president has asked our cricket boards chief to take stern action against
Shoaib Akhtar as he has brought a bad name to the country. The distressing
deportation of Nawaz Sharif has also brought a bad name to the
homeland. I am sure someone is responsible for this as our highest courts
had asked the government not to prevent Nawazs return.
Fida Muhammad from Peshawar asked few questions. The Generals
deportation of Mian Nawaz Sharif is a blatant violation of a citizens
constitutional rights. Lots of questions arise regarding the incident, but
the foremost among them is: when the exiled leader was such a heinous
criminal; why did the General let him go? Under what authority did he do
so? Wasnt it just to serve his own interests?
The next question is: when Mian Nawaz Sharif was spared after the
lapse of almost eight years why cases of corruption were, or whatever those
91

cases were, reopened against him when he came back? And why was he sent
back to Saudi Arabia? Isnt it a clear act of blackmailing? When the
Supreme Court of Pakistan had given its verdict that there is no bar on
Nawaz Sharifs return, wasnt the deportation contempt of court?
Farrukh Shahzad from Islamabad opined: The recent maltreatment by
the Musharraf regime of a former prime minister on his arrival in Pakistan
has presented the real picture of the governments dictatorial and
dubious policies. Despite the verdict of the apex court, our omnipotent
intelligence agencies, which consider themselves above the law, have shown
imprudence to the Supreme Court verdict, which entitled Nawaz Sharif to
return and live in the country as embedded in the Constitution of Pakistan
for every citizen of the country.
After the CJs triumph, the people were hoping to see a rejuvenation
of the judiciary, which would ensure rule of law and supremacy of the
Constitution. But this latest flouting of the courts orders has once again
shown the mindset of our military establishment. This has also lessened
the credibility of the current regime to hold fair and free elections. The time
has come for the nation to decide whether there will be rule of law or the
rule of the generals.
Ummad Mazhar from Karachi wrote: The government of a country is
not the name of some party or leader. Rather, it is the name of the collective
wisdom of a society. However, the recent events in Pakistan have put a big
question mark over the government of Pakistans capabilities in this respect.
The rigid and intransigent manner in which government is handling the
political developments is eroding its credibility and the ability of
governing besides causing embarrassment to the whole nation in this
globalized world. It indicates how cavalier is the approach of our governing
authorities and how little they are concerned about national integrity.
The government has given enough false colouring to the issue of
the Sharifs return by emphasizing the moral basis of the agreement
rather than sticking to its legal basis to confuse the public. But one can fool
all the people all the time.
M Jamal Khan from Islamabad said: We know a lion returned from
London and was even prepared to be caged. Alas, a commando of our SSG,
who is also a four star general, was so scared of even a caged lion that he
left no stone unturned to get the lion out of his domain. Under such
92

circumstances, can we expect our commando general/president to protect

us?
Saira Qadeer from Rawalpindi wrote: The deportation of Nawaz
Sharif shows undoubtedly that our Supreme Court has no status in the
eyes of the government and that there is dictatorship in Pakistan with no
regard to public opinion. And if the media is free, as our government never
tires of claiming, it has no value.
Why are the Saudis and Pakistani governments so bent upon
enforcing the agreement between the Saudis and Nawaz Sharif? Why cant
the Saudis let go him? Do the have no regard for the wishes of the Pakistani
people, and the ruling of our Supreme Court?
With due respect, the Saudi royal family doesnt have much to do
with democracy. They have no idea how hard the lawyer community and
the civil society have struggled and what sacrifices they have made in order
to bring about democracy and the rule of law in Pakistan. They must let the
Pakistani people decide their own fate.
Zeeshan Ahmad from Lahore opined: It is very unfortunate that a
Pakistani citizen, who is also a former prime minister of the country, was
exiled again by the regime of General Musharraf. Despite a clear
constitutional verdict of the Supreme Court, the government took a decision
which was nothing else but a show of might is right. It is very clear that any
undertaking or agreement in contradiction of Constitution of Pakistan is
invalid within the territory of Pakistan. I am also extremely disappointed
with the astonishingly negative attitude of Saudi Arabia.
Some ministers are saying it was their moral responsibility to support
the Saudis. I totally disagree. In my opinion, more respect should be given
to the Supreme Court than any foreign government. Further, if
Musharraf had not insisted on the implementation of this so-called
agreement, the Saudis would never play such a role in this act of lawlessness
above their political affiliation.
Nasir Farooq from Karachi observed: Statements issued by the White
House seem to lack any sense these days. As far as Nawaz Sharifs
deportation is concerned, the White House has decided not to intervene in
the internal affairs of Pakistan. On the other hand, the same White House is
trying to cook up a new theory of a deal between Benazir Bhutto and Pervez

93

Musharraf to deceive the Pakistani nation. The United States is interested

more in the survival of Pervez Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto than the
interests of the Pakistani nation.
Mirza Tuftan Baig from Lahore wrote: I had always been a Nawaz
Sharifs supporter, but not after his rush back to the country and his
subsequent deportation. I find him too simple and straight-forward. I
have transferred my loyalties to Benazir Bhutto. Henceforth, I am a lota.
I like a leader who if foxier, more cunning than a crow and changes colours
faster than a chameleon. I like her for saying too many things at a time when
she knows none of them is true.
This is like showing your right punch but hitting with the left, or not
hitting at all. I also commend her choice of the finest spin-doctor,
Farhatullah Babar; poor fellow. At his ripe age he has to do so much to
forestall criticism against her He hopes people someday believe him
because of his silvery hair.
Aisha Sana from Lahore was of the view that we should hang our
heads in shame after seeing the blatant and despicable display of tyranny
by the government on the return of Nawaz Sharif. The government has yet
again proved that it has no tolerance for its opponents. The president is ready
to cut deal with the one he himself once declared culprit and plunderer, but
he is not ready to accept the decision of the Supreme Court which allowed
Nawaz Sharif return by nullifying the so-called agreement.
What kind of country we are living in where one man is running the
affairs trampling the integrity and dignity of every institution Those who
wanted Nawaz Sharif to abide by the agreement themselves have no
regards for the oaths they took. We have become hostages to the desires of
only one man who wants to stay in power no matter what happens to this
country.
Dr Zafar Elahi from Islamabad urged: Exiling Nawaz Sharif back to
Saudi Arabia, whether done on the orders of the current dictatorship or by
the higher powers that be, will not make things better for the people of
Pakistan. It is time that the people rose against oppression and broke
free from their shackles. The current leadership in this country is but a
pawn in the big game of world domination.

94

The exile was widely commented upon by analysts and media

men. The editor Daily News wrote: The forced exile of former Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif to Saudi Arabia on Monday is an act of pure and utter
desperation by a government that seems to be now operating very much in
panic mode. It leaves the government open to severe criticism for acting in a
most ham-handed manner. The treatment of the former prime minister as
virtually felon not deserving of even a return to his own country is only
going to add to the growing popularity of Mr Sharif.
Many government ministers and even the Attorney General had
already said the ruling of the Supreme Court in the petition filed by Nawaz
and Shahbaz Sharif seeking a return to Pakistan would be respected. It has to
be said with great regret that this was not done and by its actions the
government has conducted itself in a most dishonourable and devious
way. To his credit, the former prime minister did not back off and come
good on his pledge to return
The government deserves censure also for all the actions that it
took prior to the flights arrival in Islamabad. In keeping with the public
perception that in the eyes of the government the people dont matter (and
may just as well go to hell), the airport was sealed as were parts of
Rawalpindi Where does the law allows the sealing of an international
airport?
One would hope that perhaps the government realizes that what
it did was something that will be a) universally condemned as being in
contempt of the Supreme Court and b) reflective of a regime that is weak, on
the verge of disarray, and scared of any solid political opposition. Besides,
the involvement of brotherly countries in matters pertaining to domestic
politics is something that also has shown many, including, one has to say, the
Sharifs, in poor light. What happened on Monday also needs to be looked in
context with the outcome of the proceedings of the PML-Qs central
executive committee which met on Sept 8 to discuss the current political
situation.
It seems that faced with an unexpected future, many in the ruling
party, itself a cobbled coalition of defectors from various other parties, have
realized that the president needs their vote as much as he needs Benazirs
support to get re-elected. That is probably why their leader said publicly that
the government should allow Mr Sharif to return unhindered the

95

presumption being that he would provide a much needed counter, in the eyes
of the PML-Q, to the presidents planned deal with the PPP. Obviously, that
did not materialize but it remains to be seen that the ruling party will do
now, given that it would now be fair to assume that its objectives are no
longer necessarily the same as that of the president. Either way, the country
faces turbulent times in the next few days and weeks.
Nasim Zehra termed it a blunder. Given the gradual shift in the
balance of power within Pakistan tilting more towards civilian institutions,
peoples power and a growing and organized demand for rule of law and
constitutional democracy, the negative fall-out of this deportation will
further undermine the Musharraf governments moral, legal and
political standing.
The first line of resistance to such high-handedness will come
from the Supreme Court when admitting the PML-N petitions seeking
return of Nawaz Sharif from Saudi Arabia. Also the deportation, coinciding
with what lawyer community maintains is harassment on Sept 9 of the Sindh
High Court bench by MQM supporters and the murder of a prominent
lawyer, is likely to bring the lawyers back into activism.
On the political front the deportation of Mr Sharif will provide the
opposition parties with a strong rallying point. Fresh into a new electoral
alliance the All Parties Democratic Movement against the backdrop of
the considerably weakened position of President Musharraf, there will be
renewed gusto in the oppositions rhetoric and anti-Musharraf agitation.
The former prime ministers deportation of 2000 and now cannot
be compared in any way. Then, it was the result of a deal of willing parties
without any major fallout Now it is a vastly different context. The
deportation has been coerced and it violated the law. It is being seen as a
highly unpopular step and may well spark off a new round of confrontation
with the judiciary. Besides, General Musharraf is very weak politically while
in 2000 his popularity was on the rise now that is not the case. Also, he was
not embroiled in any controversy then while that is also not the situation in
2007.
Why then did the Musharraf regime believe it would be able to
pull it off? The answer lies in the over-confidence and incompetence of core
decision-making team around the president. With their dated calculations of
how to control and manipulate the politics of Pakistan they must have been
96

convinced that they could legally, politically, morally and diplomatically

execute the deportation plan.
General Musharrafs legal advisers must have convinced him that
deporting the former prime minister after first letting him enter Pakistan will
give them an opportunity to technically argue that the government did not
violate the courts orders. Any layperson can tell that there are many gaping
holes in such an argument. The obvious one is that by deporting Nawaz
Sharif the spirit of the Supreme Court judgment has been violated.
On the political front they must have argued that after strict security
measures in place meaning arresting thousands of PML-N workers and
opposition leaders there will be no political protests. Also, that there will be
no assembly of people in support of the former prime ministers arrival
because of heavy deployment of law-enforcement personnel in key towns
and highways and through coercive methods such as shelling and batoncharging. The presidents team must have also calculated and rightly so
that the threat of street power would be effectively curtailed.
On the moral front, the regime banked on exposing Nawaz
Sharifs incorrect statement that he had no agreement with the government
under which he had left in 2000. They got the Saudi intelligence chief and
the Lebanese to publicly state that there was a deal. PML-N party members
did sit up and notice this revelation but in the current political situation
neither their party workers nor the opposition is likely to act against their
leader on the agreement issue. The fact today is that the moral questions
revolve more around General Musharrafs politics, around the question of
democracy and of rule of law.
Meanwhile on the diplomatic front whatever step, in the US
calculation, strengthens general Musharraf is welcome. A statement by
the European Union, however, was critical of Mr Sharifs deportation but
then the EUs position is often not given too much weight in Islamabad
compared to that of America. The latter, itself directly involved in trying to
facilitate the Bhutto-Musharraf deal, seems to have taken a hands-off
position saying that the deportation was Pakistans internal matter.
Whatever the presidents team may have calculated, Pakistan-Saudi
relations will not remain untouched from the fallout of what has
happened. By getting publicly involved in the Government of Pakistans
plan to deport Nawaz Sharif in violation of the Supreme Court order the
97

Saudi government could well become the target of public anger and
criticism. Not only Nawaz Sharifs supporters but all those who believe in
constitutional rule, those who supported the lawyers movement and
participated in the struggle for an independent, fair and powerful judiciary
will increasingly see the Saudi royal family as facilitating an illegal act
planned by the government of Pakistan.
The growing general mood backed by lawyers and the media and
pushed forward institutionally by the Supreme Court is that that Pakistan
must no longer be run like a country with no law. The Constitution of
Pakistan must be peacefully and firmly be upheld, reining in all those who,
irrespective of the jurisdiction, exercise extra-constitutional power. This is
the beginning of the birth of a new Pakistan. No matter how rocky the road
ahead, the direction is correct.
The multi-million question will however remain: will General
Musharraf retrace his steps, postpone presidential elections, take the route
of reconciliation with all parties including the PML-N, give up selective
engagement and make the holding of genuinely free elections his priority?
His re-election must be of secondary consideration. He has believed in
Pakistan first and in that spirit his responsibility is first to national
reconciliation and to holding general elections.
M B Naqvi called it a shameful act. For one thing, a citizen of
Pakistan cannot be deported; the penal code of Pakistan does not contain any
provision for it. Secondly, there is some hush-hush because a brotherly
country is said to be involved. Why should it have been involved, in the first
place? For another, this was an extra-legal step. Then, the political context
was political rivalry between a chief of army staff, General Pervez
Musharraf, of uncertain status then, and Mian Nawaz Sharif
Musharraf knew that so long as Nawaz Sharif and Benazir
Bhutto were around, his own rule in Pakistan would not be stable. This aim
was clear, and was a shabby one. There was technical debate about an
agreement between Nawaz Sharif and who? Actually, the agreement
should have been between Nawaz and Musharraf.
Whatever the agreement contained, it was not between a free
agent and Authority, an element of duress was inheres in it. Both
deportations to Saudi Arabia can only be attributed to the political purposes

98

of Musharraf to rule without interference by major politicians, for which

purpose he had also ensured Benazirs self-exile.
The legal position of the first deportation was blasted by two
judgments of the Supreme Court. An earlier judgment simply said that Mr
Shahbaz Sharif and/or any other Pakistani had full freedom to return to
Pakistan, travel in it or reside in any part of it. The judgment of Aug 23 was
more specific
Mondays deportation is clearly contrary to the orders of the
Supreme Court and the kind of justification offered by the government is
no more than a fig leaf, a threadbare technical excuse. He was allowed in, so
said the immigration stamp on his passport, and later, of course, under
various legal penalties that the government had chosen to invent, now or
previously, he had to leave. This does not constitute a reasonable basis for
thinking that Nawaz was either freely allowed in or that he left freely.
Second, the deportation smacks of kidnapping for political ends.
An oppressive illegality has been committed against a prominent
citizen of Pakistan and the justification for which cannot be found in any
particular action of Nawaz himself in Pakistan. The purpose is political, to
benefit President Musharraf and his party. This is taking the country down a
totalitarian path. The president is rushing headlong into actions that are
contrary to law and a clear contempt of the whole Supreme Court of
Pakistan.
Musharrafs plan is to be re-elected by the current Assemblies
while he is still in uniform; appointing a caretaker government of his own
nominees, just as the ECP comprises of nominees. He wants to hold
elections while he is still chief of army staff, commanding the armys
agencies. This series of actions would be prejudicial to the spirit of
democracy and to the well-established conventions and norms of
democracy.
Ones immediate concerns are two. The Supreme Courts orders
should not have been violated; this is disobedience of judicial orders.
Secondly, the democratic rights of people are being violated at will by the
government presided over by the COAS.
The people of Pakistan are showing deep unrest and dissatisfaction
with the state of affairs. They want a change. What the Musharraf regime

99

wants is to hang on to power for five more years by hook or by crook,

especially by holding the election under the immediate control of his own
nominees or subordinates.
The country is also being rocked by Pakistans policy of aligning
itself with America, and that is not acceptable to a growing number of
people The idea of promoting enlightenment, free thinking, moderation,
and indeed, spreading democratic values is something dear to the writer and
to most Pakistanis.
The way to achieve these is to establish true democracy and not a
sham one in which the wishes of one man take precedence over the entire
nation. The country is in the throes of what is a civil war The Pakistanis,
all said and done, are a people who love freedom, honour and democracy;
they have proved their preference for democracy a number of times. Only
economic misery and preoccupations with the next meal has prevented them
from being part of a raging and tearing agitation now.
The Americans are operating without the least concern for this
countrys sovereignty and territorial integrity. Their dictating to Musharraf
is resented by even his opponents. That is a circumstance that hurts the
national pride of all Pakistanis.
Lubna Jarar Naqvi was of the view that the regime hasnt learnt from
its previous mistakes. Watching the Nawaz Sharif footage, one wonders
why Musharrafs government doesnt learn from its previous mistakes.
The CJ imbroglio didnt occur that long ago now did it, and shouldnt the
government have taken heed by not getting into a tiff with the Supreme
Court and head towards contempt of court by deporting Mr Sharif?
Of course, legal loopholes and the likes are always found to save
the erring leader of the day, but that doesnt make the wrong right. This
time around, the contempt of court of deporting Mr Sharif will also be dealt
with a new clause in some law, which will make this act legal, and that is
what happened when a NAB ordinance was twisted to suit the situation.
Mr Sharif was aware, as all of us were, that he would be deported but
he had to go through this to save political face. If he hadnt shown up, his
supporters would have been hurt the same way Benazir Bhuttos are for her
deal with the General. Anyway, this episode has only made Mr Sharif
retrieve some of the lost political ground.

100

Dr Waheed Khan said that his dream to see an omnipotent monarch

has come true. Today, fortunately, or should I say most unfortunately, my
dream to see an omnipotent monarch has come true. He has the power to
use his people and their life and property at his disposal. If he chooses, he
can declare war in a city. The deportation of the former premier back into a
life of exile, after the judiciary rule in that he could come back, is not only a
harsh slap in the face of the Supreme Court of Pakistan but it is also an
example of the high-handedness of our emperor. The blocking of the roads
and the foiling of all attempts to welcome him by his supporters also
bespeaks of the level of regard that our emperor has for his nation. It doesnt
matter what people might feel or think. He is the king and therefore for him
say of the people stands nowhere.
The political chessboard of Pakistan today is undergoing critical
upheaval. And like any match of chess close to an end, it is extremely
thrilling for observers. The difficulty, however, is that the game is played
mainly by just one person. There is a one mighty player on one side. No
one wants to lose. He too doesnt want. Therefore, he is forcefully and
repeatedly making his opponents take back a move with any potential
advantage. There have been some moves which he could not reverse such as
the reinstatement of the top judge. The mighty player should also know that
at times, it is not possible to win no matter how much one manoeuvres the
game.
The nation is gripped by fear, anxiety and a sense of uncertainty.
Riots, tear gassing, shooting, killing, taking military hostages, raids on
mosques, stand-offs by militants, strikes by militants on the military and vice
versa so much is happening that an ordinary Pakistan can simply not but
feel concerned. Was Pakistan created for all this?
Aoun Shah was of the view that September 10, 2007 can easily be
termed as another shameful day in the history of Pakistan. The
government despite having a clear-cut decision from the Apex Court did not
allow former prime minister Mian Nawaz Sharif to stay in the country.
The government did everything according to its wishes. This clearly
indicates that the establishment still is the strongest player in Pakistani
politics and plays a very significant role in the making or breaking of
political coalitions and even parties. The way the establishment managed
to break Alliance for Restoration of Democracy is really credible. Six
months back, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif were vowing to launch a
101

combined movement for the restoration of democracy in Pakistan. But on

September 10, the differences between two parties had widened so much
that PPP remained totally indifferent to the arrival of Nawaz Sharif in the
country.
Fasi Zaka commented on Saudis role in kidnapping of Nawaz Sharif.
Imagine you are immigration official. A man comes to you asking for
asylum. You begin to process his case. This man tried to overthrow the
military commander while he was out of the country. He is accused of
embezzling millions of dollars, and is responsible for the deaths of 300,000
of his people The mans nickname is the genial Butcher of Uganda.
So would you give this man asylum? Of course not, but Saudi Arabia
did. The mans name was Idi Amin. Saudi Arabias role as a destination of
choice for asylum seekers is rancid. With all the brouhaha over the
commitment regarding the exile deal we need to maintain as a matter of
honour, it seems that Saudi Arabia doesnt exactly have a very honourable
past.
After all they took in Nawaz Sharif, who at the time was a convict
and had pending cases against him. By doing so, they massacred the
integrity of our Constitution. Of all the commentary over the Nawaz Sharifs
deal, I have always found the exhortations of the honour code to be
nauseating. The implicit message that comes from it is that we need to
respect Saudi Arabia for an illegal deal when it did not have the same
respect for our country and its rules and regulations.
As for Nawaz Sharif, he has just been deported. That cannot be true
for in a deportation you can only remove non-citizens, he, on the other hand
is a bona fide Pakistani. Secondly, even if we were to believe that he has
actually been deported, then it must be according to some agreement, and
we know from the Supreme Court that the document in question doesnt
hold water. What has happened is that Nawaz Sharif has been
kidnapped. Presumably, he is now in Saudi Arabiaa non-representative
police state themselves, a state that supposedly has the Quraan as its
constitution, but operates with an absolutely monarchy.
While the Benazirs, Musharrafs and Shujaats of the world sound
totally duplicitous, Nawaz, along with Imran Khan, was the only one who
looked as if he had turned over a new leaf by not negotiating with the
dictatorship to create an unholy marriage but, by admitting the existence
102

of the deal and trying to push an incredulous story that he had signed on the
tacit assumption that it would be renegotiated, it makes him no different than
the others.
The high-handedness of the government in forcing Nawaz to leave
the country will once again pit the executive against the judiciary. Even
if they have ensured the stamping of Nawazs passport to make it look like
he went voluntarily when he was read out accusations against him at the
Islamabad Airport to serve as a cloak for his forced exit, it might just work.
There is only one man who can unmask the governments deceit in
the Nawaz case, and that is Nawaz himself. He needs to have the guts to
come out and communicate what happened, claim he is in illegal
detention in foreign shores, and counter his royal captors. That is the only
way he can honour his deal with Pakistani public as a leader. His interests
are with us, not the Saudis.
Ayesha Tammy Haq opined: Despite the Supreme Courts ruling and
numerous talk shows on television discussing threadbare the issue of Mian
Nawaz Sharif agreeing to surrender his fundamental rights, many people still
think that if Nawaz Sharif agreed to go, he should honour that agreement,
voluntarily surrender his inalienable right to live in Pakistan., and go. All
this, despite the fact that according to apex court of this country you cannot
legally sign away your fundamental rights, thereby making the pieces of
paper waved at press conference by citizens of Saudi Arabia and
Lebanon completely worthless.
So if you cant sign away your fundamental rights, then how do you
send your citizens to foreign countries against their free will? What do you
call that act? The papers and everyone on television are calling it
deportation. Deportation generally means the expulsion of a foreigner, for
whatever reason, from a country. What about citizens? What do you do with
the ones who want to send to lands far away? Expulsion of natives of a
country was not uncommon in days of yore, when natives were banished or
exiled to colonies like America, as it was known before the war of
independence, or transported to penal colonies like Australia. Pakistan has
no colonies, at least none that we, the people are aware of. Nor do we have
any penal colonies. So what is Saudi Arabias role? Is it a penal colony
today; and whose? Pakistans or the United States of Americas, or is that
just splitting hair?

103

America has come to the rescue once again. They have come up
with a lovely term that seeks to cover the transportation of a citizen out of
his own country. Its called rendition, which has been defined as the handing
over of persons or property from one jurisdiction to another. Extraordinary
rendition is the extra-judicial transfer of a person from one state to another.
The act of rendering is the delivery of that person or property. It appears that
we have witnessed the extraordinary rendition of Mian Nawaz Sharif, in that
he was transferred from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia in complete disregard of
the ruling of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, and in flagrant violation of the
rights guaranteed to a citizen of this country by the Constitution.
Pakistanis are looking at the events of last week with incredulity
and shame. Where the son of a former Lebanese Prime Minister and the spy
chief of Saudi Arabia come to Pakistan, brandish documents in front of
Pakistans, and indeed the worlds media, stating that a citizen of Pakistan
has signed away his fundamental rights and is therefore required, in
complete disregard of the Supreme Courts ruling, to give up his
fundamental right to return to Pakistan, and either remain in the United
Kingdom or live in Saudi Arabia.
This raises some serious issues for Pakistanis. The first is the issue
of sovereignty. Why, when and who decided that we should hand over our
sovereignty to another country or other countries. It drives home the
disturbing fact that deciding who will govern the country is not something
that is to be decided by the people through the ballot box, rather it is decided
in offices in Washington and London. And what of that document we have
spent months fighting to hold supreme, the Constitution? Well, as the Saudi
dont have one, we cannot expect them to understand why we are a little put
off by their willingness to go along with a military dictator, and insist that
Mr Sharif be rendered to them.
The current regime has done much to damage itself. Some of its
actions can best be described as incredibly foolish and self-destructive. What
moral authority can possibly lie with a government that disregards the ruling
of the Supreme Court? We have rendered our sovereignty, we have rendered
our citizens, we have rendered our integrity, so what have we got left to
render? How do we get back some of what is lost? Many people argue that it
is up to the lawyers to come back out and lead us once again.
It is now time for the politicians to come out and lead, and surely
the lawyers will follow like the politicians followed the lawyers up to July
104

20. Unfortunately, political leaders appear to be missing in action.

Opposition parties have chosen the worst possible time to be plagued by
factionalism. This is a time when one would imagine that squabbling for
power would cease and egos be put aside in the greater national interest.
Here is a country whose populace is depressed, despondent and
desperate to do something to change all that is making it depressed and
despondent. We know we need to do something, but we dont know how,
and the apparent enormity of the task defeats us.
This is because when we look around we dont see anyone who will
organize and lead us. Pakistan needs a leader who is unafraid, who has
the courage like the Chief Justice of Pakistan to say no to the military
establishment, who holds the interests and sovereignty of this country
paramount. Surely there is someone out there willing and capable of taking
up this challenge.
Rahimullah Yusufzai wrote: It is no longer secret that the monarchy
of Saudi Arabia was party to the decision made by the authorities in
Pakistan to deport Mian Nawaz Sharif to Jeddah. Otherwise the Saudis
would not have allowed the former prime ministers plane to fly to their
kingdom from Islamabad, or made those unprecedented last-ditch efforts to
persuade him not to return to Pakistan.
This clearly indicates that the decision to deport Nawaz Sharif to
Saudi Arabia was taken during Prince Muqrins visit to Islamabad and his
meeting with President Pervez Musharraf that lasted over three hours. The
plan to send Nawaz Sharif back to Saudi Arabia was finalized once the
consent of the Saudi intelligence chief was obtained.
As hapless Pakistanis watched in bewilderment, Prince Muqrin and
Saad Hariri publicly said in Islamabad that Nawaz Sharif should not
return home from his exile in view of the deal that bound him to stay out of
Pakistan for 10 years. The two held a press conference after meeting
President Musharraf and other government functionaries, and showed the
document that contained the said deal. It was unprecedented for an
intelligence chief, that too belonging to the secret kingdom of Saudi Arabia,
to address a news conference. It makes one wonder whether Saudi Arabia
would similarly allow a Pakistani intelligence chief to address a press
conference in Riyadh and pass judgment on an internal political issue
concerning the Saudi Kingdom.
105

In Prince Muqrins view, the agreement between Saudi Arabia and

Nawaz Sharif was paramount as it was reached prior to the judgment by the
Supreme Court of Pakistan that allowed the former prime minister to return
home from exile. The Saudi Prince, by making this flawed comparison,
reduced the importance of the verdict of Pakistans apex court. This was
something that he should have avoided. Such remarks could provoke
criticism of the Saudi role and affect the hitherto close bonds between the
Pakistani people and the Saudi Kingdom.
It is, therefore, hardly surprising that most Pakistanis are blaming the
Saudi government for Nawaz Sharifs deportation to Jeddah in violation of
the decision of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. For the first time in their
lives, many people in Pakistan are publicly criticizing Saudi Arabia for
interfering in Pakistani affairs and damaging the movement for democracy
and the rule of law.
In addition to this, most Pakistanis are convinced that the Saudi
government decided to intervene forcefully in Pakistans affairs at the
behest of the US, in a bid to keep Nawaz Sharif out of the country and stop
him from foiling plans for an American-backed political deal between
President Musharraf and PPP leader Benazir Bhutto.
Although successive Pakistani governments and rulers have often
allowed outsiders to become involved in the countrys affairs for their vested
political interests, the government of President Musharraf has surpassed
all previous regimes in enabling foreigners to influence decision-making
in Pakistan.
It is painful to observe that many Pakistanis are now openly critical
of the Saudi monarchy. Both, the Saudi government as well as Nawaz
Sharif is at fault. One burnt its fingers by meddling in Pakistans
troublesome politics, while the other agreed to a deal to stay out of Pakistan
and politics for 10 years, in order to save himself from the life sentence
given to him by courts influenced by General Musharrafs regime. The
Musharraf government, too, cannot absolve itself of the blame because it got
the Saudis involved in the game plan to keep its biggest opponent, Nawaz
Sharif, out of Pakistan.
The same Pakistanis are now angry with the Saudi rulers, once
had great affection for the country that contained two of Islams holiest
cities, Makkah and Madina. Some of that affection was passed onto the
106

Saudi King on account of the feeling that he took good care of the holy cities
as well as the Haram Sharif and Masjid-i-Nabvi. As custodians of the two
holy mosques, successive Saudi kings were highly respected in Pakistan.
However, the situation has changed following Nawaz Sharifs deportation
with the connivance of the Saudi government. Already, there is a vocal
criticism of the Saudi royals and their government. Now, issues such as the
exploitation of Pakistani workers in Saudi Arabia or the uninhibited hunting
sprees of Saudi princes in Pakistan would be highlighted instead of being
ignored. As a consequence, Pakistans relations with Saudi Arabia will never
be the same again.
Praful Bidwai observed: In medieval times, despotic rulers would
routinely exile anyone they didnt trust or like emerging military rivals,
potential future claimants to the throne, even petty criminals. Banishment
was a rough-and-ready way of keeping troublemakers away from societies,
which had no pretence to delivering justice based on objective criteria, or to
defending citizens rights. (Indeed, such rights didnt exist.)
On Monday, Pakistan witnessed a modern version of this
obnoxious practice when President Musharrafs government deported
Nawaz Sharif to Saudi Arabia. On arrival at Islamabad Airport, Sharif was
served a warrant charging him with money laundering. Logically, he should
have been arrested and put on trial. Instead, he was manhandled, humiliated
and summarily deported.
Only the nave will buy into the propaganda that Pakistani and
Saudi negotiators offered Sharif the choice to be jailed or deported, and
that he preferred the second. Even if one assumes that he was reluctant to
face incarceration and some of my Pakistani friends believe he almost
broke down when jailed in 1999 its hard to imagine that he would have so
easily spurned the chance of becoming a powerful symbol of the antiMusharraf resistance, which would have brought him political advantage.
Besides, he would probably have been granted bail.
If Sharif were an astute politician, he would have staged a dramatic
sit-in at the airport and made a fiery anti-regime speech. Instead, he allowed
himself to be browbeaten. However, that doesnt let the Musharraf
government off the culpability hook. He stooped low by invoking an extraconstitutional secret agreement, and privileging it over his fundamental
right, pronounced inalienable by the Supreme Court, to turn home. This
does not behoove a government with elementary respect for the rule of law.
107

Musharraf has only brought discredit upon himself by this act. This
will further inflame popular sentiment against him and more broadly, the
Pakistani military. Even an outside observer cant fail to notice that the great
currency, which anti-military slogans have acquired in Pakistans public
discourse in recent weeks, especially since the May 12 events in Karachi.
At any rate, Musharraf seems bent on committing blunder after
blunder, as if driven by a self-destructive calculus. This is typical of the
way all authoritarian regimes behave once they start losing legitimacy. After
Sharifs return, Musharrafs best bet would have been to put him on trial in a
transparent and fair manner, and while on bail, allow him, like all others, to
engage in political activity leading to free and fair National Assembly
elections.
Musharraf seems to have set the stage for another show down
with the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of Sharifs right to come
home by virtue of his citizenship. Its spirit was clearly to affirm his right to
live in Pakistan. Deporting him to Saudi Arabia, with him the Musharraf
government signed a collusive agreement, makes nonsense of this rationale.
If Sharif is a fugitive from the law, it makes nonsense to banish him.
It would convince the public that the government is neither capable
nor willing to meet a challenge politically. This is likely to foment
vigorous mass protests. Under state repression, some of them could turn
violent. The government will probably cynically try to exploit this by
engineering inter-ethnic conflict, or prepare the ground for imposing martial
law or emergency. That would be a disastrously reckless move.
Thats where the foreign hand comes in. The United States has
been aggressively proactive in Pakistani affairs and provided support to
Musharraf, although the US says that Sharifs deportation is Pakistans
internal matter, assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia
(and, Virtual Viceroy), Richard Boucher was present in Islamabad just when
the drama was taking place. He was joined in Islamabad by the Deputy
Secretary of State, John Negroponte. Clearly, the US wants to directly
supervise a power-sharing arrangement between Musharraf and Bhutto.
Not to be discounted is Saudi Arabias collaboration with
Musharraf in deporting Sharif, who is in all probability, now a captive of
sorts in Jeddah. Its unclear that hell be allowed to leave the country even if
the Pakistan Supreme Court orders his return. Saudi Arabia, a state deeply
108

compromised with the US, is messing in Pakistani affairs a fact resentfully

reflected in the growing popularity of anti-Saudi slogans among antiMusharraf protesters.
Some Indian officials have misread the meaning of Sharifs
deportation. They reportedly feel a grudging admiration for Musharrafs
handling of it. For the past year, India has been in contact with Bhutto, but
not Sharif. This needs correction with a statement that India would like a
smooth democratic transition in Pakistan.
Ghazi Salahuddin wrote: Come to think of it, Americas apparently
altruistic pursuit of democracy in Pakistan is quite like its earlier search for
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In Iraqs case, the motivation seemed to
be the ouster of Saddam Hussein. In our case, the person at the helm is
sought to be protected. And if they dont find democracy in the process, we
can safely blame poor intelligence for it.
This was particularly the week in which one could almost feel the
shadow of Iraq creeping across the vast expenses of this country. On
Thursday, around twenty commandos were killed in a blast Acts of
terrorism and target killings have become frequent and also on Thursday, a
minibus in Karachi was attacked and seven persons, mainly students of the
University of Karachi were killed.
However, on Monday that former Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif
landed at Islamabad Airport and at least for a short time, it became a kind
of Green Zone not to be penetrated by any hostile elements. Irrespective
of the failure of Nawazs party to amount any formidable resistance, the
drama that was enacted at the airport was irredeemably a national tragedy.
September 10, thus, was another red-letter day in the amazing
chronicle that began on March 9. These six months have been a rollercoaster ride, subjecting us to high moments of adventure and emotional
involvement. We have had sharp and fleeting sensations of fear, ecstasy,
hope and depression. Our journey into the unknown continues.
There was, we must never forget, the rejuvenating surge of hope in
that Supreme Court judgment of July 20. We sensed, with good reason
that Pakistan had changed, that we could finally inject some moral values
into our polity. But the dark forces of authoritarianism are unwilling to
accept any constitutional, democratic and moral code of behaviour.

109

Betraying a touch of panic, they seem inclined to adopt fascistic means to

suppress the popular urge for freedom.
If July 20 marked the pinnacle of our hope, September 10
became the day of our greatest depression in recent months, overtaking
the ignominy of May 12, particularly because it had come before July 20. In
some ways, though, September 10 had the flavour of May 12, with Karachi
providing its own share of action. An anti-government lawyer was
assassinated on a busy thorough-fare and an ominous gathering within the
grounds of the Sindh High Court led to adjournment of the case about May
12 events. Another dissenter lawyer was seriously injured in the Karachi
suburbs late on Thursday.
It is important to understand the meaning and the message of the
treatment meted out to a former prime minister when he landed in his
homeland. One could see that the purpose was also to humiliate him and
like on March 13, when Chief Justice was manhandled in public, the
gutless functionaries of the state obeyed their orders. But this shameless is
more astonishing in the case of a number of federal ministers who had not
left him until after his removal. It is totally disgusting how they now deride
their former leader.
It was Nawaz Sharifs deportation that has exposed the rulers
intended confrontation with the superior judiciary. Independent
observers agree that it amounted to a defiance of the Supreme Court verdict
to allow the former prime minister to return to Pakistan and stay in the
country, irrespective of any deals or agreements. There are numerous other
indications, including events in Karachi, of this confrontation. As an aside, if
they want to take on the judiciary, will they not come after the media next.
One feature of September 10 was a poor showing on the part of
Nawazs party, considering the fact that harsh measures to block the
protesters had to be expected. But is this not a great tragedy in itself that
people are required to suffer the brutality of the law enforcing agencies to
compel the rulers to observe constitutional and democratic principles?
Ansar Abbasi reported on the US role in the exile. Washington has
cunningly but latently maneuovered the Nawaz Sharifs exile to kill the
proverbial two birds with one stone sowed a seed of distrust between
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and smoothened the return of Benazir Bhutto by
excluding hers most potential political threat.
110

In case of Nawaz Sharifs exile, some Middle Eastern countries had

seriously tried to blackout the event from the private Pakistani television
channels broadcasted there. A journalist in one of these countries was clearly
told by the local authorities that they are under pressure from Washington
to do this Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif initially wanted to come
to Islamabad after seven years of exile via Dubai but changed his mind after
being warned that the Dubai authorities might divert him to Riyadh because
of the American pressure.
But the way the Saudi government responded to Nawaz Sharifs
decision to return wondered most if not all here. Believing in silent
diplomacy and enjoying extremely good relations with Pakistan and its
people, Riyadh not only sent its intelligence chief to Pakistan but also asked
Islamabad to re-exile the PML-N Quaid as soon as he lands.
On the very day when Nawaz Sharif was exiled, Ch Shujaat admitted
in a Geo News talk show that not only he but President Musharraf was also
of the view to allow Nawaz Sharif entry into Pakistan as per the decision of
the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Shujaat, however, disclosed that still the
former premier was exiled because of Saudi rulers insistence that Sharif
should be deported back to Riyadh. There is no doubt in anyones mind here
that the otherwise extremely cautious and never willing to get themselves
involved into any controversy, Riyadh was under tremendous pressure
from US to do this.
Riyadh is keeping a complete mum on the subject. However,
Washington is denying to have played any role in Nawaz Sharifs exile.
The US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte when asked told
reporters the other day here in Islamabad that the deportation of Nawaz
Sharif was an internal Pakistani political and legal matter and it is for the
government, people and authorities of Pakistan to decide.
Against this apparent distance from the internal affairs of Pakistan,
the sources said that both Richard Boucher, Assistant Secretary of State and
Negroponte even during their latest visits had discussed with authorities
here the issue of Benazir Bhuttos deal with Musharraf and the forced exile
of Nawaz Sharif.
Analysts believe here that ensuring the exile of Nawaz Sharif, the
Americans on one side has smoothened the return of Benazir Bhutto,

111

who would now find an open political field upon her arrival to benefit as
much as is possible for her.
But through Nawaz Sharifs exile manoeuvre the Americans, it is
believed, have tried to dent the unprecedented relationship between the
governments and the people of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Never
anyone in Pakistan had ever thought of uttering a word against Saudi Arabia
neither was there any such reason available to them.
Ikram Sehgal felt that Musharraf needed good counsel. Attempting to
pre-empt a meltdown of his presidency Pervez Musharraf took on the
judiciary on March 9. The blowback is looming six months later.
Manhandling the man ousted in his counter-coup of Oct 12, 1999, has
compounded the situation. Mian Nawaz Sharif should have been tackled
politically, as suggested by the PML-Q, since his credibility was in question
because of the evasive explanation of the agreement with the Saudis. The
governments trade-mark ham-handed way has rejuvenated him politically.
Musharraf either seems to have become selective in applying the
adage taught to us as soldiers, Honour while you strike him down the foe
that comes with fearless eyes, or else the blatant show of force was
meant both as an example and a warning shot, to friend and foe alike.
Differences between March and September: (1) The people of
Pakistan have become politically charged and are rooting for change, and (2)
the reference exercise has alienated the Honourable Chief Justice. If not,
there is more than meets the eye. During the period spent out in the cold and
in the streets the chief justice was careful not to explicitly express his stance
on a uniformed president. There is no love lost between him and Musharraf,
so it is surprising why the chief justice has not excused himself from
presiding over the bench in this case. The CJP did that only a couple of days
after this observation.
Pervez Musharraf needs good counsel, to start with from his
immediate family. His mother, wife and children have conducted themselves
in exemplary manner, rather uncommon in any countrys hierarchy. And that
includes functionaries down the line. One would not be surprised if they opt
for a graceful exit, now! Contrast that with the stance of his official inner
circle, consisting of National Security Advisor Tariq Aziz, his principal staff
officer, and three intelligence chiefs; they would counsel brazening it out. An
unofficial inner circle consisting of a controversial three-star general who is
112

a real-estate specialist, a couple of arms merchants and bridge partners, and

a handful of his course-mates, etc have a vested interest in Musharraf staying
in place.
One option would for Pervez Musharraf to go the route of Chilean
dictator General Augusto Pinochet If declared ineligible for election,
Musharraf could possibly opt to continue as COAS for the foreseeable
future. This would require a safe and loyal president. The odds on choice
being Shaukat Aziz, available conveniently as a man for all seasons and
like David Copperfields Barkis; ready and willing.
Musharrafs legal eagle, Sharifuddin Pirzada, boasting an
unenviable record for familiar advice to all Pakistan military rulers of the
past, will almost certainly counsel the drastic option of emergency. This
could explain why the chief justices presence on the bench in this particular
case, coming to a head On Sept 17, has been challenged; the matter could
become infructuous by then. Consider a possible spoiling attack by
declaring emergency. The Supreme Court judges would be required to take a
fresh oath, which could easily knock out eight or nine of the more activist,
including the chief justice himself, and leave a residual, more amenable
bench.
In all the hoopla, Chaudhry Shujaat and the PML-Q have come out
cleansed, the decks cleared of those deserting what they think is a sinking
ship. The uniform issue aside, without free and fair elections in the near
future we should fear for the future of this country. The people may
reluctantly accept an emergency, but not without a firm and credible
commitment to a transparent electoral exercise under a genuinely neutral
caretaker government.
Dr Masooda Bano observed: The current government has brought
Pakistans political debate to new levels of absurdity. When a
government so blatantly violates the decision of the Supreme Court as the
present government did by sending Nawaz Sharif off to Saudi Arabia against
his will and against the order of the Supreme Court, it makes all kind of
analysis irrelevant as only an idiot or the one holding the gun can approve
of such a system. There can simply be no two opinions about what is right
and wrong in such extreme cases of state transgression.
The concern is not so much about Nawaz Sharifs individual rights
and his political career. He has regained respect within the public by
113

attempting to return. Of course, being allowed to stay or even being in

prison within Pakistan would have helped build a strong momentum for his
party. But when seven years of exile did not curb his popularity, another
three wont.
The real concern however in this whole episode is the
psychological pressure that the sitting government has tried to build on
the judiciary. By violating the Supreme Court order so blatantly the
government has basically told the public that the judiciary can pass all kinds
of just orders but the implementing arm is under the executive and
eventually the orders dont mean anything. This is very dangerous as it puts
the newly found confidence in the judiciary in question. Also, it puts
immense pressure on the chief justice and the heads of the bar councils who
have fought for this independence fearlessly. There is no doubt that everyone
who wants to see an independent judiciary is right now conscious of the
pressure on the chief justice, especially given that life itself can be at threat
in this country where the ruling coalition has no qualms about using force.
In addition, the government is also trying its best to break the
lawyers movement as is visible in the split that the government has been
able to create within the Supreme Court Bar. One can only wish the chief
justice and the lawyers and judges fighting for the independence of the
judiciary and rule of law, sincere wishes and luck against these severe odds
and note their bravery. Pakistans future depends a lot on how the lawyers
movement is able to strategize and sustain a future plan of action to support
the chief justice. But, it is also important for the public and especially
college and university students to come out and support the movement. It is
unfair to expect political workers and lawyers to get all the beating when
establishing a representative government and rule of law is in everyones
interest.
Meanwhile, it is pointless to even try to counter the comical
explanations provided by the members of the ruling coalition on the talk
shows to defend this action. So lame are their explanations, and so pathetic
they look while making them, that one is better off not hearing them. To
have to keep hearing from the PML-Q members about the morals of keeping
to an agreement when the party epitomizes lotaism is completely pointless
as there has to be a limit to which public representatives should be
allowed to lie.

114

When blatant lies from sitting ministers become a routine matter,

it stagnates the political culture and debate. And as for foreign
intervention in Pakistans political scene it is clear that the US has had a role
in averting Nawaz Sharifs return. The Saudis dont bother becoming so
involved in any countrys politics without the US asking them do so. The
House of Saud does not gain its legitimacy from Arab vote; it does so
through US backing. This is an important point as this shows that Nawaz
Sharif is not a favourite of the US at least at this point in time. This should
add to Sharifs political image as any political party seen sitting in the US
lap is not going down well in free and fair elections in this country. But, the
question is that will we ever have such elections. So far the signs are bleak.
Kamal K Jabbar criticized regimes wanton disregard for the law.
One may have thought that General Musharraf had learnt a lesson
following his abortive attempt to sack Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad
Chaudhry and the debacle that ensued. Such a notion has been clarified
resoundingly, however, by the expulsion of Nawaz Sharif from the country
on Sept 10 contrary to August 23 ruling of the Supreme Court.
With the banishment of Nawaz Sharif, the General and incumbent
government have, like others before them, shown their myopia, arrogance
and contempt for the laws of Pakistan and the sanctity of its highest court.
But its ill-advised action, the General and the government have: (a) acted in
a manner contrary to the letter and spirit of the Supreme Courts ruling that
Sharif has a constitutional right to return to Pakistan (b) committed the
criminal offence of Kidnapping from Pakistan under section 360 of
Pakistan Penal Code (c) violated fundamental human rights given to
Pakistani citizens under the Constitution (d) forcibly expelled a person
charged with plundering our money, from the jurisdiction of Pakistan.
It is obvious that Sharifs expulsion from Pakistan was without his
consent and willingness. Statements by various government ministers and
spokesmen that he left willingly are risible. The president, various officers of
the federal and provincial governments including, the prime minister,
interior minister and bureaucrats have, therefore, rendered themselves
liable to criminal prosecutions for the acts committed on Sept 10, 2007.
Sharifs banishment was also a grave violation of his constitutional
right to enter and remain in his country as guaranteed by Article 15 of the
Constitution. The Government argument that its action was justified in view
of an alleged agreement between the Government and the Sharifs is at least
115

as thin as the paper it was allegedly written on. Is there room, in the eyes of
the law, for a supra-constitutional agreement?
The General and the governments actions reek of hubris and a
wanton disregard for the law, though it is in complete harmony with
incidents such as the physical attack on the Supreme Court of Pakistan by
Sharifs party members in November 1998 when the PML-N was in
government. With the laws having been cut from coast to coast, how can we
expect to stand upright in the winds that are blowing?
Babar Sattar was of the view that the rule of law must be protected by
ordinary people. The biggest casualties of the Nawaz Sharif deportation
saga have been the rule of law and sovereignty of Pakistan. The general
has made it abundantly clear that there has been no transformation in the
nature of his regime and its reliance on brute force to cling to power since
his coup in 1999. What is most disconcerting is that the Musharraf regimes
blatant breach of our fundamental law and the unequivocal ruling of the
Supreme Court has not outraged the nation as it ought to have.
But one must give the Devil his due. The Musharraf regime and its
cronies have been largely successful in confusing the public discourse on
the issue. In recent days we have heard much about Nawaz Sharifs dismal
record as a leader and ruler of Pakistan. We have been reminded of his
vindictive and authoritarian nature. The Sharif familys shameful and
treacherous act of escaping from Pakistan and leaving the party and its
second-tier leaders in the lurch has been highlighted. And most of all, Nawaz
Sharifs lack of ethics in refusing to abide by the legally unenforceable
personal commitment given to Saudi Arabia has been portrayed as
blasphemous. Even if the facts underlying such accusations are true, these
arguments are totally irrelevant for purposes of evaluating the legitimacy of
the Musharraf regimes actions in forcing Sharif out.
The real issue simply is whether we wish to be a country ruled by
law, or one ruled by edicts of autocrats The Constitution, together with
the Supreme Courts reiteration of this constitutional right, left no room for
any creative interpretation of the law by the Musharraf regime.
It is indeed incredible that our general-president decided to defy
the law and the Constitution in full public eye and send a loud message to
all and sundry that he still had no intention of letting legal formalities get in
the way of personal ambition. Equally unfortunate is the fact that any
116

judicial recourse that Nawaz Sharif and the PML-N might have will not be
able to hold the General legally accountable. The maximum punishment
under Pakistans contempt law for defying court orders is six months
imprisonment and up to Rs 100,000b in fine.
Thus, even if the Supreme Court departs from past practice and
actually holds the head of government accountable as opposed to some puny
official, Shaukat Aziz will end up being disciplined, instead of the General.
Further the General has the authority as president of Pakistan to pardon
any convict under Article 45 of the Constitution. Given the audacity of the
General to blatantly defy the Constitution and the clear ruling of the
Supreme Court, he is unlikely to have any qualms about using his powers to
pardon those who agreed to his bidding.
Nawaz Sharifs deportation also exposes the limitations of judicial
authority and legal remedies. At the end of the day, the judiciary relies on
the executive to enforce the law. But in the event that the executive
flagrantly shuns legality, the real remedy lies not with the courts but with the
people. In a country where concepts of legalism are fragile and in a state of
infancy and political alternatives to a deprived regime almost equally
discredited, who can issue the call for public accountability that is actually
heeded by people? The act of deporting Nawaz Sharif is not much different
from that of sacking the chief justice, in terms of the illegality of such
actions and in terms of infringing individual rights, as well as of the adverse
impact on judicial independence in one case and continuity of the political
process and creation of a level playing field in the other.
The Musharraf regimes approach in the aftermath of both events
has also been similar: intimidation and illegal use of force in the short-term
combined with a focus on the personalities of individuals as opposed to the
unprincipled nature of its own actions. The strategy backfired in the case of
the chief justice due to the non-political character of his office as well as the
non-partisan nature of the lawyers movement that took up arms in defence
of the judiciary. In the present case it is much easier to bring focus to bear on
the person of Nawaz Sharif and highlight his past record and weakness to
justify illegitimate actions of the ruling regime, as opposed to defending the
deliberate molestation of the law.
Whether or not Nawaz Sharif is a timid leader, a hopeless politician,
a liar or a criminal has nothing to do with his constitutional right to return to
return and remain in Pakistan. If he deserted his party by negotiating his
117

fight to a palatial life in Saudi Arabia, let his party leaders and members
judge him. If he is bad news for the Pakistani political scene, let the people
of Pakistan reject him through the electoral process. And if he is a criminal
liable to be prosecuted, the ruling regime is obliged by law to bring him to
justice within Pakistan. The last thing democracy in Pakistan needs is
military saviors protecting the nation from evil politicians.
The brazen foreign interference in the Sharif deportation episode
has questioned our status as a sovereign nation. Whether the Saudis have
acted on their own or on US prodding, the Musharraf regime has used the
political capital of Saudi Arabia as a friendly Muslim state Pakistanis loved
and respected. While the emerging scenario serves the Generals immediate
political interests, the schism it is creating between Pakistan and Saudi
Arabia is an unfortunate product of the self-serving and the short-sighted
approach of the rulers in both countries.
The Sharif deportation has two other lessons. One, the
independence of the judiciary is a means to securing a just legal and political
order. Restoration of the chief justice might be a symbolic victory for
judicial independence, but the judiciary, the legal fraternity and the people of
Pakistan will need to continue an unflinching struggle to establish a just
order in the country where defying the law simply doesnt remain an option
anymore.
And, two, continuation of the political process and creation of a level
playing field for indulging in politics threatens to wipe out the ruling regime.
Democracy will, thus, not be restored either by the General or by the
political shenanigans of the PPP. Entrenchment of constitutionalism is our
best guarantee for securing a level playing field, and continuation of the
political process our best hope for finding a decent leadership. The rule of
law will have to be protected by ordinary people, and to that end political
activism is probably more crucial than judicial activism.
M Ismail Khan opined that the people have resigned. Politics in this
country appears to have traveled some distance. From the streets and
assemblies it first moved to the newly arrived television channels and is now
standing on the doorsteps of the higher courts. However, the muted
response accorded by the people to the twice-elected prime ministers
aborted revolution showed some signs for politicians, and also for the legal
fraternity.

118

The public disapproval of Nawaz Sharifs misadventure carries

three emphatic messages firstly, the people are not willing to allow
politicians to take them for free rides anymore, secondly, people are not
willing to stand up and endorse every decision the higher courts may deliver
in a charged political atmosphere, and thirdly, people look for a smooth and
orderly transition and are not prepared for revolution or another Martial
Law.
Broadly speaking, there is a sense of realism creeping in among the
people who have traveled a long way in concluding that democracy cannot
be a one-stop destination, as it is a socio-political attitude and a dynamic
process needing stability, continuity and above all, food security.
There is also a need to look at the specific elements or dynamic of
change, which has and is shaping public perceptions. The change in the
mood and the behaviour pattern of the people, as demonstrated during the
Nawaz Sharif episode, is the result of the multi dimensional transformation
that people are experiencing, which unfortunately is not being properly read
by the politicians and analysts. This has in turn created a gap or say a
perpetual disconnect between the people on the streets and the politicians
and legal theorists operating from drawing rooms, courts and TV studios.
The dynamics behind the attitudinal change that we observe today are
different in rural and urban areas.
The cool-headed reaction to the Nawaz Sharif episode proves that the
people have outgrown the institutions in terms of political maturity. It is
now up to the political leadership, the military and the judiciary to step back
and respect the sense of responsibility being shown by the people. The Chief
Justice, while taking up the petition against the dual office of the president
did well to exclude him from the nine member larger bench, which is
comprised of judges who have earlier delivered two consecutive landmark
decisions against the federation, both through short orders. However, the
appointment of lawyers with political baggage as amices curiae to assist the
honourable court has raised some eyebrows.
Short orders from the Supreme Court or from GHQ are a bad idea at
this point of time. People deserve peace, stability and development, they
deserve Pakistan. Justice demands that the people and their interest should
not be allowed to become a collateral damage in a clash of egos.

119

Omar R Quraishi did not agree with the regimes version of exile. If
he indeed chose to go to Saudi Arabia, why did dozens of police goons
have to be used to make him get into the bus which then took him to the
plane? Or all the reports that say that he was forced and physically
manhandled to board the flight to Jeddah fabrications by a media bent on
maligning the present government?
Surely, the people are not fools to think that, as claimed by the
government, the plan was the baby of the interior ministry. Who hatched the
scheme and in this a report dated Sept 11 in Dawn is instructive in that it
claims the plan was coordinated by the Pakistani government and had
the blessings of Washington and the direct involvement of Saudi Arabias
intelligence chief.
Also, there has not been a whimper of protest on this from Benazir
Bhutto and in fact one foreign newspaper, The New York Times, quotes an
unnamed American official as saying that the deportation of Nawaz
Sharif was not such a bad thing, implying that it would pave the way for
Ms Bhutto to return to Pakistan which she apparently intends to sometime
in October where there will be (yes, you guessed it right!) no hindrances
created by the current government on her arrival and ensuing movement
within the country.
Obviously, Mr Sharifs recent statement obviously directed at the
Americans that he too could be relied on to fight the war on terror wasnt
enough to sway Washington to his side. As for Ms Bhutto, her impending
deal with President Musharraf, at a time when another major opposition
figure has been deported pretty much against his will, will not hold her party
in good stead. One can only wonder what those who have some ethics and
morals in her party people like Aitzaz Ahsan and others like him have to
think about all of this.
Mir Jamilur Rahman as usual preferred to remain an odd exception by
justifying regimes misdeeds. He could choose to retire from his army post
not before but after being elected as president. To be sure, it would
jeopardize his candidacy if he were to retire before becoming president.
If he were to retire now, he would be out of the presidential race because the
constitutional clause of a two years wait becomes operative, which prohibits
government servants from entering politics for two years after retirement.

120

The opposition appears to have made the uniform a matter of life and
death. The crescendo of without uniform has been replaced with or
without uniform. The opposition may not admit that it needs President
Musharraf as much as the government party. The nation has often seen now
bitterly the politicians fight among each other if there was no restraining
hand to calm them.
Confrontation is not the better way to elicit a democratic deal from a
military dictator. Nawaz Sharif has learned at a heavy cost that it is not
always good to sound belligerent. As a warm up to his homecoming he had
adopted a threatening tone against Gen Musharraf. His statements gave the
impression that President Musharraf would be looking for a hideout as soon
as he touched Pakistan. He gave the impression as if Julius Caesar was
returning home after conquering half the world.
The political parties and other institutions should refrain from
creating conditions that could provide an excuse to the government to clamp
emergency on the country. Some leaders of the PML-Q are openly
advocating emergency. The opposition should not get in that trap by
becoming belligerent and threatening The opposition should get into a
serious dialogue with the PML-Q chief, the prime minister and the
president on a one-point agenda of ensuring free and honest elections.

GENERAL VIEWS
Despite the heinous act of Sharifs exile people and analysts did not
ignore Mushy-Pinky affair. Muhammad Islam from Lahore wrote:
Through your newspaper, I request the sundry spokespersons of the
Pakistan Peoples Party to spare us their clarifications and explanations of
the Mohtramas parleys with General Pervez Musharrafs military regime. A
compromise with military dictator is, at the end of the day, still a
compromise, no matter how well it is packaged. And in this case, the
packaging is as disgusting as the contents.
Abid Mahmood Ansari from Islamabad asked: If Gen Musharraf
continues as president and Ms Bhutto becomes prime minister as a result of
these negotiations, not through the actual decision of the people of the
country, the questions arise: Can we call such government be considered a
democratically elected and a representative of the people? Does there remain

121

any need for the farce of free and fair election? For a government formed
in this manner, will it be independent in its decisions, particularly where the
vital national interests of the country are concerned?
Anjum Niaz wrote: Presently, the deal is a dirty secret between an
embattled general and a desperate woman wanting to return and rule for
the third time. Public posturing by sodden mouthpieces in the government
and PPP heightens as time for Benazir Bhuttos arrival draws closer. Truth,
as usual is the first casualty. The talking heads on television are in a heck of
a pickle, figuring out the specs of the deal.
Are Benazir and Musharraf an item finally or bi-polar
adversaries still? The answer could well lie with the National
Accountability Cell. Just as its corruption cell was wound up one fine
morning last spring on the behest of Benazir, the likelihood of its rebirth
cannot be ruled out. Perhaps, its being activated as we speak, why? Have
we not been duly informed about the freshly filed corruption cases against
the Sharif brothers in courts after Nawazs forced foray into Pakistan?
Common sense dictates that if the courts can be given a soaped-up
version of Sharifs corruption, whats holding General Musharraf from
reviving Benazirs cases all ready and bound in official folders, the colour
of which is pink, set to be presented before the courts. Should she try
double-crossing the general? Hassan Wasim Afzal is just a phone call
away and can swing back into his old job.
Afzals boast to reporters was that Benazir Bhutto, Rehman Malik,
the former FIA additional director, and Hassan Ali Jaffery, her nephew will
be charged and sentenced. The Pakistani government will prosecute these
three Pakistanis under UN guidelines. Today Afzals investigative files
bite the dust as hes told to zip up while PPP jiyalas prepare to give a
rousing welcome to their leader Who then, do you think is laughing all
the way to the bank today?
NABs wantonness fits perfectly into the description of a hooker:
with a sly wink, long gaze, flip of the hair, lips pursed, furrowed brow and
finger at, the lady is a tramp! With its moral compass directed towards the
Army House, NAB today has lost all its credibility.
And so has General Pervez Musharraf. He has lost our respect by
bartering away Pakistans independence and allowing the Saudis, Brits,

122

Yankees and Lebanese to choose our leaders. President Bush, with his bogus
axis of evil theory looks like an apparition while face, white hair and white
lips. Having led his nation into a fraudulent war with Iraq, he is now
directing via long distance, a disaster waiting to happen in Pakistan. General
Musharraf must reboot his exit strategy or take responsibility for an epic
strategy.
Ansar Abbasi reported: Benazir Bhutto has agreed to an unwritten
understanding with the Presidency that she would be an advocate and part of
a smooth transition once she is back and would not be a problem for
powers that be in any way.
Ms Bhuttos announcement to end her eight and a half year self-exile
and return on October 18 is the result of this understanding and the
consequence of USs assurance that all cases against her in the foreign
courts would be taken care of.
One of the three presidential aides, who had recently held dealdialogue with Ms Bhutto, is quoted by a source having said that although
there is no formal deal struck between the two sides, Ms Bhutto has
agreed to an understanding that she would follow the present regimes
rules of the game for the next few months and not work as a spoiler.
Ms Bhutto, the source said, has assured that she would not create any
mess upon her arrival on October 18 or thereafter. It is also said that the
dialogue process for deal between the two sides would remain open. Had
Nawaz Sharif also shown some flexibility in his stance, he would not have
been exiled on September 10, the source added.
Altaf Hussain-led MQMs announcement Ms Bhuttos decision to
return and land at Karachi on October 18 is also meaningful in this scenario.
The MQM, which had even refused to greet the countrys chief justice and
also denied entry to the Tehrik-e-Insaaf Chief Imran Khan, has now
welcomed the PPP chairperson in the same city where the two parties
were at each others throats on May 12.
Meanwhile, sources confirmed that Washingtons keenness to see Ms
Bhutto and General Pervez Musharraf working together has already forced
Islamabad to agree to stop persuading itself from the PPP chairpersons
cases in Spain, England and Switzerland.

123

At this point of time it is entirely a win-win situation for Ms

Bhutto, who is returning home claiming no deal but securing an assurance
that the Musharraf-led regime would not pursue her corruption cases in the
foreign courts. Her party will also be allowed a level-playing field in the
upcoming general elections.
On the direction from the top, NAB has already distanced itself
from Madrid Court in Spain that had already issued charge-sheet against
Ms Bhutto and her newly found lieutenant and business partner Rehman
Malik But interestingly despite Islamabads lack of interest the Madrid
Court is proceeding with the case and has reportedly served notices to both
Ms Bhutto and Malik.
Like Madrid, the former prime minister also faces serious challenges
in England and Switzerland courts. According to a source, just like Madrid,
the Government of Pakistan has also distanced itself from London and
Swiss trial of Ms Bhuttos corruption cases.
Dr Mahjabeen Islam observed: General Musharraf is trying every
permutation to try to hold onto power. His driving delusion is his messiah
complex and the entrenched sense in mind that Pakistan cannot possibly do
without him. First came the attempt to dispense with the Chief Justice for his
murmurings of dissent from Musharrafs re-election agenda were obvious,
then the wooing of Benazir and when that, initially, did not go as planned,
the flirtation with emergency rule which Condi Rice squashed in her 2 a.m.
phone call. Now apparently a deal with Benazir has occurred
When the Sharif brothers decide to return, they are told that they
would have to stand trial for their respective corruption. Now I do
understand that Musharraf is the president of Pakistan, but does that office
come with the arbitrary and self serving waiving away of charges against
the goose, but the stolid prosecution of the gander?
It is deep insult to the collective injury of Pakistani nation for
these leaders to think that their pillage of Pakistan has been forgotten, or
brushed under the rug, just because they have now decided to make a comeback What innovate surgery have Benazir and Sharif undergone, that shall
guarantee to the Pakistani nation that the corruption gene within them has
been dissected out?

124

Azmooda ra azmoodan jahal ast is a Persian saying which translates

into Trying out one that has already been tried is the sure sign of
ignorance. Why is the Pakistani nation allowing this power charade of
characters that need immediate political retirement to continue?
Imtiaz Rafi Butt was of the view that it is nothing but politics of
compromises. We, individuals and nations alike, no matter how noble or
malevolent, are driven subconsciously by perhaps the most powerful force in
the human experience, raw self-interest. Self-interest is our very basic
survival instinct; almost all actions undertaken by men and states alike are
purely based in pursuit of this irresistible fundamental. History has been
shaped by it; soon this fundamental principle will solve all of Pakistans
ailments.
Pakistans political landscape is more dynamic today than ever
before; every day that passes paints an even more puzzling portrait. The
view from the ground; an unpopular and concerned General Musharraf is
now negotiating a political lifeline with Benazir Bhutto. Word spreads
quickly of an agreement only for the General to back out at the last moment,
wait for a short period of time and then re-enter negotiations. Government
officials hint at deal one day and flatly deny any sort of understanding the
next; all the while General Musharraf and Mohtrama Benazir Bhutto are
involved in on again off again negotiations.
These are no ordinary times and in times like these one can easily
be confused by the fluidic nature of statements by our political overlords.
For it is the very nature of politics to be flexible. Analysis however requires
solid facts, in-depth understanding of all the players involved, their
established tendencies and the odd bit of wisdom.
In order to correctly understand not just the nature of the deal but the
necessity for it and the influence of its main proponents (The US, the UK
and Saudi Arabia), we cannot rely on shifting political statements conflicting
party interests, or personal animosity between leaders; for time like these.
All of this is irrelevant in the theatre of politics. The key factor which has
to be considered is that the US is the engine behind recent reconciliation
efforts Musharraf and the opposition.
The United States has formed a comfortable relationship with
General Musharraf over the years and has backed him throughout;
Musharraf is viewed as an essential ally. However, given the current political
125

situation inside Pakistan the US realizes that continuing to force

Musharraf on the people on the people in his present role as absolute
ruler will lead to political disaster. With the worst case scenario (Islamic
takeover and proliferation of Pakistani nuclear assets) being too difficult to
fathom for the whole world, with time running out, action must be taken and
taken soon.
In these special times, it pleases me to see that our political
leadership appreciates the epic scale of this adventure of reconciliation
and is bravely venturing beyond traditional political hang-ups. One needs to
admire the courage and wisdom shown by Benazir Bhutto in pursuing back
door diplomacy with Musharraf in spite of immense party pressure not to do
so. This is indeed a sacrifice for she has a lot of more to lose; she is risking
voter outrage and the legacy of her father and the PPP itself.
General Musharraf has made vital political mistakes in governing
Pakistan. Military dictators always make mistakes because they treat politics
with a soldiers mind-frame. What should be appreciated about him is that
he could have followed his soldier psyche to the very end and go down
fighting, as it were. When a dictator does this, the whole usually goes
down with him. The fact that the General seems to have finally realized
that he has to compromise for the greater good and he will respect the
Constitution is a welcome sign.
As for Nawaz Sharif, he has gone through harsh times and the
journey has been tough for him and his family. One can appreciate the
principled stand not to negotiate with the government. However, these are
extraordinary times and a man who has held the prime ministers office on
more than one occasion must display the wisdom to recognize the needs
of the country. Those needs dictate that he should let go of any personal
grudges with Musharraf or the PPP and support a united alliance for the
moderation, stabilization and prosperity of Pakistan.
Some of the incidents in the recent past clearly indicated that the
regime was quite determined to curtail the independence of the judiciary.
The executive at the centre arrogantly defied those orders of the superior
courts which were not to its liking. The MQM was quite belligerent against
the Bench and the Bar.
Shafqat Mahmood wrote: You dont have to be a supporter of Nawaz
Sharif to feel shocked at the cavalier treatment given to the Supreme Courts
126

decision. Its firm observation that every citizen has an inalienable right to
enter and remain in the country was not considered worth the paper it was
written on. The courts explicit direction to federal and provincial authorities
not to hinder the exercise of a citizens fundamental right was audaciously
and disdainfully ignored.
This is not just contempt of court. It is an open challenge to the
authority of the apex court and a deliberate violation of the Constitution.
Article 190 explicitly states that all executive and judicial authorities
throughout Pakistan shall act in aid of the Supreme Court. The removal of
Nawaz Sharif from the country by force the word deportation should only
be used for non-citizens in an egregious example of an executive authority
intentionally disobeying a Supreme Court order.
I am not a lawyer, but this act of the state authorities, is a breach of
the Constitution and should alone disqualify Pervez Musharraf from being a
candidate for the office of president. He took an oath to protect and defend
the Constitution while he was a cadet in the military academy, but let us
ignore that because he was a callow youth and did not quite understand the
implication of what he was doing.
He then took the oath again, twice, when he assured, without
election, the office of president in 2001 and 2003. By this time, he should
have known what he was doing. Protecting and defending the Constitution is
an integral and perhaps the most important part of the oath for the office of
president. By flouting the Constitution, he has violated that oath and
should be charged, or at the very least disqualified from being a
presidential candidate.
Not only that, there is no regret by state authorities at this
shocking defiance of the Supreme Court order and violation of the
Constitution. A deliberate campaign has been launched against the Chief
Justice and superior courts. On the very day that Nawaz Sharif was being
forcibly removed to Saudi Arabia, the Sindh High Court was mobbed by
thousands of MQM supporters. They disrupted the working pf the court and
stopped it from functioning.
While this has been going on as a trailer of things to come, a virtual
media campaign against the superior judiciary has been launched by
government ministers and their political supporters. Altaf Hussain has issued
a broadside from London and Chaudhry Shujaat took up the theme in
127

Islamabad by targeting the courts. Government minister such as Sher Afgan

Niazi, Raza Hayat Hiraj and Babar Ghauri and the ever-present Shaikh
Rashid have appeared on talk shows and used aggressive language against
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and Sindh High Court judges.
The purpose of this onslaught is two-fold. One, to scare the
superior judiciary from taking any adverse decision against General Pervez
Musharraf in the petition of Qazi Hussain Ahmed that comes up for hearing
on Sept 17 to my lay reading, if the court holds against him, he can
certainly not become a candidate in uniform. Whether the two-year cooling
off clause also becomes relevant would probably be a subject of other
petitions, particularly when he files his nomination papers.
It is obvious that a serious legal battle looms on issues that
fundamentally affect Pervez Musharrafs future. This campaign launched
by his supporters against the judiciary is a signal to the judges that if
they dont act correctly there will be consequences. And, what these
consequences will be brings us to the second purpose of this campaign of
threat and intimidation against the judiciary.
We have been hearing about the imposition of martial law for some
time, and I always thought that this was another ruse to scare the
judiciary. Now I am hearing from people who should know that some
explicit thinking has been done and a possible scenario worked out. The
expression being used to describe it is surgical martial law.
For the first time in our history, this surgical martial law is
essentially being contemplated against the judiciary. Some people like
Shaukat Aziz have been advocating a less drastic option and calling it
emergency-plus; meaning that the same results can be achieved, of sorting
out the judiciary, while remaining within the frayed umbrella of the
Constitution. But, such an emergency has the risk of being overturned by the
very judiciary against which it is being contemplated.
This only leaves the option of a short martial law. It will be used to
get rid of troublesome judges and also Article 184 of the Constitution,
which relates to human rights. There is also a plan to curtail, if not remove
altogether, the suo motu powers of the judges. On the political side, a
caretaker government will be put in place to conduct elections within three
months with General Musharraf remaining president in uniform. After

128

ensuring positive results, the new assembly will stamp approval on the
constitutional amendments and also elect the General as president.
This scenario, it is said, will become unnecessary if Benazir
Bhutto and the PPP are ready to cooperate in making constitutional
amendments that protect General Musharrafs candidature and election
against a judicial challenge. It will also include a two-and-a-half-year limit
for the chief justice, which will result in the removal of Iftikhar Mohammad
Chaudhry. Whether Benazir agrees to all this, one does not know, but if she
does, she will forever be tarnished.
The country is being put through a wringer because one man
wants to be president for five more years. And arrogance of power is
making his camp contemplate horrendous actions to achieve just that. They
should remember that victors are by the victories undone. Even if they
manage to steamroll their way through brute force, their fragile foundation
will collapse with one concentrated push. Is it worth it? Please spare the
nation this agony and let rule of law prevail.
The News commented on perpetration of terrorism by MQM upon
legal community in Karachi. Recent tensions in the legal community in
Karachi have had lethal consequences of late and do not bode well for the
future. Lawyers representing the government in suo moto hearings being
held by a seven-member bench of the Sindh High Court had earlier verbally
clashed with each other. This was followed by the Karachi Bar Association
canceling the memberships of several senior lawyers who were representing
the government and culminated in the tragic death (murder) of Raja Riaz,
who earlier had had an altercation with a well-known lawyer representing
the government in the said hearings. Now on Friday, another lawyer, one
who reportedly has represented Mohajir Qaumi Movements Afaq Ahmed in
several cases, was shot and seriously injured outside his home.
The legal fraternity in the city is understandably up in arms and has
said that this all seems to be part of an overall campaign to intimidate
the lawyers community, especially in the wake of the powerful and
successful role it played in rallying to the cause of the Chief Justice of
Pakistan after he was unceremoniously suspended from his post on March 9.
It should be recalled that as far back as May 12 the lawyers community in
the province was harassed and intimidated especially on that day when
hundreds of them were literally held hostage by activists of a political party

129

in and around the Sindh High Court. Violence only begets violence and is no
answer to anything.
Michael Krepon and Alex Stolar were of the view that Pakistani
nation must reclaim the right to make and enforce its own laws. Nawaz
Sharifs dramatic return to Pakistan was short-lived. His deportation to Saudi
Arabia accelerates the political drama presently unfolding in Pakistan, which
is now at a critical juncture. Recent developments, and dramatic new events
sure to follow, clarify how crucial an independent judiciary and free and
fair elections are to Pakistans well being.
Pakistani leaders, both civilian and military, have a long history of
manipulating judiciary. Nawaz Sharif, whose sudden political revival can be
traced to a surprisingly independent judiciary, did much to weaken the
Supreme Court when he was Prime Minister.
The best way forward might require solemn pledges voluntarily
undertaken by contending factions in Pakistan that are backed up by the
international community. The following ideas might be worth considering.
First, major contenders for leadership positions might serve national
interests best by pledging allegiance to an independent judiciary that serves
as a check against corruption, disregard for the rule of law, and abuse of
power by future presidents and prime ministers.
Second, the continuation of a winner take all approach to
domestic politics increases the probability that Pakistans domestic
violence and internal security dilemmas will grow. These divisions can
badly impair Pakistans ability to address the upsurge in domestic violence,
much of which appears to be connected to the presence on Pakistani soil of
those who do not accept the writ of the state. Only a government that
respects political diversity can tackle the sources of domestic unrest and
violence in a sustained, effective way.
Third, to help promote free and fair elections and the subsequent
formation of a representative government, all major parties within Pakistan
might agree in advance to invite election monitors from all the nations that
wish to help in this regard. This proposal would entail no imposition or
infringement of Pakistani sovereignty
Pakistans well-being, domestic tranquility and economic growth
depend on reclaiming the nations right to make and enforce its own

130

laws. Put another way, prosecuting extremists is not a favour that Pakistan
does for the United States. It is an obligation that Pakistani leaders undertake
for the well-being of their country.
Analysts dwelled on tactics of the regime to stay in power;
discussed the dim prospects of it coming out of the woods unscratched; and
also suggested the ways out to lead the nation out of prevalent turmoil.
Anjum Naz wrote about the coercive strategy of the ruling elite.
The Sheikh from Lal Haveli in Rawalpindi is being used by his
intelligence handlers to spread Musharrafs message, so that the citizens
dont swoon with shock after shock that the president has been dealing the
public, beginning from his deal with BB, the CJ crisis and now his election
in uniform by the present assemblies. And should that not happen, then get
ready for martial law, warns the prognosticator. Notice how Sheikh Rashid
grinds his words as he utters them with a grimace that gets more and more
grounded into a reality that the viewers are loath to accept.
What Sheikh Rashid says stands; the rest is bunkum uttered by others
of his ilk. Should BB come into power and Chaudhry Shujaat become a
political orphan, Rashid still has a bright future as a psychic in
America. His jet-black toupee and swirling mustache with twinkling eyes
would make the American women here go crazy!
Time-out for the opinion-slingers of the written words too, both in
Pakistan and abroad. Their analysis is emasculated by the say-so of
Musharraf, Benazir and Nawazs mouthpieces who other than secondguessing their leaders true intentions have nothing of value to share with the
nation. Plus, the political scenario changes like the candle in the wind
throwing pundits in spin. Musharrafs inner circle has warned him that he
risks losing power unless he radically changes course.
One American retired general is making a last ditch bid to save
General Musharraf from political execution by appealing to America to
hold on fast to the Pakistani president and not let him slip through the
trapdoor. In last Sundays article in the Washington Post, the General (Zinni)
who is great buddy with Musharraf wrote: When Musharraf took control of
the government in a 1999 coup, I was told to break off all ties with him. He
called me right after he assumed power to explain the events that had led to
the takeover and to underscore his determination to bring democracy in
substance and not just in form. Allies (Musharraf) are supposed to be
131

partners, not paragons. We will find ourselves in trouble if we insist that our
allies do everything we ask, measure up totally to our concepts of how their
societies should function and make no demands of us.
Lets finally move to the provocateurs. The bloated community of
Pakistani-American bloggers eagerly lap up two articles ferreted from the
archives of Vanity Fair and the New York Times. Edward Jay Epstein, a
renowned investigative journalist traced General Zias air crash in Vanity
Fair headlined Who Killed Zia? The story reads like an Agatha Christie
thriller. The punch line in the article is the creepy self-serving role of the
State Department history seems to repeat itself in every particular
Pakistan Armys role is equally mystifying. At a time when suicide
bombers were unknown, the khakis came up with a nutty answer as to who
killed Zia. According to Epstein, it blamed the crash on Shiite fanatics
saying the co-pilot being a Shia had purposely crashed the plane.
Prof Dr Anwarul Haq from Islamabad, who planned to contest
presidential election, objected to presidential election before general
election. The Attorney Generals statement in the Supreme Court that the
presidential election will be held between 15th September and 15th October is
very disturbing as it amounts to snatching the right of people to bring
about any change. Holding the presidential election prior to the elections of
provincial assemblies and national assembly which are about to expire
would amount to getting elected from an assembly whose current popularity
and approval among people of Pakistan has not been tested.
This would definitely deprive people from their right of vote to bring
about change. For example, in any country an electoral college which has
lost all the trust, credibility and approval among the people cannot be
allowed to affect the peoples right to bring change including that of the
president for the next tenure. I being the potential presidential candidate
(waiting for the Election Commission or the Supreme Courts decision) have
serious objection over holding of the presidential election prior to the
election of the fresh Electoral College.
The News commented on EC Notification. It is certain that
opposition political parties as well as many neutral observers will see it as
acting not with a great degree of independence because its actions will be
seen as tending to unduly favour one particular candidate, the president

132

 of course its another story that he may well be the only candidate but the
rules should not be amended for one person.
In doing so the EC will be seen by many, particularly the opposition
and much of civil society, as acting in a manner prejudicial to other
possible candidates in that it is unlikely that it would have made this rule
change if another individual currently in the employment of the government
were to announce his or her intention to contest the presidents re-election.
In fact, according to reports a professor at a government college has
expressed this desire only to be reportedly reprimanded by his institution for
doing so.
As for respecting the Supreme Court rulings of 2002 and 2005,
according to which the change has apparently been made, this issue is
bound to generate considerable controversy The said rulings will
probably have to be examined and interpreted by legal minds to infer
whether the allowance given to the president to continue in the post of army
chief was a one-time waiver or whether it could be used again to exempt him
from Article 63 at the time of his desired re-election as president. It has
already been pointed out that the EC needs express approval of the president
to make any such changes in its own rules.
Masood Hasan, in his peculiar style, expressed his views with
reference with reference to the exile of Nawaz Sharif. He opined that the
rulers have turned Pakistan into a banana republic for their selfish motive of
perpetuating their rule.
Allah be praised, democracy is safe. Enlightened Moderation is also
safe. House of Chaudhries is safe for the time being. Above all, Presidency
is safe. Progressive policies of nine years are safe; so many safes all in one
day; full marks to macho commandos and colonels with megaphones. They
ensured that the naughty boy was sent to Soddisville through a cunning plan.
With all the dangers thus removed, Pakistan is now a banana republic or
as some think, a republic of bananas, destined to even greater glory led by
the greatest bananas of all time.
This is a marvelous transition, but one may well ask what indeed a
banana republic is? Is it a country where bananas rule as opposed to
cabbage? The answer is absolutely correct. This may sound strange, but it is
the truth not Durrani-truth but the real deal. Bananas call the shots, though
this entails an intense knowledge of counting. As most of us banana133

watchers know, bananas cannot count, which has never stopped a banana
from going places and getting plots. Between March 9 and Sept 10, the
bananas have had a pretty torrid time, but such is their resilience that they
have come out of it unscathed and unmarked, which is no ordinary feat.
They have taken a punch or two and some bananas have had to be
sacrificed to save the plantation, but things are well now. Because of this
great achievement, the Banana Plan has been put into action and citizens can
look forward to happy days ahead, in the company of senior bananas who
may be slippery, but love Pakistan. The Banana Plan is popularly believed
to be the handiwork of the Jadoogar of Jeddah who has always had a
hand sometimes two in all things shady.
Some of its outstanding features are quite fascinating. The recent
revelation of bananas as the national fruit has been welcomed by everyone.
It is seen as a most progressive step, thus ending the long and bitter dispute
between the bananas and the countrys leading lotas, fondly known as the
national rolling utensils. There is a move to further assimilate the rolling
utensils into the folds of the bananas, so that such misunderstandings that
arose recently are never repeated again.
The prime minister, who has a distinguished record of having never
said anything solid, is a natty dresser and his forays into banana haute
couture are seen as the best thing thats ever happened to the fashion
industry. All government officials will be expected to wear banana suits
and those more traditionally-inclined, banana sherwanis. The general
public, who no longer have a general they can call their own, will be
required to use at least one article that reflects the countrys new plunge into
banana-culture.
Those unable to afford full banana suits will be required by law to
wear at least one article, be it a banana vest, lungi or shalwar. Beggars,
whose number is on the rise, may wear banana rags and eat cake. The
armed forces have the least adjustment to do since their uniforms,
tanks, trucks and guns are already banana-designed; what they call
camouflage. That it can be spotted a few miles away without the aid of
binoculars is just another cunning plan.
The government has decided that all roads will be named in line
with the countrys new ethos. The much-loved Lahore Mall will henceforth
be called The Banana Mall. Banana Convention Centre will be the new
134

name of that strange ball-like creature that sits astride Islamabad.

Constitution Avenue will be called Banana Avenue, which is most
appropriate since the Constitution has gone missing for many years now and
cannot be found for love or money. Pictures of various varieties of bananas
along with their descriptions will be featured in the new Constitution. All
airports will be renamed. Lahore Airport will now be called Allama Iqbal
International Banana Airport and tourists will be given bunches of the fruit
to spread Pakistans new and dynamic culture.
Similarly, the National Assembly and all the Provincial Assemblies
will be appropriately renamed, and some are suggesting this be done before
they are ready to leave. This might be asking too much of the legislators,
who even on good days have serious problems finding shoes to fit feet. As it
is, they are perplexed; hearing all sorts of rumours that they have to elect the
President again or elect someone else, who will step down and pave the path
for the real President to be re-elected things like that can be very confusing
for most people and the sight of legislators holding their heads is
indicative of the fact that most are having a hard time focusing on
anything.
There is also a strong move to ban cricket and hockey, the only two
games we still insist on playing. Most people equate squash with Mitchells
or Shezan, and in track events we are already so low that organizers of
global events run out of space at the bottom to accommodate us. Luckily, our
performers are very considerate and work hard, so that they dont win any
medal at all. Perhaps, if they had a lota category we would be on top, but
sadly the Olympic Authority is not aware of such a utensil. Apparently
the Greeks never used them
There isconsiderable merit in the Punjab Chief Ministers
suggestion based on another dream he had between the nights of 9 th and 10th
September, which basically means that slipping on banana peels should
now be the national game. This is game at which Pakistanis are quite
naturally adept, particularly the civilians who unlike their khaki brothers
spend their lives slipping and sliding on banana peels
Of course, there are many people who are not in agreement with this
banana plunge. They believe that the transition from cabbages to dented
rolling utensils and there on to bananas is a sad deterioration in national
standards. Given the fact that Pakistan after 60 years in highly confused state
critics of the banana fever are saying that this is yet another sign of our
135

meaningless journeys into wilderness. They feel that rolling utensils capture
the national psyche so well that they deserve more prominence and
recognition at the highest levels, although endorsements from the high and
mighty testify to the lotas irresistible appeal. There seems some merit in a
suggestion recently aired by a bored citizen that we should paint a banana as
a lota and end the tamasha. Not a bad idea at all.
Adil Najam also expressed his views on the regime with reference to
Sharifs exile. The way the government handled Nawaz Sharifs return
to Pakistan was shameful; but it was not surprising. Talk of exactly this
happening had been rife here in Islamabad in the days leading up to
September 10. What is truly surprising astonishing, in fact is why Gen
Pervez Musharraf would do what he did or even let it happen.
His government chose to deploy excessive force for the public
humiliation of a twice-elected former prime minister in what was the
equivalent of using cannon to swat a housefly. As a result, it may have
gained some little time and an illusionary victory, but the current and
future costs have been huge.
This incident has further tarnished Pakistans image, exposed the
vulnerabilities of the Musharraf regime, emboldened opposition forces,
created considerable domestic and international sympathy for Nawaz Sharif,
prepared the ground for yet another confrontation between government and
judiciary, and severely damaged Pakistans foreign policy relations with
Saudi Arabia. The Saudis may stand by Musharraf now, but they will
certainly think many times before they ever try to bail out another Pakistani
government on any issue again.
All of these costs were entirely predictable, and just have been
known to those who planned and executed the script for September 10. Why,
then, would Gen Musharraf risk losing so much for so little? But there
may also be deeper dynamics at work. At least four possible
explanations come to mind.
Commando logic: Give the nature of the operation troops storming
a plane, pressure negotiations, intimidation tactics, diverted flights, changed
call numbers and Gen Musharrafs pride in his own commando pedigree,
an obvious explanation is to call this a commandos instinct: Take swift and
decisive action to ward of future complications. Enticing as it sounds, this
explanation is unsatisfactory.
136

Personal prejudices: There is great irony in the fact that airplanes

and airports were as central to Nawaz Sharifs rise to power. Neither man
would have missed the parallel between the events of September 10, 2007
and October 12, 1999. Both events involved one person working feverishly,
trying to prevent the other from entering Pakistan. Pervez Musharraf won
the cat-and-mouse game on each occasion.
Encouraging bad advice: autocratic leaders invariably land
themselves in the downward spiral of suicidal politics of denial and
delusion and Gen Musharraf is showing all the classic signs of being there.
One sure sign of this condition is that autocrats get surrounded by indeed,
they surrounded themselves with bad advisors. The arrogance of hubris
and the slyness of sycophants combine in a healthy mix that slowly eases out
those few who might once have spoken truth to power. Invariably, they get
replaced either by outright lackeys or by those who have a real interest in
giving bad advice. The latter are more dangerous.
Misunderstanding the moment: While each of the above
explanations have some limited merit, the most potent explanation is that for
at least a year now since the killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti Gen
Musharraf has actually lost touch with the realities of the political moment
that he and the nation are living through
Two trends, in particular, define Pakistans current political
moment. First, the defining public outcries of the last year have not been
for someone, they have been against Pervaiz Musharraf. Neither Bugti,
nor Chief Justice Iftikhar and certainly not Nawaz Sharif have a great
personal following. Bugti was probably disliked by more Pakistanis than
not.
Second, the revolution in terms of media assertiveness and more
recently judicial assertiveness has come about not because these
institutions are perfect, but because they promise accountability. The media,
certainly has made enough mistakes in the sensationalism and hype around
impending emergencies, etc for example, in the sentimental jingoism
seen in reporting towards the end of the Lal Masjid operation. The courts
will, necessarily, also fluctuate in performance. That is the nature of
institutions. The real revolution is that people now demand accountability,
have found alternative institutions in which to actualize it, and will settle for
nothing else.

137

Working together, these twin realities imply that the government is

no longer able to save its political soul by diverting attention to others,
nor does it now have the ability to manipulate the context in which Pakistani
view and interpret their politics. Yet, these are the exact two tactics
(diversions and manipulations) that Pervez Musharrafs government has
been applying again and again. The more they try these tactics, the more
dramatically they fail.
Farahnaz Ispahani cautioned that politics of exclusion never work.
The current political crisis in the country is a direct result of the failed
efforts to exclude Mohtrama Benazir Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Sharif from
Pakistans political life. Politics does not operate in neat straight lines and
certainly is never as simple as ordering trained soldiers to march in
single file. Eight years after General Musharraf declared that he would not
let Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif influence the course of events, he is negotiating
with one through emissaries and trying to prevent the other from returning to
the country Ironically, similar designs have been pursued by militarytechnocrat regimes in several countries around the world, only to be finally
abandoned in favour of undiluted democracy.
In the current phase of the military-intelligence complexs
interpretation of what is good for Pakistan, the nation has been duped with
claims that the popular leadership of the country cannot deliver. It is
argued that Pakistan will become a stable country only if this leadership is
kept out of the country with the help of tailor-made election laws,
persecution in the name of accountability and threats of physical harm.
The party created by the establishment to replace the exiled
popular leadership comprised of people who were interested in power but
unconcerned with public service. They were elected only because they had
money and received help from intelligence agencies.
The faade of political stability created over the last few years
was blown away as soon as the Musharraf regime and its political allies
blundered into suspending the chief justice. Such was the chaos in the
structure so carefully created by the so-called powerful quarters, that for
the first few days even cabinet ministers were afraid of defending the action
of the President on television. The prime minister upon whose advice the
reference against the chief justice was supposedly moved was hardly visible
throughout the ensuing crisis. The reaction of the people over this ill-advised
action was massive and suddenly made the nation aware that there was
138

something fundamentally wrong with the artificially created edifice of

establishment-guided politics.
Politicians rise and fall not on the basis of the judgments of generals
and bureaucrats, and a countrys politics cannot be fundamentally altered by
manipulation alone. Instead of thinking up new ways of excluding
politicians that it cannot defeat in free and fair polls, the Pakistani
establishment should reconcile itself to the fact that leaders can be changed
only through continuance of the political process. Instead of Minus 2, what
Pakistan needs is politics Minus One the one being the militaryintelligence apparatus that has divided and destabilized Pakistan for far too
long.
Jassna Javed observed: The legal experts in the presidency are
willing to maim, rape, and kill the already molested Constitution to keep
the incumbent political conformists in power; the establishmentarians have
traversed all boundaries of Musharraf adulation; and the office-holders in
their zeal to please their political masters have tended to overshoot.
The way forward is down, and there is no other. Time has come for a
sober calculation of the visceral hatred for constitutional democracy
expressed by the current regime with such brazen clarity. Despite its veneer,
the military regimes hegemonic bubble has reached the point where it
must pop and allow constitutional supremacy, rule of law and fair play to
take precedence. We may have our subjective judgments about politics, but
elementary honesty dictates that people must be given an opportunity to vote
and elect their leaders. Representation is crucial to all things public be it
public policy, public opinion, public sentiment, or public leadership.
Shakir Husain wrote: Before we get carried away and hail Benazir
Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif or the MMA as the saviours of the nation, we
should all reflect on the performance of all these players when they have
been in power before. All of them were equally incompetent and greedy, and
have disregarded the public good in the past, and I am sure will continue to
do so. And while absence makes the heart fonder; let us not have
expectations of statesmanship from any of the three of them.
The current government in its last throes of existence has gone into
siege mode and is making the moves only a dying animal can be expected
to make. On Friday night, 400 motorcycles were impounded in Rawalpindi
and Islamabad and will be released on September 11 apparently all of them
139

were to be used in a rally for Nawaz Sharif. Whats the big deal? Let him
come back and let the government facilitate his return as per the Supreme
Courts orders. Take some of the winds out of the oppositions sails by doing
exactly what they dont expect them to do. Can we have some maturity,
please? If Nawaz Sharif today has become the Saviour of Democracy in
Pakistan it is not because of his political acumen but rather the mistakes of
those who oppose him. For once, let us call a spade a spade, and not carried
away with the moment.
Aamir Ghauri opined that the change is must and it should come
through the people of Pakistan. Pakistanis who grew up singing Humpty
Dumpty would be wondering how the European rhyme writers of the past
had the wisdom to predict Pakistani political shenanigans. From the Gujrat
gurus to the Kakul fraternity, all are desperately trying to drum up a future
political set-up that is ready to retain Pervez Musharraf as the head of state
who many say is running out of steam fast. His own promises to the nation
(if there remains one), constitutional constraints on his ability to play encore
and the peoples aspirations can wait for ever because the crowd around
the man who came to power through an unnecessary coup is yelling: Long
live the king.
Not attempting to inform my fellow countrymen and women how
frivolous politics has become in the country for that would indeed be
blasphemous I do wonder how long this crippled system would work. It is
immaterial now whether Pervez Musharraf remains or sinks soon. More
important is it to note that this checkmated General has been running a
roundabout all these years. He told us many a time how corrupt and
degenerated Bhutto and the Sharifs were
We are being told that the new dispensation, headed surely by
Musharraf, would be better placed to fight the dubious War on Terror. And
it would deflate extremism along with boosting enlightened moderation. And
it would re-establish the rule of law and harmonize relations between
provinces. And it would take the country towards political stability, etc. if all
these expectations are to be taken prima facie, then would we be wrong in
concluding that Pakistan presently remains devoid of all these nobilities?
Bigger still would be the question what the hell this present government
has been doing for the last five years.
And if the change is inevitable, should this come through the
people of Pakistan or a few nerds would go on deciding on their behalf?
140

Will these decisions ever be made in Pakistani cities, towns and villages or
will Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Riyadh, Washington, New York and London
continue to be better suited for such important decisions about all of us? The
symbiotic relationship between London and Pakistan was no doubt severed
sixty years ago, but the Pakistani elite, military or otherwise, kept it alive
nonetheless.
The Musharrafs, Bhuttos, Sharifs, and the Chaudhrys might have
magnanimous plans to make Pakistan a world marvel. Pakistanis, ironically,
do not appear moved. Sloganeering might be thunderous by those with a
stake in the power pie, the people, however, hardly seem convinced.
Maybe they know it already that the government would come and go;
promises would be made and broken; democracy may flourish or flounder.
More important is to know if the future dispensation would be able to
reign in suicidal mullas, hard-line nationalists, coup-plotting soldiers and the
people-crumbling elite structures. Meanwhile, all the kings horses and all
the kings men can go on doing what they do best try to stop the Humpty
Dumpty from falling and not to be able to put him together again.
Kamila Hyat was of the view that people find no leader to march
behind. The many questions that have arisen in the wake of these
developments have as yet received no answers. After all, why was Nawaz
Sharif, a wanted criminal under Pakistans law, handed over to the Saudis in
the first place? Why was he once again permitted to depart for his luxury
residence in the desert state after, quite literally, flying back into the lands of
the authorities?
And, a more fundamental question: Why is the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia able to play so decisive and active a role in the internal politics
of Pakistan? After all, the money Nawaz Sharif and his cronies are alleged
to have siphoned off from the State of Pakistan belongs to its people, to
taxpayers who work hard for their money, and as such anyone guilty of
stealing it must be accountable to them. Why should General Musharraf, or,
for that matter any other authority, have the right to dispatch such a looter of
national wealth into exile effectively pardoning him and enabling him to
escape any form of punishment as per the rule of law?
But beyond these issues, which are all likely to continue to come
under spotlight in the days ahead, is the question of whether to address the
major concerns of people. It is worth noting that, for all the PML-Ns cries
141

to the contrary, not many people made any effort to greet Nawaz Sharif.
Certainly, it is true that many arrests were made; in a display of zeal the
Punjab police arrested a number who were only remotely linked to the PMLN and immense barricades were placed on the GT Road and other entry
points Threats, harassment and intimidation were also used.
Of course it is not the PML-N alone that seems to be struggling to
hang on to the ability to bring people onto the streets. Pictures from
mass rallies organized in the past years by the ruling PML-Q, and indeed
other parties, all too often show images of people who have literally fallen
asleep in the middle of speeches delivered by leaders, or are quite obviously
disinterested in the proceedings of the gathering. A few, quite literally, can
be seen on television pictures twiddling their thumbs.
While such instant crowds may meet the immediate needs of
political leaders, anxious to show they have mass following, in times of
crisis they are next to worthless. As Mian Nawaz Sharif and his men should
have realized, the presence of tens of thousands of people in streets, behind
barricades or even in jails, could have made all the difference to his arrival,
which, as it happened, fizzled out something like a damp squib.
The question the PML-N, and indeed all other major parties need to
ask is why people have relatively little interest in the comings and goings
of their leaders, in their fortunes and misfortunes. In Lahore, while it was
obvious there was sympathy at a human level for the Sharifs, there was little
political support with many watching the event on TV, or following it in
their cars over radio, seeing it largely as a rather humorous, but shallow, item
of entertainment. Little passion or excitement appeared to be visible.
When asked themselves, people have precise, sensible answers to the
reasons for this. They argue that they in fact have no leader to follow, no
tune to keep in step with, no one to march behind. After all, the question
of deals signed or agreed with Saudi Arabia, or the other contents of secret
negotiations between leaders, have little relevance for people. As they have
done for the last three decades, they continue to wait patiently, sometimes
desperately for a leader who plays a drum to a beat that rings out in their
own hearts.
Omar Salim Khan from London had one leader in mind. Pakistanis
must look to new options and new leadership, if we are to make any
progress and regain some sort of standing in the comity of nations. Imran
142

Khan and the PTI are an alternative worth considering. I hope that the
Pakistanis, citizens back home and expatriates, will not be fooled into voting
for the typical politicians once again but will, for once, bring in a new and
fresh leadership with ideals and a good track record.
Imtiaz Alam carried out comparison of confrontationist and gradualist
approaches for change. Ms Bhutto preferred to play on the weakness of
Musharraf to force a transitional course, rather take a confrontational course
by joining hands with her ideological adversaries. Her tactical course
appears to be based on objective ground realities and real politick.
However, by doing so she has had put herself to the scrutiny of popular
sentiment, which is anti-American and anti-Musharraf. The question is that
whether Musharraf, after getting elected, allows his adversaries an even
playing field in the elections or not. The problem with the Musharraf project
is that it survives with it has created and falls with the erosion of the stakes it
had created. This is why, to have the PML-Q survive, he had to deport Sharif
and may not let the PPP upset the apple cart of the Kings Party Musharraf
would prefer to take along.
The ground reality is that the Musharraf project has failed to
deliver on its most crucial objectives, but it still holds the round. An
isolated regime lacking in legitimacy cannot surmount the challenges being
thrown by the extremists and terrorists. Already, after daily abductions and
killing of security personnel, the concerns are being expressed as to who
should protect the armed forces. And if the armed forces are not secure, who
will prevent the country falling into the hands of the extremists? To get out
of this Catch-22 position, the state, in its own enlightened self-interest, must
act and let a coalition of democratic and liberal forces emerge to tackle the
crisis the state is unable to solve under a military regime.
What appears at the moment is that a new troika may emerge
following the election of Musharraf without uniform to the presidency and
general elections. But the general elections will turn into a big disorder if
they are not inclusive, even-handed and fair. Both the transformational and
gradualist courses may end up in failing to achieve their otherwise common
objective, if Musharraf is not forced to relinquish all the powers that he
currently holds. A gradualist course can help retrieve some civilian space
in the midterm, while a confrontationist course can pave the way for yet
another martial law.

143

M B Naqvi felt that the Supreme Court has a role to help the nation to
get out of the political quagmire. Any number of political battles are
being expected in the coming days. These will issue from what the chief of
the army staff and president will do in the coming days or weeks. They will
all be controversial.
Musharraf will get himself elected while still wearing the hat of chief
of staff of the Pakistan Army. He calls it re-election; others call it first
election. Even that will be controversial. (He has never been properly elected
president by the prescribed Electoral College.) His second step will be
nominating caretaker governments at the centre and in the provinces. He will
then hold a general election, while still the COAS; thats the pith of the
programme.
He will later revalidate his election by the newly elected Assemblies,
supervised by himself, probably through a re-election (depending upon how
pliable the new Assemblies are) or through an act of parliament. Fifth, it is
hinted that at some obscure stage, he will resign from the Army and become
a civilian. But that will be after he had been elected for the next five years
and has managed the next Assemblies the way he wants.
This programme involves many challengeable steps and stages. It
will involve innumerable writs being filed with the Supreme Court
challenging the legality of each presidential action. Some are already being
heard. Here, being legal and in consonance with the Constitution also
requires conforming to its spirit and basic scheme. This places a great
responsibility on the Supreme Court on the spot
True, the Supreme Court has been strengthened by the historic fourand-a-half-month long lawyers agitation that reinstated the chief justice then
on forced leave. The climate of opinion stands charged thereby. The moral
stocks of the Supreme Court and of the chief justice himself have gone
sky-high. But no one should forget that these coming battles may still be an
unequal fight.
The Supreme Court is a segment of the state and the state as a whole
has to work together; otherwise will break down. In the case of a breakdown
of the state the only sector that hopes to gain in power and credibility would
be the Army. For the present, it is under Musharrafs control and if he
can manage to impose martial law or some how put the Constitution out of
the way, the judiciary can be cornered and neutralized, if not eliminated. No
144

one knows how far would Musharraf and the Army can, or will, go.
Anything can happen.
Musharraf has successfully divided the major political parties.
The PPP says it cannot sit with the MMA. But everyone knows that it does
not wish to sit even with Nawaz Sharifs PML-N. To please her friends in
the American government, Benazir Bhutto wants to strengthen the hands of
Musharraf, if only he will let her. Most other parties were half-hearted in
their support of the lawyers movement or of the notion of rule of law itself.
Civil society had been energized by the lawyers movement and had
begun protesting against the high-handed actions of the military regime; they
are now settling down into daily routines. The cause of the rule of law and
democracy goes abegging.
Where can one find true support for genuine democracy, rule of law,
respect in action for the Constitution and a politics that tackles the problems
of the poor masses. The mainstream parties irrelevance is devastatingly
clear. They want to run the same coalition of interests that is in power today:
the feudals, big-business tycoons and other pulocrats. Where can the
superior judiciary and lawyers find active support despite the moral truth
of their stance?
The executive branch appears to be planning to mount a
counterattack. Contempt of the Supreme Court has been committed by the
ministers, and the president himself has said that his last punch would be
a knockout one. The way Nawaz Sharif was prevented from remaining in
Pakistan was a reprehensible as it showed gross contempt to the Supreme
Courts Aug 23 decision. That means he is planning the last punch. What it
cannot be can be ticked off: It cannot be a mere state of emergency that can
suspend the Supreme Courts suo motu powers or its writ jurisdiction for
human-rights and public-interest litigation. That would surely be struck
down by the Supreme Court as an illegal attempt to muzzle the country for
one persons political benefit.
The only option left to him is martial law. It need not be doubted
that the Pakistan Army, being aware of the change in public perceptions and
the state of military itself, would want the president to desist. But there are
two uncertainties here: would the US continue its unstinted and loud support
for General Musharraf? Secondly, so long as the army continues to be a
disciplined force, Musharraf can, with the concurrence of both the US and
145

the military high command, impose another martial law. But the idea
violates common sense that a military strongman having ruled eight years
will now stage a coup against his own regime.
Shareen M Mazari criticized the external interference in
Pakistans internal affairs. At a time when we are facing some serious
substantive threats, the whole nation has been made hostage to the political
shenanigans of deals, deportations and bizarre interventions from external
actors; all this, because the people of this country have shown their
commitment to a democratic dispensation and rule of law.
In the nations pursuit of the democratic and rule of law ideal, some
crucial debilitating factors are coming into play. The first is to find that
despite sixty years as a sovereign nation, external players continue to write
our political scripts for us because we allow them to. Hence, our path to
democracy is littered with deals and political engineering.
After sixty years, we must learn to trust our own people
certainly more than outsiders who, no matter how friendly, do have their
own agendas. Indeed, we Pakistanis were embarrassed into seeing the image
of the visit by the Saudi intelligence chief and Saad Hariri a few days earlier,
laying bare the deal brokered by Saudi leaders and Hariri, which allowed the
Sharifs to escape incarceration, while their party people stayed on to face the
music.
It seems as though deals brokered from outside are going to be our
fate, unless the people show their rejection of this but for that, a new
leadership is needed and that does not seem to be emerging on the
horizon. Perhaps, that is part of our tragedy that we cannot find anyone
beyond the tested and failed leaders of the past, whenever we move towards
unhindered democracy. Or, is it because the democratic trail must perforce
recommence from where it was truncated?
So, we now face the truth of one leader being made to pay the price
for a deal, which allowed for an exit from the country, while another one
makes a deal to ensure her return to the country in a position of power. This
is surely the worst of all motivations, and to seek a hostile powers
intervention makes it even worse. After all, no one in Pakistan is blind to
the negative Pakistan agenda of the US; but those who ostensibly seek to
lead the people of this country through a democratic process are, it seems,
unwilling to put their faith in the same people. Instead, the wooing of
146

Washington takes primacy and so the US now is attempting to engineer the

future democratic dispensation within Pakistan, aided and abetted by its
faithful ally, Britain.
What a farce. Is this what the peoples struggle for their democratic
rights has been reduced to deals and still more deals? This is not to say that
political forces do not form alliances for elections but the deals we are
seeing, involve external players and are intended to pre-empt the form of the
political dispensation even before the elections have been held. Already, the
US has damaged our body politic immeasurably with its eventual goal to
target our national strategic assets.
Dr Farrukh Saleem observed: There are three powerful power plays
being played out in Pakistan. First, democracy versus dictatorship. Second,
moderate versus extremist. Third, the executive versus the judiciary. Under
the democracy versus dictatorship power play, the game is mostly between
confrontationalists versus the gradualists. The end result sought by both the
confrontationalists as well as the gradualists is the same: a change in the
current political order. The confrontationalists, led by the PML-N, Jammate-Islami and the Tehrik-e-Insaf, seek a clash of forces. The gradualists, led
by the PPP, also seek a change albeit in small, discrete, peaceful increments.
Americas foreign policy is all about preservation of her military and
economic superiority. Americas power play in Pakistan has two
priorities: One, the war on terror. Two, the security of our nuclear arsenal.
As a consequence, America will support Pakistani leaders and Pakistani
institutions that are capable of and willing to help America pursue her
priorities. In essence, that amounts to the Pakistan Armys primacy within
Pakistans political infrastructure.
Saudi Arabia has her own power play going. To begin with, the
Saudi royal family has no option but to take its cue from the US Department
of State. Additionally, al-Qaeda has threatened many a times to bring down
the Saudi royal family, Pakistans resolve to fight al-Qaeda must not be
weakened. Nawaz Sharif, is thus, getting grinded in not one but two
powerful international power plays. Saudi Arabias intrusion into Pakistani
politics wont suit Saudi Arabia. The new Guantanamo Bay inside Saudi
Arabia will backfire. As a result, Pakistans 30-year long Arabisation will
recede. In Pakistani eyes, Saudi Arabia played the role of a villain.

147

Our internal power equation has long had two variables:

uniformed and non-uniformed politicians while the judiciary played second
fiddle to the Executive, whether uniformed or not. July 20 added a new
variable to that old power equation; the judiciary is now the new power on
the block. Under the new scenario, both the judiciary and the executive are
drawing up new battle-lines. As has happened around the world, a classic
executive-judiciary power play is now being played out in Islamabads
power corridors; the war is on.
On the international front, there is a race going on as to who is
Americas worst ally. According to a survey of 100 leading US foreign
policy experts, Russia has been rated as Americas worst ally and Pakistan
has come in as Americas second-worst ally. Saudi Arabia holds the third
position.
In recent memory, courts and judges have been attacked in at least
three continents. In Russia, tanks were called out to soften up non-compliant
judges. Courts have been burnt, judges harassed. Risen from the ashes courts
always have; risen more influential than ever before. In the midst of all the
power plays, our General has reached a T-junction. From here on, it is
either democracy or Martial Law.
Chris Cork was of the view that Musharraf remains by far the
strongest local option for the Crusaders. The events surrounding the
unceremonious dumping of Nawaz Sharif into the complicit hands of the
Saudis may have appeared ham-fisted and crude but look closer and
with a different eye and you see a tightly plotted and meticulously executed
operation that in the shortest possible time took a significant actor from the
stage. It was slick, seamless and cunningly executed. It may have been
unpleasant, unprincipled, against the spirit of the law and flying in the face
of a ruling group who are very much in control. What we saw was the
cynical manipulation of power and an exercise of authority designed to
facilitate a larger piece of political furniture-moving; not so much a rearrangement of the deckchairs on the Titanic as a ditching overboard of
goods not wanted on voyage.
The game spreads wide taking in the USA and the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia, both of which for differing reasons have vested interests in
Pakistan, and both of which have rather more digits pie-inserted than might
be constant with national sovereignty.

148

For the USA it is about getting the least-worst outcome both

politically and strategically, and keeping on the field a key player in the War
on Terror. Musharraf may have been weakened by recent events but he
remains by far the strongest local option
Note also the widespread apathy towards all this manoeuvring
and the re-export of Sharif. The millions he believed would welcome him
were revealed as a few thousand diehard activists who even if they stood in
single file, arms-akimbo would never have stretched from Islamabad to
Lahore.
It remains to be seen whether Bhutto is a greater attraction. Whatever
the outcome, there appears to be an immense national weariness, a feeling
that the people of Pakistan are seeing yet another recycling of yesterdays
people offering little but thin platitudes and empty rhetoric.

REVIEW
Two prominent touts of the USA, President of Pakistan and Saudi
King, committed a criminal act in the capital of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
on September 10, 2007, as a result of which Nawaz Sharifs forced exile
was carried out. It was not something unexpected from a hardened out-law
like Musharraf. The events of the last few months have amply proved that he
has the same criminal inclinations which the leaders of the so-called party of
the middle class have.
He was in search of a victory and that was won at Islamabad Airport.
It was a victory for him and his foreign backers on multiple counts. Superior
judiciary was conveyed a message, loud and clear, that its decisions are not
even worth a trash. Judiciary has to exercise its independence according to
the wishes of the executive.
This message was reinforced by MQM at Karachi when its activists
virtually mobbed the Sindh High Court disrupting the proceedings of the
case of May 12 killings. This was done only couple of days after the
terrorist-in-chief sitting in London had threatened the judiciary. Meanwhile,
the statement of eight office bearers of SCBA also indicated that the regime
has made inroads in subverting the unity of lawyers community.

149

Musharrafs staunch supporter, Chief Minister of Punjab,

demonstrated his administrative competence required for ruling a colony. He
did it splendidly well. Gujrat mafia was the main force behind expulsion of
Nawaz Sharif; though publicly and cleverly, the elder Chaudhry has been
repeatedly saying that he was not in favour of Nawazs second exile.
Actually they left no stone unturned to throw him out of the country. The
reason was very obvious; Nawaz in Pakistan could be potent threat to Kings
party as compared to Benazir.
At personal level, Musharrafs men humiliated and insulted Nawaz for
hours to the satisfaction of dictators vindictiveness, the glimpses of which
were widely reported by the media. Having done that, the regime tried to
create an impression that Nawaz had cowardly opted for second exile to
avoid jail in Pakistan.
The victory also showed the might of the agents of the United States
ruling the two important Muslim nations. The US wanted them to keep
Nawaz Sharif away from Pakistan during solemnization of the marriage of
convenience of its two dedicated Pakistani servants. Americans have
ensured the regime change in Pakistan through regime pre-emption.
Musharraf has been used just as Abbas has been used in Palestine.
Nevertheless, the vanquished too has won a victory. On moral
grounds, the only losers have been the rulers of Saudi Arabia. Their abetting
in this crime would cause irreparable damage to the relations of two nations.
Pakistanis always held them in esteem being the Khadmeen-e-Harmain
Sharif, but many would now consider them Kabizeen-e-Harmain Sharif. It
would be nave on their part to expect that Pakistanis would respect the
criminals for simple reason that they live in the holy land of Saudi Arabia.
The understanding of the law by the Bedouin intelligence chief was
evident from his statement in the context of the verdict of the Supreme
Court. He asserted that agreement with Saudis should take precedence over
the verdict of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, because it had been struck
earlier. He did not know that the latest legal document on a contested point
over-rules the older one. Moreover, a paper signed by a man solitary
confined in a prison cell, irrespective of its holy contents, has no value as
compared to a verdict of a panel of judges given after hearing the case in an
open court.

150

The exile of Nawaz Sharif in blatant defiance of apex courts

unambiguous verdict raised many questions about the independence of
judiciary. For the dispensation of judicial justice mere independence of the
courts is not sufficient; the country needs all-encompassing and elaborate
judicial system capable of not only giving verdicts but also having powers
to implement those.
To achieve this objective, some measures are suggested. The judicial
system should be reorganized in manner that justice is ensured at all levels
and all phases of dispensation of justice. These phases include appointment
of judges having commensurate competence and integrity. Up to a certain
level of the judiciary, the judges should be selected and appointed by the
superior judiciary following a well-defined transparent recruiting system
based on promoting the merit; nothing else but the merit.
The procedure of appointment of judges of higher judiciary high
courts and the Supreme Court should be modified. A panel comprising
chief justices of the four high courts headed by the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court should recommend three names for each vacancy of a judge
and the executive should select one out of the recommended list. Chief
justices being in intimate touch with the senior practicing lawyers are the
best placed to pick up the right person for the job.
The second phase is the functioning of the courts for which these must
be self-reliant in all respects including the finances. Arrangements must be
made that no outsider could think of interfering in their functioning,
however in this context, a lot will depend on the courts themselves, and one
should have no doubts that the best men selected for the job would be able to
ensure that.
The next phase of dispensation of justice is the implementation of
decisions and orders of the courts. Presently, this phase of vital importance is
entirely left to the discretion of the executive. The recent events have
proved that administration of justice goes for a six at this stage.
The flouting of the court orders can be prevented by providing a
suitable means to the judiciary for implementation of its decisions in letter
and spirit. To this end the judicial system must have an integral setup of
judicial police independent of executives control.

151

The administration of justice must go beyond this. Most of the culprits

punished by the courts land in various jails wherein they often undergo the
punishments not awarded by the courts or even permitted under the law.
Therefore, all the jails and prisons must be placed under the judicial system.
The above would require a large scale reorganization of the judicial
system. Apart from the Bar and the Bench, the system must have an
Administrative Wing comprising three branches namely; recruitment,
implementation and the prison system. This Wing should be headed by a
judge of the Supreme Court and its each branch should function under a
judge of the high court. This would demand expansion of the judiciary,
which is otherwise necessary in view of the cases pending in courts.
Last but not the least, all parallel judicial systems like NAB and ATC
must be scrapped because these have failed in meeting the spelled out
objectives; it would not be wrong to say that these have often been used for
promoting injustice, rather than administering the justice.
Benazir Bhutto cannot be treated like Nawaz, not because of her
political support inside Pakistan, but because of the strength of her foreign
backers. The destination of her return, Karachi, was shrewdly selected.
Elsewhere she could expect mischief from anti-deal forces.
In Karachi, she would be treated exactly according to the wishes of
Musharraf Bhai. Some time back, Minister of Ports had had joyfully
announced the new relationship between PPP and MQM as Samdhis. She
will be received with warmth familiar to newly-weds; till she would start
kicking the Susralis.
The regime deliberately created two false impressions. First was the
ambiguity about the deal whether it has been done or not. This was to
safeguard against the negative impact on the PPPs vote bank. This also
served the ruling partys interest.
Secondly, the PML-Q pretended that it was against the exile of Nawaz
Sharif, but inwardly it was hell-bent to throw him out with motive similar to
that in the context of Benazir. The party has already benefited from this as
the disgruntled MPs now have no choice but to stick with Gujrati brothers.
As regards Musharraf, he is not bothered about public opinion because his
re-election and subsequent functioning largely depends on the Electoral
College, which is quite manageable for him.

152

19th September 2007

HELMET vs WIG
AFTERSHOCKS - VI
During the period, Election Commission set October 6 the date for
presidential election; nomination papers were to be received on 27 th and
scrutinized on 29th September. The leaders of lawyers community
nominated Justice Wajihuddin Ahmed as their candidate for presidency
with the sole aim of challenging Musharrafs candidacy. In all, 43 entered
the free-for-all race for the presidency.
The regime continued harassing APDM leaders and workers. The
opposition parties continued their struggle to pre-empt Musharrafs reelection. APDM agreed to resign from assemblies on 29th September and

153

dissolve NWFP Assembly on 2nd October; PML-Q decided to check

dissolution by moving no-confidence move against Chief Minister.
The judges hearing the dual office petition came down heavy on
politicians. Justice Javed Iqbal remarked during the proceedings that it was
not the court, but Parliament that validated the president through 17 th
Amendment.
Don McKinnon arrived in Pakistan to show that the West was
interested in promoting democracy in Pakistan. Benazir continued obliging
the West; while in Washington she reiterated that she would give IAEA an
access to Dr A Q Khan after becoming prime minister.

EVENTS
On 19th September, during the hearing of Qazis petition, Justice
Muhammad Raza remarked that EC can make rules for holding elections but
cannot temper with Constitution. Qazi and Imran announced holding of a
rally in front of the Supreme Court on 21 st September, the day the court was
expected to announce the decision.
Don McKinnon arrived in Pakistan to promote democracy in
Pakistan. He urged Musharraf to doff uniform, who met the visitor in
uniform and informed the visitor that the doffing plan has already been
announced by his counsel in the Supreme Court. Benazir was reportedly
surprised over Musharrafs plan to contest election in uniform. Shaikh
Rashid issued his periodic warning to opposition of extreme decisions.
Next day, the judges hearing Qazis petition remarked that 17 th
Amendment was passed by the parliament and if they didnt like it now they
could change it inside the house. The court said it cant turn a lame duck
parliament into a lion. It was added that when people were in search of atta,
parties were seeking power-sharing. Earlier, the court rejected Imrans plea
to implead CEC. Qazi asked masses to put pressure on judiciary.
Election Commission set October 6 the date to re-elect Musharraf;
nomination on 27th and scrutiny on 29th September. Lawyers announced
besieging of EC offices across the country on 29th September. APDM
members planned to resign on 27th September and PPP also talked of

154

resignations. McKinnon ended his visit by lauding the commitment of

Musharraf as the Viceroy.
On 21st September, Justice Abbasi remarked during the hearing that
17th Amendment was passed after a deal and asked the counsel how can the
Supreme4 Court review this amendment. APDM staged a rally in front of
Supreme Court. Another bench of the Supreme Court was informed that 13
more missing people had been traced out. The court gave two more weeks to
the government to trace out others.
Lawyers kept secret the name of their nominee for presidential
election. A doctor, a lawyer and a cleric were also to compete with neverretiring General. APDM planned to resign on 29th September, but Fazl said
he was not taken into confidence.
Next day, the regime launched crackdown against APDM leaders and
activists to ensure peaceful re-election of the man considered indispensable
by the West. Lawyers asked political parties to quit assemblies. Thirty-five
presidential candidates had collected forms from EC. A citizen filed a
petition in the Supreme Court requesting stoppage of the process of
presidential election.
Hunt for APDM leaders and workers continued on 23rd September.
Attock Bridge and other crossings over Indus River were blocked to stop
leaders from attending the meeting called in Peshawar. Main aim of the
crackdown remained blocking oppositions resignations. The regime has
resorted to mean tactic, said Kulsoom.
Bigwigs will make Rs 6 billion from the recent atta crisis; some of
the earnings will be reinvested during next general elections. Prime
Minister tasked DCOs and SSPs to ensure presence of MPs for voting in
presidential election.
Fazl met Nawaz Sharif in Jeddah and discussed the issue of
resignation. Approaches to Constitution Avenue were closed to deny access
to the Supreme Court. The methods used were similar to those used in
Karachi on May 12.
On 24th September, Justice Javed Iqbal remarked during the
proceedings that it was not the court, but Parliament that validated the
president through 17th Amendment. Khurshid Khan, a lawyer from

155

Peshawar, sprayed Ahmad Raza Kasuris face black. Musharrafs faithful

lawyer accused Aitzaz, Munir and Kurd for attempting to blind him using
poisonous spray. Members of Rawalpindi District Bar were unanimously
of the view that Ahmad Raza Kasuri deserved blackening of his face because
of the language he used for lawyers in a TV debate.
The leaders of lawyers community nominated Justice Wajihuddin
Ahmed as their candidate for presidency. More than fifty aspirants for
presidency had collected the forms. Hunt for opposition leaders continued in
Punjab as Pervaiz Elahi banned entry of PML-N leaders into Punjab. The
regime successfully foiled the opposition protest in Islamabad. The US and
EU expressed their concern over arrests of politicians.
Next day, Justice Javed Iqbal remarked that doctrine of necessity has
been buried. Attorney General countered the remark by hurling the threat
that Musharraf would remain COAS if failed to become president. The
lawyer who blackened Raza Kasuris face received warm welcome on his
arrival in Peshawar. He was later arrested and granted transit bail.
Musharraf signed nomination papers. He reached Quetta for his
election campaign and met MPAs of various parties including those of JWP
and JUI. Shujaat and Mushahid sought talks with Amin Fahim. Crackdown
against APDM activists continued. The US and EU shed crocodile tears over
arrest of opposition leaders; the regime rejected the criticism.
Benazir while in Washington reiterated that she would give IAEA
access to Dr A Q Khan after becoming prime minister. PPP asked Musharraf
to doff uniform before 6th October. The party threatened to resign and also
nominated Amin Fahim as its candidate for presidency.
Umar Cheema reported that Saudis asked Fazl not to rock Musharrafs
boat. Fazlur Rahman said MMA would follow APDM decision on
resignations. SCBA asked MPs to resign. Jailed Sirajul Haq of MMA
resigned from NWFP Assembly. IJT staged protest rally against MQM and
Sindh government.
On 26th September, S M Zafar as helper of the court suggested that the
issue of uniform should be made part of the judgment. Aitzaz Ahsan said the
proposer and seconder of Musharraf for candidacy of presidency can be
punished under PPC and PAA for instigating a serving soldier to indulge in

156

politics. He told the judges of the bench; be loved like Cornelius or be

reviled like Munir.
PEMRA directed TV channels not to conduct media trials; dont
debate sub-judice issues; anchors must act as moderators not judges; should
no ask leading questions; and added that freedom beyond limits becomes
anarchy; thus, transgression of law and code cannot be allowed.
Wajihuddin Ahmad signed his nomination papers. Musharraf assured
that this time he would abide by his promise on uniform. Presidential
election is under close watch, said McKinnon. Crackdown against APDM
activists was intensified on the eve of submission of nomination papers for
presidency.
Next day, as many as 43 entered the free-for-all race for presidency.
Life in twin cities was crippled to make sure that Musharrafs nomination
papers were submitted peacefully. The CJP took suo moto notice of arrests
and impeding the free movement; the administration tendered apology but
said these measures were necessary because Brig Cheema had warned
against suicide bombings.
APDM agreed to resign on 29th September and dissolve NWFP
Assembly on 2nd October; PML-Q decided to pre-empt dissolution by
moving no-confidence move against Durranis government. Minister
Durrani termed APDM decision an escape from democracy. Lawyers
boycotted courts to protest filing of nomination papers by Musharraf. The
regime was quite optimistic about favourable court decision on Qazis
petition. The US wanted democratic and moderate Pakistan.
Musharrafs opponents were knocked out on technical grounds by the
independent judiciary by 6:3 split verdict on 28th September. None of the
three dissenting judges belonged to Punjab; one from Sindh and two from
NWFP. Punjabis won the day for Musharraf. The regime rejoiced over the
decision; sweets were distributed. The opposition decided to file review
petition. The Bar was gripped by gloom over Benchs performance.
The Supreme Court served notices to prime minister, chief minister
and others in Nawaz Sharif deportation case. The Supreme Court postponed
the announcement of the verdict on manhandling of the CJP case. Sindh
(MQM) lifted the ban on Imran Khan. PPP called ARD meeting, but PML-N

157

stayed away. At last she admitted meeting Him secretly. The US hoped that
matters in Pakistan would be resolved as per law.

VIEWS
The executive became conspicuously aggressive against the
judiciary with every passing day since flouting of the apex courts verdict
on September 10. Sheeba Ajmal from Peshawar observed that every
Pakistani is alarmed at the expulsion of Nawaz Sharif.
President Musharraf has written another chapter in Pakistans
history of insulting and humiliating the judiciary and the nation as a
whole. The four-star general has added a fifth star by taking this foul step. I
feel depressed and shaken by the military regimes actions, including the
killings in Bajaur and Waziristan, the Jamia Hafsa and the judicial crisis.
Nawaz Sharifs deportation is in complete violation of the Supreme
Courts orders. Above all, involving foreigners in our internal matters is
not acceptable at all. Why should we ask others to take our decisions for
us? Dont we trust ourselves?
The leaders of the PML-Q, who say the people of Pakistan are
with them, are completely mistaken. They should open their eyes and look
around. All the actions that the government has taken in recent months have
only led to increase resentment against the army and the PML-Q
The rule of law should prevail in this land. Pakistanis reject any
form of military dictatorship. The voice of Mr Aitzaz Ahsan is the voice of
the 160 million people of this country. He should be encouraged to stand
against this military dictatorship so that true democracy prevails in
Pakistan.
The regime made a move to influence the apex court regarding Qazis
petition by submitting Musharrafs conditional plan to doff uniform. B A
Malik from Islamabad opined: Gen Musharraf has pledged to the Supreme
Court that he will doff his uniform if re-elected by the outgoing assemblies.
The conditional commitment shows that the General has no intention to quit
the top army post. By linking the abandonment of his uniform with his reelection, the commando has manifested his ambition to stay in command of

158

the army. General Musharraf seems to be pondering the imposition of an

emergency or martial law if his nomination papers are rejected by the
Election Commission under the orders of the Supreme Court.
Anjum Naz hoped that the judges would seize the opportunity. We
wait for good news (not the oft-repeated type promised by President
Musharraf or Chaudhry Shujaat) but real news that can impact the future of
this nation. The nine judges can seize history and rewrite it. They can
reshape and restructure the pillars of power for generations to come.
So whats the verdict going to be? The cue lies in the past opinions
rendered by the nine judges deciding General Musharrafs fate. Each
judges own judicial journey and his judgments over the years are dead giveaway. They carry us inside the chambers of their hearts and souls; the inner
temples; the very fabric of their being; what ideology inside their psyche
drives their opinions; what is it they hold most dear in life? They are the Xrays that show each judges moral compass and its direction.
To understand the current wave of constitutional crisis, people must
have some understanding of the judges sitting on the bench and their
character to put the missing parts of a puzzle together and make an
educated guess which way their ruling will go. Some basic underlying truths
can unravel the rationality of such a judgment.
By the way, what became of all the false affidavits and dodgy
documents presented before the Supreme Court by President Musharrafs
advocates, Sharifuddin Pirzada, Malik Qayyum and others, during the CJ
hearings? We know the court fined the government Rs 100,000 for
disrespect directed at the persons of some honourable judges as contained in
some documents, but the rest of the cooked-up affidavits got shelved. They
were never heard again. Obviously the best defence is a good offence
worked well in this particular instance. Can the Supreme Court still be a
model for a new vision of legal liberalism in the 21st century?
The tensions mounted with the passage of each hearing in the court. A
lawyer from Peshawar blackened the face of the counsel for the federation,
Ahmed Raza Kasuri. The victim accused media and some senior lawyers of
the incident.
The News wrote: To blame the media for what happened to the
government lawyer, when a rival blackened his face on Sept 24, is to point

159

culpability where none exists. Of course, what happened to the gentleman

cannot be condoned on any account and needs to be condemned, but to say
that the media is responsible for it is to ignore the obvious.
Regrettably, even government ministers have acted inappropriately.
The impolite manner of speaking (and one is being charitable here) of a
former law minister was shown to ordinary Pakistanis thanks to the
electronic media. The same can be said for a couple of other ministers who it
seems do not know much about tolerance, dissent and letting the opposing
side have its say. Also, it needs to be said yet again that the media is but
a mirror to society and shows it with all its pimples and scars as well as
its beauty spots.
Tehseen Alam Khan from Mirpur was of the view that what one saw
during a debate on a TV channel was shocking. Ahmed Raza Kasuris tall
claims about himself were nullified when his own self negated them. The
funniest thing is that he had himself talked of patience and tolerance before
trampling these values in a manner that was repellent to say the least. We
saw what the present regime really stands for. A word of sincere advice for
the president: If you really want to present your case, please rid yourself of
such people, for they are doing nothing but harming you.
Iftikharur-Rehman from Rawalpindi was quite blunt. What is one to
say about the behaviour of the lawyer from Kasur? Thanks to the media we
now know the difference between such people and the unimpeachable
personages who have shown the moral courage to face dictatorship by not
compromising on principles. Somehow it was not very surprising the way
the highly educated barrister, a representative of this government,
behaved, in a talk show. This shows the attitude of the government towards
the people.
Having read the mind of the judges as reflected in their remarks, Qazi
Hussain Ahmed resorted to exerting pressure on the court. M H Abbasi from
Lahore observed: Only yesterday, the opposition leaders were all praise for
the judiciary for its independence and freedom and its upholding of justice
and truth. But now that the Supreme Court is critical of politicians too,
the oppositions tone has changed dramatically. The other day, MMA
president Qazi Hussain Ahmad used rough language against the judiciary
while addressing a gathering in Islamabad.

160

Qazi Hussain Ahmads call to people to come out on the roads in

Islamabad on Friday was unfortunate. The politicians and civil society,
and the lawyers community, in particular, protested against the presidential
reference and supported Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry
because they believed he was right.
By mentioning this support the MMA chief only tried to pressure
the countrys apex court, which is hearing his petition as well as that filed
by Imran Khan against the presidents holding of two offices. Casting
aspersions on the Supreme Court by saying in so many words that he did not
expect it to give a verdict against General Pervez Musharraf is
unacceptable.
M Z Rifat from Lahore opined: The MMA president now wants the
Supreme Court judges to pay back by delivering judgments favouring the
petitions against the presidents dual offices his own petition in particular.
There could not have been a worse allegation than accusing the
Supreme Court judges of being silent and subdued, despite their
historic judgments such as the restoration of the chief justice and calling for
Nawaz Sharifs return.
M Humayun Khan from Lahore wrote: If staging a protest in front of
the building and criticizing the superior judiciary, in a way asking for a
decision favorable to your side is not a pressure tactic, then what should
it be called? Was Qazi Hussain Ahmad really trying to divert the
attention of opposition supporters from what was going on within the MMA,
such as the split among its components?
Nasim Zehra commented: As Pakistanis eagerly await the
Supreme Courts judgment on the dual office which will significantly
determine General Pervez Musharrafs political future, it is the politics
around the presidential election which is also acquiring increasing
significance as a determined factor. It trumps all else as the force that
determines the context within which the interplay between state, society and
politics takes place. Admittedly Pakistans new reality is that the mediafacilitated discourse has generated public awareness.
The politics of the ruling party which is essentially General
Musharrafs political arm is simple. Its members will support the
president since he and, by extension, the Establishment have until now been
like their insurance policy for political relevance in the corridors of power.
161

With general elections nearing, the ruling party, though having taken
independent positions on the Bugti, judiciary, Kalabagh and uniform issues,
still generally appears to be an Establishment-dependent political force.
General Musharrafs unwavering commitment to his own reelection combines with his willingness to take dramatic U-turns to
wriggle out of political or legal dead ends. He will soon be giving up his
army chief position, his dialogue with Benazir Bhutto may soon yield some
agreement on basic but desperately needed quid pro quos, his political teams
engagement with the JUI leadership to divide the MMA will continue and its
negotiations with the Saudis on Nawaz Sharifs return in October.
As the party and the presidents men jointly politicking to ensure
General Musharrafs re-election, above all, they are seeking credibility for
the highly divisive election process, numbers for the re-election they do
have. Technically, even if a provincial assembly or two is wrapped up before
his election, the presidential election can still go through. But resignation of
all opposition members and provincial assembly dissolutions is what would
make Musharrafs re-election completely controversial. It will forever be
stamped as a polarizing election which threw up a highly controversial
presidential candidate.
Politically, however, the government has opted to repeat old
mistakes. Nervousness over which way the judgment will go and
emboldened by no street reaction to the mass arrests and the massive road
blockades on Nawaz Sharifs return, it has begun arresting opposition
leaders and opposition workers. The right to public protest cannot be denied
unless it unmistakably threatens public safety. Such mistakes can at times
potentially snowball into wider political discontent and even unrest. Most
importantly, it diverts public focus on the purely confrontational and
illogical politics that sections of the opposition are propagating.
Beyond the ruling coalition, other potentially active forces opposing
General Musharraf can be divided into three groups. One, the pragmatists
group that seeks to compromise with him in exchange for some personal
and party gains; this includes the PPP and the JUI leadership which also
hopes to take credit for receding military-democracy.
Two, the radicals groups, which consist of political parties seeking
radical action, to remove the individual, they believe is the main
impediment to genuine democracy. From among the political mainstream
162

groups it includes the APDM parties, which appear willing to even take on
the Supreme Court in case it does not rule out Musharraf as a presidential
candidate They seek the removal of Musharraf at all costs.
The third group is the lawyers movement group which seeks
genuine constitutional democracy by battling Musharraf through
continued engagement with legal and political tools. Half-a-dozen among
thousands of lawyers have also wrongly taken to violence in pursuit of their
goal of removing Musharraf To directly confront General Musharraf they
have nominated their own presidential candidate. This is a positive move.
Against this political backdrop Musharrafs political survival stands a
fifty-fifty chance. However, no matter who is the winner in Pakistans next
presidential elections, Pakistans journey to political adulthood has
already begun. It will be somewhat turbulent, but no longer will it have the
diversions that will take Pakistan away from constitutional democracy.
Martial laws have forever been trashed in the dustbin.
In an earlier article, she had written: Today General Musharrafs reelection is under unprecedented scrutiny. The Supreme Court is hearing
petitions against his holding two offices, Article 63 poses a major hurdle too,
the Opposition wants nothing less than Musharrafs ouster. Musharrafs
political future is now dependent on multiple factors. In a context of
multiple power centres in a context of multiple power centres in the country,
including the Supreme Court, the professional groups, the politicians and the
media, Musharrafs survival is far from guaranteed.
Nervous steps like prompting an Election Commission notification
on amending rules for the presidential elections making Article 63
inapplicable, are being taken by the presidents camp. Behind the scenes, the
government is still trying to see how to back-peddle on Benazir Bhuttos
corruption cases. The minimum the president requires from the PPP right
now is its commitment that its parliamentarians will not resign from the
Assemblies. Against the backdrop for a key member of the presidents legal
camp to believe that General Musharraf is in a formidable position is
illogical.
All eyes are fixed on the Supreme Court. Even as General
Musharraf addresses the uniform issue though his lawyer by announcing his
decision to remove his uniform, the issue of a two-year bar before holding a
public office remains intact
163

The factors influencing the Supreme Courts interpretation will

also include the learned judges own proclivity for a purist application of the
Constitution or an application that does not compromise on the spirit of the
law but is influenced by the context in which law is being applied. The
context-specific interpretation of law would overlook the violations of his
oath, the Army Rules and the constitutional provisions by General
Musharraf by factoring in the political situation prompting those violations.
More importantly, the context-specific interpretation would acknowledge the
role of Pakistans political forces which facilitated and indeed indemnified
these violations through constitutional amendments.
Both approaches, the purist and context-specific, given the
constitutional prerogative for interpretation of the learned members of the
bench, would be equally valid. The purist approach would have specific
impacts. One, it would signal the Courta adherence to an almost
unprecedented strict and literalist application of constitutional law. Two, it
would have undertaken unprecedented legal and political accountability of a
serving army chief. Three, it would hand down, through legal means, a
political victory to anti-Musharraf political forces. Four, unless the present
Assembly would constitutionally amend Article 63 of the Constitution to
waive the two-year bar for General Musharraf, it would initiate the end of
General Musharrafs political career.
Five, with the Court disqualifying him as a presidential candidate and
initiating the abrupt end of the political career, it would also end the
possibility of Musharraf playing the bridging role in Pakistan transiting from
military-led democracy to genuine civilian democracy. With ruling
Musharraf out of the political calculus Pakistans politics would be put on
the radical path seeking an abrupt change. This approach would not factor in
the special circumstances of this case and of Pakistans current political
situation in which the bench is called upon to give its judgment.
The impacts of the context-specific approach in interpreting law
would be numerous. One, the survival of General Musharraf, at least for
now, as a political player. Two, it does not completely rule out the possibility
of Musharraf being the transition bridge between the khaki and the civilian
democracy and between the civilian and khaki forces. Three, for the
politicians seeking Musharrafs ouster from Pakistans civil and military
power scene, the context-specific approach would shift the onus of battling
Musharraf back on the politicians shoulders. Four, it will disappoint those

164

who insist that removal of General Musharraf is the magic solution that will
either solve Pakistans acute security problems or will ensure the perfect
landing into genuine civilian democracy. Five, strong political contestations
will continue with the political temperatures remaining high.
Even if the judgment favours Musharraf his challenges do not
end. From the domains of the Courts the challenges will move to the active
political sphere. Power, passion, rhetoric and rage will invoke principles,
legitimacy, reality and myth to craft multiple realities that will become
handy weapons for power contestants. The media in keeping with its
business of tell it all will give it all full play. The public will remain riveted
by the continuing narrative of a presidential election! In the realm of sheer
political play, Musharraf will need more than just a simple majority vote to
become a legitimate president who can qualify as an honourable head of the
State.
Clearly for smooth sailing and credible elections Musharraf cannot
afford two things. One, empty opposition seats when the voting takes place.
Mass resignations would underscore the oppositions no-confidence in the
presidential elections and would reinforce Musharraf as the polarizing
figure. Although winning presidential candidates nowhere get all the votes, it
is the strict adherence to the constitutional process that earns the winner a
largely non-controversial status. That seems missing in Pakistan.
The other political challenge for Musharraf is widespread street
protests. The APDM has called for protests and strikes on Sept 21. Massive
protests can further diminish Musharrafs political stature. However, given
the complete non-show of street power, the governments harsh clampdown
notwithstanding, on Sept 10 by the PML-N-led opposition when Nawaz
Sharif arrived, the possibility of any significant show of street power
appears unlikely.
If General Musharrafs candidacy is rejected by the Supreme
Court there is the constitutional option to follow. He should dissolve the
Assemblies and go for the immediate holding of general elections by setting
up a consensus caretaker government. The caretaker set-up would oversee
the holding of general elections. The presidential elections would follow the
general elections in a changed political scenario and with new political
figures.

165

Kamila Hyat opined: The anticipation of a Supreme Court judgment

on a new term at the presidency for Musharraf has meanwhile added to the
growing air of uncertainty. A verdict adverse to the President would in
effect throw things into chaos, and possibly, raise the possibility of
desperate action such as the imposition of martial law.
The government, meanwhile, has proved no more adept than the
opposition at displaying either an adherence to democratic principle, or
grace immediately beginning a round-up of opposition leaders ahead of a
planned protest in Islamabad. By doing so, it has possibly helped the
opposition cover-up its lack of organization or unity and also indirectly
built further support for leaders who have once more been dispatched to
jail.
Indeed, a stint behind the slammer is considered so crucial to political
success that, the more astute members of the opposition are said to be
delighted by the clumsy government action. One leader, who had till
Sunday not been whisked away, was reported to be begging senior police
and administrative officials to ensure he was not left outside the embraces of
the law, arguing that arrest would bring him considerable mileage in the run
up to the polls.
With Mian Nawaz Sharif deported, and that rather high-profile
episode more or less fizzling out following the announcement of Kulsoom
Nawaz that she would postpone any planned return till the month of fasting
was safely over, attention is now focused on another second coming
that of Benazir Bhutto. It is true that the return of Benazir will inject some
much-needed energy within the rank and file of the party, and possibly also
add to the political excitement in the country. But beyond this, it is uncertain
how effective role Benazir can actually play in future developments.
It is already apparent that the PPPs hopes of being promised the top
executive office have not quite materialized. At the same time, the
perception that Benazir has been attempting, for many months now, to strike
a deal has weakened her and angered some within her party
The PML-Qs leadership, however, seems determined to ensure
Benazir Bhutto has little or no say in actual decision-making, and she and
her party strongmen will then need to decide on how best to manage the
situation. In the smaller provinces, especially the NWFP, things are far more
uncertain.
166

So far, as the elbowing for poll position begins, no party has put
forward a clear-cut policy on such issue. While in her recent Washington
Post article, Benazir Bhutto has identified the situation in Pakistan as one
where extremism and moderation are pitched against each other, she has still
to state how she would deal with this crisis and indeed so do the other
parties of the opposition amidst the continuing uncertainty that still
surrounds the issue of polls in the coming months.
At last the much awaited verdict came and The News received it in
these words: Of course, for the opposition, especially the All Parties
Democratic Movement and the lawyers opposing military rule and who
campaigned for the restoration of the chief justice, and perhaps for a larger
section of civil society, the verdict comes as a surprise and a
disappointment. Also, going by the reactions of the opposition parties and
some senior lawyers, it seems that the political uncertainty and air of dissent
that has enveloped the country in recent months is not going to dissipate any
time soon.
It may seem surprising to some that non-maintainability was
cited as being the reason why the petitions were rejected, since one would
have thought that given that several hearings, beginning from September 17,
had been held to examine the petitions, the question whether they (the
petitions) were maintainable had already been settled.
Other than the General and his supporters, Fridays verdict will
presumably be a relief to the presidents strongest backer, Washington The
verdict, which basically validates the stand taken by the General and his
supporters that the Constitution does not bar the president from seeking reelection while also keeping the post of army chief, will be seen by many as
defying logic and in fact running contrary to any rational and/or
reasonable interpretation of the Constitution.
One particular firebrand lawyer told the media right after the
announcement of the verdict that the ruling was written and sent from
Aiwan-e-Sadr and would be seen as a black mark on the countrys history.
While resorting to such language is perhaps more a sign of emotion and
disappointment than reason, what is disturbing is that many people may tend
to partially or tacitly agree with this assessment. After all, pressure by a
government in this country on the other organs of the state and society
especially the judiciary and the media is nothing new and has happened
many a times in the past and under this government.
167

The verdict may well embolden the presidents camp to take a more
aggressive approach toward dealing with the political opposition. The signs
are not good because those in the opposition have clearly not accepted the
verdict and it doesnt seem that they will. The stage is now stage for more
conflict and the scene will move on the resignations front, and perhaps more
legal challenges. The public perception of a military dictator bent on
extending his weakening grip on power by any means possible will now be
replaced by one of a military dictator who managed to extend his
weakening grip on power thanks to the judiciary.
Nasim Zehra wrote: The split judgment on the petitions challenging
General Pervez Musharrafs holding of two offices and also his candidacy
for the October 6 presidential election does give him a legal go-ahead.
However, it does not give Musharraf and more importantly the process,
through which he seeks re-election, political legitimacy.
Matters have come full circle. The issue is back to where it started
from, i.e. politics. Frustrated by the governments bulldozing ahead on many
fronts, the opposition took the political mess to the court and wanted the
court to clean it up. It wanted Musharraf to surrender his army position and
not to seek re-election as the president. Their list of complaints against
Musharraf was unending.
Obviously, conclusion of the majority on the bench was that the
current political polarization and confrontation does not have a legal
dimension. That it has constitutional and political dimension and for that the
parliament is the forum the contesting politicians must go to.
Many of us would have liked the court to have ruled that General
Musharraf remove his uniform before the legislators cast their votes for or
against him. Unquestionably, an army chief getting votes as a president is
a caricature of democracy. Its counter-reality to democracy.
Lawyers and their presidential candidate are taking the
rejectionist and attacking position vis--vis the Supreme Court. This
speaks volumes for the maturity and the discipline of the lawyers. They are
abandoning the hallmark of their profession; discipline, uprightness and
respect for law and for the countrys apex court.
In the run up to the presidential election, Pakistan promises to be a
hotbed of confrontational political activities; both within and outside the

168

parliament. The onus will now be on those opposing General Musharraf

to make winning moves in the political battlefield. Unless any wholly
unexpected developments take place, there is little likelihood that they will
manage any winning and decisive moves.
Ansar Abbasi compiled an analytical report. We are back to square
one. The much condemned doctrine of necessity has re-surfaced and the
peoples dream of independent judiciary has got blurred if not disappeared
altogether. Friday was a sad day for many.
However, it brought lot of delight for General Pervez Musharraf and
his supporters Many in the government interpret that the Chief of Army
Staff has got a green signal from the apex court to contest the
presidential elections in uniform. If so, this is really unfortunate. Imagine,
the apex court allowing the Army Chief to context elections in uniform in a
country that claims to be a democratic state.
But the legal experts disagree to such an interpretation. They say that
Supreme Court instead of burying the doctrine of necessity for all times to
come, has left it to the election commission to decide and has delayed the
decision on the matter that ultimately would again be brought before it for a
final verdict. If the petitions were not maintainable then why did it take
the apex court so many days to dismiss them on technical grounds?
Perhaps at this juncture when the military ruler is about to doff his uniform,
the majority judges might have thought to play safe for the sake of smooth
transition from the present military-led democracy to pure peoples rule
But the fact remains that such compromises in the past had never served the
country but only strengthened the military dictators and their rule. By the
way what message have we given to the whole world?
If our future is to be determined by this ruling of the Supreme Court
then there is no confusion in ones mind that we are directionless. We would
continue to live with compromises. There would be no end to exceptions
while rule of law would remain a far cry. Friday the 28th September would
be an encouraging day for the future dictators of Pakistan.
We thought that the era of Justice Munir had ended but we are not so
lucky. Perhaps we have to wait for another 60 years or even more. But for
our failures it would not be fair to blame one particular segment of the
society the judiciary. Every one of us would have to share the
responsibility for bringing Pakistan to such a situation. The role of
169

political parties during the last eight years of the military rule has not been
encouraging too.
There were also reports of judges being intimidated by the
government, which on September 10 violated the Supreme Courts order on
Nawaz Sharifs return. Senior government functionaries including ministers
have also been involved in judiciarys bashing.
Ordinary people in the streets are really down. Most of them see it as
a serious blow to the independence of countrys judiciary for which the
people had struggled hard and even sacrificed many lives. To share with the
readers the general mood of the ordinary souls a few of the SMS received by
this scribe are reproduced here: Whole nation is depressed. People fought a
war to get independence for judiciary and look what judiciary has given us
in return, Raho Musharraf Ab Rehney Do Musharraf, Bhaag Pakistani.
Rahimullah Yusufzai wondered: Why is it so that Supreme Court
judges belonging to Sindh and NWFP often give dissenting judgments in
important constitution petitions having political implications while those
from Punjab usually uphold the government stance? This question arose
once again Friday when the apex court gave its verdict on the
maintainability of a number of identical petitions
The three judges of the nine-member Supreme Court bench who gave
dissenting note in the dual offices cases belong to Sindh and NWFP. Justice
Rana Bhagwandas, who headed the bench, is from Sindh while Justice
Sardar Mohammad Raza Khan and Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan hail from
the NWFP.
Former Senator and PPP leader Qazi Mohammed Anwar, who has
been an active participant in the lawyers movement for independence of
judiciary, noted in his comments while talking to reporters Friday that
Justice Sardar Raza and Justice Shakirullah Jan had made NWFP proud due
to their independent judgment in the dual office case. Another senior
Frontier lawyer, Barrister Baachaa also paid tributes to the two judges for
their deep knowledge of the Constitution and understanding of its spirit. He
remarked that the Pashtuns were proud of the courage, commitment and
integrity of Justice Sardar Raza and Justice Shakirullah Jan.
Tariq Butt opined: After about seven months of trials and
tribulations, Musharraf heard the first good news from the judicial front

170

as a result of the split ruling from the nine-judge bench. It made the
presidential camp and its allies euphoric and elated.
But the majority verdict instantly plunged the high-spirited
lawyers and anti-Musharraf political forces in a bout of disappointment.
They greeted the ruling with brickbats. The judiciary that was receiving
accolades from them since July 20 was put on the mat without loss of
moments.
The presidents worst fears that he would be knocked out of the
presidential race by the Supreme Court at the last moment evaporated in thin
air. His detractors quickly recalled the repeat of Justice Munirs
judgment based on the despicable doctrine of necessity that had inflicted
monumental damage to Pakistan since 1954.
The pronouncement of the short order by Justice Bhagwandas
brought shocking silence to an unbelieving audience. Howls of protest
from the boisterous elements were natural. None of them expected this kind
of verdict, but the government was relaxed and composed on the basis of its
own information that its case would not be discarded.
The observations of some honourable judges during the two-week
long proceedings had also created great optimism among the anti-Musharraf
forces about a favourable judgment. It was generally believed that the
ruling would be a close call, not six-to-three majority decision. rather many
thought it could go either way.
Despite the pall of gloom that gripped the lawyers and the opposition
forces, the proceedings of these petitions did definitely produce
something worthwhile and satisfying for them, Musharraf committed in
writing that he would doff his uniform after his re-election and before his
second swearing-in as the president. This means that in any case, he has to
leave the army position before November 15, which was the major demand
of the democratic forces as well as lawyers.
Presently, two opinions prevail in the government about the
timing of Musharrafs quitting the military office. Either he will shed his
uniform on October 7 with his fresh oath-taking on the same day, or he will
drag his swearing-in till November 15, the cut-off date, and say goodbye to
the army before that. Certainly, it would be a unique swearing-in as the oath
will be administered by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry.

171

The people continued commenting on Mushy-Pinky affair. Dr

Misbah Azam from USA wrote: It is good to hear that Ms Bhutto finally
decided to come back to Pakistan. However, things do not look as kosher as
being portrayed.
So far, unfortunately, it looks more like a stage set for a noora
kushti between the PPP and Musharraf. Only time will tell if there was
really no deal between Musharraf and Benazir or if it was a one-sided deal
where Musharraf was the main beneficiary while Benazir got relaxation in
the cases.
Engr S T Hussain from Lahore opined: Ms Bhutto will surely not be
deported like Nawaz Sharif when she returns to Pakistan because
Washington wants her to share power with the PML-Q, the kings party.
Benazir Bhuttos personal objective is to become prime minister for
third time. She is prepared to compromise with the establishment as she
knows that the majority of the people of Pakistan have no trust in politicians
and they consider them equally responsible for the present state of mess in
which Pakistan is now trapped.
Imran Hotiana from Lahore observed: It seems the US wants all
wishes to be fulfilled and at the same time disowning any acts necessary
to accomplish them. The US decision to support Gen Musharraf and
coalition with Benazir Bhutto shows a policy of favouring a weaker
government internally that is more dependent on foreign support and is
obliged to nod to every direction from outside.
At the same time the US government, experts and international
community call for a politically stable Pakistan. I wonder how a man
widely considered usurper among local masses can give political
stability in coalition with the present imported and installed PM or with a
not very popular leader which Ms Bhutto has recently became.
I would also request the US advisers to revise their policy in the light
of the latest scenario developing in Pakistan. The latest socio-political
conditions in Pakistan demand greater transparency and real democracy
(public involvement). At the same time no one can ignore the recent
reports regarding Pakistan becoming more dangerous for international
security.

172

I must add here that the situation is becoming even worse for the
state and people of Pakistan; though it has to be a matter of concern for
others as well. Favouring a setup with non-democratic military head
with a dubiously elected dummy government could have never succeeded
in the long run for it lacked public involvement and confidence, thus badly
missed public favour.
Another important reason of failure that has recently become evident
is President Musharrafs sincerity towards his commitments against security
threats to Pakistan and the world Gen Musharraf himself declares aloud
agreeing to the expert opinion that extremists and terrorist elements have
never been as big a threat to national and international security as they are
now. If security threats that the world is concerned about only grew during
his seven years rule, what better is the world expecting from another
five-year term?
The News wrote: There is a fine line between showing interest in the
politics of a friendly country and meddling in the internal affairs of a
sovereign state, which is exactly the line that the United States is treading
more preciously today than it has in the recent past in regards to Pakistans
political future. To categorize the statements emanating from Washington
as being invasive would not be anything short of justifiable.
These gratuitous statements come in the backdrop of the now welldocumented fact, which has also confirmed by Boucher at the same event,
that the US has played a big role in the reconciliation between Benazir
Bhutto and President Pervez Musharraf. Reports suggest that the latter is
being pressurized to come to an understanding with the former, because
Benazir is seen as a desirable commodity due to her seeming liberal, prowest stance, which makes it easier for Washington to push its agenda not
only in Islamabad but in the entire region.
Such speculative statements will only provide more fuel to rightwing religious elements to substantiate the general perception in the country
that the mandate for the next leader is being decided in Washington and not
being sought from the 160 million people that make up Pakistan. Moreover,
contrary to assertions of the US, there is nothing free and fair about
external pressure on the head of a sovereign state to alter the course of
the domestic political scene.

173

Shireen M Mazari was of the view that we have had the US now
brazenly accepting their interventionist role in our domestic politics to
ensure the success of so-called moderates. Of course, by their
intervention they may well ensure the success of the other but one
cannot rationalize with an irrational and extremist mindset of the American
neo-cons led by Mr Bush. However, rumours now abound that the reason
she (BB) has agreed not only to allow the US an unhindered access to the
tribal areas in terms of military action, but also to open the file on Dr Khan.
The focus of media and observers obviously shifted on to
presidential election with the announcement of its schedule. The News
expressed its views on the notification issued by the Election Commission of
Pakistan.
The honourable and right thing to do would be for the president to
leave the post of army chief first and contest the elections as a civilian
candidate. His refusal to do so gives the impression that he clearly believes
that it is crucial for him to remain army chief while standing for re-election.
To this one would ask whether the president believes that his chances for reelection would severely diminish if he were to stand as a civilian candidate.
Even if the answer to that is in the affirmative, there is still no moral ground
for the president to do so. As far as legal considerations are concerned, that
is something better left to the courts to adjudicate upon.
The scheme to re-elect the president seems to be relying on other
questionable measures. These involve the Election Commission of Pakistan
which, in recent days, has regrettably shown itself to be working in a manner
not entirely akin to being independent of the executive. First came its
notification of a change in the rules governing the presidents re-election
whereby it amended them to exempt the president from being subject to
Article 63. This means that the constitutional bar on any individual who has
been in the service of Pakistan or of any statutory body or any body which
is owned or controlled by the Government or in which the Government has a
controlling share or interest from contesting an election for public office
until at least two years have passed since the individual cease to be in such
service doesnt apply to the president.
The Election Commissions disclaimer the following day that this
change was not person-specific and hence should not be seen as favouring
any particular individual does not hold water because one can only imagine

174

who other than President Musharraf would benefit from such an amendment.
This was followed by another amendment, which curtails the power of
returning officers to reject, on the basis of Article 63, the papers of a
candidate who stands for president. This also shows an ulterior motive and
brings the independence of the Election Commission itself into
question.
On top of all of this is of course the fact that the president seeking reelection from the current assemblies, rather than waiting for the general
election and then standing for re-election is something that has already made
the whole exercise needlessly controversial. This also defies common sense
and logic because it only makes sense that a new president who will have a
five-year term should be elected by the next assemblies, given that the tenure
of existing ones is about to run out soon.
M Rashid Mafzool Zaka from Islamabad wrote: It is strange that the
ECP did not even announce this change until after the federal minister for
parliamentary affairs had shared this with the media. This has raised serious
questions about the legality and credibility of the procedure that was
followed, and whether it was really the ECP that had initiated and steered the
amendment process. It is highly unfortunate that, by operating in a nontransparent manner on this matter, the ECP has made itself controversial at
such a critical juncture of Pakistans history. As the amendment explicitly
favours the incumbent president, it is hardly surprising that the EC is
being widely criticized for being biased and partial.
The ECP should fully explain the process that it followed to amend
the rules that govern the presidential elections and why the need for such
an amendment was felt at this particular time. Information must also be
disclosed about the officers or the legal experts, who were consulted for their
comments and whether all of them agreed that such an amendment was,
indeed, required.
It is strange that the two Supreme Court judgments, which the ECP
has referred to justify the amendment in the rules, had been announced in
2002 and 2005. The questions arise: if the change in the rules in the light of
these judgments was at all necessary, why did the EC continue to sleep over
them for such a long time and why has it chosen to change the rules just
before the presidential election and at the time when the larger bench of the
Supreme Court was about to start its hearing on a range of questions
surrounding the presidential election? Until such questions are answered by
175

the EC in a satisfactory manner, it will continue to be perceived as a biased,

partial and non-transparent organization.
Musharrafs pledge to the court on uniform failed in clearing peoples
apprehensions. Imran Hotiana from Lahore observed: The statement by
Sharifuddin Pirzada that Gen Musharraf will give up his army position if he
is re-elected is only adding to the political uncertainty When the
president has already gone back on his words twice over the same
subject, how can he be trusted now? Then, the condition, his resignation
from the army, is his moral and legal obligation anyway.
What has not been made clear is what will happen if he is not elected.
In view of his past, he may resort to extra-constitutional measures once
again if he fails to get elected. The undertaking is very much an attempt to
make a deal with the nation through the Supreme Court after his
subordinates failed to reach an agreement with the politicians. It is clear that
the nation will not gain anything from this. People now hope that our
resurrected judiciary will set aside the shameful doctrine of necessity
once and for all.
Gulsher Panhwer from Dadu wrote: Fears that Musharraf will go
back on his pledge to the Supreme Court that he would give up his uniform
after being elected by the current Assemblies are not unfounded. Musharraf
has already reneged on the solemn pledge he made to the nation in a
television address in 2003. If elected for another term, he will be in a strongenough position to go back on the undertaking, for the sake of national
interest, and rule indefinitely. No military ruler in Pakistan has left power
voluntarily.
M Haroon Abbasi from Lahore had different views. The assurance
should be trusted as a sincere commitment on the part of General Musharraf,
who is indeed very trustworthy. Some people may have some doubts in this
regard. But like millions of other, I firmly believe that General Musharraf,
just as he has assured the apex court, will give up the uniform and quit
the army position. This will surely have a very positive impact, bring about
political stability and ensure the continuity of his initiated policies and
programmes in the larger national interests if he is re-elected president.
Rahimullah Yusufzai saw the government machinery in top gear to reelect Musharraf. There is intrigue in the air as efforts are being made to
circumvent the law, over-ride constitutional hurdles and overcome political
176

challenges to install one more time the 64-year-old Pakistan Army chief in
the coveted presidential office.
No other issue has pre-occupied the minds of the camp followers of
the uniformed president these past weeks and months. They have benefited
immensely for the last eight years by having a military general at the helm of
affairs in the country and every effort is being made to prolong the good
times that the ruling elite has had by electing President Musharraf once
again
The Presidents Camp Office, the adhoc-sounding name given to his
Rawalpindi headquarters, is busy war-gaming the presidential re-election
campaign due to the strong belief that General Musharraf would be able
to cope with all threats to his political ambitions with the support of the
Army and America. The nation doesnt figure in their scheme of things
because the General in the first place had used his troops to grab power
through a coup detat after ousting the democratically elected prime
minister, Nawaz Sharif. The idea is to first snatch power by whatever means
that are available and then present the nation, courts and political parties
with a fait accompli.
There is no concern also for the negative impact all this is having on
the countrys international image, political stability and economic wellbeing. Having an army chief as president for two terms was bad enough but
enabling him to secure the job a third time would surely make Pakistan
the butt of jokes worldwide. We should end up setting a record of sorts as a
unique military-managed democracy where the rules are bent and the
Constitution tailor-made to suit an individual holding a soldiers pistol in
hand.
The announcement of the schedule of the election for president by
the Election Commission of Pakistan even before the judgment by the
Supreme Court is another indication that the rulers have every intention of
going ahead with plans to elect General Musharraf in uniform and from the
same assemblies. The Election Commission, spineless and vulnerable to
executive pressure, had earlier earned criticism by allowing itself to be
manipulated by the government and amending the rules for the
presidential election
The petitions challenging General Musharrafs dual offices have
become another test case for the independence of the judiciary, and the
177

Supreme Courts eagerly awaited verdict would show whether there

would be a rule of law in the country or laws would continue to be bent
and circumvented for the sake of powerful individuals and institutions.
Lawyers and opposition politicians have accused the Chief Election
Commissioner, Justice Qazi Mohammad Farooq, of being biased after
having amended these rules with mala-fide intentions only to favour General
Musharraf. He has obviously become a controversial figure and this has
happened just at the start of the election season
Former chief election commissioners such as Justice Nusrat, Justice
Irshad Hasan Khan and Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar are some of the names
that come to mind for holding elections that werent recognized as free and
fair and this certainly sullied their reputation. Wont it be honourable for
Justice Qazi Farooq to step down and reveal the kind of pressure that he is
facing from the government instead of earning further criticism and going
down in history with a tainted reputation?
Imtiaz Alam discussed real politick behind the presidential election.
Even if he succeeds in overcoming all hurdles and crosses the bridge, will
President General Musharrafs re-election still be legitimate on any count
and not pre-empt the emergence of more representative rule? What is real
politick behind the presidential election?
Given the incapacity of the opposition parties in mobilizing the
people and building greater public pressure, the whole issue of the
presidential election has become a legalistic quagmire to be sorted out in the
courtrooms. Too much reliance on and exaggerated expectations from the
superior courts has effectively foreclosed other options and means of
struggle to achieve political goals. No doubt the superior courts must
arbitrate in the matters of rule of law or constitutional intricacies. But they
cant be a substitute to political struggle to realize the democratic
aspirations of the people.
Musharraf has made four intelligent moves. First, he has declared
before the court to take off his uniform after getting elected and before
entering the next term, thus defusing the most controversial issue of uniform
while keeping the possibility of keeping it if not elected or not allowed to
seek re-election. Second, by borrowing the arguments from the two earlier
judgments in his indefensible defence, he has got the rules for the
presidential election amended to cover his fragile flanks. Third, he has
178

engineered yet another division within the opposition ranks Fourth, and
quite controversial and coercive, he busted the most hyped balloon of Nawaz
Sharifs return
Although a doubtful but crucial threat to call the dissolution of the
NWFP Assembly can be pre-empted with a no-confidence motion against
the chief minister, the collective resignations of all the opposition parties
can lower the esteem of the presidential election which also doesnt carry
much moral and political weight from the Assemblies that are at the fag end
of their mandates.
The real politick behind the re-election of Musharraf from the current
captive assemblies is too crucial to understand the things to come.
Musharraf is insistent upon keeping the uniform for another few weeks
to cover his flanks in his real constituency of the Army by making crucial
appointments, including his hand-picked successor, and keep the house of
cards of the PML-Q and other allies intact.
In his strong presence, backed by a strong civil-military
establishment, no caretaker government or election commission can
ensure a free election. In a three-way contest, either his loyalists with
strong local constituencies, backed by local governments and administration,
are going the make a good showing or help a hung parliament emerge.
Although such selectively or generically engineered elections as his own
from the outgoing Assemblies will not be seen to be fair, or accepted as
such, this kind of election and parliament would suit a powerful Presidency
backed by the GHQ.
But the whole process, if it goes on according to the convenience of
Musharraf, will still not to be able to overcome the crisis of legitimacy, and
the political crisis is going to worsen further. Therefore, Musharraf Project
II will also remain devoid of both legitimacy and support to meet the
increasing challenges of extremism and terrorism and reversing a dangerous
degeneration of the state. For him, after the habit of an absolute rule for
eight years, it is difficult to abdicate excessive powers and allow the
emergence of the other alternative of a truly representative parliament with a
popularly elected prime minister.
Such a scenario is doomed to fail and what we have not seen during
these ungratifying years may erupt if once again the peoples mandate is
going to be hijacked Is Musharraf ready to abdicate extraordinary powers
179

after getting re-elected and doffing uniform, and allow fair play in the next
elections to let a sovereign parliament emerge? It is, unfortunately, doubtful
and so will be the smooth transition which may end up in a greater fiasco
if it doesnt allow a break from Musharraf Project I.
Dr Adil Najam observed the regime going to any limit to this end.
Given how ready and willing we have been to discard, reconstruct,
renovate, manipulate, suspend, or simply ignore our constitution (s), one has
to be amused by the earnestness with which we, as a nation, indulge in
constitutional discussions. At any given point, everyone seems to be
discussing the intricacies of Article this or Amendment that with the zest of
legal enthusiasts everyone, it seems, has turned into a constitutional
hobbyist.
Such constitutional earnestness should be a matter of national
pride rather than amusement; unless, of course, you happen to know
Pakistans constitutional history. If you do, then it is a matter not only of
bemusement but also of sadness. It is sad because it suggests that out
proclivity for constitutional discussions emanates not only from an innate
respect for the Constitution but from a desire to search forever new ways to
manipulate it or keep it from being manipulated. Either case would imply
that the spirit of the Constitution is dead and what remains is the minutia of
technicalities and wordplay.
Gen Musharraf is fond of saying that whatever decisions he takes
will be according to the Constitution. It is clear that he intends to do so, even
if it means he has to change the Constitution. Frankly, the reverence he
expresses for the Constitution is more disturbing than it is impressive.
Not just because his actions belie his word; much more so because he did
not gain power by following the Constitution and it is clear that he intends to
now hold on to that power despite the Constitution.
The mind games that Gen Musharrafs legal eagles seem to be
playing with the Supreme Court and the nation notwithstanding, the fact of
the matter is that the Constitution has now been reduced to a hurdle
that has to be worked around rather than an expression of a sacrosanct
contract between ruler and the ruled in this process of problem solving,
the intent of the Constitution giving the public an honest, fair and
democratic opportunity to choose who rules them will not be ignored, it
will be made irrelevant.

180

If this is indeed so, then does it really matter if the letter of the
Constitution is abided or not? What good is it to maintain the faade of
constitutionalism, if it is merely to manipulate the Constitution at will
and with such abundance? And is the much-amended patchwork
Constitution that we have defined as it is by a series of autocratic dictates
approved by rubberstamp parliaments really worth holding on to? Can a
truly democratic polity really be constructed out of such a maligned and
manipulated document?
These are not easy questions to ask, especially, for those of us for
whom constitutionalism and rule of law are non-negotiable tenets of good
governance. Yet, it may be time now to ask exactly these questions. The
purpose of asking these questions, however, is not to invite the imposition of
extra-constitutional means of governance. It is, instead, to suggest that the
letter of the Constitution has been so deeply compromised today that it
is no longer is sync with the spirit in which it was originally crafted.
The charge against those of us speaking for constitutionalism is that
our current strategy is constrained by its own lack of ambition. Because such
efforts are single-mindedly focused on ensuring that the Constitution as it
now stands is compromised no further, therefore it validates, de facto, all the
compromises that have already been incorporated into the Constitution. In
accepting prior compromises, it not only leaves the doors open for, but also
invites future compromises. The more appropriate goal should be to seek
a return to the original 1973 Constitution.
Once a truly democratic system and parliament is back in place as
one hopes will happen it could clearly amend it to their hearts content.
Possibly, even bring back any of the scrapped amendments. But let us cross
that bridge when we come to it. For now let us at least set our gaze upon an
ideal, which even if not really attainable, is worthy of aspiration. If we are
going to be dreamers and anyone calling for constitutionalism in
Pakistan is, by definition, a dreamer then at least let our dreams be
glorious ones.
Saeed Najam from Lahore expressed his views on lawyers and their
presidential candidate. The announcement of Justice Wajihuddins decision
to contest the presidential election must have gladdened the hearts of the
majority of Pakistanis. He is a man of impeccable repute, a man every
Pakistani could be proud of. I believe if fair elections are held, he would
leave the rest in the field miles behind. The announcement is to be
181

welcomed on another count also; the lawyers have formally entered the
political arena. No doubt they will prove a formidable political group in
the days to come.
Babar Sattar discussed this at length. Justice Ahmed is a breath of
fresh air for he combines unassailable integrity with a righteous cause and
now leads a struggle that is modeled on the concept of rendering personal
sacrifice in order to pursue larger public interest. This movement, part legal
and part political, is welcome for multiple reasons.
One, its righteousness is rooted not in morality but legality and
justice, making it possible to develop a larger consensus around it across the
political divide. Two, its aim is to defend the Constitution and perpetuate the
rule of law and its focus on promoting principles as opposed to individuals
makes it less susceptible to controversy and partisan attacks.
Three, the strategy is to fight legally, fairly and with dignity and
while such approach challenges the conventional political wisdom it appeals
to people and raises the stature of people like Munir A Malik and Justice
Tariq Mehmood who respond to obscene outbursts of ruling regimes
lackeys with utmost restraint. Four, when vanguards of the law challenge
illegalities being perpetrated by the general in public forums and on the
street, they are better placed to resist oppression for they have a countrywide
organizational structure and are fully aware of their legal and political
rights.
And finally, the legal and political movement launched by the
lawyers is a pro bono enterprise that is not staking a claim to power for
itself. It is thus reviving the concept of public service in the public arena and
cleansing the concept of politics itself that has unfortunately come to stand
for selfish, unscrupulous and corrupt power play. But is participation in an
election considered illegal by the lawyers movement legitimizing the
exercise?
The position the candidate and his constituency with regard to
the presidential election is that (a) General Musharraf is specifically barred
from contesting presidential elections under Articles 41, 43, 63 and 244 of
the Constitution, (b) even as matter of principle a khaki president comprises
the concept of civilian control of the military that constitutes a fundamental
constitutional principle, (c) the Election Commission stepped beyond its
jurisdiction when it amended Rule 5 of the Presidential Election Rules 1988
182

to accommodate the general by excluding disqualifications applicable to a

member of the National Assembly from also applying to a presidential
candidate as is required by the Constitution and (d) the timing of the
presidential election has been skewed due to the molestation of the
Constitution by the general and in view of the spirit of the Constitution (as
well as common sense) a president should be elected by new assemblies.
The decision to field a candidate to prevent General Musharraf
from stealing away from this nation another five years as president is
both symbolic and tactical. It is symbolic in that Justice Ahmed and the
lawyers movement have formally taken up arms, under protest if you will,
to fight the oppression and illegalities unleashed by the General through all
legal means available.
When viewed outside the context of our distressing political realities
where might is almost always right, Justice Ahmed as a candidate puts the
general to shame. It is the presence and contributions of individuals like
him that explains Pakistans resilience and ability to endure the drabbing this
nation continues to receive at the hands of our military and political elites.
As a tactical measure, the lawyers movement needs an individual
who has a personal stake in the electoral process, for under the Constitution
one has to be an aggrieved party to seek certain legal remedies. Depending
on the decision of the Supreme Court on the petitions challenging the
Generals right to get himself re-elected as president and how the Election
Commission behaves and political events unfold over the next few weeks,
there might be another round of legal wrangling. And in order to
challenge any further assaults on the Constitution and any extralegal
measures taken by the ruling regime and the Election Commission during
the presidential election, the lawyers will need a candidate to represent who
has standing under the law, i.e. someone whose personal right has been
directly infringed. Justice Ahmed will be that person.
On September 27, Justice Ahmed bid adieu to his amenable retired
life for he could no longer take the torture this nation is being put through
lying down. It is not his prospect at the ballot box but his decision to
publicly resist tyranny that is the true harbinger of hope in this story.
Everyday that this regime abuses the power that it has annexed to itself
and each time that it seals entire cities, inconveniences ordinary people and
arrests political leaders and activists exercising their constitutional right to
dissent, it exhibits its true colours and shakes more and more individuals
183

constituting the silent majority of Pakistan out of their state of apathy

and slumber. Maybe General Musharraf is a blessing in disguise for this
country for his rule has been one big lesson on why law and the Constitution
should matter to nations that wish to prosper.
Aqil Sajjad from USA urged: In this situation, short of full fledged
street protests completely paralyzing the government, the opposition only
seems to have one option. That is to unite behind a single opposition
candidate for the presidential election and try to woo enough dissidents from
the ruling parties (such as PML-Q and PPP patriots) to vote in favour of that
consensus candidate. The lawyers choice, retired judge Wajihuddin Ahmed,
is most suitable for this purpose and any opposition party trying to field
its own candidate instead of fully supporting him will only end up
helping Musharraf.
Anwar Syed visualized future prospects for the PPP. The
forthcoming elections (if free and fair) will not throw up a majority
party in the Assembly. The possibility cannot be ruled out that the PPP will
do less well in these elections than it did in the preceding ones. Being away
from the country, Ms Bhutto has not mingled with the people, addressed
public meetings, or led rallies for eight years. Makhdoom Amin Fahim,
Jehangir Badr and Farahtullah Babar have held the fort, so to speak, and kept
the partys hardcore support. But I doubt that they have been able to enliven
their party workers and raise their spirits and enthusiasm.
Second, there is admittedly a certain amount of disillusionment in
party ranks as a result of Ms Bhuttos self-centered negotiations with
General Musharraf. Third, Ms Bhutto is bound to be perceived as Americas
agent in Pakistani politics, and the widespread disapproval of its policies
will rub off on her.
Fourth, she and her associates have taken no clear position on major
domestic and foreign policy issues other than routine calls for the restoration
of democracy. A report in this newspaper (The Dawn) a few weeks ago said
that likely winners in the next election, wishing to contest on PPP tickets,
had not been found in about a dozen districts of Punjab.
The odds then are that in the post-election scenario Ms Bhutto will be
a significant actor like the Sharifs and the MMA leaders and she may
even be a partner in a ruling coalition, but hers will not be the determining
say in the halls of governance.
184

The Dawn commented on the plight of the Opposition. The

oppositions ranks have been characterized by disunity bordering on chaos
and lack of consistency in policies. The opposition consists of honest
hardliners as well as conscientious soft-liners, besides turncoats, timeservers and the dubious like their counterparts in the kings party. With less
than a fortnight left for the crucial presidential vote on Oct 6, the opposition
has failed to demonstrate even a semblance of unity.
Babar Sattar diagnosed the nature of ailment of the political parties.
The argument being made is simply this: let the General rule by consent
or else he shall rule by brute force and everyone will be worse off. Now
the carrot within the argument has been presented to the Supreme Court as
well, and the stick embedded in the word if has been left to everyones
imagination.
The court is being told that a political solution to our crisis of
democracy is in the offing only if it were to bend the law to enable as such to
take effect. In other words, the court is being burdened with the
responsibility of facilitating an orderly transition to democracy or that of
endangering anarchy in the country by leaving no way out for the ruling
dispensation to hang-on to power.
This argument is not new. It underlies what has come to be known
as the doctrine of necessity. It is also couched in other legal arguments,
such as the one that restrictions mentioned in Article 63 of our Constitution,
including one that prohibits a person in the service of Pakistan from
contesting elections; do not apply to the president. In its support are
quoted rulings of the apex court in other cases, which were also a product
of the doctrine of necessity.
The court decided those matters the way it did because it neither
bought into the argument of necessity and the need for extra-legal
transitional arrangements or thought it had no option to act otherwise for
reasons of consistency after the initial judicial sin of justifying the Generals
coup was committed. The times when the aforesaid rulings saw the light
of day will be remembered as the dark ages of Pakistans judicial
history. There is no legal or logical reason for the court to be held hostage to
such history. First of all, two wrongs dont make a right. And it is exactly for
purposes of correcting past wrongs that the rule of stare decicis in not
applicable the Supreme Court i.e. its past rulings are not binding on itself.

185

Second, how many transitions are needed to allow democracy to

return? The court allowed a transition in 1999 by giving the General a free
hand (even to amend the Constitution) in the Zafar Ali Shah case. It
facilitated another transition in the Qazi Hussain Ahmed case by according
legitimacy to his being president and army chief at the same time. And it is
now being asked to allow the general to be re-elected (read selected) yet
again in uniform. Third, the ruling regime has perfected the art of justifying
all its excesses in the name of the law as laid out by the Supreme Court.
Thus, apart from mutilating Pakistans jurisprudence, the court also
ends up shouldering the blame of abetment while facilitating transitions.
What is helpful in developing an understanding of Pakistans culture
of expediency is the concept of prisoners dilemma, framed by analysts at
the RAND Corporation in the 1950s. Here is a basic introduction courtesy
Wikipedia: Two suspects, A and B, are arrested by the police. The police
have insufficient evidence for a conviction, and, having separated both
prisoners, offer them the same deal: if one testifies for the prosecution
against the other and the other remains silent, the betrayer goes free and the
silent accomplice receives the full 10-year sentence. If both stay silent, both
prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge. If each
betrays the other each receives a five year sentence.
Each prisoner must make the choice of whether to betray the other or
to remain silent. However, neither prisoner knows for sure what choice the
other prisoner will make. If you knew the other prisoner would betray, your
best move is still to betray, as you receive lesser sentence than by silence.
The paradox of the situation lies in that the prisoners are not defecting in
hope that other will not. Even when they both know the other to be rational
and selfish, they will both play defect to maximize their individual payoff.
This has been dilemma of our politicians in dealing with dictators.
The prisoners dilemma confronting politicians in Pakistan can
only be eased by the ordinary people. Once citizens establish that the
political cost of defection, especially on integrity and principles, will be
unacceptably high for political leaders, the choice of defection will cease to
be a rational choice. But in the immediate term the Supreme Court can also
end the prisoners dilemma. The justices are not confronted with the paradox
as was established by the proceedings and ruling of Justice Ramdays bench.
Deciding the law in accordance with principle will not only serve the
interests of the nation, but also the personal stature of justices.

186

The News criticized high-handedness of the regime in dealing with

opposition parties. The arrests and detention of hundreds of activists of the
parties that make up the All Parties Democratic Movement seems to be an
ominous harbinger of what lies in store for the countrys electoral politics in
the coming few weeks
This hamfistedness shatters the governments oft-repeated claim
that it wants to give all political parties a level playing field in the coming
elections and the often-stated claims of various ministers asking the political
opposition to play its role in this regard. While the opposition seems to be
more than willing to do this, to further the cause of democracy, the same
cannot really be said of the government.
Reports that the civil bureaucracy (at the level of the district
coordination officer) and the police have been tasked with ensuring that the
MPs report to the assemblies on October 6 and cast their vote, already gives
the impression that pre-election rigging is underway and its first and
immediate beneficiary seems to be none other than the president himself. It
is perhaps for the first time that a government has detained opposition party
MPs so as to prevent them from resigning from parliament.
Other than that, the crackdown, although severe in nature given the
numbers arrested, far from presenting the government in a position of
strength reflects a desperation that many would feel is suffering from a
severe crisis of credibility and authenticity. The latter refers to whether it
reflects the wishes of the people, and to that an answer is obvious. If the
massive protests of the past few months, along with results of various
opinion surveys, rising dissatisfaction with government policies and even an
admission by the president himself that his popularity has dipped have not
convinced the government that its claims to being democratic and
representative of the popular will ring very hollow, then one can only say
that it is living in a state of self-delusion.
The fact is that the current dispensation, by trying to get the
president re-elected by hook or by crook, has been shorn of any
democratic credentials of the civil-military cabal/dictatorship which has
ruled this country is now fully unveiled and going about doing what it has to
do to retain its grip on power.
R Niazi from Islamabad was of the view that the person who publicly
promised to discard his uniform blatantly breaks the pledges and insists that
187

Mr Nawaz Sharif should honour his own promise. May Allah help us! We
deserve such rulers, because we are a docile nation.
Shafqat Mahmood discussed the plight of the nation into which the
regime has pushed it in. It is significant that the likes of Chaudhry Shujaat
who were earlier threatening the judges and holding the chief justice
responsible for all their troubles, are now saying that they will accept
whatever judgment is delivered by the court. In a democracy such a
statement itself would be contemptuous because the question of not
accepting a superior court judgment would never arise. However, since it has
been certified after Nawaz Sharifs banishment that we live in a banana
republic, we have to take seriously the rulers intentions regarding a
particular decision of the Supreme Court. This selective submission may
be an indicator of what is to come.
Earlier this week, the Election Commission caused a major flutter by
making Article 63 of the Constitution relating to the disqualifications of a
candidate inapplicable to the presidential election. Without going into arcane
legalities, this qualifies the General to be a candidate as far as the Chief
Election Commissioner is concerned. Whether he has the power to change
an essential of the Constitution is now for the Supreme Court to decide, but
one thing is clear. The independence and neutrality of the commission
has taken a nose-dive in the eyes of the people and its role will now be
viewed with suspicion throughout the forthcoming election period.
General Musharrafs affidavit in the Supreme Court in which he has
promised to quit the army office if he is elected as president has also led to
some repercussions. In the first place this if is significant, because what
happens if he is not elected? Will he continue as army chief and make
someone else president? His wife, perhaps, as suggested by the mumbler
with dark shades. It also amounts to blackmailing the nation. Elect me or I
will never leave the army post. What have we come to as a nation if we
have to get him in to get him out?
The import of this affidavit is also that he will be a candidate in
uniform. This has incensed the PPP leader and she has again started to
threaten resignations. This is like closing the barn door after the horse has
bolted. Perhaps, now Benazir Bhutto will begin to realize that by engaging
her in a never-ending dialogue the General has used her to divide the
opposition and weaken the pro-democracy forces.

188

This has been a bad deal for Benazir, and was she not so focused on
her court cases perhaps she would never have been so easily duped. She can
still make amends by throwing her weight behind the pro-democratic
movement, but we hear that Musharrafs people are yet again going to her
for another round of dialogue. It is clear that being so close to her objective
the General will keep promising her lollipops to stop her from going for
resignations, but in the end he will leave her humiliated.
While this soap opera continues the real battle in the tribal areas is
becoming grim. Our soldiers are dying by the dozen every day and the
number kidnapped is in the hundreds. We have yet to find out what made an
entire unit surrender. This is obviously not just a fight with the Afghan
Taliban and al-Qaeda but also a war with our own tribes.
In Lahore the Defence Day celebrations were inaugurated two hours
earlier to protect the army personnel from a surprise attack. It is even being
said that soldiers have been cautioned from going out of their units in
uniform. Never in our history was the army such a target, and this is sad.
One small, but perhaps not insignificant, sign of this is the short shrift
the Indians have given to our representation/protest on promoting
Siachen as a tourist destination. Why do we put ourselves in situations
where we are destined to lose face? Wasnt it more appropriate to have a
quite word with them rather than take a public position and get a rebuff?
More importantly, why have the Indians started to retreat cavalierly
whatever we say to them? Do they perceive a weakening of our power?
When Pakistans brave commando has ruled out military options, what is
the harm in turning a battlefield into a recreational venue?
Going beyond security matters, lack of state control is also visible
in Karachi where courts are being mobbed and prominent lawyers being
killed The citizens of Karachiare once again faced with targeted killings
and internecine warfare.
These are just few glimpses into the state of our nation, and yet
Pervez Musharraf thinks that he is the best thing that ever happened to us.
He is now ready to put us through every imaginable difficulty, including
martial law, just to hang on to power. Are eight years not enough? He has
done whatever he could and the results are not so good. It is time he realizes
that his presence has now become a burden for the nation. Instead of putting
us through even greater problems he should have mercy on us and leave.
189

Dr Adil Najam focused on the damage in terms of civil-military

relations. All indications suggest that despite the strain, the Pakistan
military remains a professional institution. There is no evidence that these
pressures have created serious internal fissures in their rank or file; at least,
not yet. However, in looking to the future, we must be concerned lest these
pressures grow to an extent where they begin to undermine the integrity of
the institution. After all, the integrity of the military is a key ingredient in
the integrity of the state.
It is never simply a matter of telling people that they must respect the
military or threatening them with serious consequences if they dont. It is,
rather, about giving people a reason to continue respecting the institution of
the military. One of the sad legacies of Gen Musharrafs term as President
particularly the last year is a steady decline in this societal respect for
the military. Although the society-military bond has not yet been broken, it
has been greatly weakened.
Of course, criticism of the power grabbing ploys of generals,
corruption by the top brass, and resentment against the ubiquitous intrusion
of senior military officers in civilian institutions has been a permanent
centerpiece of Pakistani conversations, even in times of civilian rule. But
what we are seeing today is qualitatively different. The object of public
wrath is no longer just the excesses of the senior officers and usurpation by
the military bureaucracy. It is now directed at the fauj (military) as an
institution. This level of public resentment is undeserved because the fault
clearly does not lie with the jawan in the trenches. However, public
frustration with the excesses of those at the top is now so deep that everyone
in the institution is being sullied even those brave souls who are actually
putting their lives on the line for our collective security and safety.
So much has gone wrong with Gen Musharrafs government. The
pivotal moment was the military operation that led to the killing of Nawab
Akbar Bugti. However, a deeper cause of this disturbing turnaround in
society-military relations has been military operations related to the socalled War on Terror along our northwestern borders, particularly in the
Tribal Areas.
The Musharraf government has been unable to convince Pakistanis
that the alarming rise of militancy and religious fanaticism is an
existential threat to Pakistans current peace and future stability. More

190

importantly, it has not really tried very hard, largely because it has been so
very busy in trying to ensure its own political survival.
At this time of great challenges for the Pakistan armed forces
strategic, operational and relational one would have wanted the full
attention of the military leadership to be focused on navigating through the
stormy waters that the Armed Forces find themselves in. Instead, an added
source of pressure on the military is that its top leadership is greatly
consumed by matters political rather than matters military. Gen
Musharrafs insistence on clinging to the Presidency is not only a cause of
many of the problems the military finds itself in, it is also a great distraction
from the search for possible solutions.
The post of chief of army staff was never meant to be a part-time
position. But since Gen Musharrafs passions now reside much more in his
political office than his military post, it has been seemingly been relegated to
a part-time activity. In fact, by suggesting that he is willing to vacate his
military position if guaranteed the Presidency, he has made clear which
office he prefers.
Even though his tenure in power has brought great resources and
privileges to the military, the fact of the matter is that he is now in danger
of becoming a liability to his own institution. Gen Musharrafs departure
as army chief will not, in and of itself, resolve all the challenges facing the
Pakistan military today. But it will help ease at least some of the tensions.
Whether his doffing the uniform helps the cause of democracy in Pakistan or
not remains unclear. However, it is more and more clear that it will help
rebuild the image of the armed forces.
Dr Afiyah Sherbano attributed these damages to the leaders around the
dictator. The current critique against democratic activism comes from two,
not necessarily mutually exclusive, schools of thought. The apologists
defend the legitimacy of the Musharraf-democracy. They point to the
Generals lack of territorial constituency and thus his ability to bring real,
nation-building, liberal democracy.
The skeptics target the weak credibility of power-mongering
political parties and a compromised civil society. The criticism that in
Pakistan, democracy doesnt have to win but just that dictators have to die,
emerges from those who are dubious about the revolutionary potential of our

191

pro-democracy forces. What both critics have in common is that they deny
the agency of the oppressed and the importance of representation.
Today, the debate should not be limited to the form of democratic
dispensation or power-sharing arrangements. Rather, the pro-democrats need
to radicalize the agenda of the democratic forces and pry them away from
the institutions that make dictatorship possible. The first step for party
leaders (in and out of power) and civil society is, to stop becoming rentseekers themselves or look for the same linear path to power that dictators
use. Instead, their re-definition and reclaim to democracy may be polymeric
in approach and more inclusive in its design. Towards that, leaders need to
quit being the kind of democrats that hide in the dictators closet,
regardless of whether there is a uniform or a suit hanging in there.
Dr Masooda Bano was of the view that Musharraf was fighting a
losing battle. The promise that he would take off his uniform once he is
elected for a second term as president, has been making rounds for
sometime. Even during the governments negotiations with Benazir, this was
one of the reported proposals. However, if elected for another term while in
uniform, it would be utterly unlikely that General Musharraf takes it off.
Standing by his word is not something that General Musharraf
has a record for. He constantly switches his position and breaks his
commitments under the easiest of pretexts: the national interest. Right now
when the pressure is on, he is willing to talk about removing his uniform and
be a civilian president. However, once elected he will simply refuse to do so.
From his past experience, he knows that his excuses for changing positions
do not necessarily have to be very convincing or constitutional because he
has force and many willing politicians as accomplices to implement them.
But more than his past record, what makes this option is that without
uniform General Musharraf is no good to the US. The fact that General
Musharraf has no strong constituency within the country is clear to
everyone. If this fact was not obvious in the strong resistance put up by the
lawyers or the rising attacks on the military targets, the desperation to win
over different political parties to save his position is reflective of the fact that
all General Musharraf has in money and force to win over support. He has
no popular support base or legitimacy.
If General Musharraf is wanted in power that is only by one
party: US. But, that is of course again not for his individual charisma but
192

for his position as chief of army staff and for his willingness to command the
Pakistan Army according to the American wishes in the war on terror. The
US wants the Pakistan Army to be available to fight its war and General
Musharraf without uniform cannot deliver that end. Once General
Musharrafs uniform is off, it is not him but the next army chief, who will be
the focus of Americas attention.
What is very clear right now is that General Musharraf is not going
to exit from the corridors of power peacefully. It is impossible for the
government not to know how unpopular (in fact this is a soft term, the real
word for many is hated) it is among the public, yet General Musharraf is
adamant to hold on to power.
Even if General Musharraf rides the current storm and saves
both his offices, he wont be able to form a stable government. His
presence as chief of the army will continue to make the entire army a target
of attacks and sooner or later this will break the ranks within the army too.
Continuation of the current faces in power will thus mean an uncertain
future.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal expressed similar views by narrating the story of
the rooster. Last week, the nation finally heard the news the Generals
bridals had been saying for months each in a voice louder than the other
to register their sycophantic chorus in the Generals ears: the next act of the
theatrical farce will be staged on October 6 six days ahead of the eighth
anniversary of the dreadful night a prime minister, high on his historic
mandate, was dispatched to a lonely barrack
The stage was now clear and those waiting for a cue wondered what
would begin Act III. A deafening chorus of international voices
clamoured for the restoration of democracy and the civilian rule. No one
knew who was playing the lead role in this chorus coming from afar, but
voices were loud everywhere from Washington DC to London: we wont
accept a man in uniform; we wont accept the army rule. We want
democracy in Pakistan.
Having acquiesced to the make-or-break phone call, the General
hoped to live happily ever after. He then embarked upon his grand vision
for the nation. He took upon himself to reform Islam, the madressahs, the
educational system and God knows what. In his glory he did well as is
evident by the multitudes who praised his vision both at home and abroad.
193

But time has a strange habit: it keeps going, making all humans
dispensable. Hence the General now finds himself in need of yet another
staged performance and he has given the nation the good news: the date has
been set for the nation to watch the next act.
As soon as this was announced prices of both commodities and
members of assemblies started to climb. The numbers game has already
started, but the white marble4 house of justice is holding everyone in
suspense at the time of writing these words. In any case, what awaits the
nation in the next few days is hidden behind only a thin veil. Of course, no
one knows where this camel will eventually rest, but one thing is certain: the
rooster who thinks he brings out the sun everyday will find out, sooner
rather than later, how shallow his conceit actually is.
This rooster lived in a coop with so many hens that he could not
count their number even if he wanted to. He was the undisputed hero, the
master of the coop, the lord who ruled his dominion. Every morning he
would haughtily flap up to the roof, stretch out his neck, and call out: cookroo-croo. And just then the sun would come up from the east. Then he would
climb down and the hens would sing his praises and commend him for
bringing up the sun: his pride would soar and he would announce his grand
plans for the coop and beyond.
One day, the rooster did not come out of his little hole to call for the
sun. And in a short while, the hens saw the sun rising to their utter surprise,
even though the rooster had not crowed. This was the end of the roosters
rule.
Shafqat Mahmood observed that as the endgame neared, leaders were
showing their true colours. As D-Day of the presidential election
approaches, the twists and turns of Pakistani politics acquire a dizzying
rapidity. The situation seems to change by the day and sometimes by the
hour Many slippery characters in politics are also being forced by
events to show their true colours. Maulana Fazlur Rehman is a classical
example of this, because he has turned double speak and dual politics into an
art form.
His problem is that he and some of his colleagues, particularly in
Baluchistan, love being in power while their electorate is fiercely opposed to
Musharraf. They have had a grand ride by ruling in the Frontier and
controlling the choices Ministries in Baluchistan. Fazal himself became
194

opposition leader in the national assembly when he did not have the votes
because the government wanted him here.
Benazir Bhutto is another one who has to show her true colours
before the presidential election. Her rhetoric regarding Musharraf is getting
sharper but there is little to show for it in practical terms. In fact as I said last
week, whether a deal now goes through or not, by engaging with Musharraf
and distancing herself from pro-democracy forces, she has already
grievously hurt the movement.
Meanwhile true to form, she has thrown another bombshell by
saying in Washington that she will allow the International Atomic Energy
Agency access to Dr A Q Khan. This may have been music to American ears
but it has caused a huge ruckus within the country. She could serve her
interests much better if she sidesteps certain tricky questions but sadly, she
seems so keen to please the Americans that she will say anything to earn
their goodwill.
This brings me to this wonderful man, Justice Wajihuddin. Here is a
man who could have remained a judge of the Supreme Court for several
years, had he agreed to take oath under the provincial constitutional order.
He refused. If there is anyone I know who personifies goodness, Judge
Wajihuddin is it. A soft-spoken retiring man, he displays an unshakeable
commitment to principles and an iron will to resist despotism.
But, unfortunately, in this cynical world good men seldom win. All
is not lost though, because while Judge Wajihuddin will not win the
presidential electionthe current two offices case will determine the future
of the country. It will have a huge impact, but it is not the only case in the
pipeline.
Meanwhile, before going into the crucial fortnight of elections and
before he leaves the office of the army chief, General Musharraf has
started to consolidate his position by making promotions and key
appointments in the army. Irrespective of the merit of the people promoted
or appointed, these have come at the wrong time. With the new Chief about
to take over, it should have been left to his discretion to recommend the right
people for promotion But now Musharraf is even suspicious of his own
shadow and would certainly not allow the new Chief this authority. He wants
to make sure that he is safe.

195

I also hear a rumour that some changes in the rules of business are
being contemplated to give some powers of the army chief to the president.
One proposal, it is said, is to make every senior promotion or
posting/transfer subject to presidential approval. This would amount to
undermining the authority of the army chief and good neither for the army
nor for the country.
Ikram Sehgal suggested the middle way to the regime. The attempted
return to Pakistan by Mian Nawaz Sharif became a defining moment for
Musharraf; any sign of weakness would have caused a meltdown of his
support. Some had already deserted; many were ready to switch sides. The
international media in attendance gave a set-piece opportunity to the boss
to display his power, contempt of the Supreme Court notwithstanding.
Musharrafs show of force in packing the former prime minister off back to
Saudi Arabia was a deliberate and a clear signal to friend and foe alike that
he was not going to roll over and play dead. Many wavering on the failsafe
line became born-again Musharraf supporters.
The ball is now in the court of the Supreme Court. Mr Akram
Shaikhs attempt to get a full bench to hear the case indicated that he felt that
the bench announced by the chief justice was weighted in Musharrafs
favour. That plea, despite discussion, was rejected, confirming the
apprehensions of the opposition. In the meantime, the Election Commission
cleared the technicality of the uniform. What will the Supreme Court do?
In a sudden move Musharraf made the issue of the uniform almost
infructuous by a categorical filing before the Supreme Court about
doffing the uniform before he takes oath of office as president
One expects he will doff the uniform on or before Oct 8, 2007.
Election from the present assemblies is in fact the real issue, other than the
time-bar. Musharraf has succeeded in his strategic objective using
diversionary tactics embroiling the opposition in extraneous issues. Except
for the National Assembly, none of the other assemblies make up the
Electoral College. Their members do. If the NWFP assembly is dissolved,
as the opposition has threatened, the presidential elections can still
proceed.
Musharrafs successes still far outmatch his failures. He has recently
said that elections 2007 will decide Pakistans destiny, one believes it is the
way the elections are conducted that will decide the countrys destiny. Even
though the light at the end of the tunnel reveals a signboard reading
196

power-sharing is a must for Pakistan, it will be useless if the powerparleys choose to ignore it.
Mir Jamilur Rahman remained an exception by urging the opponents
of Musharraf to be satisfied with him. It is very unfair on the part of Qazi
Sahib. When the Supreme Court gives a judgment, which goes against the
government such as the reinstatement of the Chief Justice, the judiciary
according to Qazi Sahib is independent and free. But when the judges make
observations which are unpalatable to the MMA, the judiciary is seen as not
being free and independent.
It appears that Qazi Sahib has become disillusioned with the
judiciary. This disillusioned and ire may have been caused by
observations of some honourable judges who are hearing the case of the
dual office. Justice Javed Iqbal observed that the political parties took an
extra constitutional step by entering into a compromise with President
Musharraf for approving the 17th Amendment
Justice Falak Sher recalled that nothing was wrong when MMA
leadership struck a deal with President Musharraf and nobody raised an
objection. Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan wondered whether any
member of the parliament had deliberated on a clause in the Act 7of 2004,
regarding the Present Holder of the Office, when it was passed.
It is not a logical argument that the election of the President
should be put on hold, pending the decision of the Supreme Court. There is
no law that allows the drastic step of postponement of the presidential
election. It would, thus, be an extra-constitutional step if the presidential
election were postponed. Such a step would have very negative fallout that
could retard political progress towards democracy.
Pakistan may have true, real or basic democracy and be happy
with it but it needs five hundred more years or perhaps more to become a
democracy in the real sense. Our neighbour, Afghanistan, can never be a
democracy even if the Americans stay there for a thousand years. Hence, our
opposition should not spoil the game by adopting extreme measures. It will
not succeed in unseating Musharraf, but in the process it will increase the
distance between Pakistan and democracy.

197

REVIEW
Three verdicts of the apex court during the months of July and August
regarding reinstatement of the chief justice, release of Javed Hashmi and
return of Nawaz Sharif were big boost to the expectations of the people.
They hoped that the apex court would rein in the regime by curtailing its
unlawful activities.
In their mood of high-hopes, the people were able to absorb the forced
re-exile of Nawaz Sharif for the reason that they took it as an act of
arrogance on the part of the regime. The courts had nothing to do with it; in
fact, the superior judiciary was one of those at the receiving end. The real
rude shock came on 28th September when the Supreme Court set aside
petitions on the issue of dual office on the issue of maintainability.
The verdict of the nine-member bench indicated one thing for certain
that the judges were not yet prepared to shoulder the burden that comes with
the independence of their institution. Their habit developed over decades
can be conveyed in words of a poet: Itney manoos siyaad sey ho gai keh
rehai meli bhi tu mar jaanian gey.
If the petitions were technically not maintainable, what was the
rationale behind such lengthy arguments on merits of the case, in the
presence of three amicus curiae? During the hearings spread over two weeks
almost every aspect of the merit of the issues raised was debated threadbare
by either side; whereas hardly a few words were said about maintainability
of the petition. Yet, the honourable court after spending so much of time and
effort on merit rejected the petition on technical grounds.
Was the judicial-show deliberately prolonged so as to end at the nick
of the time? A lawyer said that the justice has been sacrificed on the altar of
technicalities. The legal experts termed it unprecedented. In fact, the court
avoided giving decision on the burning issue of the day for reasons best
known to them.
The questions that come to mind are: Did the CJP play clever or
succumbed to pressure while constituting the bench to hear Qazis petition?
Was it the result of the visit of Presidents COS to the Supreme Court? The
threat of imposition of emergency or promulgation of martial law for
fixing the judiciary might not have been easy to be ignored by the man
who said No on March 9.

198

During the court proceedings of the case, MMA was frequently

embarrassed by the remarks of the honourable judges. Its suffering because
of the sin of Seventeenth Amendment and it will keep haunting its leaders
for years to come. They must confess their mistake publicly and apologize to
the nation for their mistake of trusting a man to stand by his words, who
had betrayed the solemn oath prohibiting a soldier to take part in politics.
29th September 2007

PEACEMAKER MERCENARY - II
Pakistan Army in its role of peacemaking continued killing its own
people who have been dubbed as terrorists by the Crusaders. On 13 th
September, these militants struck back with vengeance by targeting the elite
troops located in an area which has the same security classification as
nuclear setup at Kahuta and killed 20 commandos.
Four days later, Indian Army declared Siachen as tourists trekking
area. Pakistan expressed deep concern over it. About two weeks later,
Indian Army Chief, J J Singh, retired and tributes were paid to him for his

199

strategy in IHK, which made the occupied region more peaceful than it has
ever been in last 20 years.
The yardstick for measuring the restoration of peace was the ratio of 8
militants killed for one Indian soldier. The Indians, while paying tributes,
have been unfair in forgetting the never-retiring General across the border; it
was the result of his strategy in which he has abandoned the Kashmiris.
A survey poll indicated that Osama was more popular in Pakistan than
Musharraf. The reason behind this public opinion can be explained with the
help of a report by Shakeel Anjum that a most wanted human smuggler was
nabbed. But, the most notorious human-seller still ruled the country.

WESTERN FRONT
Fighting for peace in Afghanistan continued. Army killed ten
militants after firing on a convoy in North Waziristan on 9th September.
Two Levies men were kidnapped in Bajaur. Three shops were damaged in a
blast in Mingora. Taliban threatened suicide attacks on pro-Musharraf MPs.
Seven people, including 3 militant commanders, were killed in a clash
near Makeen in South Waziristan on 10 th September. Next day, at least 19
people were killed in suicide attack in D I Khan. Jirga condemned shelling
of residential area by army. Militants refused to free the abducted soldiers
until the peace accord was fully implemented.
Gunship helicopters provided by the US came into action in North
Waziristan on 12th September and in Islamabad Negroponte assured
Pakistan to respect its sovereignty. In Bannu district, militants attacked a
check post and kidnapped 15 FC men and two were injured during the raid.
Three government employees were kidnapped in Hangu.
Militants attacked a post in Makeen area of North Waziristan thrice in
a night and killed two soldiers and wounded eight more; militants claimed
killing more than 100 soldiers. The army retaliated during daylight on 13 th
September and used helicopters to kill 50 suspected militants.
Militants reacted to operation in Waziristan and struck with vengeance
on 13 September by targeting the elite troops located in high security area.
At least 20 commandos were killed and 25 wounded in a bomb blast in
th

200

dining room of the commando force located at Tarbela Dam. The presence
of CIA personnel in the targeted area was also suspected. The fighting in
Waziristan continued on 14th September during which six soldiers went
missing. Militants released 11 FC men who were kidnapped in Bannu area.
Two bombs were defused in Swat.
One FC soldier was killed when militants attacked two check posts in
North Waziristan on 15th September. Two girls were killed in a bomb blast in
Khar. In Swat, two people were hurt and 14 shops were damaged in a blast.
Tribesmen of Mohmand Agency struck a deal with the administration.
Four militants were killed and three security men were wounded in
clashes in North Waziristan on 16th September. Two more shops were
destroyed due to blast in Mingora. Jirga brokered ceasefire in South
Waziristan and hoped the captured soldiers would be released soon; militants
said the army men would be released only after pull out of troops from
South Waziristan towns.
On 17th September, at least 18 militants and 18 soldiers were killed in
clashes at Pashte Ziarat in North Waziristan. Several dead bodies of FC men
were recovered in South Waziristan as troops started pulling out. Office of
an NGO was damaged in a blast in Ghalanai.
Army abandoned two posts on 18th September and would vacate the
third in South Waziristan as militants agreed to release 100 soldiers. Dead
bodies of slain soldiers were recovered from Shawal Valley. Next day,
militants attacked a post on Mirali-Tall Road and kidnapped seven FC men.
On 20th September, a policeman was killed and four others wounded
in a blast in Swat. Osama declared war on Islamabad. Next day, militants
released 25 soldiers as a goodwill gesture; jirga hoped that the regime
would reciprocate. ANP leader, Afzal Khan was injured in an ambush in
Swat; his driver and guard were killed. Four persons were killed in a tribal
clash in Orakzai Agency.
A soldier and two women were killed in clash between security forces
and militants in Khar on 22nd September. A suicide bomber rammed his jeep
into a military truck wounding three soldiers near Tank. A policeman was
killed and two others were kidnapped in Swat.

201

On 23rd September, two militants were killed and a contractor who

supplied food to troops was beheaded in North Waziristan. Ten persons were
killed in factional fighting in Bara. Next day, two FC men were wounded in
roadside bombing in North Waziristan. JI leader, Sahibzada Haroonur
Rashid, decided to file a writ petition against President Musharraf for
killings of innocent people in Damadola and Chinagai. Taliban launched
drive against anti-Islamic activities in Landikotal area.
Four FC soldiers were wounded in rocket attack on a fort on Road
Razmak-Tall on 25th September. Talks for release of more than two hundred
soldiers failed to make headway. Two persons were killed in a grenade
attack near a police station in Hangu. Police station was attacked with
rockets in Swat. Three children were injured in landmine blast in Khar; five
tribesmen were arrested.
Two US spies were beheaded in North Waziristan on 26 th September.
One person was killed in a blast near Khar. Seven shops were destroyed in a
blast in Matta, Swat. Haroonur Rashid filed a constitutional petition
challenging the military operation in Chinagai on October 30, 2006, in
which 80 students of madrassa were killed.
Nine people were injured in a clash between militants and troops near
Miranshah on 27th September. Militants occupied Khassadar check posts in
Mohmand Agency. Six shops and a hotel were damaged in a blast in Matta,
Swat. Next day, at least four soldiers were killed and 16 wounded in
roadside bombing on Road Tank-Jandola. US drone crashed in North
Waziristan. Nine people were killed in a tribal clash in Kurram Agency.
One person was killed and 15 others including 10 security men were
wounded in violence in North Waziristan on 29th September. Son of an elder
and member of jirga negotiating peace in Waziristan was shot dead.
Militants blew up Buddha Statue in Swat.
Two soldiers were killed and 17 wounded in various attacks in North
Waziristan on 30th September. Three persons were kidnapped in Bannu. An
Afghan leader and his son were shot dead near Cherat. A woman was injured
in a blast in Hangu. Next day, at least 16 people, including 3 policemen,
were killed and 32 wounded in a suicide attack in Bannu. More than 20
security personnel went missing after militants attack on a fort.

202

Six people including three soldiers were killed in attacks/clashes in

Waziristan and Bannu area on 2nd October. Two policemen and a Levies man
were killed in attack on a post in Hangu area. Rockets were fired at FC
headquarters in Swat injuring six soldiers. The house of governors brother
was attacked. Ministry of Interior claimed bursting a network of suicide
bombers and arresting eight suspects. Police chief said RAW and Mossad
were involved in killing of three Chinese in Peshawar.
On 3rd October, 14 people were killed when a passenger coach hit a
landmine in North Waziristan. Army claimed killing ten militants in an
encounter and two soldiers were killed in an attack on a post. Ayatollah
threatened to kill the captured soldiers. Seven of the eight terrorists the
government claimed to have arrested couple of days ago, according to
spokesman of Ministry of Interior were already in the custody of police for
the last two-and-a-half months.
Followers of Maulana Fazalullah claimed capturing eight kidnappers
and recovering two kidnapped women. So, another Mulla was challenging
the writ of the State. A bomber was killed near Mingora when his bomb
exploded prematurely.
On 4th October, the dead bodies of three hostage soldiers were
recovered from area near Jandola. The militants threatened to kill hostages
on daily basis to press on their demands. A police official was killed in an
ambush near Lakki Marwat.
The militant tribesmen kidnapped 28 FC personnel on 6 th October in
North Waziristan. Meanwhile, two soldiers were killed and 26 wounded in
attacks on check posts. A tribesman was killed and five security personnel
wounded in clashes in North Waziristan on 5th October.
Having received felicitations from Washington over sweeping victory
in elections, Musharraf regime turned to the assigned task. On 7 th October,
45 tribesmen and 20 soldiers were killed in clashes in North Waziristan in
which artillery and air force jets were used. FC denied kidnapping of its 28
men. Five paramilitary soldiers escaped from the captivity of the militants. A
spy of the regime was killed in Darra Adamkhel. On the second day of fierce
fighting, at least 60 tribesmen and 25 soldiers were killed in North
Waziristan; 50 FC soldiers went missing.

203

Pressure on the mercenary was maintained by the use of carrot and

stick for doing more and more. On 12th September, former US Ambassador
to Islamabad, Crocker told a Senate committee that al-Qaeda in Pakistan was
a major challenge for the US.
Next day, Musharraf met Negroponte in Islamabad and reportedly
asked the US to shun negative approach. He, in fact, wanted regular
payments for tasks performed as mercenary. A tranche worth $30 million
was granted for improvement of mercenarys anti-terror capabilities.
Osama called for fight against the mercenary and the US promptly
pledged support to Musharraf. On 28th September, Maulana Fazlur Rehman
met US Ambassador and asked him not to take any action that could
destabilize Pakistan. He told her that peace to Afghanistan can only come
through dialogue.
A day earlier, Harvard University report alleged that Pakistans nukes
face huge threat from jihadis. On 2nd October, a US official criticized
Pakistan governments deal in tribal areas where al-Qaeda network was reemerging.
Militants attack on a commando unit located in Tarbela was a daring
military operation. The News wrote: The unit whose soldiers died is said
to have been raised in 2002 as part of Pakistans participation in the formers
(US) war on terror and was tasked to fight al-Qaeda and other terrorist
groups. Drawn from the Special Services Group of the Pakistan Army, it was
said to have been involved in carrying out raids on alleged militant
hideouts in the tribal areas, especially North and South Waziristan and other
counter-terrorism activities.
One may recall that SSG commandos were also known to have
participated in the final operation to flush out militants hiding inside
Lal Masjid this past July. Pictures in newspapers following the end of the
operation showed at least one such commando flashing V for victory sign
at the camera.
Following the operation, al-Qaedas senior leaders Ayman alZawahiri, who was thought to have close links to the Lal Masjid clerics,
issued an unusually blunt and prompt statement asking for his followers
to strike at the Pakistani armed forces or else face elimination themselves.
He mentioned specifically President Pervez Musharraf not for the first

204

time who he said was intent on eliminating al-Qaeda and hence had to be
countered. It was following this that the country became engulfed in a wave
of suicide attacks targeting military and law-enforcement personnel.
The attack in Tarbela is perhaps the first time that a suicide bomber
managed to carry out his mission inside a heavily guarded base and inside
the mess where soldiers were about to have their dinner. The attack
coincided with the visit of a senior US official to Islamabad and follows
at least two days of relentless clashes between government forces and
militants in Waziristan which have left dozens dead. It was also possibly a
warning to the Pakistani military that it could expect such things within the
walls of its own bases and installations, conveying the ominous message that
soldiers are not safe from suicide attacks even inside their own fortified
bases.
Investigators were probing a possible al-Qaeda connection. Clearly,
what also needs strict scrutiny is whether the attacker was someone working
at the facility. One hopes that counter-terrorism tactics from other countries
that have been forced to deal with similar situations, will be also considered
by the government as it goes about trying to put in place a coherent and
effective strategy to deal with this problem.
Possible links between banned groups and those serving in the
military need to be investigated and countered given the nature of
Thursdays attack and also the one that preceded it in Rawalpindi
cantonment and which killed several employees of a sensitive organization.
One also hopes that heinous and tragic as they indeed are, acts such
as this make the Americans understand just how high a price Pakistan is
willing to pay to fight extremists and terrorists on its soil and just how
counter-productive the constant crises of do more are.
Sheeba Ajmal from Peshawar opined: The killing of SSG soldiers is a
highly condemnable act. But dont we know that every action has reaction.
The director general of ISPR has stated that the army had killed almost 40
militants in Waziristan. The same evening, the soldiers were martyred.
The interior minister says we would continue with the military action in
South/North Waziristan until the 250 kidnapped soldiers are released. This
means that more of our army men will be targeted.

205

Whenever an American government official comes for a visit we

gladden him by killing our own people. Its a shame and disgrace! This is
surely not Quaids Pakistan. His dreams have been shattered by our military
rulers. The time is not far-off when Pakistan turns into Iraq, all because of
our military rulers and their lust for power.
Khurshid Ahmed observed: There is almost universal aversion to the
US policies in relation to this crusade against so-called terrorism It is
time to seriously reflect upon all that has plagued the world during
these six blood-letting years. There are number of searching questions and
fundamental issues that must be looked into
Terrorist began to be treated as combatants, and as much legitimate
targets for attack and annihilation. This was the first major violation of
international law, creating a space for committing crimes against
humanity in the name of war against terrorism. For this the US was
criticized roundly, even by some of its own generals, who said that terrorists
were not combatants but merely criminals. Secondly, terrorism remains a
vague, undefined and elusive term. There cannot be a war without a welldefined enemy as target. You cannot have war against shadows. Absence of a
clear definition has robbed the whole exercise of any legitimacy or
usefulness.
The war on terror has become an instrument for terrorizing the
world, invading sovereign countries, abducting, imprisoning and torturing
suspects and unleashing a reign of terror in different parts of the world. It is
therefore imperative to look into its conceptual, political and humanitarian
costs It must be admitted that that many of the countries that were
peaceful before the war against terrorism have now been turned into fertile
grounds for breeding new terrorists.
Besides, the massive occurrence of human rights violations, without
the world at large showing any concernis mind boggling. Thousands of
people have been arrested and detained without trial after 9/11. The
percentage of those who have been formally charged is hardly around two
percent of those detained. Those finally convicted in a court of law can be
counted on the figures. This wanton and large-scale violation of human
rights has eroded the entire fabric of the rule of law, and damaged the
fortress of constitutionalism in a number of countries, including the United
States.

206

Whatever has been achieved over the centuries in terms of

international law and consensus as to the norms of civilized conduct in
war and peace is dangerously at stake. Basic percepts of law and of
international law are being rewritten, at least in practice, in a unilateral and
arbitrary manner. The powerful are trying to bully and bulldoze others only
because the others are weak and powerless. This is what is producing an
unending army of terrorists, because terrorism is the weapon of the weak
against the strong who are not prepared to respect any rules of law and
norms of just behaviour.
Another fundamental question that must be faced squarely relates
to the serious limitations of any military strategy in fighting terrorism.
Is it possible to bring terrorism to an end by resort to military force alone?
Can this stateless and faceless enemy be chained down in that manner? Is it
not time to reflect on alternative strategies addressing the causes and factors
that breed terrorism? How long are we going to fight the branches while
ignoring the roots of the problem?
Finally, the people of Pakistan must squarely face yet another
fundamental question: Why have we been drawn into this wretched US war
of aggression and aggrandizement? The US has its own global hegemonistic
designs. Why has Pakistan become an accomplice in this war, which is
considered by Muslims as a war against Islam and Muslims? Whatever the
compulsions in 2001, in 2007 we must rethink our entire policy of
unconditional cooperation and participation in this war on terror. We
have earned the enmity of our Afghan brothers and have turned our own
tribal areas into theatres of war. The recent surrender of some three hundred
personnel of the armed forces is an index of the failure of this policy and a
message from the armed forces that in the heart of their hearts they do not
want to kill their own kith and kin simply to please America. Are we
prepared to rise to the occasion to seek liberation from the US-imposed
shackles that chain us?
M Afzal Sadiq from Attock wrote: Our troops and civilians are being
killed for no fault of theirs. We have made our country a battleground. Our
casualties in the war on terror are more than US casualties in the war in Iraq.
Pakistan is being taken for a ride, for which the cost is horrendous. The
more we oblige the US the more we are mired in Waziristan.
The governments policy of killing militants and at the same time
pressing for negotiations with them is hard to understand. The government
207

must try one option and wait for the results, rather than for instructions from
the White House on what operation to carry out. Our house is crumbling
because of policies made in the US.
The aid we get to do the tasks we do for the US is peanuts. Pakistan
can exist without such aid, and it is time we thought of tightening our belts
to live within our resources rather than extending a begging bowl to the
Americans. Whatever transpired at meetings between Pakistani and US
officials should be debated in Parliament. The public should be told of all
secret dialogues with foreign powers.

EASTERN FRONT
Apart from agreeing to exchange of persons, who cross border by
mistake, Pak-India peace process was all about actions and statements
negative measures to confidence building. Soon after the ending of the
massive joint naval exercise in Indian Ocean India tested submarinelaunched ballistic missiles on 11th September.
British and Indian troops planned to hold joint exercise in Ladakh. On
18 September, India told Pakistan to keep shut on its decision on Siachen.
Next day, Indian trekkers left for expedition in the area. Kasuri reacted by
saying that Siachen trekking could affect composite dialogue. (So what, this
dialogue is the need of Pakistan, not India.)
th

India decided to stay away from tripartite talks on IPI gas pipeline
until the issue of transit fee is settled with Pakistan. On 24 th September,
Pakistan protested the UK-India joint military exercises in Ladakh. Next it
was reported that India had deployed Israeli Surveillance system along Line
of Control.
Indo-British military maneouvres kicked of in Ladakh on 29 th
September. Nuclear-capable Agni-I missile, capable of striking deep inside
Pakistan, passed a final user trial on 5 th October. Next day, the new Indian
army Chief, Gen Deepak Kapoor ruled out troop cut in Occupied Kashmir.
Perpetration of state terrorism against Kashmiris continued.
Following acts of atrocities and retaliatory actions by freedom fighters were
reported:

208

 Three female cops were wounded in a blast on 10th September. Next

day, at least 20 people were injured when police used force to disperse
a rally protesting killing of a youth.
Four freedom fighters were martyred by the occupation forces on 14 th
September. Two days later, an Indian soldier committed suicide.
Five Kashmiri youth were martyred on 18th September. Three days
later, a JCO and a civilian were killed in separate incidents.
EU team met Yasin Malik on 23rd September. Next day, Indian troops
killed a key commander, Abu Haider Ali.
On 26th September, 11 fighters and a policeman were killed in fighting
in various incidents in Poonch, Kipwara, Kulgam and Doda districts.
Next day, five Kashmiris were killed.
On 29th September, Mirwaiz asked US and UK to send their observers
to IHK. Next day, Indian troops raided a mosque and killed two
Kashmiris. At least 69 Kashmiris were martyred in September.
Two Indian army majors were killed in IHK on 3 rd October. Two days
later, police claimed killing a militant leader.
Ten freedom fighters and three Indian soldiers were killed in a clash
on 6th October.
M Ismail Khan expressed his views on Siachen trekking. There are
two major developments taking place across the Siachen, the other being
the United Kingdom and India military high altitude war game in Ladakh.
The unilateral and ill-timed decision to open Siachen for mass tourism
clearly goes against the spirit of the peace building and dialogue process. It
can actually cast a shadow over the bilateral dtente, which has seen a fair
degree of improvement and consistency during the last few years.
When it comes to Siachen, it seems as if it is the Indian Army and
not the political leadership in Delhi that calls the shots here again, it is
Indian Army Chief General J J Singh, who has come forward to defend
Indias position with regard to allowing trekking activities on the glacier,
while Indias political leadership and bureaucracy are playing cool.

209

Siachen is part of Baltistan, which is a major constituent of the

federally administered Northern Areas of Pakistan. Before 1947, Ladakh
Wizarat was comprised of two districts, namely Baltistan and Ladakh. The
wizarat had two capitals, Skardu and Leh, wherein the seat of the
government moved alternately in winters and summers. The entire Siachen
area and the Kargil valleys were part of Baltistan district. All trekking
expeditions to Siachen would commence from Skardu till the early 80s.
The provisional boundary agreement between Pakistan and China,
which demarcates the boundary between the Xingjian province of China and
the Northern Areas, also points to the tri-junction with Afghanistan on the
west and the Karakoram Pass on the east. At that time India protested saying
that the portion west of Karakoram Pass was under Pakistans unlawful
occupation, thus implying that the part was actually under Pakistans
control.
It was only after 1982 that India started sending exploratory
expedition from its high altitude warfare school to the area, which
culminated in the moving of troops to the area in 1984, another unilateral
action to which Pakistan responded kindly. Since then, Siachens treacherous
sub zero climate has sucked in billion of rupees in military expenditures of
both the impoverish countries and has counted for scores of lives, more due
to frost bite and high altitude sickness than combat action.
There were times when both the countries were actually keen
about negotiating terms of disengagement from the glacier. In 1989,
former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and Rajiv Gandhi arrived on an
agreement for redeployment of troops from Siachen but the agreement was
not implemented. India has since been insisting on an authentication of
actual ground position but the two sides have so far failed to evolve
consensus methodology and a system to do so.
Instead of rushing in trekking expeditions to legitimize occupation,
that too in off-season, the two countries should take their dialogue process
forward for total disengagement from the glacier. This would eventually
pave the way for developing an appropriate conservation and management
mechanism to turn the Siachen glacier area into a cross boundary peace
park.
Shireen M Mazari criticized UK-India wargame in Ladakh and
Siachen trekking. Although our Foreign Office has finally protested the
210

issue: why did we make our protease vis--vis the Ladakh exercises after
they had already been initiated, on September 17? Did we not know of
these exercises in advance, given that such a scale of military exercises in
advance, given that such a scale of military exercises can hardly have been
kept under wraps? Could we not have launched a diplomatic offensive to
prevent this from happening, given the internationally recognized disputed
nature of Kashmir? We are told that Pakistan made a demarche, both with
Britain and India last week, but why was it done so quietly? Why are we so
reluctant to expose British and India wrongdoings against us before our
nation?
What is absolutely unacceptable is for Britain to be party to this
Indian contravention of the UN resolutions, given that they are parties to
these resolutions not to mention their role in the origins of the dispute
itself. What is the British intent in deliberately abusing Pakistan in this
fashion? It is indeed ironic that both Britain and the US lambaste countries
like Iran for alleged violations of international commitments while they
themselves break their own international legal commitments as and when it
suits them.
We have had India declare it is beginning tourist trekking in Siachen
and have not been able to use international pressure to prevent it from
increasing its illegal activities in this region as well as in Occupied Kashmir.
A French trekking team already went on trek with the Indians on July 30 this
year, and two expeditions were already in Siachen when Pakistan protested
earlier this month. No wonder an Indian Army officialmerely shrugged off
the Pakistani protest. In the face of a defiant India and a Britain unconcerned
about giving legitimacy to Indian occupation of Kashmir through the joint
exercises, we are strangely subdued and unable to go beyond the mere
formalities of protest.
In fact, there is clearly a growing malaise creeping in into our
external relations, with many subscribing to the view that there is no point
in doing anything on certain fronts because we cannot effect change. For
instance, we have accepted the India-US nuclear dealeven though there is
enormous opposition to this internationally.
Our internal machinations are reducing us to on the international
arena. States like India are brazenly defying international resolutions relating
to Kashmir as well as their bilateral commitment under the Simla Agreement
and European states like Britain and France are only too willing to give
211

support to Indias defiance. Not only are the Brits holding joint exercises
in Occupied Kashmir, they are planning to hold joint exercises with India in
Siachen also if press reports are correct. Pakistani protests hold little value;
it would seem, for these countries even as we continue to put up with their
interventions in our domestic affairs.
The News commented on the latest truck diplomacy. First there was
a train, then came the bus, and now it seems there will be trucks one is of
course talking in the context of resumption of links between India and
Pakistan clearly, this is a confidence-building measure, not least because
this kind of link has never been in place before. For the hawks of this
country, it will be seen a sort of a let-down, especially when looked at with
respect to recent developments on Siachen where India has allowed apparent
tourists to trek in the area. To add insult to injury, when news of this
became public, the Indian army chief was quoted as saying in public that
there was nothing to make fuss about given that the trekking was going to be
carried out within Indias borders.
While New Delhi seems to be keen to push this new link as part of
CBMs taken by it to facilitate the ongoing peace process, Islamabad would
do well to ask itself what really is the status of the dialogue. For instance,
when will other more important CBMs, such as troops withdrawal on
Siachen, resolution of Sir Creek or even the relatively more straightforward
re-establishment of consulates in Karachi and Mumbai materialize?
As for Kashmir, things seem relatively quiet. India seems to be
blowing hot and cold on it, for reasons that may have to do with its domestic
politics. Sometimes it says that violence and infiltration of terrorist is on the
rise, while other times a minister or a general says that it is on the decline.
Last week its outgoing army chief said that the situation was such that a real
change could take place in the region. While one is not sure what exactly he
meant by this, this was the first time that he said something positive And
one is also now hearing of senior Pakistani journalists, who have attended
international conferences with prominent Indians also invited, of a deal
already struck between the two countries but not announced because of
the domestic situation in Pakistan.

HOME FRONT

212

Insurgency in Baluchistan kept simmering. Following incidents were

reported during the period:
Two soldiers were killed in an attack near Sibi on 17 th September. Two
days later, blast in Pasni damaged school building.
Bomb exploded in Quetta on 23rd September. Three days later, SP
Sheryab Ali and his two guards were shot dead in Quetta.
On 29th September, inmates of Central jail in Mach clashed with jail
administration and held 20 wardens as hostage.
Police arrested four BSO activists in Panjgur on 1 st October. An
electric pylon was destroyed in Hub area. Next day, a grenade was
lobbed into Bugti House in Quetta.
Two Bugti tribesmen were killed in a clash with police on 3 rd October
in Jaffarabad district. Two days later, a militant was killed in a clash in
Kohlu district.
Gas pipeline was blown up in Loti gas field on 6th October. Two days
later, a bomb exploded in a market in Kalat.
Ideological battle between obscurantist and enlightened moderates
continued. On 13th September, some Ulema demonstrated and demanded reopening of Lal Masjid. An ex-student of Lal Masjid madrassa was denied
admission in a government school in Ghazi. This was in the spirit of the
regimes rhetoric that it would bear all expenses of education of such
students in prime institutions of the country.
On 14th September, a Judicial Magistrate transferred the cases of
Maulana Abdul Aziz to Anti-Terror Court. People said Juma prayer outside
the Lal Masjid and protested delay in re-opening of the mosque. Next day,
one of the most revered religious scholars, Maulana Hassan Jan was shot
dead in suburbs of Peshawar. An attempt to choke the voice of the just,
observed Mubarik A Virk. The deceased Maulana was No 2 in Wafaqul
Madaris.
Chief Minister Durrani and Sherpao were stoned by mourners on 16 th
September when they arrived to attend Namaz-e-Janaza of Maulana Hassan

213

Jan while shouting, rulers are killers. Mulla Omar paid tributes to Maulana
Hassan Jan; did this indicate the reason of this targeted killing.
The in charge of Jamia Fareedia was arrested as he visited the
madrassa on 18th September. Next day, the regime through Brigadier
Cheema used the killing of Maulana Hassan Jan to demonize the militants
saying that he paid the price for declaring suicide bombing un-Islamic.
On 21st September, hundreds of people said Juma prayer outside Lal
Masjid, as the regime maintained control over the House of Allah. Students
and followers of Hassan Jan rejected regimes theory according to which the
Maulana was killed because of his decree against suicide bombing.
The same day, Altaf Hussains wife announced separation because of
the inhuman and obnoxious behaviour the MQM chief. On 24th September,
Police suspected Indian hand in murder of Maulana Hassan Jan; contrary to
Brig Cheemas findings that Jihadis were involved.
On 3rd October, the day Lal Masjid was re-opened under the orders of
the Supreme Court; Musharraf vowed that the writ of the state over the
House of Allah wont be allowed to be compromised. The residents of the
locality formed a management committee and appointed a temporary Imam
till the return of Maulana Aziz. The committee also decided to repaint the
mosque red. Meanwhile, Maulana Abdul Azizs bail plea was deferred. Two
days later, Nasir Mehmood, a suspect in Aabpara suicide bombing, died in
Faisalabad jail; police said he committed suicide.
The News commented on the survey poll on Osamas popularity.
That Osama is more popular than President Musharraf may come as no
surprise in these turbulent times. In fact, if anything, one would have
expected the difference to have been far greater than the eight percentagepoint advantage that the al-Qaeda leader polled. But how should one
interpret these results? The president is clearly not as popular as he once was
this is something that he himself has admitted of late.
This may be tragically flawed view of reality but nonetheless it has
credence for those who hold it and unfortunately the conduct of American
policy, particularly its double standards in dealing with the Palestine
question, Iraq and other issues of concern to the Muslim World only
reinforce this perception. Osama bin Laden fits in well with this and his
higher favourable rating compared to President Musharraf can be

214

explained by his perception among many Pakistanis as someone who

actually stood up to Washington.
The News also wrote an editorial on MQM terrorists killing-spree in
Karachi. No suspects have been mentioned so far by the police which have
said that it is too early to say anything yet. However, the four students who
died have been claimed by the student wing of a religious party as its
activists and it has also accused its arch-rival, the student wing of a
Karachi-based political party as its activists of being behind the attack.
Given the current tense atmosphere and prevailing polarization in the
country, especially between the government and its allied parties on one side
and the opposition on the other, it is important that the MQM and the
Jamaat-e-Islami impress upon their respective student wings to calm
down and not resort to using violence. However, looking at the past record
of student violence in the city, this may be expecting too much. Also, those
who have been at the receiving end in Thursdays minibus ambush will not
too much faith in the police investigation given that the party whose student
wing has been accused of carrying out the attack is part of the provincial
government and in fact its nominee controls the police.
The Dawn wrote on the reopening of Lal Masjid. The
administration must take extra precautions and prove that it has learnt
from past mistakes. It must monitor the mosques activities to ensure no
unwanted incident takes place again. It should have realized by now that
choosing to turn blind eye all the while the Lal Masjid clerics were stocking
up on arms and ammunition or policing the streets of the capital was the
wrong approach.
A committee has been formed to run the affairs of the mosquethis
committee must work to ensure that the mosque is run in accordance
with the law. The same is true for the Jamia Hafsa madressah which has
also been ordered to be rebuilt by next year. It is hoped that the Capital
Development Authority will rebuild the original structure on the plot granted
to Lal Masjid, and not on any land that the mosques administration had
encroached upon over the years.

CONCLUSION

215

The escalation of the fighting in Waziristan has something to do with

the appointment of General Kiani as the VCOAS and as the army chief after
Musharraf removes his second skin. This move has been welcomed by the
US for reasons too obvious; they have found a fresh mercenary in Kiani.
He seemed to have started with earnest desire to prove that the choice
made is absolutely correct. This does not augur well for Pakistanis longing
for the end to bloodletting. The situation will keep deteriorating unless
measures other that the military option are adopted. New mercenary has bear
in that mind that incidents like Tarbela cannot take place without strong case
of dissent within the elite force.
The Foreign Office of Pakistan summoned Indian High
Commissioner, reportedly to show deep concern over opening the Siachen
Glacier to trekking expeditions. But, who knows that Kasuri might have
handed over quietly an application seeking trekking-visa.
9th October 2007

HELMET vs WIG
AFTERSHOCKS - VII
On the day of scrutiny of the nomination papers the Constitution
Avenue turned into battleground; IG Police led the charge against protesting
lawyers. Ali Ahmed Kurd, Aitzaz Ahsan, Zamurad Khan, Tariq Azeem and
Farooq Sattar were among the injured during the day. All this happened

216

when Prime Minister, chief minister, interior minister and others were sitting
inside the Election Commission building.
The Chief Justice took suo moto of police violence and summoned
Islamabad administration. IGP, SSP and DC Islamabad were suspended on
the insistence of the apex court. The court also issued contempt of court
notices; administration apologized for disregarding the court orders.
APDM made the much talked about move when 85 members of
National Assembly and 78 members of provincial assemblies less NWFP
resigned in protest against presidential election. A few days later, APDM
members less JUI-F resigned from NWFP Assembly as well.
Musharraf made his moves by appointing new VCOAS and more
importantly stepped up finalization of the deal with Benazir. The deal, in
the form of National Reconciliation Ordinance, was formally approved by
the ruling party less than 24 hours before presidential election.
Musharraf won the election as PPP stayed away from the polling as
per understanding. Supporters of the regime celebrated the victory across
the country. However, the lawyers candidate also secured grounds to have
another legal bout with Musharraf.

EVENTS
On 29th September, Constitution Avenue turned into battleground; IG
Police, Marwat, led the charge against lawyers. Security forces did far more
than for which the IG had apologized to the CJP. The battle raged for hours
during which media men also became the target of gallant security men of a
regime backed by the Crusaders. Scores of people, including Ali Ahmed
Kurd, Aitzaz Ahsan, and Zamurad Khan were hurt and for a change Tariq
Azeem and Farooq Sattar were also caught in the run of the battle.
All this happened when Prime Minister, chief minister, interior
minister and others were sitting inside the Election Commission building
and were repeatedly requested to stop the atrocities being committed outside
only a few yards away. The only thing they did was blacking out the TV
channels which were airing the battle scenes live. Resultantly, the teams of
Wajihuddin Ahmad and Amin Fahim boycotted the process of scrutiny of

217

nomination papers. The Election Commissioner cleared the papers of

Musharraf.
After the battle, the Prime Minister visited hospital to inquire about
the health of the wounded men of the regime and obviously he had no
concern for the wounded enemy; lawyers and media men. Opposition
leaders slated the violence perpetrated by security personnel.
In reaction to the Islamabad battle skirmishes also took place in
Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar. Qazi and Media men announced observance
of black day on 30th September. Media men boycotted Sherpaos iftar-dinner.
The teams of Amin Fahim and Wajihuddin Ahmad contemplated going to
the courts separately to contest the issue of Musharrafs candidacy.
PML-Q held celebration rallies in Peshawar and Quetta. Dr Saira
Tariq of PML-Q became the first to respond to the call of the conscience and
resigned from National Assembly in protest against Musharraf contesting in
uniform. Reportedly, Saudis told the regime in Islamabad that it has nothing
to do with Nawaz Sharif after Eidul Fitr.
Civil judge, Ijaz Ahmad, resigned to protest Supreme Court judgment.
Baghwandas said his judgment in favour of the petition was according to his
conscience and he considered 17th Amendment against the spirit of the
Constitution.
Next day, the CJP took suo moto of police violence and summoned
Islamabad administration. PML-Q decided to move the court against
dissolution of the provincial assembly in addition to no-confidence move
against CM NWFP. Wajihuddin questioned the Supreme Court verdict.
Journalists and opposition parties held country-wide protests on 30th
September against state repression. Minister Durrani promised to address
grievances of journalists. Journalists rejected the probe body formed by IGP
Islamabad. Ansar Abbasi hinted at secret meetings of some with
government representatives to undermine media freedom. The government
machinery moved fast over beating of Farooq Sattar and arrested many
lawyers. Farooq Sattar accused Munir, Kurd and Aitzaz of attacking him.
PPP MPs handed over their resignations to Amin Fahim, as BB
fighting the battle for democracy from the soil of America said time was

218

running out for the deal with Musharraf. She, with the backing of the US,
also demanded security for herself at state expense after her return.
Ansar Abbasi reported: A key member of the presidential camp when
told that he must have been extremely happy with what the Supreme Court
had decided on Friday, said that he was not very happy. Explaining the
reason, he said, he was not very happy because as a nation we are going
astray.
He admitted that the line between right and wrong has gone haywire.
There is too much hatred across the board in various segments of the society
and nobody is willing to apply balm, the source of the presidential camp
admitted.
Rauf Klasra reported the views published by British media. It is
being claimed in the foreign media that the judgment of the Supreme Court
in favour of General Musharraf was extracted at gun point by the military
regime. The foreign media, like many in Pakistan, too has observed that the
decision dealt a blow to hopes of driving the military from politics.
The British media which has been taking keen interest in the affairs
of Pakistan, particularly since the sacking of chief justice on March 9,
published depressing stories and comments on the situation arising out of
court decision to allow Musharraf to contest the election in uniform.
It had great hopes in the ability of the revived judiciary to deliver but
the decision to allow Musharraf to contest election has come as a shock as it
thinks that it would be a big blow to the efforts of the opposition parties to
help the country regain full democracy.
On 1st October, IGP, SSP and DC Islamabad were suspended on the
insistence of the apex court. The court also issued contempt of court notices.
Administration apologized for its repeated disregard for the court orders. It
was second request for pardon from administration in four days.
Hospital staff lied before the court about the nature of injuries suffered
by the victims of police brutality. When the injured were brought to the
court, the court admonished the medics and asked for production of their
medical record. The court was informed that the record had been taken away
by unknown officials of the regime. MS was asked as to why he had not
registered an FIR about the medical record taken away by force.

219

Lawyers observed Black Day and held country-wide protest rallies.

Advocate General of Sindh felt the burden of governments illegal actions on
his conscience and resigned. Six lawyers of Rawalpindi were released on
bail. Lawyers and politicians showed solidarity with journalists. Aitzaz
Ahsan filed his nomination papers to contest elections of President SBPA.
Opposition in NWFP moved no-trust motion against the CM to preempt dissolution of assembly. Foreign Office admitted that use of brute force
against unarmed lawyers and journalists has sent a bad message abroad. BB
said she would allow America to strike inside Pakistan. Ansar Abbasi
reported that legal experts of the regime and PPP were drafting legislation to
allow BB to be prime minister for the third time.
Next day, APDM made the much talked about move when 85
members of National Assembly and 78 members of Punjab, Sindh and
Baluchistan assemblies resigned in protest against presidential election.
Resignations in NWFP were held back to defeat no-confidence move
initiated by PML-Q. Two MPs in Baluchistan backed out on resignations and
one was convinced not to resign by Sindh CM. Imran said the resignations
were too late.
Musharraf made his moves by appointing new VCOAS and more
importantly stepped up finalization of the deal with Benazir. The cabinet
approved withdrawal of cases against Benazir, Zardari and her confidants
under the cover of Reconciliation Ordinance. Meanwhile, Interpol tried to
embarrass the un-embarrassable regime by seeking clarification on the
status of Benazir. PML-Q chalked out celebration plan for Musharrafs
victory and MQM terrorists tried to crush a senior journalist under a car in
Karachi.
In Washington, Foreign Secretary of Pakistan met Negroponte and
apprised him the presidential election and the deal with Benazir. Rice said
that Benazir has a role in future political set-up in Pakistan. The State
Department said the US interests were at stake in Pakistans presidential and
general elections.
Musharrafs rival candidates filed constitutional petitions against
validity of the election and candidacy of the General. The Supreme Court
constituted nine-member bench to hear the petitions. The Supreme Court
restored the Lal Masjid to the custody of its former management. The court

220

ordered opening of Lal Masjid from 3 rd October and registration of case

about the killing of innocent people in Operation Silence.
Four more FIRs regarding missing persons during Operation Silence
were registered on the orders of the Supreme Court; a desecration case
against Administrator Islamabad was also registered on the basis of holy
books found in the Jamia Hafsa debris.
On 3rd October, the regime succeeded in delaying the dissolution of
NWFP Assembly till after the presidential elections by tabling a noconfidence motion. Fazl said the assembly would be dissolved on 8 th
October.
Hectic efforts were made to finalize the deal between the regime and
Benazir, but failed to make headway because of the opposition from within
Kings party. Benazir threatened the resignations but its lawmakers remained
divided on the issue.
The much criticized deal to serve the interests of a power hungry
civil-military couple was labeled as National Reconciliation Plan to be
promulgated through an ordinance. Imran Khan decried the withdrawal of
corruption cases against Benazir.
Justice Sardar Raza Khan opted out of the nine-member bench giving
reason that he had already given his view that Musharraf was disqualified to
contest election. The other two judges who had given similar views, Justice
Bhagwandas and Justice Shakiruulh, were already excluded.
The CJP reconstituted the bench by raising the number to ten.
Wajihuddin had urged the CJP to form a full court. Meanwhile, one of the
judges on the bench which had dismissed Qazis petition on technical
grounds, Justice Falak Sher, in his remarks noted that Musharraf was not
qualified to contest presidential election.
The deal was finally done on 4th October, not for Pakistan First but for
the unity of moderates, in the words of Musharraf. This alliance of
moderates was to fight against extremists. In other words, the moderates
would act as vanguards of the Crusaders in their war against Islamic fascists.
The deal, code named as Reconciliation Ordinance was to be formally
approved by the ruling party on 5 th October. The issues of 58-2(B) and third
time premiership would be addressed later. The PPP agreed not to resign
221

from assemblies and the petitions filed in the courts against candidature of
Musharraf would be withdrawn.
APDM increased pressure on Fazl to quit NWFP Assembly. Maulana
Ghafoor Haidri of JUI criticized Qazi Hussain and told him not to try to
become Gorbachev. Election Commission was told to complete voters list
by 25th October. Punjab police started fresh raids on PML-N leaders and
activists.
Justice Javed Iqbal, who headed the bench, said that the five judges on
the bench who had set aside Qazis petition had done it on technical grounds,
and not the merit of the case. He added that the court would not take into
consideration the repercussions if it found that staying the poll process was a
legal and constitutional requirement.
Next day, APDM members, less JUI-F, resigned from NWFP
Assembly. The decision damaged the solidarity of newly found APDM and
MMA. It also exposed the position where Fazl stood in this row. Mushahid
denied any US pressure in the context of the deal and said the talks with PPP
were led by Shujaat.
The larger bench did not stay the presidential election; thereby
rejected the first prayer of the petitioner. However, the court ordered holding
back the election result till legal aspects were sorted out. The CJP while
hearing the missing persons case said he would summon heads of prime
intelligence agencies if the missing persons were not released.
Musharraf steals the show, read the headline of The Dawn a day
after the presidential election. He bagged all the valid votes cast, except
eight. The minister involved in a murder case was also brought from jail to
for casting vote for the Dadagir. After the victory, he called for political
harmony and advised lawyers to shun agitation.
Supporters of the regime celebrated the victory across the country by
dancing, distributing sweets and fireworks. In Karachi, 15 celebrators were
burnt. Altaf congratulated the winner and praised the ordinance. The
sponsor, the US, felicitated the winner for his excellent performance.
However, for some reason a US paper termed it an ugly victory.
The PPP stayed away from the polling as per agreement struck before
the reconciliation deal. It was a day of utter embarrassment for the

222

opposition parties. People literally ignored APDMs call for strike. Lawyers,
however, boycotted the courts. In Peshawar, they clashed with police during
which legs of the President of PHC Bar were broken. The court took suo
moto notice of the incident. Six activists of ANP were arrested. The Supreme
Court and the Lahore High Court were requested to adjudicate the legality of
the National Reconciliation Ordinance.
On 7th October, the mumbler said: raat gai baat gai. While answering
a question about the NRO, he said they played siasat with us and we also
played siasat of the ordinance and we won. PML-Q decided to withdraw notrust motion against NWFP chief minister.
Next day, founder member of the PPP, Dr Mubashar Hasan,
challenged the legality of the NRO in the Supreme Court. SHC issued a
show-cause notice to Chief Minister for contempt of court over his remarks
on wall-chalking against the chief justice. The CM had said that banners
and chalking against the Sindh High Court Chief Justice were a matter of
public opinion.
Fazl saw no future for APDM, but wanted the MMA to remain intact.
CM Durrani sent assemblys dissolution advice to the Governor and the
Speaker resigned. Ex-Senator, Qazi Muhammad Anwar resigned from PPP
over NRO. Qadir Magsi said the NRO would mainly benefit MQM.
Washington remained concerned over the security of Benazir. UK urged
MQM not to hinder the Return of She. Israeli President greeted Musharraf
on his re-election.

VIEWS
The decision of the superior judiciary dated 28th September was
widely commented upon. In Pakistan the parties do not accept court
decisions or election results that are not to their liking, opined Gulsher
Panhwer from Dadu.
He urged: Now when the judiciary has gained its independence due
to the brave and just struggle by the bar and the bench and the SC has
already delivered some rulings against the government, which were hailed

223

by the opposition parties, it is the moral duty of all the stakeholders to

accept the decision with magnanimity.
Khaild Quraishi from Karachi wrote: The Supreme Court has given a
historic judgment. As expected, the lawyers, as this judgment is not to their
liking, have termed it unacceptable. They have on the one hand criticized the
bench showing lack of confidence and, on the other have announced that
they will file a review application. One can see both sides of the same coin
all I can say is that its a case of sour grapes.
People like Nusrat Bokhari from Rawalpindi, who were carried away
by judges remarks during the hearing of the case, were definitely
disappointed. He had observed: The judges of the Supreme Court have
made some pertinent remarks while hearing the petitions of Qazi Hussain
Ahmad and Imran Khan. These include remarks on important issues like the
law of necessity and the 17th Amendment to the Constitution The judges
remarks on the law of necessity were like a breath of fresh air. It is the
spirit of the 1973 Constitution that has suffered most. So much so that as a
result of the mutilating changes made in after 1999 have virtually left it
more presidential than parliamentary.
If elected president, Pervez Musharraf would doff his uniform but
stay on as chief of the army staff until another man is appointed to the post
by the incumbent president. In view of Gen Musharrafs takeover of Oct 12,
what is to prevent him from taking the same action if the incumbent
president tries to appoint someone in his place? After the Nawaz Sharif
episode of Sept 10, no one in his right mind would expect Gen
Musharraf to abide by any ruling of the Supreme Court if it does not suit
him.
M Shaikh from Islamabad opined: In essence the Supreme Court
has refrained from solving the political crisis of Pakistan by simply
throwing back the petitions stating them as non-maintainable. This is
unfortunate as it will either simply result in the boycott of elections by
political forces across the political horizon and prolongation of the political
crisis which is now damaging the economy. The result of the decision is that
one civil servant Dr Anwarul Haq of the Pakistan Institute of Medical
Sciences, is barred from standing for president and another grade 22 officer,
Mr Musharraf, is allowed to contest. This is not the first time Supreme Court
has given a mind-boggling decision, but this one has shocked even the
lawyers community itself.
224

Agha Yasir from Islamabad said: The decision of the Supreme Court
comes as no surprise. The president could have shown real compassion and
dignity by stepping down personally. But he must be congratulated now on
his victory. He has won and the nation has lost.
The Dawn wrote on courts decision on Wajihuddins petition in
which presidential polls were not stayed. The governments euphoria over
the Supreme Courts refusal to stay the presidential election has been
dampened by the accompanying caveat that the results of the polling will
not be notified till the apex court makes its decision known on the merit of
the case. That only postpones the outcome of the current bout of politicojudicial battles.
The opposition must have felt disappointed, though a flicker of
hope must still be there, since the apex court is still to give its opinion on
what after all is the issue whether a general can contest the presidential
election. Profound and arcane they may be, the implications of the
Seventeenth Amendment have served President Musharraf eminently well.
As for the deal, even a cursory reading of the national
reconciliation ordinance will show the militarys realization that it
cannot call for a systempolitically legitimate and acceptable to the world
as a partner in the war on terror it must have a popular mandate reflecting
the plurality of Pakistans political and ethnic reality.
Battered and bruised no less than the government, the opposition
must redefine its aim. Getting President Musharraf out of uniform or even
out of power is too small an aim; his exit may make the opposition smell the
sweet scent of victory, but that will hardly guarantee a bright and democratic
future for the nation. What the opposition must do is to try on its own to
develop a national consensus whose aim should be a forward move
towards a genuine civilization of the polity. The nation has suffered too
much because of confrontations whose outcome invariably led to regression
and to unbridled dictatorship.
September 29 was termed as a day of shame because of the brute
use of force against protesting lawyers and media men covering the event.
Nasim Zehra wrote: The legal home-run handed down to General Pervez
Musharraf was never going to translate into immediate political gain. But
that the government by its own blunders would in fact opt to aggravate its

225

existing political problems, is a feat that the Musharraf government seems to

have become adept at.
If September 28 brought some respite for the Musharraf camp,
September 29 should have been a day of serious remorse and reflection. The
dominant reality of the day was intermittently the unfettered application of
brutal force by the police on protesting lawyers and on the reporting
journalists By the end of the day the government had two active fronts
to fight one with the lawyers and the second with the journalists.
The journalists reporting the attacking police and the battling lawyers
were also mindlessly and viciously targeted by the police. Naturally state
functionaries will also seek to block the relaying of the ugly truth to the
public. The police on the rampage attacking anything that moved
towards the Supreme Court (Election Commission) left at least half a dozen
journalists from the print and electronic media, bleeding and injured.
The police diligently obeyed the orders they had got to prevent
the lawyers from getting to the Election Commission building. While the
lawyers protested and chanted Go Musharraf Go, the prime minister and
almost the entire cabinet was present in the EC building where the Election
Commission scrutinized the nomination papers of General Musharraf and
the other candidates.
If this is a taste of things to come, the week-long political journey to
the presidential elections promises to be turbulent for General Musharraf, his
men and above all for Pakistan. The fall-out of this turbulence will be
deeper political polarization making General Musharrafs candidacy
increasingly more controversial.
The government is principally responsible for promoting such
intolerance. Yet its negative fall-out extends beyond the government the
current message from most of the contestants in public space is if you are
not with us completely you are against us. Then it dangerously no holds
barred on any front.
Khalid Mustafa from Islamabad observed: To block the roads leading
to Islamabad was against the spirit of democracy. The action has raised the
level of anti-government sentiments. People suffered a lot due to this act,
which was against the fundamental rights defined in the Constitution and
therefore needs to be condemned. The authorities could have reduced the

226

peoples inconvenience, by announcing a public holiday to the twin cities,

but who cares for the public? The leadership is busy in the power game and
looks unconcerned about the welfare of the general public.
The News wrote: The ugly scenes shown of policemen dressed in riot
gear mercilessly beating unarmed lawyers and broadcast all over national
television channels on the Saturday afternoon are a matter of
unadulterated shame for the government the brutal use of state force
was not much different than what has been seen in another Asian country;
Myanmar
What happened was that as usual, the law-enforcement authorities
over-reacted and came down heavily on the lawyers (the media was to
follow next). According to several TV channels, they also then used
overwhelming force against many of the journalists present outside the EC
building who were there to carry out their professional duties as required by
their respective organizations. One scene is particular; broadcast on several
TV channels, showed a seemingly worried information minister standing
inside the foyer of what must have been the Election Commission building
looking at something. This was juxtaposed with scenes showing several
visibly distraught journalists trying desperately to splash water on their faces
and eyes. Clearly, they had come under tear gas attack and were trying to
recover from it.
The scenes witnessed on Saturday would make most people unless
one happens to be a diehard PML-Q supporter think we were living in
some kind of police state. Unfortunately, some brutal tactics to quash any
protest or opposition have been used before as well. Instead of realizing that
it is being unnecessarily overbearing and that such a strong show of violent
force does its own image domestic as well as overseas no good, the
government refuses to learn from its mistakes.
Here, two questions may be asked: one, will this be done each time
anti-government protests are held? And two, does the government not know
or understand that actions such as these will tend to expose its own
weaknesses and further lower its credibility in the eyes of ordinary
Pakistanis? Saturdays aggression and needless crackdown is likely to add
greater momentum to the lawyers movement against the presidents reelection in particular and military rule in general. The main premise by the
government for such tactics usually is that it needs to preserve law and
order Here, however, it seems the objective is not to preserve law and
227

order but to target those individuals and groups whom the government feels
are threatening its interests.
Ayesha Tammy Haq opined: There must be something in the air in
Pakistan. From March 9 of this year it has witnessed some extremely
curious scenes. The way the police reacted to the initial protests against the
removal of the Chief Justice of Pakistan was replayed on Saturday. Lawyers
and journalists were pelted with rocks and beaten up, the Supreme Court was
shelled, and senior leaders of the bar were targeted and attacked by the
overly efficient police.
Sadly, the message sent out by the government on Saturday is being
echoed in Karachi where lawyers are continuing to be arrested, intimidated
and beaten up by a government that takes instructions well and executes
orders with cruel efficiency. So far the resistance continues to come from
the Bar. The lawyers have said that if the latest Supreme Court ruling on the
holding of dual offices was a battle lost in this war against dictatorship, then
Saturdays protest exposed the government and was a battle won. Pakistans
black coats are coming back out to continue to do battle with a military-led
government.
The lawyers have made a call for the political parties to join them
but their participation was negligible. It makes one wonder why. In any
event, symbolism means that there was a symbol. On Saturday, while the
token politician may have made a token appearance, the complete absence of
any symbolism in that token appearance is telling. It shows a complete lack
of leadership and direction. This vacuum was shown up during the
movement to restore the chief justice where it was the lawyers, with
ideologically strong leadership at the Bar, who led the movement.
Once again, we are looking at a defining moment in Pakistans
history. The protests against the government are being spearheaded by
professional organizations and civil-society groups. But do not be fooled that
there is a leadership vacuum here. The lawyers have shown they are
politically astute body capable of doing much, and as they are joined by the
journalists, doctors, teachers, women activists, human rights bodies it is
more than the usual suspects coming out It looks like the General has
opened up a new front, and that is civil society.
Sassu Palijo, MPA from Thatta wrote: Do Gen Musharraf and his
followers believe they can suppress politicians, lawyers and journalists just
228

with stick and stones? No, never. The sacrifices made by the lawyers and
journalists will be embedded in the nations hearts and minds forever.
September 29 seems like a harbinger of a mighty storm. Those who have
sown the wind, they will reap the whirlwind.
Ayesha Siddiqa was of the view that September 29 has been marked
as another dark day in Pakistans history Apparently, the khakis are
extremely unhappy with the Chief Justices team of lawyers and are
determined to sort these people out for challenging the army chief and
making comments denigrating the uniform To those who believe that
General Musharraf is an extraordinary man who can rise above the cyclic
behaviour, one would like to pose this question: who gave orders for the
brutality that was on display on May 12 and Sept 29?
Logically, (if we forget for a minute that this is not another military
regime) the government should not have shown aggression soon after the
Supreme Court judgment even if it wanted to send a message to the
general public that any difference of opinion and act of disobedience would
not be tolerated.. Although pressure from several sides was mounting,
Musharraf has won a round of the political battle when the Supreme Court
rejected the petitions challenging his eligibility for the presidential race.
Was it Musharraf himself who ordered the police to use the tactics of
street urchins? Perhaps not; he is certainly not choreographing the entire
show of his regime. In fact, possibly the problem exists that he is not in
total control of all parts of his government including the armed forces.
Some might consider this an extreme conclusion and would argue
that he is very much in control. In this case, it is nothing more than poor
intelligence which the agencies are quite capable of. Historically, the
intelligence agencies have never been up to the mark in informing a
regime intelligently.
Why is no one checking such failures or is it really a question of
how much General Musharraf is in control of the situation? A political crisis
is a good way for the organization to get rid of an individual when he refuses
to give up. Surely, people around the top general know how greater coercion
is counter-productive. More aggression will create the opposite result of
what the regime would like to see.

229

It is vital for the people to understand where power resides in

Pakistan today. Is the general-president, who claims to be fighting
extremism, completely in charge or are there forces and ideas that we do not
know anything about? Transparency is essential for restoring the
common mans confidence in his country.
From across the border, Kuldip Nayar wrote: The police and the
soldiers beat some 200 lawyers and journalists, coming like waves in a
battlefield. What I saw on Pakistan television screens, before they were
switched off, was no beating That the Supreme Court ordered a suo motu
inquiry into the beating in Islamabad is a commendable step.
I am not surprised at the brutalities. When governments run amok,
they use every method, illegal and repressive, to suppress opponents and
critics. The idea is to use power to break the morale of the opposition and
the intelligentsia. I saw this happening in India during the emergency (197577) when the police and government servants became a willing tool of
tyranny.
What hurts me is the ethical considerations inherent in public
behaviour become dim and in many cases go beyond the mental grasp of
many government functionaries. Desire for self-preservation is the sole
motivation for official action and behaviour. What the police did on
Constitution Avenue could not have been possible without a word from
above.
Police brutality is not uncommon in India either. There are instances
of Gujjars being beaten up in Rajasthan and workers in Haryana. The
difference in India is that people have their revenge when free and fair
elections take place. They see to it that the rulers who use the police for
their ends are defeated.
I wish elections in Pakistan could give the kind of freedom which the
Indians have. A democratic system makes all the difference despite the
excesses which the security forces commit. In an open society, justice
catches up with the criminals, sooner or later.
What I have not been able to make out is why PPP chief Benazir
Bhutto is conspicuous by her silence. Many lawyers who were beaten up
are her partys stalwarts, particularly Aitzaz Ahsan. There has been no public

230

condemnation, nor any warning to the government which behaved as if it

was pitted against the enemy.
Beating was bad enough, but her tacit acceptance was worse. Is it
a part of the deal that some articulate and radical members should be
eliminated for the smooth running of the new relationship between Benazir
Bhutto and Musharraf?
Irfan Husain observed: The entire system is being subjected to
intolerable strains and stresses for Musharrafs re-election. The seeds
being sown now will yield a bitter harvest. The journalists and lawyers who
were subjected to such brutal treatment by the state on Sept 29 in the
countrys capital are unlikely to forgive and forget. And neither for that
matter, are we.
Governments have certain tripping point when they lose their moral
authority to rule. Future historians might pinpoint Sept 29 as the date for
Musharrafs fall from grace. Although he has been heavily criticized over
the years, his real decline began on March 9 when he tried to sack the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court. But this little slide reached its nadir when
plain-clothed thugs went berserk on Islamabads Constitution Avenue last
week. Things can only get worse.
Criticism of the regime continued on many counts. Ayesha Tammy
Haq observed: There are places you can go online and live a virtual life of
your own creation in a virtual world. Places like Second Life where you
could even become a virtual Second Term President and where you can
believe that there is no real world where real stuff happens. Its a place
where you could probably hold as many offices as you like for as many
terms. A place where you get to write your own script and for that matter
everyone elses, and no one objects.
Conventional wisdom is that the Generals election will take place
and while he is virtually there at the finish line a lot has changed again. For
one the lawyers have crashed the party. His virtual world is no longer a
sanctuary. Hackers have broken the codes and messed things up. Things
are definitely not going according to plan. It now requires mass mobilization
of the countrys already stretched security forces. The unpleasant use of
force where more often than not things go horribly wrong and virtual
becomes reality.

231

The Supreme Court may have dismissed the petitions challenging the
presidents dual office on the issue of maintainability and Gen Musharraf
may at the time this article is printed be declared eligible to contest the
presidential election in uniform but the merits of the issue have yet to be
dealt with. Lawyers have said that while they may have lost this battle
they are ready to fight the war. Those who followed the battle for the
restoration of the chief justice of Pakistan know that the lawyers have the
ability to put up a good fight.
But its not just a good fight that they are capable of putting up.
There is something else: they have managed to fire the imagination of the
people, something our politicians have not managed to do in recent times.
They are seen potentially as leaders that people prefer to follow. And
because our political leaders continue to be missing in action people
continue to look to the lawyers for leadership. To lead them out of this dark
period where institutions are either collapsing or just do not exist. The
virtual world has its very dark side and that is the reality faced by the people
of Pakistan.
The reality is that now for the General to continue to play in his
virtual world he needs to pull out all the stops. This means that every time
he chooses to do something that the people and, more often that not, the
Constitution may not concur with; he is going to have to, to use the popular
phraseology of the moment, lock down Constitution Avenue or seal off
Islamabad.
Employable tactics to pre-empt any agitation would include Amin
Gulgee sculptures giving way to containers and tankers which in turn are
likely to become permanent fixtures at all intersections on roads leading to
the capital. Mass scale pre-emptive arrests of opposition leaders and workers
on non-charges. Soliciting the good and brutal offices of the constabulary so
as to ensure that no one steps on or off the sidewalk. And as the agitation
increases there will no doubt be the need for teargas and baton-charging and
even firing on the agitators. The only problem with tactics like these is that
despite the happy television commercials it does not make for a happy
populace. People do not like being locked down or beaten up or shot at if
they happen to disagree with the Generals state of affairs.
The virtual election may turn out to be a real nightmare as in a flurry
of activity many a candidate has emerged; among them a serving General, a
politician, a retired judge and a government clerk. It will be interesting to see
232

if the clerks papers are rejected under Article 63 (1) (d) as he holds an office
of profit. In all this it is important to remember why Justice Wajihuddin
Ahmed is in the fray, he has no illusions about being elected president. In
fact from what one gathers he is not there to become president rather he is
there to determine who may be eligible to become president.
Masood Hasan expressed his views in style typical of him. Some
excerpts are reproduced. All over the country, people are climbing on their
rooftops not to hoist flags because that is slightly out of fashion, but to
proclaim that they know whats going to happen. Everyone else who is not
similarly engaged are playing the role of dumbos and going around
wringing their hands and shaking their heads not an easy task to
perform if you have ever tried it because they dont know what the hell is
going on.
When Mushahid Hussain, who was temporarily lost in the US till he
was spotted bathing in a public fountain in LA, was asked to throw some
light on the matter, he said the Chaudhrys had taken away his cells and he
had a torch but not light. That for most people is the end of the road. It is
patently clear that unless we put a halt to things immediately, we will
have a nation of constitutional experts without a constitution and without
a nation. Even Hamid Karzai wouldnt favour that and thats a biggie. So
what should we do?
Firstly, there is a limit to the presidents patience. A billion people are
telling him to take it off. A billion people are telling him to keep it on. Just
when he starts unbuttoning, up go the wails of the PML-Q group who
implore him never to take it off. Chaudhry Shujaat has taken to sleeping
on a cot next to the president just to make sure he never takes his
uniform off. The poor man has now had to wear that wretched uniform for
the last nine years and to think that he will have to wear it for another five
years is just too much. Yet he must because if he doesnt, we are all done
for.
Personally, I say stop the nonsense. If the man wants to rule us in his
pajamas and matching top, let him. If he wants to don those humungous caps
the Pathans and Baluchis fling on their heads at the drop of a hat, let him. If
he wants to spend his time wearing swimming trunks or tennis shorts, let
him do what you will but please spare us this uniform nonsense because
we are going round in circles while we are encased in square pegs and that
as anyone will tell you, is not very nice.
233

Shakir Husain wrote about Musharraf and messiah myth. The

Supreme Courts verdict on General Musharrafs ability to contest the
presidential elections should come as no surprise to anyone, nor should
the predetermined result of this elevation be a shocker to anyone. The
verdict is part of an orchestrated campaign which the government launched
two months ago to ensure that General Musharraf stays in power after all
what would he do if he werent president of the chief of army staff?
The messiah myth has been created around General Pervez
Musharraf by his band of sycophantic PR gerbils and bankrolled by the
Pakistani taxpayers to the tune of millions of rupees. We are bombarded with
television spots, billboards, and print advertising telling us about the
achievements of this government. The only saving grace of this media blitz
is that there are no background images of Mohammad Ali Jinnah. How the
old man would have turned in his grave if that were the case. At least
someone in the PR department has some sense of shame.
We have been told that without General Musharraf at the helm of
power in Pakistan, the rapacious politicians will go a looting binge and
Talibanization of society will continue unabated. If we look at the past eight
years, General Musharraf has been able to stem neither.
There is not one example in the modern history of any nation
which has been led to greatness or even economic prosperity by a military
dictator; yet General Musharraf and his team seem convinced that without
him the things will fall apart. People of Chaudhrys of Gujrat, whose fates
and fortunes are pegged to the General, keep egging him on while they
spend millions of rupees on useless and shameless self-promotion in the
national media. I hope voters will remember this abuse of power and the
exchequer when they go to the election booth. This is our money which is
being doled out like water, yet we seem so desensitized to everything which
is going on around us.
If General Musharraf truly is the messiah, then where is his miracle?
As far as I am concerned, he had a good run till 2002 when he enjoyed broad
support from a large part of the population. The day he brought in his idea
of democracy in the likes of the Chaudhrys, Shaukat Aziz, and the
graduate assemblies, things went south The promises made over the
last five years have not been kept, and the economic prosperity which is
touted in Islamabad has been kept to a select few who harp on about the
importance of keeping General Musharraf. The ones who have won out have
234

no real stake in the country they have hedged their bets by taking dual
citizenships and moving a large portion of their assets abroad, and when the
proverbial excrement hits the fan theyll be the first ones to leave.
Kamal Siddiqui discussed the General and his promises. A new and
improved General Pervez Musharraf has emerged after the Supreme Court
rejected the constitutional petitions challenging his right to hold two posts
while standing for the presidential election. Lawyers and members of the All
Parties Democratic Movement are miffed and understandably so. Our
president is on his way to being re-elected. Once he is, and chances of that
happening are very bright, he has promised that he will resign as the chief
of army staff.
Our General No 1 is taking no chances. MNAs and MPAs are
being kept under a watchful eye. Their movements are being monitored.
Closer to election time, possibly in a day or two, they will be detained at
government rest houses and hostels where their attendance would be marked
and their presence noted. And on the given day they will be herded to
parliament to tick on the dotted line.
Viewers are bombarded with paid advertising highlighting the
achievements of the president. Not to be outdone, the Punjab chief minister
has also followed suit. Both these exercises are a bit strange since it is not
the people who are voting for the president and many of the members of
parliament are already in the bag. Secondly, the Punjab chief minister is not
even standing for elections at this stage. One need to ask the Press
Information Department as well as the President House how much is being
spent on these self-congratulatory messages.
Not so, says someone highly placed and well-connected. He says that
General Musharraf plans to give the now-dead National Security Council a
new life. He says that General Musharraf plans to give the now-dead
National Security Council a new life. Important decisions will take place
at the NSC. It will confirm the long-held military view that the army
should have a say in state affairs. If one was hoping for free and fair
elections, all such notions were dispelled in the manner the chief election
commissioner went out of the way to accommodate the president. The way it
was done left a lot to be desired. If the West is upset, so be it. In a
deliberately provocative move, the government swooped down on
opposition leaders at a time when the Commonwealth secretary-general was

235

in Islamabad to push the government for a freer democratic environment

its business as usual in Pakistan.
Aurangzeb from Saidu Sharif restricted his comments to the issue of
uniform. If Musharraf wins the election, he may take off his uniform at
some later stage. If he loses the election, he will give himself a fourth
extension as COAS; excellent plan. How can the people of Pakistan,
especially those in the Q League live without him? If Benazir Bhutto can
be a lifetime chairperson of the PPP without any objections, why cant
Musharraf not be a life COAS, after he has been tolerated by the people
for so many years?
Honestly, there is no one who can replace him. He has vision, is
moderate and enlightened. So long as we have him around, President
Bush will remain at our service. Instead of agitating against him for his
undemocratic changes in the Constitution, we should encourage him to
introduce monarchy in Pakistan. May be this will be the answer to all our
problems. I am not joking.
Imtiaz Alam tried to peep into the future with reference to poor
performance of the opposition. The opposition is again going back to the
court after the latter had technically knocked out its petitions this time
again hoping against the hopelessness of self-created legalistic quagmire.
Being professionals, the learned counsels can never say no to legal remedy
even if the dice is loaded against their client and the client may be the
unwanted politicians.
To the dismay of democrats of all hues, both the demagogues
(rejectionists/confrontationists) and the liberal pragmatists have led the
opposition into a blind alley. They are exhausting their cards amateurishly
and recklessly. Consider: First, both the sides of the opposition, despite
getting together in Londons All Parties Conference, preferred a course of
division, instead of agreeing on a unified minimum tactical alliance.
Second, on the imagination of demagogues (Qazi Hussain Ahmad,
Imran Khan and others), when Nawaz Sharif decided to come back while
breaching his undertaking to Saudis, the powers that be could not allow
either gate crashing or a spanner in the works of smooth transition to
democracy.

236

Third, disappointed with the reconciliatory (misalihat pasand)

people of Pakistan, both Qazi and Imran turned to the court they detest
(Qazi prefers Shariat Courts and Imran tribal jirga as the best model of
justice), despite having constitutionally constrained the superior judiciary
with the burden of the infamous 17th Amendment that allowed a serving
army chief in the presidency. With the original sin of mutilating the
Constitution and allowing two offices, how could the sinners hope from the
judiciary to rectify the sin of their parliamentary misconduct?
Fourth, frustrated with the failure of the legalistic shenanigan,
Qazi promptly gave a call to the people of Pakistan to shun maslihat
(opportunism) and come out on streets, not even a leaf moved on the call of
this great million marcher of the past who has to his credit the fall of almost
four elected governments at the behest of the powers to be.
Fifth, and the most lethal damage is being inflicted on the cause of
democracy is the APDMs decision to resign from the assemblies today.
They have enjoyed the perks for five years and when the time to wash the
blot of endorsing the 17th Amendment came, they have decided to leave the
field open to Gen Musharraf by vacating their seats while using the absurd
logic of not providing the legitimacy for the presidential election by the
outgoing assemblies.
There are just two tactical options: either you contest or
successfully stop the re-election of Gen Musharraf with the power of the
street. The best course in the given situation is that, as you cannot bring a
million people on the streets of Islamabad on October 6, both the sections of
the opposition (the ARD and the APDM) adopt former judge Wajihuddin
Ahmed as their candidate at a time when many of the governments camp
are inclined to ditch an about-to-retire General. The numbers game will
become extremely difficult for Gen Musharraf to win, if the opposition takes
this pro-active decision rather than take refuge behind providing him with a
walkover. But once again the demagogues will succeed in providing a safe
passage for Musharraf who must thank the APDM for making it easy for
him as a loyal opposition.
The real and decisive battle will be on the nature of the general
elections. The opposition may have lost this round, but it must prepare for
the next round in the court of the real sovereign the people of Pakistan.
The window of exit being offered by the present circumstances must be

237

expanded into a door to usher into a relatively more democratic set-up.

Everything now depends on the next general elections and their nature.
Salma Iqbal from Karachi wrote on US interference. America
pretends to be a sincere friend and well-wisher of Pakistan. But it has
assumed the right itself to interfere in Pakistans domestic affairs. It
encourages our intelligent President Musharraf whenever he takes a decision
against the law and the judiciary. America claims to advocate supremacy of
democracy and liberalism. On the other hand, it is supporting dictatorship
and army rule in Pakistan.
The Dawn talked about Pinkys fondness for the Yankees. Ms
Benazir Bhuttos growing estrangement from reality is now
approaching irreconceivable proportions. Just about a week ago, Ms
Bhutto told a gathering in Washington, tellingly that she would make Dr
Abdul Qadeer Khanaccessible to international agencies if she were to
come to power. Now comes the astonishing statement on BBC that a
government headed by her would, under the right circumstances, allow the
US military to strike within the territorial borders of Pakistan.
Ignore for the moment questions of national sovereignty, for that is
an area where almost every government has failed us. Focus instead on the
fact that the country is facing an insurgency-like situation rooted in antiAmerican sentiment. Against this backdrop, does Ms Bhutto not realize or
care about the perils of sounding more and more like a mouthpiece of
the US State Department.
On the political front, there is an element of practicality on the PPPs
on-again, off-again collaboration with a military ruler, allowing as it does an
opportunity for Ms Bhutto to assume the reins of government for a third
time. This is true to an extent, the grievous moral costs notwithstanding. The
benefits of any deal with a military ruler will, however, be limited to Ms
Bhuttos person and some select hangers-on, not the country or its people.
Even if the next elections are not rigged in favour of the PPP, and even if Ms
Bhutto wins fair and square, her tenure will be plagued by the irreparable
damage she has inflicted on what remained of her credibility.
Sultan Ahmed Geelani from Karachi opined: Now the confirmed
news is that at least Benazir Bhutto and her spouse are fully poised to arrive
in Pakistan very soon with full absolution from appearing in courts for
their crimes of corruption and loot. This when courts in Pakistan,
238

Switzerland and England, have conclusive prima facie record of their

culpability to have issued the indictments.
No doubt a throng of dynastic hangers-on will welcome the two (to
line themselves up for future rewards). And this time around the BBC is
unlikely to make a documentary like the princess and the playboy
about them, because the masters of the BBC will be told to keep off this turf,
in the interest of the freedom.
Just why such a thing, such a traversry of justice is being allowed.
Gen Musharraf cannot use the alibi of our being under the threat of being
bombed into Stone Age, to be complying with morally and legally corrosive
American diktats on our domestic politics.
At the very least, we have the freedom to refuse, point blank, any and
all American blandishments on any matter. Gen Musharraf and his foreign
minister have actually been shouting from rooftops that we never accept
dictation from the US on any matter. But just when the strategic boot is truly
on our foot to help the US save its superpower face in Afghanistan, we are
demonstrating a morally devastating, slavish compliance.
Karamatullah K Ghori dwelled on the deal made in USA. Gone is all
the thunder of the rhetoric resorted to, ad nauseam, all these past eight
years by the general that he would never allow these corrupt politicians to
return to Pakistan. Now, at least one of them seems well poised to return in
triumph and also to share the power pie with him.
The cabinet, in any case, has had precious little input into, or
even smaller inkling of, the fabled deal. Thats a privilege exclusive to the
Generals own kitchen cabinet in which none of the cabinet members,
including the puffed-up PM, figures in. However, for the sake of form and
convenience the poor cabinet must rubberstamp whatever little chunks of the
deal are thrown in its lap.
The Daughter of the East has had a canny sense to know exactly
that her doting audience was in the West, particularly in the US. So she
has painstakingly and meticulously packaged herself into the trappings of
George W Bush.
No wonder, therefore, that while Ms Benazir Bhutto was in
Washington to butter her own toast she had become an instantaneous toast-

239

of-the-town to the policy gurus who cozy up there, with a highly inflated
sense of their power and importance to our universe. Benazir has cultivated
them over dozens of visits to Washington in the past several years and also
honed a sales pitch that appeals to their megalomania.
In carefully calibrated sound bytes that must sound like music to
Washingtons lobbyists and power hustlers, BB has been saying all the
right things in words and phrases that couldnt but convince her hosts,
or mentors or whoever, that shes the person-of-the-moment in Pakistans
context and must wield power in Islamabad in order to deliver according to
requirements of the mission entrusted to her.
Washingtons new game plan is anchored in making a clean
break between the civilian and military dynamics of Pakistan. Let the
civilians manage the political hustling, without too much obtrusive
interference from the khakis, while the military brass should have its
attention and energy riveted on combating terrorism menacing the American
regional and global agenda on Pakistans frontier land with Afghanistan.
Benazir Bhutto is Washingtons choice to manage Pakistans political
and democratic platform. She has the right credentials in the eyes of her
American promoters for the job. Those credentials she has been hawking
with calibrated enthusiasm in her extended sojourn in Washington, telling
her avid establishment audience that shes one who has a greater capability
to fight al-Qaeda than General Musharraf has ever been able to deploy.
Kiyani seems to have received advance blessing of Washington
for his elevation to the most sensitive military position in Pakistan. The
Newsweek, an established mouth-piece, has welcomed him, already, as the
Next Musharraf of Pakistan. The Americans, apparently, have no
objection to a soft-spoken, chain-smoking and westernized General Kayani
succeeding Musharraf. He must have earned their admiration during his stint
at ISI.
It couldnt, once again, be mere coincidence that General Kiyani has
been Musharrafs point man and emissary to Benazir in the back-channel
negotiations that have been going on for months. Kiyani and Benazir could
be assumed to have developed a good working equation, if not exactly
camaraderie, in the process, something of great value, potentially, to
Washington. So there we are, back to square one, back to familiar story of
Pakistani deals made with Washingtons active connivance and blessings,
240

with the people of Pakistan in the disquieting role of mute spectators to an

arrangement that may not, necessarily, be of much benefit to them but whose
consequences and spin-offs would impact their destiny for a long time to
come.
Does it matter to Washington that the people of Pakistan, a large
majority of them at the very least, doesnt approve of their country being
used to pull the American chestnut out of the fire of Afghanistan Has it
occurred to Benazir that her awam, the font of her popularity and power,
take fright at her abject pandering to the power brokers in Washington
her willingness to feed Dr A Q Khan to the wolves, her readiness to allow
the American forces inside Pakistan in pursuit of the shadowy al-Qaeda chief
et al?
Would it matter to General Kiyani that the popular sentiment in
Pakistan is not in favour of the military operation in the tribal areas going
on, ad infinitum, to cater to the war agenda of a power that has little regard
for the sentiment of the Pakistani people, or to the long term interest of the
Pakistani army?
Sandy Berger and Bruce Riedel wrote: America faces stark choice in
Pakistan this fall: do we support democracy and the rule of law or do we
support a failing military dictator? President Bush seems to have made his
call and chosen to back the dictator, Pervez Musharraf. This is a mistake that
will damage our interests in South Asia and in the Muslim World.
The stakes are critical. Pakistan is the epicenter of the most
dangerous corner of the world, where terrorism, nuclear weapons, war,
narcotics and dictators come together. We have looked to Musharraf since
9/11 to be the edge of our spear against al-Qaeda, and handsomely rewarded
him with over $10bn in aid, but al-Qaeda is stronger than ever.
All too often America has forsaken its long-term interests and,
chosen the short-term convenience of backing military dictators. Each
time they have failed to develop the countrys freedoms and undermined its
democratic institutions. Consequently today only 15 percent of Pakistanis
have a favourable opinion of America and over 70 percent fear an American
military attack.
Pakistans democratic institutions and politicians are far from
perfect. Whose are? But they should be given the opportunity to address

241

their countrys problems. Sharif and Benazir Bhutto should be allowed to

compete at home, and face trial if accused of crimes, not deported.
Free and fair elections with international monitors will produce a
secular government that would have the legitimacy to tackle extremism.
Every election in Pakistans history shows the Islamists are a small minority
and the more secular parties are the majority.
Democrats are always more troublesome partners because they listen
to their own people. A secular government in Pakistan will have its own selfinterest in fighting extremism and bin Laden but they will do so for their
interests, not ours. It is time for Pakistan Army to go back to its barracks
for good and for us to have confidence in the 170 million people of
Pakistan.
A day before the promulgation of National Reconciliation
Ordinance, the Daily Dawn wrote: The plot as scripted by General
Headquarters and Washington is making rapid strides towards the
denouement desired by the presidency
The symbolic resignations promised by lawmakers affiliated with All
Parties Democratic Movement were duly tendered on Tuesday, though there
is little chance that the gesture will alter the course of events in any way. If
the idea was to somehow shear the exercise of credibility, that too may have
been pointless for questions of morality have no place in the equation.
The other major development is the move to promulgate an ordinance
granting a blanket amnesty to all politicians and government functionaries
who held office between 1988 and 1999 and who were accused in court of
corruption but never convicted. Though the amnesty is being touted by the
government as an attempt at national reconciliation, it is clear that the law
is being introduced primarily to facilitate Ms Benazir Bhuttos return to
the country, and possibly to the corridors of power.
The stellar exclusion from the list of beneficiaries is Mr Nawaz
Sharif, who does not meet the criteria set down in the proposed ordinance. A
far more seemly and equitable option would have been a grand
reconciliation package applicable to all major stakeholders. Given the way
events have unfolded, the perception is that Ms Bhutto is receiving
preferential treatment. This view is bound to linger and could hurt the
legitimacy of the next elections.

242

After the promulgation of the NRO, it added: It favours select

individuals and groups and discriminates against others While some
are favoured, the amnestys conviction clause and its 1988 to 1999 time
frame have been so devised as to exclude Mr Nawaz Sharif from the list of
beneficiaries. By announcing a blanket amnesty for public officials accused
of corruption, the countrys taxpayers have been stripped publicly of any
lingering hope they may have harboured that the culprits would be brought
to justice one day.
Spare a thought too for the family members of those killed by
political rivals, or the relatives of ordinary citizens mowed down at a bus
stop by terrorists toeing the party line. True, pending criminal cases will be
reviewed and not dismissed outright. But the political pressure that could be
brought to bear on the review boards, especially by organizations with
fearsome reputations, may well reduce the exercise to a sham.
Ordinance is all about personal gain and has little to do with
national reconciliation a misnomer in any case because all stakeholders
are not on board. The ordinance strengthens the view that crime goes
unpunished in Pakistan and that too with official blessing. This is not the
right signal to send to a public that is on the verge of losing all faith in the
system. If anything, the corrupt and the criminal will be emboldened further
by this get-out-of-jail-free pass handed out by the government in the name of
national reconciliation.
Editors concluding remarks were with reference to Truth and
Reconciliation in South Africa. The accused had to confess to their
crimes and express remorse, and even then not everyone was given
amnesty. What we have is not reconciliation but resignation to expediency.
Perhaps the only positive in all this is that in terms of future accountability,
elected representatives have been extended privileges similar to those
already in place for military officials and members of the judiciary.
I A Rehman commented: During its brief history Pakistan has been
used as a stage for many a charade, sometimes in the name of religion,
sometimes in the name of democracy but always in national interest and for
the people. The latest farce is a deal between Gen Pervez Musharraf and
Benazir Bhutto. As usual on such occasions the people do not know
whether to laugh or curse their stars.

243

Quite a few people believe that on the fourth of October, in the year
2007, Zulfiqar Ali Bhuttos party was stabbed in the back by no other
than his daughter and that the injury may prove fatal. Did the 40-year-old
party that had begun by holding up the promise of peoples empowerment
deserve to spend its adult years as the bonded maid of a praetorian consul?
When the country was going through a convulsion on whose
outcome depended the future of its young ones, the PPP had three concerns
on the top of its agenda: the peoples right to democracy, the partys
prospects in the coming general elections, and the possibility of its
chairpersons rehabilitation in active politics in that order.
Those who have persuaded themselves to believe that the deal
will benefit Pakistan or the PPP may be in for early shocks. The
ordinance that is being hailed for reconciliation between Gen Musharraf and
Benazir Bhutto is most likely to further alienate the people from both.
Besides, the Generals team will ensure that his promises to BB removal of
bar to a third bid for premiership, etc are put on hold till after the electoral
contest, which the PPP will enter with a thin force of bedraggled soldiers. If
it does not do well enough at the polls, the General is likely to renege on his
pledges to BB as comfortably as he had abandoned MMA after the pact
leading to the 17th Amendment.
The other party to the deal is unlikely to fare any better that the
PPP. The Generals victory is as pyrrhic as pyrrhic can be. He will not be as
strong and as free a ruler as he has so far been. Attempts to run the country
as before will make the going much tougher.
The fate of the deal-makers will matter to the people less than
their own ordeal. The peoples disappointments over the past few weeks
will severely affect their activism that the lawyers agitation had engendered.
Between March 9 and September 29 Pakistan politics went through a cycle
that has certain basic lessons for the hardy democrats.
All this constitutional and legal quibble apart, the essential fact is that
the battle for the peoples right to self-rule will be won neither in courts nor
in assemblies of doubtful origins; this battle will be won by peoples
mobilization alone. The democrats are on the verge of another defeat
because they have been looking for shortcuts to democracy where none are
available. Its time to return to the basics of mass mobilization through
serious political work.
244

Zafar Iqbal from Karachi opined: This concept was originated by

Nelson Mandela except that in his case they called it the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission. Our pragmatic president and equally
pragmatic prime minister had decided to eliminate the word truth.
Not that one expects Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif to tell the truth
or their prominent supporters to embark on such an adventure. It is true of
politicians the world over but it is good to remind people that there is such a
thing as truth. There have been two interesting new developments. The
first is the slogan demanding an independent judiciary. This is fine but not
adequate because we also need a competent judiciary.
To achieve this, the selection process would have to be changed. The
second important slogan is that military rule is bad. This is of course true
except that our so-called democratic rule was worse. It was certainly not
democratic: they were elected under the auspices of military intelligence and
the ISI. It was a revolving door arrangement the PPP succeeded the PML
and the PML kept succeeding the PPP.
Not one of them supported freedom of the press and media or wanted
an independent judiciary or, for that matter, had any interest in good
governance or transparency in decision-making. Will they now really try to
introduce or work for the creation of democracy in the country?
Naeem Sadiq was of the view that the people of Pakistan are now
ruled by a serving commando who simultaneously heads a political party
and also contests elections while still retaining his uniform. No one protests
even at the dichotomy of the law that will punish thelaywala for the slightest
misconduct, but will pardon the criminals and thieves who looted billions of
dollars to build palaces in foreign lands.
The people of Pakistan excel in the art of suffering. Affliction and
adversity are seen as divine compensation of local misdeeds or simply a part
of the Lords higher order pre-ordained strategy. To challenge, protest or
question are clearly not a part of our temperament or tradition. The educated
middle classes, loaded with cynicism, disillusionment or apathy, unwontedly
become part of the very problem they grumble so much about.
Protests are considered futile and better left to political parties,
NGOs or volunteer organizations. Discussions often come around to a

245

familiar foregone conclusion: There is nothing we can do that will make a

change. In any case what can we do?
How do ordinary citizens raise their voice, make a contribution or
lodge a peaceful protest on issues ranging from a complaint about the special
VIP check in counters at the airports, a protest against a serving military
general fidgeting elections for a political post, or dissuading the government
from taking fraudulent foreign loans?
How do citizens stop these unlawful activities? Recent movements
by the lawyers forum, womens groups and journalists have shown that
citizens when operating under organized platforms can have a much greater
impact.
Therefore, the first option that the citizens could choose is to
organize and raise their voice through platforms such as doctors,
engineers, architects, teachers, retired military personnel, businessmen,
traders, writers and similar professional groups. Public action litigation by
individuals and groups is another powerful but much under-utilized method
of taking up public causes. Inviting the courts attention for suo motu notice
on important issues is another option open to all citizens.
Finally, how do citizens not belonging to any formal group find a
space for their voice or actions? Citizens can refuse to participate in
events organized by corrupt officials and politicians. They can make
formal complaints to organizations against specific wrongdoings. They can
resign from their government posts as a mark of protest. They can form likeminded groups and make collective representations
Surely, it is time to explore these and other such options. Even the
silent protest of wearing a black band can begin to create a contagious
movement. Imagine the impact of a few million persons wearing black
bands everyday to protest against a specific issue; clearly, a forerunner for
larger civil protest movements.
Some observers noted that the people seemed to have resigned.
Munizeh Z wrote: Has anyone ever taken notice of what the public of
this country wants? It seems like that the people have resigned themselves
to the fact that whether it is Ms Bhutto, Mr Sharif, President Musharraf or
any of the usual corps of politicians, at the end of the day it really doesnt

246

matter because its the same person behind all their various faces and
dresses.
No one expects any drastic change of fortunes with the change of
leadership. It will not be surprise to anyone if the voter turnout in the
upcoming elections is much below than expected. The public is now well
aware that casting a vote is not equivalent to, or a guarantee of, democracy.
What will happen in Pakistan in the coming months, no one
anywhere in the world wants to speculate? What the nation is most worried
about is human development, ethnic strife and increasing extremism and
terrorism. And that no one seems to be addressing.
As the nation watches, wrongs are being righted and the villains are
being knighted. Whoever said that there was even an ounce of morality in
Pakistani politics! In such circumstances, we cannot and should not trust
anyone. I, for one, am not holding my breath, waiting for true democracy to
flourish after the elections. After all, we are set to have a president who
will not be able to shun his dictatorial mindset anytime soon and a
possible prime minister whose feudal mentality has had the better of her,
more often than not, during her two tenures; and who looks to uphold the
legacy for her father a ruthless dictator in his time and the man responsible
for the disintegration of this country.
The Dawn expressed similar views with reference to the APDMs call
for protest. The general indifference seen to the so-called winds of change
that the president so confidently says are blowing is disparaging. The French
adage the more it changes, the more it remains the same seems to define
the publics muted response.
The street mobilization seen during the Chief Justices quest for
reinstatement from last March to July seems but a distant memory. What has
gone wrong between then and now is all too evident. The rule of law for
which the people had taken to the streets alongside the legal fraternity
eludes them, especially when they see amnesty deals offered to some while
keeping others out.
It is also disconcerting to see that all rules can be cast aside to meet
the militarys political exigencies again. The opposition is in complete
disarray. For all practical purposes, the APDM is now as dead as the ARD

247

after the surfacing of differences between Fazlur Rehmans JUI and the rest
of the component parties.
Above all else, the failure to lead by either side is to blame for the
absence of political participation among the public. The people feel helpless,
like poet Faiz did when he wrote the prophetic line: apne bas ki baat hi kya
hai, hum se kya manvao ge?
The Dawn wrote: Musharraf thanked God for his great victory, and
Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sher Afgan Niazi declared
everything about the election to be constitutional, legal, moral and
legitimate. That however is his opinion, and it is for the judges to decide
what they think about it. The nation will now wait with bated breath for the
Supreme Courts verdict which could, if the ten judges so decide, upset
Generals applecart We hope the Supreme Court will not delay the verdict
too long so that the hiatus that has descended on the nation is lifted.

REVIEW
While commenting on the gory events of September 29, Tariq Azeem
had the cheeks to claim that it was a step forward towards real democracy.
He disregarded all the brutality perpetrated by the regime and only cared for
the acceptance of General Musharrafs nomination papers.
The way Chief Minister of Punjab acted on that day forced one to say
that the men from two Gujrats located on either side of Indo-Pak border have
become a curse for the respective countries. The people on this side of the
border, however, should forget achieving change through democratic or
judicial means. The regime cares very little for the either of the two; the only
way is to resort to the same means which the dictator is using against them.
Will any body dare?
In a talk-show on the Dawn TV on the days event, a British journalist
summed up by saying that people of Pakistan have the desire for change but
lack the will to bring the change. He indirectly pointed out the non-existence
of the leadership in which the people could repose their trust.
The nexus of Musharraf-Benazir-America (MQM can be added) has
been in the making since many months. With the promulgation of National
Reconciliation Ordinance, it is now looming large on the horizon. It is up
248

to the people of Pakistan to take note of it and act to save their country and
the values they cherish. If they dont, no one can save them from committing
collective suicide.
They must realize that only a part of the US sponsored deal was made
public in the form of a presidential ordinance and even in doing that a false
impression has been created that it is not for one person or a party. The
period spelled out in the ordinance has been cleverly restricted to exclude
Nawaz Sharif.
The period of present regime has also not been included in the
reconciliation to preserve the vindictive acts of Musharraf era; or to create
an impression that this regime has committed no wrong against anyone. The
hidden message, perhaps not so hidden, is that those who join the regime all
their sins can be pardoned.
Even this part which has been made public has celestial dimensions.
According to initial estimates, speaking in terms of numbers, at least half a
dozen of PPP leaders, and about 30 from the ruling party and almost
everyone from the MQM will fall in the category of beneficiaries. The
beneficiaries of PPP and PML-Q will be on account of corruption, but in
case of MQM the benefits will go to those who have committed heinous
criminal acts.
In terms of the quantum of benefits in the context of misappropriation
of wealth, the PPP will leave everyone far behind. Unfortunately, all this has
been negotiated by the future chief of an army which is committed as
vanguard of the Crusades. A simple yardstick to measure worth of the NRO
is that Dr Sher Afgan Niazi claimed to have drafted it.
Looking at the NRO, purely in the context Pakistani power-politics,
Benazir has proved to be a very shrewd politician. She read the situation
well and exploited it to the best of her advantage. Musharraf gave in
willingly, because he had been disappointed by PML-Qs performance since
March 9 when he was confronted with agitation by lawyers supported by
opposition parties, civil society and the media. He strongly felt the need to
broaden his political support and she agreed to provide that support but not
free of cost.
The Gujrati Brothers, having served the dictator for five years, had no
choice but to obey his commands; despite seeing NROs in-built threats to

249

their political dominance. The mumbler tried to regain the lost ground, but
he faltered in adopting the Gujrati style by saying: raat gai baat gai.
While answering a question about the NRO, he said they played
siasat with us and we also played siasat of the Ordinance and we won. From
Akbar Bugti to Ghazi, the mumbler has been playing siasat of dialogue and
deal for deceiving the other side.
In fact, Kings party has presented, willingly or under duress, the gift
of National Reconciliation Ordinance on the happy occasion of
establishment of working relationship between the King and the Queen-tobe. For the people of Pakistan this Ordinance marks the establishment of
nexus between the gangs of looters and criminals under supervision of a
Dadagir.
The point of Musharraf not being corrupt has been commented upon
previously in one of the articles. The present bargaining with one of the
looters and plunderers, amply reflect on his much hyped honesty. The
hue and cry raised by him about corruption has been for illegitimately
holding on to power.
When this pretext lost its credibility, he has bargained with one of the
looters to withdraw cases against her in return for another five years in
power. Yet his supporters say he is not corrupt; nay, he is not only corrupt
but a blackmailer of highest caliber.
Irrespective of the means and methods use, the brave commando has
won an electoral victory. He completely routed his political opponents and
at the same time pre-empted the ten judges sitting on the bench from acting
against the supreme interest of the executive.
Pakistani Generals have proved time and again their prowess and
acumen in political arena; it should be time to test some of the politicians in
military arena; they might surprise the world with their performance parexcellence and in the same go prove that its a nation of misfits.
No analyst has looked at the victory from the historic perspective. In a
way it is good that he stayed in power to reap what he has sown since 9/11.
Gen Yahya Khan suffered humiliation because of the misdeeds of his
predecessors and similarly all those who came into power after Ziaul Haq

250

had to suffer because of his misdeeds. This legacy of kare koi aur bughtey
koi must end.
Musharraf has brought lot of miseries to Pakistan by joining Bushs
war on terror and things are likely to change for worse in not too distant
future, especially due to change in US administration which promises for
him nothing but hostility of Democrats. It would be fair, for a change that
the man who did it should be there to bear the brunt.
10th October 2007

BEYOND THE INFERNO

The vast region of Muslim World from Palestine to Pakistan has been
turned into an inferno for cremation of that part the humanity that follows
the religion of Islam. Beyond this raging inferno, the life for Muslims has
also been made unbearable, particularly for those who pose presumed
251

threat to the interests of the civilized world. This is called Bushs war on
terror.
Six years of war, and still counting, he has turned those parts of world
into hell, which are inhabited by the Muslims. Seeking end to terrorism did
not seem an aim of the wagers of this war; by mid 2007, terror attack in the
world increased by 29 percent. Amnesty International said that fears stoked
by the war on terror are increasingly dividing the world.
Hate campaign against Islam and its followers by White Christians
continued unabated. During the period, Britain conferred knighthood on
Rushdie for his anti-Islam services and a Dutch MP demanded imposition of
ban on Quraan. From across the Atlantic a presidential candidate-to-be
suggested bombing Makkah and Madina. The rulers in Islamic countries,
barring a few, digested it to prove that they are enlightened and moderate.

AFRO-ASIA
Beyond the main battleground, the war continued but at significantly
decreased intensity; even Somalia and Sudan were allowed to smolder as
both no more posed any immediate threat to the civilized world. However, of
late Turkey started experiencing what it had feared since the day of Iraq
invasion. In the Fareast the peace seemed to have returned.
In Philippines, the war against terrorism obviously remained focused
on Islamic militants, but it also had a mix of communist rebels. This mix
was quite natural because till the advent of clash of civilizations,
communists had been the Number One enemy of the civilized world.
Following incidents were reported:
On 8th May, four people were killed and 30 wounded in bomb blast in
the city of Tacurang in Philippines.
Nine people were killed in a bomb blast in southern Philippines on
15th June. Next day, eight people were killed in bus-bombing and four
policemen were killed by communist rebels. Troops killed four
communists on 23rd July.

252

 At least 57 people, including 26 soldiers, were killed in a clash in the

south on 10th August.
On 18th August, 58 people including 16 soldiers, were killed in an
encounter in the restive south. During second week of September,
Philippines launched fresh crackdown against Muslims.
On 19th September, gunmen attacked convoy of a former governor and
killed ten people. One person was killed and two wounded in bombing
in Philippines on 5th October.
Thailand experienced marked decline in terror related incidents. In
April, government-backed militias killed four Muslims. In May, nine people
were killed in bomb attack on 5th May and four days later one major and
seven soldiers were killed in Narathiwat province. Four people were killed
in violence in on 26th May and five days later, ten soldiers and five
worshipers were killed in bomb blast and an ambush in the South. Two
security personnel were killed in the south on 24th June.
Rest of the region remained almost peaceful barring a couple of
incidents. In Indonesia, head of Jamiat Islami was captured on 15 th June.
Bombs exploded at three railway stations in Bangladesh on 1st May.
The situation in Mainland Asia was even better than Fareast.
Russia seemed to have curbed the militancy in Chechnya, or had clamped
the reporting from that troubled region. On 27 th April, 17 soldiers were killed
in Chechnya in a helicopter crash; authorities probed for the possibility of
helicopters shooting down. Ten soldiers were killed when Chechen fighters
attacked ministers convoy on 8th October.
North Korea had been gradually coming to terms with the civilized
world. During second week of April, its frozen funds were released in
principle, but the US alleged that actions by North Korea about nuclear
reactor were uncertain. North Korea promised to honour the deal on
scrapping its nuclear programme if dispute over millions of dollars in frozen
assets was settled. US envoy urged Pyongyang to call in nuclear inspectors.
In third week, the US rejected blame on hold-up in nuclear talks; North
Korea reiterated that it would shut down nuclear plant when bank row was
settled. In May, North Korea carried out missile test. During the month of
June, North Korea tested a short-range missile.

253

Pyongyang was blamed for stalling disarmament talks. DPRK

reiterated that it was ready to close its nuclear reactor as per agreement and
finally North Korea shut down the nuclear reactor on 15 th July. During first
week of October, it agreed to disclose all nuclear plans and leaders of two
Koreas signed a peace pact.
Countries in Middle East, other than the four falling in the main
battle zone remained fairly calm. Saudi Interior Ministry claimed smashing
seven terror cells and arrested 172 people on 29 th April. On 16th July, sixteen
Saudis were released from Guantanamo facility.
On 10th May, UAE deported dozens of Pakistanis, the disciples of Dr
Israr Ahmed, fearing spread of Talibanization. In Kuwait, a US Marine was
killed on 28th May while off-loading equipment at a base. In Yemen, nine
people, including seven Spanish tourists were killed on 2 nd July in a suicide
bombing at a tourist resort. Four militants were killed by security forces on
8th August. In Egypt, fifty Muslim Brotherhood men were arrested on 30 th
June.
Turkey was confronted with the devil it had feared from day one of
the US occupation of Iraq. Encouraged by the US backing, the Kurd rebels
became quite aggressive. Following incidents were reported:
On 16th April, 12 Kurds and a Turkish soldier were killed in a clash in
Tunceli province.
One person was killed and 14 wounded in a bomb blast in Izmir on
12th May.
On 22nd May, six people including a Pakistani were killed and more
than 60 including four Pakistanis wounded in bomb blast in Ankara;
Kurd separatists were suspected for the terrorist attack.
Six Turkish soldiers perished on 24th May in landmine blast planted by
Kurdish rebels.
Turkey moved its army closer to Iraqi border during first week of June
and thousands of Turkish soldiers entered Iraq to chase Kurdish
rebels.

254

 Turkey was warned not to attack Iraq, reported New York Times on 8th
June. A week later, five persons, including a soldier, were wounded in
a bomb blast.
Turkish troops killed three Kurd rebels on 19th June. Five days later,
five militants linked to al-Qaeda were arrested.
On 27th June, Turkish forces killed 8 Kurdish rebels near the border
with Iraq. Ten days later, prime ministers of Iraq and Turkey signed a
deal for cooperation to fight against Kurdish rebels.
On 12th August, 12 Turkish soldiers were wounded in roadside
bombings in Kurdish south.
Separatist Kurds attacked an army post in Turkey and killed one
soldier on 19th September.
On 29th September, 12 people were killed in Kurd rebels attack on a
minibus. Next day, two Kurdish militants were killed in southeastern
Turkey.
Kurds killed 13 Turkish soldiers on 7th October. Next day, two more
Turkish soldiers and a Kurd fighter were killed near Iraqi border.
Resurgence of Islam was another development not liked by the
civilized world and the secular forces within Turkey. On 29th April,
thousands of Turks protested against Islamist government of Erdogan and
called him a traitor and supported secularism for Turkey.
On 1st May, more than one million Turks protested against the present
Islamic government and in favour of secularism on second consecutive day;
about 700 protesters were arrested. Supreme Court declared first round of
presidential election null and void in which the foreign minister was a
candidate of the Islamic party.
Next day, Turkish Prime Minister asked parliament to call early polls.
On 5 May, Opposition in Turkey carried out massive rally before
presidential vote. Next day, Abdullah Gul withdrew candidacy for Turkeys
presidency. On 10th May, Turkish parliament approved the bill for direct
election of the president.
th

255

Thousands of Turks rallied in Izmir on 13th May in support of

secularism. Two days later, Prime Minister said secularism and Islam are not
in conflict, but pro-secularism rallies continued in Turkey. On 15 th June,
Turkey called for referendum on presidential election. On 22nd July, Turkeys
ruling Islamist Justice Party won 331 of 550 seats. Gul was elected President
of Turkey in third round of voting on 28th August. On 19th September,
Turkish PM demanded lifting of ban on headscarf.
While western media and analysts never talked about Kurd rebels
terrorist activities, they expressed concern over Turkish attack on Iraqi
Kurds. Peter Brookes wrote: Turkey could send troops into Iraq any day
now. Its massing ground forces on its southeastern border for a possible
strike against the terrorist/separatist group of Kurdistan Workers Party
(PKK). Turkish special ops are already on the ground in Iraq.
The Kurdish area is the most stable and pro-American part of Iraq;
neither Washington nor Baghdad can afford to have it become a new
item on the problem list. The Turks wouldnt go in unopposed, either.
Besides the PKK, Iraqi Kurds have promised to resist any Turkish incursion
into Iraq.
Fighting between Turks and Kurds in Iraq could also spread to
Turkeys Kurdish population of about 15 million. Even an accidental
engagement with US troops would damage US-Turkish relations, including
Turkish air-base access for supplying US forces in Iraq and Ankaras support
to coalition efforts in Afghanistan.
All that said; the Turks have good cause for being agitated. The
PKKstepped up attacks recently; killing 20 soldiers and civilians in the
past two weeks. A suicide bombing in Ankara in late May killed six and
wounded more than 100.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyab Erodgan noted: our patience
has run outnecessary steps will be taken when needed. The Turkish
Chief of General Staff said the army is ready all he needs is the goahead. The Turkish public seems up for a strike, too But Turkey isnt
entirely innocent here, either. Ankara has ruled the Kurds, 20 percent of
Turkeys population, with a heavy hand. Kurdish autonomy across the
border in Iraq hasnt gone unnoticed.

256

Turkey is fed up with PKK and wants the United States (its NATO
ally) and Iraq to do something about it. A military buildup sends a clear
signal that Turkey wants indeed, demands action. In the mean time,
manoeuvres on the border could pacify the Turkish domestic audience.
But if the PKK attacks in Turkey continue as they have, Ankara may
just give the army the dreaded green light So what to do? If all else
fails, US and Iraqi forces could move against the PKK a group on the US
terrorist list closing camps and ending cross-border raids into Turkey.
Not ideal, but better than a showdown with Ankara.
Irfan Asghar observed: Insofar as Turkey is concerned, its generals
perceive of an autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan as an anathema and it will
inflame the secessionist propensities among 14m Kurds living in Turkey.
Turks are ferociously averse to a referendum in Kirkuk. Of late, Turkish
officials have threatened to intervene if the Kurds take over Kirkuk.
Turkish forces have been beefed up along the Iraqi border and
speculations of a large scale Turkish invasion of Northern Iraq are rife and
this possible incursion has been dubbed as necessary and useful. Martial
Law has been imposed in Turkeys three Kurdish provinces as Turkeys
civilian forces have miserably failed to clobber the PKK guerrillas and
bring them in line despite the use of massive force. These PKK guerrillas,
who are allegedly propped up by Iraqi Kurds, have wreaked havoc with the
peace of Turkey as they have been found enmeshed in violent activities.
America has made it clear that any unilateral Turkish action
against the Iraqi Kurds will rattle its cage because of the following two
reasons: Firstly, it will accentuate the instability and restiveness in a country.
Secondly, the Iraqi Kurds have hitherto been by far the most pro-American
group in Iraq. But America would also be loath to let the Iraqi Kurds help
the PKK fighters since Turkey is a cherished NATO ally.
America gives counsel of perfection that Turkey should stay out of
Iraq despite PKKs provocations and it should seek the help of Iraqi Kurds
to clinch a deal with the PKK. But if we dont shut ourselves on from
reality and take leave of common sense, it would be tremendously difficult
to pull off a Turkish-Kurdish deal as it is always a Herculean task to alter the
stream of history.

257

Irfan Asghar also wrote on Turkish elections. On July 22, Recep

Tayyib Erdogans pro-business and center-right AK Party the offshoot of a
now banned Islamic movement, got a thumping majority by grabbing 46.6
(percent) of the vote in a parliamentary election in which turnout touched the
point of 85 percent Erdogans Justice and Development Party (AKP) has
bagged votes more than double of its nearest rival and far more than 34
percent, it garnered in 2002 elections.
If we give a sobering thought to the matter, it comes out loud and
clear that this snap election was called by Prime Minister Erdogan, four
months ahead of schedule to end a crippling political rumpus sparked in
April and May by AKPs unsuccessful bid to have its own candidate,
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul elected president and precipitated by fears
that AKP wants to unravel and overturn Turkeys secular foundation.
The Turks have delivered an unquestionably strong mandate to
Erdogan because during his tenure, the economy experienced whacking
growth rate averaging around 7% and huge foreign investment was lured in,
financial markets prospered tremendously, the lira went into the stratosphere
and the share prices underwent whopping surge. Unemployment and
inflation were tamed effectively as a sequel of which the nominal GDP per
person has doubled.
Erdogans another important feather in the cap during his
previous tenure has been his act of ramming through a raft of democratic and
constitutional reforms which jollied and coaxed the EU leaders into
opening membership talks with Turkey in Oct 2005.
Indubitably, Erdogan has returned to power by getting a landslide
win but formidable challenges stare Erdogan in the face To begin with,
there is the challenge of presidential election to be held in this week. AKP
lacks the two-third majority in the parliament that is sine qua non to form a
quorum for presidential election
Secondly, a bumpy road lies ahead of Turkeys bid to enter the
European Union. With many EU leaders already opposing Turkeys entry in
the club, the election of Nicolas Sakovy to the Elysee Palace of France has
dealt a deadly blow to Turkeys ambition because he is vehemently opposed
to Turkeys EU membership.

258

Then about 14 million Kurds live in Turkeys southeast and they have
got secessionist propensities. The problem has got aggravated further
because of a split between AKP and army over the issue of dealing with
increased violence from Kurdish Workers Party insurgents holed up in Iraq
and slipping into Turkey. Erdogan will have to tackle this issue sensibly as
27 Kurdish politicians have entered the parliament by winning as
independent candidates. However, if we look at Turkeys electoral exercise
from a global perspective, it amply demonstrates two points: Islam and
democracy are not mutually exclusive or divorced from each other. Never
the twain shall meet is over the hill now. Secular and religious values are
not incompatible.
Mansoor Akbar Kundi commented on elections from historic
perspective. The Turkish parliament in its third round finally elected AKP
candidate Abdullah Gul as the eleventh president of the Republic. And thus
the possible looming political and constitutional crisis that whether the
AKP candidate with traditional religious background will step into the
highest office is finally over.
Abdullah Guls candidacy was blocked by the secular forces who
regarded him dangerous for the secular principles the modern Turkey is
based on. Propounded by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in his manifesto published
on April 20, 1931 and incorporated in the 1924 Constitution by an
amendment in the same year; secularism is the corner stone of Kemalism
comprising republicanism, populism, nationalism, statism, and
revolutionism; declared as fundamental for the Turkish Republic.
Abdullah Gul comes from a lower middle Islamic background of
Kayseri. His father, Ahmet Hamdi was a mechanic. His mother was a rigid
Islamist who brought up Gul in a conservative family environment. Gul
graduated from the University of Istanbul and did his Masters from Exeter
in London. He began his career as a lecturer in Adapazari University where
he initiated the Department of Industrial Engineering.
Having acted as the prime minister for some time until Erdogan
replaced him he served as the foreign minister of Turkey and played very
important role in the adoption of frontline policies for Turkish EU
membership and Iraq policy.
He advocated not to allow US troops for using Northern Turkey
to attack Iraq. He like Erdogan, a policy Erbakan initiated, is least
259

supportive of Turkish dependence on America. He is supportive of the

Democracy Theory that a country with huge foreign debt and nonrepresentative policy cannot have an independent foreign policy.
Guls candidacy for the highest office mobilized severe resistance
from secular forces, particularly the Democratic Republican Party and
National Action Party with 112 and 70 seats. Nevertheless, the AKP with
341 seats and with the support of a few independents had no problem in the
third round to support his election as the president After Erdogan, Gul was
considered as the best option with AKP for the office.
Abdullah Gul as president is believed to mobilize an energetic and
competent leadership for promoting political, economic and social
development in Turkey. Their being in power witnessed considerable
development in control of inflation that the Turkish were severely concerned
about. Gul repeatedly assures the promotion of secularism and the public is
now less concerned than they were 30 to 40 years ago. The power transition
in Turkey and the process of democracy since 1984 assures not only the
strengthening of democratic values in the country but its future membership
in the European Union as well.
Militancy in various countries of Africa kept smoldering, out of
which two countries, Sudan and Somalia, can be flared into flames as and
when the supreme interests of the White Christians are threatened or
presumed to have been threatened.
In Morocco, three militants blew themselves up in Casablanca On 10 th
April; killing 33 people and wounding over 200. Moroccos king urged
cooperation within North African countries over terror attacks. Police
claimed killing two terrorists and hunt for suspected suicide bombers
continued next day. On 14th April, two brothers blew themselves up near
American cultural centre and a hotel in Casablanca.
In Libya, death sentence of four convicts in HIV case was upheld by
the court on 11th July. Two weeks later, Libya freed Bulgarian nurses to
undergo remaining imprisonment in Bulgaria. On arrival in Bulgaria, the
government received the nurses with flowers and granted them pardon.
Libyan government expressed annoyance and an official asked EU to punish
Bulgaria, because nurses were released on their assurance.

260

Violence marred state polls in Nigeria and by 18th April, 25 people

were killed in the violence. Seven policemen were shot dead on 20th April. In
all, about 200 people were killed in election related violence. On 3 rd May,
armed men kidnapped 21 foreigners in three separate incidents. Five days
later, rebels blew up three oil pipelines. Four Brits and three Americans
working with oil giants were kidnapped on 25 th May in Bayelsa state. On
27th September, one oil worker was killed and another kidnapped.
In Algeria, at least 23 people were killed and 160 wounded in suicide
car bomb attacks in Algiers on 11th April; al-Qaeda claimed responsibility.
Algerian forces killed 13 Islamic rebels on 15 th May. Ten people were killed
and twenty wounded on 11th July in a suicide attack; al-Qaeda again claimed
the responsibility.
At least 28 soldiers were killed in a suicide truck bombing attack on
their barrack on 8th September; al-Qaeda owned the responsibility. Six days
later, three people were killed in a bomb blast. Two French and an Italian
were injured in suicide bombing on 21st September.
About 200 gunmen attacked a Chinese-run oil field in Ethiopia and
killed more than seventy workers and seven were abducted on 24 th April.
After eviction of Islamic Courts from Somalia, the Crusaders now wanted
the Chinese to get out of oil fields in the region.
After having toppled Islamists in Somalia; the country was left on its
own to suffer from bloodletting. Following incidents were reported during
the period:
Clashes in Mogadishu shattered the ceasefire and resulted in killing of
four people on 11th April.
On 18th April, 11 people were killed in Mogadishu in clashes between
Somalis and Ethiopian troops. By 20th, 30 persons were killed and
more than one hundred wounded. On fourth consecutive day of
clashes 54 more people were killed.
Mogadishu was subjected to artillery and mortar fire on 24th April,
despite UN Secretary General urging an end to fighting. Clashes
between Islamic insurgents and government-Ethiopian troops left 293
people dead and 587 wounded.

261

 On 26th April, Somali Prime Minister Ali Mohammed Gedi announced

victory over insurgents.
Three people were killed in Mogadishu on 12th May. About a week
later, three more persons were killed in an explosion.
Two persons were killed in bombing in Mogadishu on 26 th May. A
week later, US ships shelled fighters positions in Somalia.
Undisclosed numbers of Somalis were killed in a blast in Mogadishu
on 15th June. Six days later, night curfew was imposed after six
persons were killed in an attack.
Two persons were killed and twenty wounded in a blast in Mogadishu
on 28th June. Four people were killed on 16th July in a bombing attack.
Six people were killed in insurgent attacks in Somalia on 14 th
September. Two weeks later, four soldiers were killed and several
wounded in an ambush near Mogadishu. At least five persons were
killed in a grenade attack on 5th October.
In Sudan, Chad and Sudanese armies clashed on 9 th April in which 30
soldiers, including 17 of Sudan, were killed. On 2 nd May, ICC issued arrest
warrants for a Sudanese minister and a Janjweed militia leader suspected of
committing war crimes in Darfur. Bush imposed new sanctions against
Sudan on 29th May.
Four weeks later, French President Sarkozy urged tough stance against
Sudan. On 24th August, Sudan expelled Canadian diplomat. A town in Darfur
region, which was in government control, was burnt on 29 th September; at
least 12 UN peacekeepers were killed in rebels attack.
David Blair wrote in The Telegraph: Khartoum has managed to get
sanctions taken off the table in return for re-agreeing to one part of a deal it
has already signed and broken. Britain and America have dumped the idea of
sending UN peacekeepers to Darfur and their goal is now limited to
deploying a joint force that would probably be unable to use all
necessary means to protect civilians.
What should the West have done? First, a fully-fledged UN force
should have been sent to Eastern Chad and its troops deployed right on

262

the border with Darfur. This would have stopped the fighting from
spreading, protected Chadian civilians and exerted pressure on Khartoum.
Second, a no-fly zone should have been imposed over Darfur and
enforced by shooting down Sudans attack helicopters. Whenever the
regimes gunmen had executed a terrible atrocity against civilians, the West
should have selected a Sudanese military installation and destroyed it from
the air. Then Sudan might have concluded that its opponents were serious.
The West plans to deploy multi-national force as opponent of Sudan under
the pretext of peacekeeping.
The Guardian discussed prejudice and oil. The UN estimates that
three million to four million Congolese have been killed, compared with the
estimated 200,000 civilian deaths in Darfur How curious, then, that so
much more attention has been focused on Darfur than Congo. There are
no pressure groups of any note that draw attention to the Congolese
situation. In the media there is barely a word. The politicians are silent. Yet
if ever there were a case for the outside world to intervene on humanitarian
grounds alone liberal interventionalism then surely this is it.
The key difference between the two situations lies in the radical
and ethnic composition of the perceived victims and perpetrators. In
Congo, black Africans are killing other black Africans in a way that is
difficult for outsiders to identify with. The turmoil there can in that sense be
regarded as a narrowly African affair. In Darfur the fighting is portrayed as a
war between black Africans, rightly or wrongly regarded as victims, and
Arabs, widely regarded as the perpetrators of the killings.
It is not hard to imagine why some in the West have found this
perception so alluring, for there are numerous people who want to portray
the Arabs in these terms. In the United States and elsewhere those who
have spearheaded the case for foreign intervention in Darfur are largely the
people who regard the Arabs as the root cause of the Israel-Palestine dispute.
From this viewpoint, the events in Darfur form just one part of a much wider
picture of Arab malice and cruelty.
By seeing foreign conflicts through the prism of their own
prejudices, interventionalists also convince themselves that others see the
world in the same terms. This was the case with the Washington hawks who
once assured us that the Iraqi people would be dancing on the rooftops to
welcome the US invasion force that would be bringing everyone freedom.
263

Highly seductive though the rhetoric of liberal interventionalism may be, it

is always towards hubris and disaster that it leads its willing partners.
Con Coughlin tried to establish Iran-Sudan nexus. The time has
come for Sudan formally to be admitted to the exclusive club of rogue
states known as the axis of evil, those nations deemed to pose the gravest
threat to world peace Now Sudans name must be added to the list of
countries that appear to delight in outraging world opinion.
Sudan, so far as known, is not developing nuclear weapons, although
a high-ranking Sudanese delegation did pay a morale-boosting visit to Irans
top-secret uranium conversion facility at Isfahan in February. But suspicions
about its development of chemical and biological weapons have been
growing since the 1990s, when the Sudanese military was accused of using
chemical weapons against southern separatists.
Now the defence pact with Iran will enable Tehran to deploy
ballistic missiles with a range up to 440 miles. Under the agreement, which
was signed by General Abdel-Rahim Mohammad Hussein last January, the
Iranians will deploy Scud missiles at Sudans Wadi Saidna military base, 10
miles north of Khartoum.
The deal was ratified when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
made a state visit to Khartoum in February. The summit between two leaders
was arranged against a background of their respective countries worsening
relations with the UN Security Council Iran for refusing to halt its nuclear
programme, Sudan for refusing to allow the deployment of 20,000
peacekeepers to Darfur.
As for Sudan, striking a deal with Iran will give Mr Bashir added
confidence to withstand the increased pressure his regime is encountering
from the UN. In return for being allowed to base their missiles in Sudan, the
Iranians have agreed to train and equip the Sudanese army It is a prospect
that will give little comfort to the starving and dispossessed victims of
Darfur.
Opheera McDoom opined: Sudan has won a diplomatic victory by
accepting a joint UN-African Union peacekeeping force in Darfur on terms
that, once again, buy it more time and stave off sanctions, analysts say
This has to count as a diplomatic victory for the regime, said Eric Reeves, a
US academic and Darfur activist. Time and time again theyve had their

264

backs apparently against the wall, but have wiggled out to retain overall
control of the security crisis in Darfur.
The United Nations and the AU hailed Sudans acceptance of a joint
force as a breakthrough, no matter whether it resulted from threats of
sanctions and international arrest warrants for a junior minister and allied
militia leader for war crimes, or from open discussions and negotiations. But
many remain skeptical, noting that Khartoum has signed many deals that
have seen little in the way of implementation.
Top UN officials say that while the worlds largest humanitarian
operation has saved hundreds of thousands of lives, the collapse of law and
order in the region the size of France means aid convoys are attacked
almost daily. At least four aid agencies have pulled out of Darfur.
Some AU soldiers in Darfur go months without pay and have
themselves been attacked and their vehicles and ammunition stolen, even by
the one rebel faction which signed last years AU-mediated peace deal.
Khartoum had asked the United Nations to fund the African mission to
resolve these problems, and analysts say the latest agreement has granted
Sudans wish.

THE WEST
The United States continued exercising tight control over inland
security. Not a single incident of Islamic terrorism was reported during the
period, which meant that security agencies remained pro-active. On 9 th May,
six Muslims were arrested for planning an attack on a military base. At least
45 Muslims, mostly Pakistanis, were arrested in operation in Maryland on
22nd September.
The US, however, experienced the taste of its indigenous brand of
terrorism; the trigger-happiness. On 16th April, 32 people were killed and 28
wounded by an angry man in university campus in Virginia. It was the worst
act of terrorism in the US history in a university campus. Some sections of
the US media tried to link killer of Virginia Tech with Islam. Iran, however,
availed the opportunity to send condolences over the killings.

265

The terrorist was not an al-Qaeda man; he wasnt an Islamic fascist;

he did not attend a training camp in Pakistans tribal area; nor was he
brainwashed in a madrassa. He was a civilized man who got angry over
some problem with his girl friend. It is probably for such reasons that some
psychologists attribute Islamic terrorism to sexual starvation in a closed
society.
The angry young man was living in an open society, then why did he
resort to Islamic way of reacting to a situation? The experts will certainly
find out a reason other than the civilized mans tendency of violence which
has been on display since ages. As regards Muslims, they will keep
condemning those who resort to violence in reaction to the terror perpetrated
against them by such fanatics from the civilized world.
Criticism of Bushs war on terror kept mounting with each atrocious
act committed by his valiant soldiers. In addition to death and destruction
perpetrated in this war, the treatment meted out to captured suspects was not
only criticized but was also subjected to judicial scrutiny. On 11 th June, a US
court ordered release of a terror suspect, Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, saying that
the US cannot detain enemy combatant indefinitely without charge.
The Nation wrote on a facility created for the detainees with
reference to the statement of former Secretary of State. Powells statement
that Guantanamo Bay should be closed down not tomorrow but this
afternoon has provoked both commendation and ridicule. Praise because he
appears to be showing compassionand jeers because the man knowingly
lied at the UN in support of the war that has killed hundreds of thousands of
innocent civilians and now, out of office, is attempting at retrieving his
reputation.
But this controversy should not detract us from his view that
Guantanamo should be closed down immediately. It is no secret that
outrageous violations of human rights have been committed there. The
whole world, including Washingtons allies, is on record having called for its
closure.
Mr Powells efforts to remove the blot of torture and inhuman
treatment the prisoners at Guantanamo, Abu Gharaib and Bagram have been
put through at the hands of minions of the Bush Administration would not be
of much avail. He should recall top administration officials public
statements that since the detainees were dangerous criminals, they would
266

not be set free even if not found guilty by the courts. Such an outlandish,
dictatorial attitude is the very anti-thesis of democracy and freedom that
Washington never tires of espousing The former Secretary would have
to persuade US policymakers to make radically different moves to
reverse the trend.
Ekramul Haque suggested that the US should resolve the issues
through dialogue, instead of relying on military means. If US President
George W Bush had any hopes of clinching a military victory in
Afghanistan, Musharraf laid it to rest. The conflict with Taliban and alQaeda, he declared, needs a political solution. In a gutsy and wise move,
Musharraf advised the US to peacefully resolve the issues of Palestine,
Iraq and Lebanon as a way of dealing with anti-Americanism in the Muslim
World.
By linking the success of fight against terrorism to hot-button
unresolved Muslim issues around the world Musharraf has hit the nail on
the head. So far the war on terror has only dealt with the symptoms of the
malaise. Until the US confronts the root-cause of terrorism and resolves it
justly, winning the war against terror will be an exercise in self-deception.
In Europe, there was no let in the crackdown against Islamists,
despite the fact that out of 498 terror attacks across the continent during
2006, not in a single incident any Muslim was involved. UK stopped using
phrase of war on terror, after realizing that the world can no longer be fooled
with the use of this phrase. At the end of June, Blair quitted his office
without winning a visible victory in the war on terror. During the period
following incidents were reported:
Police arrested six terror suspects in and around London on 14 th April.
A fortnight later, five Brits, including four of Pakistani origin, were
sentenced to life imprisonment over fertilizer bomb case.
Widow of a 7/7 suicide bomber along with three others was held on 9th
May. Spanish police arrested 14 suspected militants on 28th May.
On 15th June, Britain jailed seven al-Qaeda plotters of dirty bomb.
During fourth week of June, Germany heightened alert against
terrorist attacks after three German militants were arrested on PakIran border.

267

 Police foiled bombing plot in London on 29 th June, involving two cars

laden with bombing material. Next day, two men rammed a blazing
jeep into the main terminal of Glasgow Airport.
Police arrested fifth suspect in terrorist attack attempts on 1 st July.
Next day, a Jordanian and a Palestinian doctor were held over
bombing plot.
Two more suspects in terror plot were held on 3rd July. Brown vowed
crackdown on foreign medics as all the suspects held were doctors.
Britain marked second anniversary of suicide attacks on 7th July. Two
days later, three men were convicted of plotting to bomb public
transport system of London in 2005.
On 11th July, four accused in London bombing plot got life sentence. A
week later, four people were sentenced for protesting over cartoons of
the Prophet (PBUH).
Danish police arrested eight terror suspects on 4th September. Next
day, three Muslims were arrested with explosive material in Germany.
One newly convert Muslim was arrested on Germany on 8 th
September. Two weeks later, two Pakistanis were held in Spain for
funding militants.
Hate campaign against Islam and its followers continued. On 16 th
June, Britain conferred knighthood on Rushdie for his anti Islam services.
Iran slammed award of knighthood and raised the head money to 80,000
pound. Muslim Council of Britain termed it provocative act but advised
Muslims to exercise restraint. Zawahiri threatened to retaliate against Britain
for having honoured Rushdie. On 8th August, a Dutch MP called for
imposing ban of Quraan.

MUSLIM WORLD
According to a poll conducted in April more than 70 percent of
Egyptians, Pakistanis, Indonesians and Moroccans believed that the US is

268

trying to divide Islamic World. Unfortunately, the ruling elite in Islamic

world did not belong to this majority of the obscurantists.
Islamic countries foreign ministers meeting in Islamabad ended on
17 May without making major breakthrough on vital issues faced by the
Muslim World. They called for withdrawal of troops from Iraq; supported
Irans right to acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes; urged
formation of independent Palestinian state; and condemned growing trend of
Islamophobia.
th

In July, a Saudi cleric dared giving a verdict that liberals were not true
Muslims. Less than three months later, Saudi Grand Mufti, Sheikh
Abdulaziz on the pay-roll of Saudi kings, warned youths against traveling
abroad for jihad since the situation there is troubled, he gave an impression
that as if jihad is permitted only in trouble free lands.
Mowahid Hussain Shah pointed out the differences of perception in
Muslim masses and the elite, especially in the Arab World. The cycle of
history continues to repeat itself. Today, once more, occupation situations
abound in Muslim lands. The lands may have been occupied but the landdwellers have not been vanquished. Force despite its massive use has
not proven to be a deterrent.
The combined military might of Israel, buttressed by unconditional
US aid, and indirectly facilitated by an impotent Arab Establishment, have
dismally failed to subdue the Palestinian resistance. So much so, that it
has compelled the former chief of Israels Mossad, Efraim Halevy, to urge
negotiations with Hamas. Terming defeat of Hamas unrealistic, he contends
that if they are not engaged in talks and continue to be shut out: they will no
longer feel constrained by anything, because there is nothing left for them to
hope for.
In striking contrast, the mind-set of Muslim elites remains
defensive. Instead of displaying leadership that can inspire and lead the
nation out of its troubles, they convey a submissive image of pessimism and
futility. The bigger picture, however, reveals that human spirit, despite
difficulty, remains unconquered.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal analyzed the causes of desperation and resultant
militancy. A quick early morning browsing of newspapers leaves one
stupefied with horror. The mind becomes cluttered with the thoughts and

269

images of severed heads, and shattered bodies on men, women and children
whose lives have been extinguished by random acts of violence, These
gruesome images emerge from cities like Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar,
Baghdad, Kufa, and Kandahar. The majority of dead are usually Muslims.
The numbers pile day by day, dead bodies are buried by the living but
their memory lingers. These men, women and children, who were walking
among the living just before the blast in a hotel or a car packed with
explosive extinguished their lives, leave the world in a state far worse than
what they had found when they arrived here. The world has never been such
a violent place as it is now. This downward journey of humanity has been
accelerated over the last decade to such an extent that even the most
violent periods of history have become pale in comparison.
A quick glance at the map of the world is enough to ascertain that the
center of this violence is within the broad geographical area where
Muslims have lived for centuries. It is true that there have been acts of
violence in the United States and UK in recent years, but these are no routine
occurrences. Most of the Western world enjoys relative peace and a sense of
safety.
A general feature of this region is a sub-current of discontent with
the political situation. Afghanistan, Palestine, and Iraq are under direct
foreign occupation with thousands of Western soldiers actively engaged in
an ongoing war. The other states in the region have a common denominator:
they are being ruled by men who do not represent the will of the people.
They are despots who have usurped power in midnight coups, or have been
installed by foreign powers, or are simply puppets who serve the goals of
those in whose hands is their control.
Apart from this political scenario, there is the economic factor: in
most of these countries, wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few and the
poor are becoming poorer. There is a great deal of social and economic
injustice in the region. The majority of population lives under harsh
conditions. Educational opportunities are either limited or non-existent.
Youth in particular has a bleak future.
This combination of poverty, the lack of educational facilities,
economic disparity, and a general lack of hope has produced polities in
which there is an abundance of men and women who are willing to

270

commit acts of violence through which they can relieve their own suffering
or so they think, although this may only be the end of one form of suffering.
Rulers in this region are blind to the underlying causes of
violence; they have only one response: violence. State violence has resulted
in nothing but more deaths, yet those who have decided to curb violence
with violence do not see this apparent cause and effect equation at all. The
result is the continuous reign of violence and death.
The so-called civil society in this region is equally bereft of any
constructive role. Few civic bodies play a role in the reconstruction of these
societies. The lawyers, the writers, the intellectuals, and the thinkers are
silent spectators of the chaos and the carnage. The businessmen, the
professionals, and the industrialists are busy in making money as the world
around them crumbles.
The cycle of violence is not going to end until something very
basic and fundamental in these societies is changed through a wellplanned long-term strategy. But in order for such a strategy to evolve, there
must be men and women who can clearly see the links between the
explosive devices which destroy lives of innocent people walking down the
road and the injustice and oppression that is the hallmark of these societies.
Such wise men and women are either asleep or simply do not exist anymore
and their absence from the scene gives death a free reign.
The factors mentioned by Dr Muzaffar undoubtedly contribute
towards discontentment in the people of the region. But the discontentment
alone cannot result in violence of a magnitude being witnessed today.
Moreover, these factors have been there for at least two centuries and the
violence is the phenomenon of this century. The people because of their
strong faith in destiny right or wrong had reconciled with their plight.
The question; therefore, arises that has there been any major change in
their belief in the destiny? If not so, which new factor has been added with
the advent of new century? The answer is the unjust war imposed on them
by the Crusaders. To their utter disgust, they find their own leaders allying
with the Crusaders; this had to result in extreme despair and violent reaction.
It would be wrong to blame the Muslims for violence as any people in the
world would have reacted the same way.

271

Nasrullah Khan Goraya reminded the rulers of Islamic World by

drawing their attention to New World Order. The present scenario, one of
the most tumultuous periods in human history, has been marked by
numerous upheavals, revolutions and radical departures from the past.
Ranging from the colonial system and the great twentieth century empires to
the rise and fall of broad and disastrous experiments with totalitarianism,
fascism and communism, some of these upheavals have been extremely
destructive, involving the deaths of millions, the eradication of old lifestyles
and traditions, and the collapse of time-honoured institutions.
Due to cancerous growth of materialism, epidemic rise of crime and
organized criminality, widespread increase in mindless violence, everdeepening disparity between rich and poor, continuing disgrace faced by
women, breakdown of family life, growth of political corruption, a billion
live in abject poverty, more than a third of the worlds people are illiterate
and other horrified dilemmas; the life has become unsecured. The persisting
danger of atomic war has snatched the comfort of humanity because it is
always girded up to grab their lives and belongings. This terrible outcome of
perishing human beings is a result of a bloody ideology that is imposed on
them by dint of technological power. This ideology is known as New
World Order (NWO). It is a policy for the imposition of a pax-Americana
on the weaker countries of Third World and creating American dependencies
out of the Muslim states.
It is a fact that the NWO is an American and NATO countries
framework for future military actions. NATO is, therefore, to act in the
world beyond under American leadership. The NWO is a killer of human
beings. It is threat to peace, security, progress, freedom, individual rights,
religion, culture and civilization. Intervention in the freedom and
sovereignty of various states, conspiracy of killing heads of states, complete
control over third worlds resources, wealth, oil, trade, finance, and
manpower are its salient features. The NWO took place after World War II
and its instruments are Political, Economic, Arms, Technology, State and
Diplomacy.
The NWO is an unveiled danger to the Muslim World, particularly
Muslim Arab world. It craves for complete control over the resources of the
Muslim World, the recognition of Israel and its integration in the ME.
Further: nuclear non-proliferation; Emancipation of Muslim women;
deteriorating Muslim family system; imposing cultural and civil war;

272

changing the education system of the Muslim countries; attacking the

honour of the Holy Prophet (SAW); and disfiguring the concept of Jihad and
relating it with terrorism.
Now you can see the consequences of this policy. The oil-rich Arab
countries are now at USs mercy. Trillions of oil revenues of Arabs are in
European and American banks. The IMF and World Bank are doing
economic exploitation. The most powerful diplomatic weapon against the
Third World in general and Muslim World in particular is the UN Security
Councils veto. Out of five, four are white European Christian permanent
members of SC who have veto powers and none of the Muslim country has
this right. The massacre of innocent individuals in Iraq, Afghanistan,
Palestine, Thailand, Turkistan, Kashmir, Bosnia, and in other parts of the
world is being carried out with the help of this new order.
The NWO is an open Crusade against the whole humanity of the
world Why it is not violating the sovereignty of Britain, France, Germany
or Japan? Why only poor countries fall a prey to its barbarism! In reality, the
evangelists, the Zionists and the extremists have joined hands with NWO
they can only be described as the worst form of religio-political
fundamentalism in American history.
In the aftermath of the recent Gulf War, the US shifted its tactical
advance headquarters of CENTCOM to Bahrain. It has kept military
equipment in the ME, mostly in Saudi Arabia. Now the demand of the NWO
is regional arms control and economic reconstruction in the ME. Its
objective is to change the Arab character of the ME into Arab-Jewish
region and establish the military-political supremacy of Israel; by allowing
Israel alone on the pretext of self-defence to retain WMD, as a nuclear
power. Whats more, is that India-Israel cooperation will cover most of
Asia.
The New World Information Order is a new aspect of the NWO
that deals with the information, media and education of the world. Electronic
and print media are controlled on daily basis so that they broadcast the order
in a very soft image. The strategies applied are virulent media approach;
spreading vulgarity in the name of enlightened moderation; concept of
accountability in the hereafter to be fainted; promoting sectarian rifts among
the followers of different religions; and extending a booby culture with lack
of all moral values.

273

All the claims made by NWO to struggle for peace, equality and
to condemn oppression and tyrannies have failed. Because historically it
has proved that the sham-democracy has remained a principle. It has dealt
such a fatal blow to the peace and prosperity of the mankind that it cannot
replace itself with the Just Order. The future of this planet may not last for
the next few decades. Now, it is a need of the hour that a fresh and Just
World Order should be formulated, purely on Islamic principles. It is
because no other religion of the world can guarantee the preservation of
human rights. It is blessing for all the humanity since it is a complete code of
life.
So, lets build a better future by introducing a New Muslim
World Order for the felicity of human kind. Some of the salient features
are: Confirming security of life; developing human beings competencies to
gain prosperity; eliminating the danger of war forever; ensuring worldly
progress as well the well-being of the life hereafter; giving equal chances of
progress, freedom and ruling to individuals regardless of language, creed,
colour, and sex etc; and respecting human-beings.
We can also take other useful steps for the implementation of this
merciful new world order. First of all, we should be sure that the New
Islamic World Order is a fact that can never be denied at all. Second, we
must create a conducive atmosphere in the Muslim World for the unity of
Muslim Ummah. Our intellectuals, scholars and theologians ought to ascend
a spirit of Islam among the followers of the religion. As we struggle for this
noble cause we must consider this endeavour as the revitalization of our
religion. We must involve the youths of the Muslim World and educate them
properly. Conservation of natural resources will enable us to sustain for a
longer time.
The total GDP of all the 61 Muslim countries is 2 trillion dollars
whereas the city of Las Vegas has the economy of 13 trillion. The single
currency will curb unproductive speculations and unpredictable market
swings, promote a leveling of incomes and prices worldwide and thereby
result in significant savings. We propose the appointment of a Commission
consisting of the most accomplished government leaders, academics and
professionals to begin immediate explorations into the economic benefits
and the political costs of a single currency and to hypothesize about an
effective implementation approach.

274

To cope with the NWO, it is essential for the Muslim World to

establish a harmonious educational system of the highest standard and
quality. Currently, there are only 500 universities in all through the Muslim
World, while the vanguard country of the NWO has 5758 universities alone
on its soil. The whole Muslim World spends 2% of its GDP on the research
work whereas the countries of the NWO spend 5% of their GDP on the
research. The history bears that Muslims were the leaders
Nothing is impossible to a willing mind. We can face out any
challenge if we are just determined and the American NWO is nothing
hard to defeat. There is a strong need of observing unity and enthusiasm. We
can learn much from our past. The widening system of Islamic Banking
around the globe including Europe is a testimony that Islam is the most
powerful and successful code of life. No doubt, there is the existence of 61
Muslim states on the surface of earth, yet there is the famine of true, honest,
active and competent leadership in them. So to fulfill this vacuum, we need
to prepare our youths. We cannot get rid of the NWO unless we provide a
true leadership. So, lets hope that tomorrow will be better than today and
that the 21st century in the century of Islam.
Mazahar Qayyum Khan expressed his views on threats of attacking
Makkah and Madina. If anyone had thought that the ascension of President
George W Bush to the White House was a freak act of nature, he had better
bury that thought. The front running contenders of both Republican and
Democratic parties in the 2008 presidential race are giving no indication
that they are different breed; rather, on their watch, the superpower risks
pursuing even more irrational and aggressive policies and turn the world into
a more chaotic place than Mr Bushs misadventures have made it.
Turning a deaf ear to Congressman Tancredos utterances on the
assumption that they are the ravings of a person desperately trying to get
into the White House will be fraught with grave danger. The US has done
before and it could do it again.
No doubt, in the mad rush for presidency, Tancredo takes the cake of
trying to strike the terror in the Muslims heart, but other candidates do
not fare too badly in venturing out to the dangerous field, though their stance
has been rather ambiguously worded.
The reality, it seems, is that George W Bush is not a freak act of
nature. Nor is nature wreaking vengeance The world is condemned to
275

live with a superpower run by parochial demagogues with little idea of what
lies beyond their noses, till other wiser nations are able to dethrone it. The
signs of its retreat are already there on the horizon.
Burhanuddin Hasan had some ideas for countering Islamophobia.
The United States is in the grip of the worst Islamophobia these days.
Irrational people such as popular radio talk show host Dennis Pragger has
said that Black Muslim Congressman Keith Ellisons decision to take his
oath of office on the Holy Quraan undermines American civilization.
Similarly, another Radio Show host, Jerry Kline, has in the past said that all
Muslims living on the US should be forced to wear identifying mark like an
armband or a tattoo.
Islam is a clear and present danger, said a pamphlet that was
distributed at an American church recently. Christians are in danger from
the spread of the doctrines of Islam. The pamphlet quotes several sources,
mostly Evangelical Christian scholars, who frame Islam as a religion at
odds with Christianity. Competing for converts around the world, the
pamphlet asserts that: Muslims consider themselves to be part of a holy war,
designed to take over the earth.
Christianity and Islam have existed for 15 hundred years, despite the
relentless efforts of Christian missionaries to convert Muslims, and Muslim
Tabligh Jamats to convert Christians in a peaceful manner, rather than by
force through terrorism. The believers of both religions never considered
this as a threat to their existence. Today, however, this has changed.
Religious persecution happened in the Middle Ages during the Crusades, no
doubt, but that was war-like situation.
The present wave of world wide terrorism directed against the
US, Britain and some other European countries is the rebound effect of
the unjustified US attack on Iraq and the execution of Saddam Hussein.
Hussein neither had a hand in the terror attacks on the US, nor possessed
weapons of mass destruction. In fact, the US was his ally when he waged a
long war against Iran after the Islamic revolution.
Historys biggest blunder was committed by President Bush, and
this has become the worst nightmare for not only the US, but also its allies
in the West. Iraq is now in the grip of a horrible civil war in which hundreds
of Iraqis and US soldiers are being killed every day at a cost of billions of
dollars to the US.
276

According to a recent Global Attitudes survey, younger Muslims in

the US are much more likely than other Muslim Americans to say that
suicide in the defense of Islam can be at least sometimes justified. About
one out of every four American Muslims under 30 thinks that suicide
bombing in defense of Islam is justified in at least some circumstancesif 5
percent of American Muslims support al-Qaeda, thats more that
100,000 people.
Al-Qaeda leaders and preachers misinterpret the teachings of the
Holy Quraan through their obscure approach to light a fire of revenge
against the infidels and their supporters. This is also a kind of
Islamophobia, which encourages al-Qaeda operatives to kill their Muslim
brothers do not believe in their interpretation of Islamic edicts. This has led
to a large-scale Sunni-Shia clash, which has resulted in the killing of
innocent people in Iraq and many other Islamic countries.
This carnage in the name of Islam is bound to continue, unless a
dedicated group of Muslim scholars comes forward in the US and other
western as well as Islamic countries to forcefully counter the war on
radicalism and terrorism in the name of Islam. There is great need to
project the liberal image of Islam through print and electronic media in the
West as well as in the Islamic World. Islamophobia is the decease that has
spread because of the intolerance of the West for Islam, and the analyst, true
the apologetic mindset of Muslim intellectuals, has ended up blaming and
advising the Muslims.
While Muslim intellectuals discussed causes and consequences of
Islamophobia, Spengler rejoiced over the spread of Christianity. Ten
thousand Chinese become Christians each day, according to a stunning
report by the National Catholic Reporters veteran correspondent John Allen,
and 200 million Chinese may comprise the worlds largest concentration of
Christians by mid-century, and the largest missionary force in history.
I suspect that even the most enthusiastic accounts err on the
downside, and that Christianity will have become a Sino-centric religion
two generations from now. China may be for the 21st century what Europe
was during the 8th-11th centuries.
If this occurs, the world will change beyond our capacity to recognize
it. Islam might defeat the western Europeans, simply by replacing their

277

diminishing numbers with immigrants, but it will crumble beneath the

challenge from the east.
Some Chinese Evangelicals and Pentecostals believe that the basic
movement of the gospel for the last 2,000 years has been westward: from
Jerusalem to Antioch, from Antioch to Europe, from Europe to America, and
from America to China. Now, they believe, its their turn to complete the
loop by carrying the gospel to Muslim lands, eventually arriving in
Jerusalem. Once that happens, they believe, the gospel will have been
preached to the entire world. Aikman reports that two Protestant seminaries
secretly are training missionaries for deployment in Muslim countries.
Islam also is expanding. At the edge of the Gobi Desert and on
Chinas western border with Central Asia, Islam claims perhaps 30 million
adherents. Islam in China remains the religion of the economic losers,
whose geographic remoteness isolates them from the economic
transformation on the coasts, Christianity, by contrast, has burgeoned among
the new middle class in Chinas cities, where the greatest wealth and
productivity are concentrated. Islam has a thousand-year presence in China
and has grown by natural increase rather than conversion; evangelical
Protestantism had almost no adherents in China a generation ago.
Chinas Protestants Evangelized at the risk of liberty and sometimes
life, and possess a sort of fervor not seen in Christian ranks for centuries.
Their pastors have been beaten and jailed, and they have had to create their
own institutions through the house church movement.
Chinas network of house churches may turn out to be the heaven of
democracy, like the radical Puritans of England who became the
Congratulationists of New England. Freedom of worship is the first
precondition for democracy, for it makes possible freedom of conscience.
The fearless Evangelists at the grassroots of China will, in the fullness of
time, do more to bring US-style democracy to the world than all the
nation-building bluster of President George W Bush and his advisers.

CONCLUSION
The US hypocrisy or double standards, or give it any name has
been in stark exposure in the brewing conflict between Kurds and Turkey.

278

Bush Regime has been pressing hard, including the use of the threat of a bill
on Armenians killings, to stop Turkey from doing more against the Kurd
terrorists who had been on the rampage of late; the reason: Kurd terrorists
are sponsored by the Crusaders.
Turks, particularly the armed forces, are obsessed with acquisition of
European identity through membership of EU. They failed to note that the
Christian Europe is reluctant to accept a Muslim country, despite its claim of
secularism, as part of their union. The Europe has already betrayed Turkey
by accepting Cyprus as member of the EU and has hyped the issue of
Armenian Holocaust to demonize Turkey; the US seemed to be joining hand
with Europeans on this issue as well.
Reportedly, OIC has been contemplating changing its name in next
meeting; will it make any difference, Mr Oh I See? Any name will be
inconsequential for the people who lack moral courage to own their failings.
Triple A (Association of American Allies), or the FOA (Friends of America),
would be more realistic name.
Nasrullah Khan Goraya discussed the dangers inherent in NWO at
length. In first part of the article he analyzed the ground realities and drew
quite logical inferences/conclusions. The later part, which primarily
addressed the ruling elite, seemed like a wish-list; being quite contrary to the
ground realities in Islamic World.
11th October 2007

279

AFTER SIX YEARS

The Afghan War has entered seventh year on 7 th October. The
American and European forces have still not succeeded in defeating the
Pashtuns resisting the occupation of their homeland, despite the outright
collaboration of Pakistan and support from rest of the Islamic World.
The sixth year of war has been the bloodiest since the invasion of
Afghanistan. In this year the war-related deaths went up by 55 percent as
compared to the average deaths during last five years. This was due to
indiscriminate use of military muscle even against women and children who
happened to be in the vicinity of suspected militants.
The resistance put up by Pashtuns, using any military yardstick, stands
out to be quite commendable, particularly in view of the fact that all the
visible sources of foreign assistance have been severed. Their tenacity has
forced the illegal occupants and their puppet to consider the option of
dialogue which had been despised for half a decade.
The holding of Pak-Afghan peace jirga in Kabul was recognition of
the reality that military means had failed in subduing the Pashtuns. The
Crusaders also aimed at full involvement of Afghan War. Musharraf
regimes blind following of the Crusaders commands has already escalated
the war beyond the Durand Line leading to persistent recitation of do more
mantra. That has posed grave threats to Pakistan security which have been
discussed in articles pertaining to Pakistan.

INSURGENCY
Afghans kept resisting the occupation. One security guard was killed
in two suicide attacks in Helmand and Farah on 16 th July. Governor of
Kapisa was sacked by Karzai over misleading the US forces and causing
civilian deaths. Two days later, seventeen Afghan policemen were killed in
two ambushes of convoys in Zabul and Logar provinces. A suicide bomber
targeted a Turkish convoy in Kabul. Reportedly, Hekmatyar declared
ceasefire in his fight against Afghan government.

280

Six policemen were killed in an ambush in Helmand province on 20th

July. A car bomber attacked a US-led convoy in Sangin killing two civilians
and wounding two soldiers. Taliban abducted 18 Koreans in Ghazni
province. They also claimed to have abducted Germans and threatened to
kill them if German troops dont leave Afghanistan.
On 21st July, Taliban said two Germans held by them had been killed
as Germany did not concede to their demand. They threatened to kill 22
Koreans if demand for release of 25 militants was not met. One security
guard was killed in an ambush. Six people were wounded in Kunar due to
fire of occupation forces. Next day, Taliban demanded release of 23 of their
men in exchange of 23 Koreans.
King Zahir Shah, who was brought back to Kabul to be used as
symbol of Afghan unity, died on 23rd July. Six coalition soldiers were killed
in a suicide attack. Sixty Taliban were killed by occupation forces in two
days. Next day, the death toll in occupation forces operation rose to 75.
On 25th July, Taliban killed one Korean captive and threatened to kill
others if their demands were not met. One Bulgarian soldier was wounded
when Kandahar airport came under fire. Next day, 50 suspected Taliban
were killed by occupation forces. A German journalist was kidnapped in
Kunar province.
Fifty suspected Taliban and 28 women and children were killed in
air strike in Helmand on 27th July. Next day, five coalition soldiers and 25
Taliban were killed in different incidents. Taliban were reported to have used
heat-seeking missile for the first time.
On 29th July, Taliban once again extended the deadline for execution
of Korean captives. Three British soldiers were killed in three days. Next
day, it was reported that 16 security guards, 3 policemen and 11 Taliban
were killed during last two days in southern Afghanistan. Governor of
Ghazni rejected military action for release of Koreans. Taliban said they
have killed second hostage.
On 31st July, ASEAN called for release of hostages and in Islamabad
Korean Ambassador met Fazlur Rahman for help. Three Afghan workers
with NGO were found dead near Kandahar on 7th August. On 8th August,
four Taliban were killed and six wounded in police raid in Ghazni province.
Two employees of a foreign company were shot dead in Nangarhar

281

province. In Laghman, a police post was attacked; five policemen and a

fighter were killed.
Five Afghan soldiers were killed in roadside bombing near border
with Waziristan on 9th August. Next day, 45 people including 35 Taliban
were killed in various incidents; one NATO soldier was also killed and
another wounded.
At least 29 people were killed on 12th August in different incidents.
One NATO soldier was killed and two wounded in roadside bombing. Next
day, at least 14 people were killed in two incidents; five NATO soldiers were
wounded in another incident. Taliban released two Korean women.
On 14th August, 11 people were killed in various incidents of violence.
The US accused but Iran denied arming Taliban; Karzai agreed with the
latter. Next day, a Polish soldier was killed in roadside bombing and
exchange of fire near Gardez; five Afghan soldiers were wounded.
A governor and his three children were killed in an attack in southern
Afghanistan on 17th August. Next day, a suicide bomber rammed his vehicle
into a US convoy near Kandahar killing 15 people including four policemen
and wounding 26 others. In a retaliatory attack 12 suspected Taliban were
killed. A German woman was kidnapped in Kabul.
A NATO soldier was among 24 killed in various incidents in southern
Afghanistan on 19th August. A trader was kidnapped in Logar province.
Conflicting reports were received about clashes in Zabul and Kapisa. Next
day, a Canadian soldier was killed in roadside bombing. Afghan police
rescued the German female aid worker from the kidnappers. At least 24
people were killed in different incidents on 21 st August. Next day, 11 people
were killed in violence across the country; Governor Khost survived in a
suicide attack.
Taliban attacked a convoy carrying supplies for occupation forces in
Zabul province on 23rd August and killed ten guards; three people were
killed in other incidents. Korean hostages called for help. Next day, a bomb
dropped by US plane killed three and wounded two NATO soldiers in
Helmand province. Two coalition soldiers were killed in road accident.
The NATO forces targeted a marriage party in Helmand province
killing 18 and wounding 22 people on 25 th August. Ten people were killed in

282

Ghazni, two in Kandahar and four elsewhere, including a NATO soldier.

Elsewhere, 20 more people were killed in the violence out of which 11 were
killed in air strike near Pakistan border.
Five NATO soldiers were among 22 killed in various incidents of
violence on 27th August. A Russian disguised as woman was arrested in
Paktia province. Imam of Seoul Mosque was inducted in efforts for release
of kidnapped Koreans.
Next day, the US-led forces killed more than one hundred Islamist
militants in a clash in southern Afghanistan in which fighter aircrafts were
used. Six Afghan soldiers and 15 Taliban were killed in another incident and
in yet another incident three NATO soldiers were killed and six wounded.
On 29th August, Taliban rejected NATO claim of killing more than 100
fighters; only 18 people were killed including Afghan security personnel.
Taliban freed 12 Koreans including seven women. South Korea agreed to
accelerate troop pullout from Afghanistan. One NATO soldier and an
interpreter were killed on 30th August. Three containers were set on fire.
Taliban released the remaining Korean hostages. Next day, 12 people were
killed in two incidents of violence.
The US-led forces resorting to air strikes killed more than 70 Taliban
on 1 September in four incidents near Pakistan border, Herat and Helmand.
Next day, occupation forces claimed killing 120 Taliban in air strikes near
Kandahar; Taliban denied suffering big losses. Four civilians were killed in
another strike in Kunar province. Afghan authorities claimed arresting four
Pakistanis.
st

On 3rd September, 7 Afghan security men were killed in roadside

bombing in Kunar province. More than five hundred policemen were killed
in last five months. Taliban vowed to kidnap and kill more foreigners. Next
day, at least 40 people were killed in a US-led raid; out of which 22,
including Commander Matin who kidnapped Koreans.
Two coalition soldiers and two policemen were killed in attacks by
Taliban on 5th September. Occupation forces retaliated and killed 75 people
in air strikes launched in Ghazni, Kandahar and Helmand areas. Next day, at
least 60 Pashtuns were killed in two air strikes. Two NATO troops were
killed in separate attacks.

283

Two NATO soldiers were killed and four wounded in an ambush in

Helmand on 8th September. Next day, 43 people including 3 NATO soldiers
were killed in incidents of violence. A suicide bomber attacked a police
convoy in Girishk on 10th September killing 27 people. In Khost, the
gunmen freed ten de-miners out of 13 held by them. Next day, five people
were killed in suicide bombing in Helmand.
At least fifteen people were killed on 12th September in incidents of
violence. Next day, at least 75 Pashtoons were killed; out of which 45 in
Uruzgan and 20 in Zabul were killed in air strikes. A Bangladeshi aid worker
was shot dead in Badakhshan. The remaining three de-miners were released
by the kidnappers.
Ten Afghan militants were killed in Helmand province, claimed US
Military on 14th September. Two days later, more than ten militants were
reported killed in an air strike in Khost. At least nine people were killed in
suicide bombing in southern Afghanistan on 17th September and one person
was killed in NATO air strike. Next day, at least 14 Taliban were killed in
two clashes in Helmand province and a British soldier was killed in a
separate incident.
At least 36 suspected militants were killed on 19 th September in
Uruzgan. Four policemen and 20 Taliban were killed in a clash in Badghis
province. One militant was killed and 6 arrested in an operation in Zabul. In
Ghazni a suicide bomber attacked a military convoy injuring one soldier.
At least 85 people were killed on 21st September; out of which 75
were routinely massacred in air strike in Helmand. One coalition soldier was
killed when a French convoy was attacked near Kabul. Two days later, 25
Afghans were killed; two former policemen were beheaded in Ghazni
province; and two Italian soldiers went missing. At least 25 people were
killed in various incidents on 24th September. Two Spanish soldiers were
killed and six wounded when their vehicle was blown up by a landmine.
Italian soldier was rescued in Herat.
At least 60 Taliban were killed in Musa Qala of Helmand province
by NATO forces on 25th September. By next day, more than 170 Afghans
were massacred by the US led forces in air strikes and clashes in last two
days in Helmand and Uruzgan; one Coalition soldier was also killed and
four others wounded.

284

Two US soldiers and an Afghan were killed in suicide bombing near

Jalalabad. Two Danish soldiers were killed and two wounded in a clash in
Helmand province. Four persons, including two foreigners, were kidnapped
by gunmen.
Five persons, including two policemen, were killed on 28 th September
in a bomb blast in Girishk. Two officials on Red Cross were kidnapped in
Wardak. Next day, at least 30 soldiers were killed in Kabul when a suicide
bomber blew himself up. Kidnappers freed four Red Cross hostages.
Taliban killed 11 policemen in Ghazni province on 30 th September.
Governor of Paktia was shot dead and three civilians were killed in crossfire.
A NATO soldier was killed in a separate incident. Next day, at least 20
people were killed in Helmand province in US-led forces air strike and
seven were killed elsewhere. Militants kidnapped two persons.
On 2nd October, at least 13 people were killed in suicide bombing on a
police bus in Kabul. Next day, Taliban seized a district in Ghazni province.
Five Afghans and a US soldier were killed in suicide attack in Kabul on 6 th
October. Taliban claimed killing five German soldiers in an attack.
On 7th October, 16 militants were killed, six wounded and one
captured in an operation in Paktika in which fighter planes were used. One
Afghan was killed in Paktia and a woman was shot dead by police in
Ghazni. Afghan authorities claimed capturing four tones of liquid heroin
near Iranian border.
Next day, 13 people were killed in violence; one Australian soldier
was also killed and four were wounded. Karzai regime announced execution
of 15 prisoners. NATO forces killed 15 Afghans in an air strike on 9 th
October. Next day, a German and four captured Afghans were exchanged
with five Taliban held by the regime. At least 11 persons were killed in
various incidents across the country.
Seven Afghan soldiers, including a senior commander, were killed in
suicide bombing in Spin Boldak on 13 th October; Taliban claimed killing ten
soldiers. Two days later, a suicide bomber killed own family when the
explosive went off prematurely.

Other events of varying significance which happened during the

period were as under:

285

 During second half of July, NATO countries were urged to send more
troops to Afghanistan.
Bush and Brown met in Washington on 2nd August and showed
differences over Afghan policy.
On 6th August, Russia canceled 90 percent debts of Afghanistan.
Karzai met Bush and asked him that Pakistan must help quell deadly
violence inside Afghanistan.
NNI reported that Iranian bombs were being smuggled into
Afghanistan. UNHCR demanded more funds for return of Afghan
refugees. Hekmatyar conditionally backed the peace jirga.
On 12th August, joint peace jirga pledged to end terrorism. Delegates
urged reconciliation with Taliban. Musharraf asked Afghanistan to
trust Pakistan. There was no mention of an end to the occupation of
Afghanistan.
Ahmadenijad visited Kabul on 14th August. Karzai termed Iran a
helper and both leaders vowed to cement ties despite US pressure.
Reportedly, the US and Taliban held secret talks. On 27 th August,
Afghan police destroyed a heroin laboratory as poppy crop increased
by 18 percent. No ceasefire with foreign forces, said Hekmatyar.
On 29th August, Netherlands asked Norway to send troops to
Afghanistan.
On 11th September, Taliban showed willingness for talks with
government for withdrawal of foreign troops. Ten days later, UNSC
extended ISAF stay in Afghanistan for one year.
Karzai offered power-sharing to Taliban. On 5th October, the US
Congress was told that the US occupation forces failed to raise
Afghan police force.
On 12th October, Mulla Omar called for withdrawal of foreign forces.
Next day, Canada formed a body to review Afghan military mission.

286

COMMENTS
Some of the events that happened during the period were discussed
by the observers. After the kidnapping of Koreans, The Nation wrote: As
the Afghan intelligence agencies are still busy trying to gather information
about the kidnapped Korean nationals, a Taliban spokesman has confirmed
that two German citizens taken hostage this week had been killed.
The resurgence of terrorism in the war-ravaged country has
posed serious challenges for the Karzai government, which has not been
able to establish the writ beyond the capital despite the active support of the
US-led NATO troops.
The prolonged presence of the coalition forces in Afghanistan has
turned into a war against foreign occupation. Perhaps Mr Karzai and his
NATO backers have not been able to find how to counter the Taliban
resurgence. It is time the Bush Administration realized that the challenge of
recreating peace and stability in Afghanistan could only be met by
ending the illegal occupation of the sovereign state.
Karl F Inderfurth expressed his views on Bush-Karzai meeting and the
NIE report. A US National Intelligence Estimate says al-Qaeda has
established a new safe haven on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
Meanwhile, international support for staying the course in Afghanistan
is slipping
Bush said that the two leaders talked about their security strategy for
Afghanistan. In the weeks ahead, that strategy should focus on two
overriding priorities what can be done to enhance the Afghan presidents
ability to govern at home and what steps can be taken to reinvigorate the
international communitys commitment to a stable and secure Afghanistan
over the long term.
Among the reports key recommendations and ones the United
States should support are: First, coordination of the international effort
in Afghanistan involving a 37-nation coalition, scores of international
agencies and non-government organizations, and billions of dollars in aid
is a huge task and not going well, setting back the reconstruction effort.
Second, violence is increasing spreading to previously more
peaceful provinces in Afghanistan and the capital, Kabul. Also increasing

287

are the numbers of civilians killed and injured as a result of NATO and US
military activity, undercutting support for the foreign presence in
Afghanistan and fueling the Taliban insurgency.
Third, NATO is falling short on its planned military requirements
for Afghanistan. The reluctance of some NATO members to provide troops
for the Afghan mission is undermining NATOs credibility and its
operations. A strategy is needed to persuade these NATO governments to
address this deficient.
Fourth, the international community should put greater emphasis on
training the Afghan National Police seen as the weakest link in the
countrys security reform program and address corruption in the judicial
system.
Fifth, the effort to redirect Afghanistans narco-state economy lacks
clarity and coherence. International disagreements over the appropriate
means of poppy eradication must be addressed along with more active
development of alternative livelihood schemes.
Finally, Afghanistans relations with Pakistan and Iran are vital
to its future. Irans effort to check the flow of narcotics across its border
with Afghanistan is welcomed, but concern is expressed about reports the
explosives originating from Iran have been used by insurgents in
Afghanistan.
One senior British official says the next 18 months are critical for
Afghanistan: If we do not make progress in that time, we could be in
deep trouble. This period coincides with President Bushs remaining term
in office. Afghanistans future and Bushs presidential legacy are, as they
have been since 9/11, inextricably linked.
Rahimullah Yusufzai discussed reported talks with Taliban. Speaking
at the Labour Party conference in Bournemouth, England, the British
defence secretary said the participation of the Taliban was necessary in
the peace process if it was to be successful As if willing to accept
ground realities, Des Browne in the same speech made it clear that there was
no possibility of establishing a western legal system in Afghanistan and
argued that an Islamic-based solution must be accepted instead. He also
warned Labour Party delegates that Britain could face civilian or military
commitments for generations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

288

Speaking at the same conference and in a similar vein based on a

sense of realism, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband stressed that
human rights should take precedence over military might and called
upon the West to understand Muslims who fear and distrust the US. He
conceded that the West had won the wars but was hard pressed to win the
peace. In his view, the lesson to be learnt was that while there were military
victories, there was never a military solution.
The ongoing British military engagement in Afghanistan has also
been costly. More than 80 British soldiers have been killed since joining the
US-led coalition to invade Afghanistan in October 2001 to overthrow the
Taliban regime and take revenge from al-Qaeda for plotting the 9/11 attacks.
Talibans greatest strength is not their military prowess but faith and
belief in their cause.
That the British are willing to consider the option of talking to the
Taliban shouldnt come as a surprise This is not to say that all Americans
are opposed to approaching the Taliban to talk peace. Some American
analysts and at least one senator have suggested talking to the Taliban
because they too realized the Afghanistan would remain destabilized as long
as they are kept out of the political mainstream.
However, there are formidable hurdles to starting a peace process
involving the Taliban The Taliban could consider offering guarantees not
to allow the use of Afghanistan as a base for launching terrorist attacks
against other countries. They may also be willing to discuss curtailing the
activities of wanted men such as Osama bin Laden who are considered a
threat to the US and its allies. However, the Taliban are unlikely to agree to
deliver bin Laden to the US after having sacrificed everything, including the
government and lives, for his sake. Conditions involving Talibans
willingness to recognize the government of President Hamid Karzai or
giving up the armed resistance would also have to be diluted to kick-start the
peace process. Ways would have to found to respond to the basic demand
of the Taliban for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Afghanistan
before starting peace negotiations.
Any offer of peace talks aimed at sidelining top Taliban leaders such
as Mulla Omar and splitting them into hardliners and moderates would lead
the Afghan government and its western sponsors nowhere. Almost all of the
Taliban, including the Pakistani ones, accept Mullah Omar as their leader
and there can be no peace or power-sharing deal in Afghanistan without
289

talking to him. Also, the Afghan government should give up the illusion
that Mullah Omar or his Taliban could be approached or convinced to
make a compromise by asking Pakistan to do the needful. The present
Pakistan government has little or no influence on the Taliban and Mullah
Omar.

Joint peace jirga was the most widely commented upon event. S
Mudassar Ali Shah explored the prospects on the eve of the jirga. With the
stage set for a much-awaited grand peace jirga between estranged
neighbours, Afghanistan and Pakistan, organizers of the four-day event are
idealistically sanguine but the overall mood in Kabul is largely downbeat
officially touted as a giant stride towards realizing shared aspirations in
terms of peace and security, cordial bilateral relations and enhanced peopleto-people contact.
Proponents are in no mood to buy the suggestion that the social and
political landscape has swiftly shifted against this half-hearted fencemending initiative taken under duress from a distant superpower
They contend representatives from the two countries will have to sit across
the negotiating table to fashion a workable strategy to achieve measurable
progress in their combined drive against extremists, intent upon fomenting
trouble in the already chaotic border areas and thereby creating bad faith
between Kabul and Islamabad.
Safe in the knowledge that Washington continues with stick policy
towards Islamabad and the carrot approach to Kabul, top-ranking
government functionaries here view the gathering as a Godsend opportunity
to bring home to Pakistani delegates the point that cross-border abatement is
keeping the insurgency pot boiling in Afghanistan.
The impression here is that the reaffirmation of stout support from
Bush has given his Afghan counterpart, beset by a whole host of security
woes on the domestic front, a badly-needed boost at a time when the US
administration is threatening direct strikes on Taliban and al-Qaeda safe
havens in FATA.
Insiders reveal the hosts arehugely interested in making the
regional peace jirga a rip-roaring success to silence the critics.
Interpreters hired for the occasion acknowledge they have been instructed
either to expunge or moderate provocative remarks to keep the atmosphere
from being vitiated intentionally or unconsciously.
290

On both sides of divide, pessimism about the outcome of the socalled peace offensive runs deep. Like the motley opposition crowd in
Afghanistan, rightwing politicians and independent-minded tribal elders in
Pakistan dont take kindly to the move, mainly for what they call lack of
consensus. Analysts hold divisions, substantive or otherwise, will surely chip
away the legitimacy of the parleys.
Just like Pakistan, Iran and Russia are also allegedly contributing
in no small measure to growing anarchy in the South Asian country, he
(Afghan minister) points out while referring to accusations from America
and Afghan officials that Tehran is shipping weapons to Taliban and
Moscow trading on insecurity to jockey for influence in the conflict-torn
country.
Meanwhile, the Taliban leadership council rejects the jirga as a
step imposed by Bush on his allies in the region themselves part of the
problem and thus unlikely to provide a remedy. People from Afghanistan
and Pakistan should, therefore, stay away from it, as they will be denied the
right to vent their views openly.
Main opposition alliance Afghanistan National Front spokesman
Mustafa Kazmi takes a rather dim view of the exercise. Citing serious
differences between the neighbours, he says: For one, Im pretty pessimistic
about the jirga measuring up to the nations expectations. Afghanistan is
unlikely to reap any tangible gains from it.
Approached for comments, Fazlur Rehman angrily reacts to the
allegation leveled against them The MMA secretary-general assails the
Musharraf Government for the Afghan conflict spilling over into the tribal
region of Pakistan. How can an egregiously incompetent government that
has failed to calm down increasing unrest in Waziristan and other tribal areas
restore peace in Afghanistan, he asks.
Syed Saleem Shahzad wrote: Washington has now devised a twopronged approach. On one hand it has indicated that it will not hesitate to
attack directly Taliban and al-Qaeda bases in Pakistan on the border with
Afghanistan if it sees fit, although this is a controversial matter and carries
with it the dangers of severe backlash At the same time, Washington and
its key ally in the war on terror, Pakistan, are promoting an unprecedented
large-scale interaction among tribal elders, Islamic clerics, politicians,

291

journalists and leaders from Pakistan and Afghanistan in the form of a threeday jirga.
The underlying aim of the event is to share information about the
militancy. It is a traditional tool that will be used to ban support and
hideouts for terrorists in their regions, said Afghan Foreign Ministry
spokesman. The jirga will find the roots of terrorism, the elements of
insecurity and the sanctuaries for terrorists, their means of financial and
other support. It will seek ways to tackle the problems, the spokesman said.
Unlike previous jirgas that only aimed to bring peace to Afghanistan,
this one is focused on all Pashtun areas, that is, on both sides of the porous
Durand Line that separates Afghanistan and Pakistan and which Pashtuns
have never recognized as an official border anyway.
This whole Washington-sponsored exercise is aimed at a broader
regional political resolution of the problems in the Pashtun lands in
which the Taliban and al-Qaeda operate. There is a clear realization that any
military or political solution has to include the Pakistani Pashtun lands.
This is the first time since the fall of Mohammad Najibullahs
communist Afghan government in 1992 that Pakistani Pashtun subnationalists have been officially invited to a jirga in Kabul. The revival of
these groups is seen as counter-foil to the religious forces on both sides
of the border, and as a ready force to fill the vacuum once these religious
elements have been broken militarily by Pakistan, the US or a combination
of both.
Washington is believed to have identified at least nine areas in
Pakistan where the Taliban and al-Qaeda have a strong foothold from where
they operate inside Afghanistan. They are likely to be attacked sooner
rather than later.
The downside of the whole exercise is Washingtons understanding
of the Taliban, who are perceived as Islamists whose natural rivals are
secular Pashtun nationalists. This might have been true some years ago, but
in the past few years the mostly ethnic-Pashtun Taliban have positioned
themselves as champions of Pashtun nationalism on both sides of border
in their efforts to broaden their grassroots support.

292

The Taliban have played up their similarities with secular Pashtuns to

soften their image as what has been described as their strictest interpretation
of Sharia law ever. The Taliban also trumpet their defiance against
foreign forces as indicative of the Pashtuns history of fighting courageously
and never surrendering to invaders.
These important commonalties between the Taliban and secular
Pashtuns make it difficult for the Taliban to be isolated be it in
Afghanistan or Pakistan. By promoting Pashtun sub-nationalism, the US is
unlikely to stave off reaction to any strikes against Taliban bases in
Pakistan.
The opposite could happen and the hand of the Taliban could be
further strengthened. As for the jirga, its definitely a positive step toward
bringing peace to the region, but tribal roots run very deep, and the Taliban
are tapped into them.
After the conclusion of the grand jirga The Nation wrote:
Musharrafs observation that there is support from Pakistani tribal
areas for the insurgency in Afghanistan, extremism and Talibanization does
not only contrast with his earlier statement but also strengthens the
perception created by many hard-line officials in the Bush Administration
that the US itself needs to do more to combat extremism in this part of the
world instead of relying on Pakistani military and intelligence services.
News reports indicated that his presence and speech lent weight to
the landmark conference after he reversed an earlier decision to pull out of
it. Both sides agreed to push for reconciliation with those Taliban who
were ready to accept the rule of law in the otherwise restive region. This is
quite significant in the backdrop of boycott by the tribal elders from
Waziristan on the grounds that the jirga did not include Taliban.
The joint communiqu presented by the Interior Minister Aftab
Ahmad Sherpao rightly recognized that terrorism was a common threat to
Pakistan and Afghanistan and the war on terror should continue to be an
integral part of their security strategies. Mr Sherpao and his Afghan
counterpart Abdullah stressed the need for utilizing all available resources to
ensure that durable peace prevailed in the region and vowed to continue their
efforts till the desired results had been achieved. This is a positive approach.
But what remains to be seen is whether the accord reached at the grand

293

jirga, whose representative status remains questionable, could be

enforced.
The mere presence of General Musharraf and Mr Karzai is not
enough to have made the grand jirga a success in resolving the most serious
challenge facing the two countries. It would not be wrong to say that
without a clear roadmap for the restoration of peace along the PakAfghan border such exercises would turn out to be counter productive.
The Boston Globe focused on Pakistan factor. One breakthrough of
the peace jirga was that it drew a rare public acknowledgement from
President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan that Taliban militants have been
using tribal areas inside Pakistan as safe havens from which to launch
attacks into Afghanistan.
Welcome as it is, the admission can hardly make difference unless
Pakistan ends its policy of backing Taliban elements, which it considers a
counterforce to Indian influence in the region. Such a change may now be
possible, but only as part of a larger set of trade-offs that balance the vital
interests of moderate forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
A deal of this kind will require compromises that the jirga
participants may be ready to make but that the Bush Administration with
its propensity to frame complex issues as stark conflicts of good and evil
may not be prepared to accept.
Left unsaid was the Pakistani belief that the Pashtun have been
deprived of their proper share of power in Afghanistan ever since the
Americans routed the Taliban in late 2001, with the help of the non-Pashtun
Northern Alliance, which had been backed previously by India, Iran and
Russia.
For such a strategy to work, Musharraf will have to do his part.
This does not mean halting all cross-border infiltration an impossible task
but dismantling the Taliban command structure. Pakistan must be
assured that a post-Taliban Afghanistan will not become a repository of
Indian influence, will not deprive the Pashtun of their fair share of power,
and will recognize the current border between the two countries.
M A Niazi saw it as a conspiracy against Pakistan aimed at fanning
Pashtun nationalism. A 700-member jirga in Afghanistan to combat terror;

294

no wonder Musharraf first tried to stay away, and only attended because
Condoleezza Rice telephoned along with Hamid Karzai. He wanted to stay
away because this jirga was a conspiracy against Pakistan and he needed
good reason to go to an anti-Pakistan moot A meeting of Pakistanis and
Afghans could only be weakening of Pakistan.
The jirga did not include any Taliban or any of their
representatives. It had, therefore, very little chance of success. The last
such Jirga had installed Nadir Shah as King. But subsequently, Daud took
over from his cousin, the then King Zahir Shah, in 1973 without benefit of
any jirga, thus ending a tradition which had started with Ahmad Shah.
The Taliban were absent from the jirga because they did not want to
legitimize a meeting called by a government that was backed by foreign
troops. Unfortunate, because such a meeting can only be successful if
attended by the Taliban.
The purpose of any Jirga is to talk and talk. The absence of the
Taliban means that one of the talking heads is absent. It almost seemed as if
Pakistan was representing the Taliban, a most unfair arrangement The
people attending this Jirga were named by their governments, which is
against the Afghan tradition. Therefore, they cannot be considered
representative. On the other, they were mostly elected people, except for a
boycott by Maulana Fazlur Rahman, who has seven of eight FATA MNAs
and half the Senators, and decided naturally to stay away from the Jirga.
There is a bit of a blame game between the Pakistan Army and the
other armies. They dont accept the Pakistan Armys charge that they are
failing as professionals in controlling Afghanistan. This is a serious charge
because it means professional reputations are at stake at the level of
brigadier and above. Foreign troops are not willing to let native sit in
judgment over them.
The jirga failed to decide who is responsible for the mess created
by the cocktail of Talibanization and drugs. In Afghanistan and the tribal
areas of Pakistan the US government and forces are working for a quick-fix
solution that suits them.
America wants to get rid of the Taliban not just because it wants to
get the drugs off its streets, but also because it wants a larger enemy that the
one provided by merely a few terrorists. It wants a full-fledged enemy it

295

can defeat in battle, even if it means keeping a Karzai government or a

Musharraf government in power. Therefore, the US government will devote
considerable effort towards keeping these governments in office, and
towards maintaining them in power.
The Jirga is set to meet again in Pakistan. It will be nothing but a hot
bed for nationalists. They might reflect on the Pakistan-Afghanistan division
of the Pashtoons, but it does not take account of two factors, one; the
existence of Pakistan and Afghanistan, two; the existence of the former
Central Asian Republics as potential homeland for most Afghan constituents.
The work of Pashtoon nationalists will matter a lot, however. For once
the true nationalists are driven away; the Jirga wont have much of a utility.
Dr Haider Mehdi termed it a date with the devil. The recently
concluded so-called Peace Jirga in Kabul, attended by Pakistan and
Afghanistan, organized under the sponsorship of the Bush Administration,
was nothing more than a date with the devil. It was simply a moot of likeminded pro-US political elements, so hypothetical as to be meaningless, and
a photo-op to make a public declaration to further bash the already
embittered Afghani and Pakistani nations.
The concluding message was explicit: the US-Western coalition in
cahoots with the Karzai-Musharraf political establishments, are hell-bent on
turning the two Muslim nations to a hellish inferno. It does not matter to
the participants and speakers if their postulations are the result of an
abominable intellectual failure rooted in an inefficacy to fully understand the
socio-cultural and political dimensions of these two societies. Most
important was the hidden agenda to promote US-Western hegemonic
interests in this region as well as to commit to a prolonged hold on power by
both Karzai and Musharraf.
The vital question here is: Given the legacy of dynamics of the Jirga
system, how could a Peace Jirga be held when one of the conflicting
parties, the Taliban, were not invited to attend the proceedings? In the
absence of the Taliban, the meeting was simply an affirmation to the dictates
of the US. So in essence, this was not a Peace Jirga; it was a staged
performance committing to a prolonged illegal occupation of Afghanistan
more precisely and appropriately termed a War Jirga.
Let us be rational and realistic for a moment of logical
contemplation: The Taliban are the legitimate representatives of a
296

segment of Afghani society. They are also genuine and justifiable actors in
the political process of the Afghani political landscape.
We are all fully aware that linking the Taliban with the 9/11 episode
is a clumsy fabrication of the US Administration Another political and
moral issue is that if the Jewish-Christian movement of 60 million members
in the US can be part of the political process, if Evangelical Christian
congregations can help elect Ronald Reagan and George W Bush, if
Christian Democrats can have political power and rule Germany for decades,
if the Christian Democrats of many European countries can have explicit
commitments to Christianity and yet continue to be an unquestioned part of
their political systems, then why cant the Taliban be lawful participants
in the political process of their country?
A Peace Jirga is not a place or an occasion where the Pakistani
and Afghani leaders should lecture the participants with political
speeches and an agenda prepared in Washington. If the Afghani leadership
and their counterparts in Pakistan are serious about peace in their countries,
they will have to change the current political strategy to deal with the
Pashtuns on both sides of the Pak-Afghan border including those of the
Taliban.
It would become absolutely imperative to completely understand the
Pashtuns socio-cultural-political-intellectual persuasions and ideological
convictions and deal with them on their terms rather than to attempt to
impose a foreign ideology on their existential survival and contemporary
way of life. After all, the Pakhtuns comprise approximately 42% of the
Afghani population, and over 15% of Pakistanis are Pathans. (Thats over 40
million people in total.)
The Pak-Afghan leaders will have to put aside the elaborate charade
of protocol accorded to them, sit on the floor with Pakhtun elders, appear in
simplistic attire with white turbans, break bread with them and listen to them
attentively. The Pakhtuns are a community of people who greatly value
respect for elders, offer legendary hospitality, view simplicity as virtue, are
committed to religious ethos and their communal decision-making is
based on mutual consultation and honouring the verdicts of their
consultative assemblies.
For the purpose of peace, Pak-Afghan leaders will have to talk to
Pakhtuns rather than talk at them listening to them carefully will be more
297

important than telling them. Pakhtuns value friends far more than
adversaries resolution is far more respected than confrontation. Pathans
have an old cultural heritage which is highly valued. And it should be
understood that this kind of community cannot be subdued by brutal force
no matter how long or how extensive.
The trouble is that the American-Western past and present political
history and intellectual legacy is littered with subjective judgments against
other peoples, nations, societies, communities, religions, values and
customs. In addition, the use of excessive military force by the US-West in
the conduct of global affairs has become a normal modus operandi.
The plain truth is that a peaceful world, a world without military
conflicts, would not make the West richer, nor would it give them the
power to subdue other peoples and nations. A peaceful world is contrary to
their psychological and ideological political mindset.
Then how do you expect the US-West alliance to comprehend that
there are communities of people in this world where conflict-resolution can
be accomplished by mutual respect and dialogue? How do you expect
George W Bush (for that matter, any Western leader) to understand the
Pakhtuns more when peace in Afghanistan (without a leader propped-up
by the US-West) can be detrimental to their neo-imperialist global agenda?
We, the Pakistanis and Afghanis, are capable of handling our
responsibilities our way only if we dare to accept the challenge. So lets
decide: do we want another date with the Devil? Or would we like to make a
date with our own destiny? Do we want peace? Or do we want to perish on
the altar of some foreign nation obsessed with subverting other nations
globally? I am willing to bet that the Karzai-Musharraf duos political
contrivance with the US-Western dogma makes them incapable of
understanding this rather simple intellectual equation!
Camella Entehabi-Fard and Richard Weitz wrote: The hottest debate
at the jirga centered on the issue of whether it is possible to distinguish
good Talibs from the bad. Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf who
addressed the jirga on August 12 after staying away from the first two days
of discussions certainly thinks it is possible to do so Some of them are
uneducated and do not know what they do, and to that we must be
sympathetic.

298

Its understandable why Pakistan would be strong backer of such a

course. Islamabad has long been a sponsor of the Taliban, believing that
the radical Islamic movement can serve as a vehicle for the preservation
of Pakistani influence in Afghanistan. Musharraf even acknowledged during
the jirga that Taliban militants have benefited from the use of safe havens in
Pakistans tribal areas.
Karzai no doubt cognizant of the Bush Administrations tendency
to frame nuanced issues in simple good/bad or black/white terms has been
reluctant to press for an all-out effort to engage the Taliban. Such efforts
would be sure to rile official Washington. However, the jirgas joint
statement indicates that his thinking on the matter may be shifting.
The jirga began with Afghan and Pakistani leaders disputing the
root causes of instability. Karzai emphasized the Pakistani factor in
abetting the Taliban insurgency. He also stressed closer bilateral cooperation.
Afghanistan is not under fire alone now, Karzai said in his opening address.
Unfortunately our Pakistani brothers are also under fire, and this fire, day by
day, is getting hotter.
Musharrafs appearance at the jirga, along with his admission
concerning Islamabads role in the revival of the Taliban insurgency, seemed
to salvage the prospect that the meeting could produce a breakthrough
in Afghanistans reconstruction, and in promoting better Afghan-Pakistani
relations.
Some political analysts have questioned whether Pakistani Pashtuns
are sufficiently unified to implement the goals outlined in the jirgas joint
declaration. Many elders from Pakistans tribal areas, which border
Afghanistan, shunned the jirga, arguing that the gathering could establish
nothing without the direct participation of Taliban representatives
Musharraf appeared to recognize the challenges facing
implementation of the jirga declaration. Upon his return to Pakistan, he
characterized the joint declaration as a step in the right direction, but, he
stressed, the commitment to reach out to the Taliban is not an end in itself,
but rather a beginning of a peace process.
Immediately after the jirgas conclusion, Karzai turned his attention
to another of Afghanistans contentious neighbouring, Iran. On August 14,
the Afghan president met with his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud

299

Ahmadinejad, in Kabul. Speaking at a news conference, Ahmadinejad

rejected US assertions that Iran is supplying Islamic militants in Afghanistan
with bombs and weapons.
Karzai described Iran as a close brother and friend to our
nation. He also expressed a desire to act as a facilitator of a US-Iranian
rapprochement. According to an official Afghan source; Afghan diplomats
have already on several occasions passed messages from the US government
to Iranian officials in Kabul.
M K Bhadrakumar reviewed it from the Pakistani perspective and the
need for the West not to disregard that. It was to have been held last
December in Jalalabad. Pakistan was lukewarm about it. And, when it finally
got under way in Kabul, there was considerable skepticism; but ended on a
high note. The jirga authorized a 50-man team to be drawn equally from
two countries to hold regular monthly meetings and to work to expedite
the ongoing process of dialogue for peace and reconciliation with the
Opposition.
In plain terms, the jirga has launched an intra-Afghan peace
process with a comprehensive approach that aims to include the Taliban and
its ally Hezb-i-Islami. President General Pervez Musharraf, who attended the
closing session of the jirga, said after his return to Pakistan that the proposed
50-member team should engage warring forces in Afghanistan to bring
terrorism and extremism to an end.
Musharraf played his cards astutely. Addressing the jirga, he
admitted with disarming candor that, yes, the Taliban enjoy support from
Pakistan. I realize this problem goes deeper; there is support from these
areas, he told delegates. Karzai, who sat beside the General nodded in
approval.
There was no acrimony over Musharrafs dramatic turn-around
from his consistent plea that the Taliban are an indigenous Afghan force.
Musharraf added: There is no doubt Afghan militants are supported from
Pakistani soil. The problem that you have in your region is because support
is provided from our side.
In his characteristic way of mixing bravado and bluster, the
General understood the criticality of his governments role in the
forthcoming intra-Afghan peace process. Again, Musharraf was forthright in

300

asserting that any meaningful settlement will have to be on the basis of a

political accommodation with the Taliban.
The jirgas agreement to push for reconciliation with the Taliban and
other opposition groups constitutes a vindication of Pakistans stand that
options other than a military solution should be adopted in reaching a
settlement in Afghanistan. The high drama surrounding Musharrafs
appearance in Kabul at the concluding session of the jirga has enabled
Pakistan to move to the centre stage of the negotiations involving the
Taliban.
Musharraf made it clear that the key to making success out of any
conceivable Afghan peace process in the near future will be winning
Pakistans support, and that cannot be extracted through threats and
exhortations. He underlined that the West can certainly aspire to make
progress with him. Provided Pakistans legitimate concerns and interests are
recognized.
The most important gain for Pakistan is that the jirga affirmed that
a key component for peace in Afghanistan would be the security and
stability of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border All in all, Pakistan has come
nearer than ever in the past 60 years in securing a Pashtun affirmation of the
sanctity of the Durand Line.
The heart of the matter is the recognition by the United States and
other Western powers that it is only through recognition of Pakistans longstanding national interests that the Afghanistan problem can be resolved.
Indeed, influential Western opinion-makers on both sides of the Atlantic
have been harping on three directions in which Pakistani interests must
be accommodated:
First, by encouraging India to reduce its presence in Afghanistan.
Second, there has been a growing realization in Western capitals in the
past year or so that the time has come to press Karzais government to
recognize the Durand Line.
Third, the US has recognized the importance of constructively
engaging the Taliban and offering them a role as stakeholders in
Afghanistan.

301

Besides, an intra-Afghan peace process of the kind mooted at the

jirga will remain exclusively under the control of the US, Britain and
Pakistan. Iran and Russia remain excluded, despite their robust efforts in
recent months to barge in. According to Browne, Iran in particular may have
begun backing every horse in the race in Afghanistan.
Given the fluidity of security in the Persian Gulf region, especially
over Iran, the US and Britain have calculated that a Pakistan at ease with
the integrity of its state will make a reliable ally for NATO in the medium
and long terms.
The fact is Musharraf has emerged from the jirga 10 feet tall.
That isnt a pleasant sight for many in Pakistan at the moment. Musharraf, in
turn, will have taken careful note of the extended standing ovation he
received at the jirga. He was indeed the cynosure of all eyes last Saturday.
He finds himself catapulted into the lead role as peacemaker in Afghanistan.
Even detractors in Pakistan grudgingly admit the salience of the
jirga, the former interior minister in Benazir government in the early 1990s,
Gen Naseerullah Babar, often touted as the Father of the Taliban,
predictably criticized the jirga but was forced to admit: the US has
recognized the identity and political clout of the Taliban by inviting them to
the jirga, which amounted to a confession of defeat on their part, for they
had never accepted the Taliban as a party to the Afghan conflict.
Equally, liberal, secular-minded sections of the Pashtun community
in Pakistan, especially the Awami National Party, have enthusiastically
welcomed the outcome of the jirga. From this perspective alone, the jirga
holds the potential to squeeze the jihadist culture out of Pakistan.
Putting faith in Musharraf may still work.
Mudassir Ali Shah observed Afghanistan getting bloodier and messier.
Despite the rosy picture of the security situation painted by President
Hamid Karzai and his western backers, notably US leader George W Bush,
the long-suffering Afghans have not even an iota of doubt about the
unpalatable reality that they are caught in a vicious circle. Anyone in
their right frame of mind would refuse being railroaded into accepting these
appraisals at face value.
Hard-hit by this unending murder and mayhem are the ill-equipped,
least-trained and under-qualified personnel of Afghanistans fledgling

302

security forces a prime target for battle-hardened guerrillas. High-casualty

assaults in recent weeks have had a morale-busting effect on the Afghan
National Army (ANA) and police, already depleted by a spate of
desertions.
More than 112 suicide attacks have taken place over the last 10
months, compared to 120 recorded last year. Around 5,000 people including
rebels, civilians, Afghan police and soldiers as well as foreign troops, have
lost their lives in violent incidents this year, the most deadly since the
toppling of the Taliban.
Apart from scaring away potential ANA and police recruits, the
anarchic conditions underline the continuing resurgence of militants,
not only inside the war-torn country but also in Pakistans tribal badlands.
That the Taliban have been able to regroup despite the presence of about
40,000 US and NATO troops in Afghanistan amply underscores the
limitations of obsession with a military solution to an uprising that has
stymied the reconstruction drive in the embattled south and elsewhere.
During the year, there were 525 security incidents attacks by
Taliban and other violent groups, bombings, terrorism of other kinds and
abductions every month, up from an average of 425 incidents a month in
2006. Most experts ascribe the deteriorating state of affairs to Bushs
derision of shifting troops and resources to Iraq, his administrations failure
to capture top rebel leaders and safe havens that the Taliban have found in
Pakistans lawless tribal region.
As the surge in violence is taking a high toll on civilians, students,
schools, officials, tribal elders, pro-government clerics and police are being
targeted in a calculated effort to impede the establishment of legitimate
government institutions. Flagrant human rights violations by ramshackle
corrupt and unprofessional security forces are contributing in no small
measure to the alienation of the common Afghan.
Apprehensive about the political price that the civilian deaths are
exacting, Karzai has repeatedly excoriated heavy-handed American and
NATO tactics while ordering an end to the so-called collateral damage.
Much to his angst, however, the bombings, raids on homes and shootings
of civilians are increasing by the day.

303

The emotive issue of civilian killings, dogging the US and its allies,
also exposes chinks in their political strategy in terms of minuscule hard
intelligence, waning popular support for counter insurgency operations
and a failure to hunt down dreaded militants.
For the war on terror to be still winnable, Pashtuns have to be
given a share in power commensurate with their numerical strength to
prevent the incumbent set-up appearing a backward autocracy and the
burgeoning drug trade curbed to chip away the bloated cash reserves of
militants.
Syed Saleem Shahzad talked of reconciliation. The process of
reconciliation with the Taliban continues on both sides of the border
between Afghanistan and Pakistan. A former top Taliban commander and
present member of the Afghan Parliament, Mullah Abdus Salam Rocketti,
and the former Taliban ambassador in Pakistan, Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef,
are two key figures who have been holding talks with Taliban elders in
south-western Afghanistan for a political settlement at the behest of Western
coalition forces.
On the other side, the leader of the opposition in Parliament, Maulana
Fazlur Rahman, recently traveled to Quetta, Baluchistan province, to
meet the local Taliban commanders under Mullah Mansoor (brother of slain
Taliban commander Mullah Dadullah), and apparently Rahman made a
major breakthrough.
An official of a Kabul-based European body that has had a major role
in facilitating the talks between the Taliban and coalition forces confirmed to
Asia Times Online, on condition of anonymity, that high-level talks
between Taliban commanders and coalition forces through Rocketti and
Zaeef had taken place in an attempt to find a broader political settlement.
In the United States case, it is obsessed with removing Taliban leader
Mullah Omar before the group can be given any political role. The Taliban
have always dismissed this out of hand. As a result, Washington has
terminated the dialogue and proceeded with the military option.
Jasjit Singh urged a fundamental shift in strategy in Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, despite its enormous military acumen and capability NATO
has not, even after six years, succeeded in ensuring peace and security in
Afghanistan. If anything, the Taliban show deeply disturbing signs of

304

resurgence. The political goals and military objectives of the global war on
terrorism, whether achievable or not, appear to be increasingly irrelevant.
The failure of NATO to achieve a recognizable victory over radical
terrorist forces will have far reaching consequences
There are already signs of a replay of the post-Soviet development
of militancy and now that it is clear that NATO and the United States are
unlikely to win the war on terrorism. Hizbullahs semi-conventional war last
year raining thousands of short-range rockets on the Israeli population is a
recent example in spite of the skillful performance of the Israeli air force.
We need a stable and non-radical Afghanistan if growth of global
terrorism is to be reversed. This requires careful crafting and sustained
policies to encourage moderate, albeit tribal cultures. The time may have
come for a fundamental shift in strategy in Afghanistan from trying to
defeat al-Qaeda to containing the Taliban and insulating the badlands from
the rest of the country.
However, even this cannot be done without the full participation of
Islamabad on one side and the cooperation of Iran on the other. Current
trends read against the backdrop of past lessons indicate that both will be
more difficult as time goes by. The US-Iran confrontation on nuclear issues
has helped the hard-liners in Tehran to move toward assertive chauvinism.
As for Pakistan, a civilian government with little actual power would find it
more difficult to curb religious extremism, as indeed was the case through
the 1990s. That is why we may be on the threshold of the further spread
of religious extremism and terrorism emanating from Pakistan and
Afghanistan.
L A Times wanted the United States to redouble its efforts to save
Afghanistan. Unlike in Iraq, the insurgency in Afghanistan doesnt spring
from deep-seated animosity toward a fatally sectarian government. Rather,
as former US special envoy James Dobbins points out, the insurgents are
primarily ethnic Pashtun living on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan
border. The Taliban have been Pakistans hedge against a united
Afghanistan allied with India. This thorny problem wont be easily solved,
but can be managed.
Why should the United States keep forces in Afghanistan while
withdrawing them from Iraq? Some argue, cogently, that if the greatest
threat to US national security comes from terrorist havens in failed states,
305

then we have more to fear from a failed Iraq, with its huge population,
strategic location and oil wealth, than from a failed Afghanistan, an
impoverished backwater.
For reasons of history, timing and practicality, the United States
should redouble its efforts to save Afghanistan from a resurgent Taliban.
First, history: The threat from Afghanistan isnt theoretical. It was the source
of the attack on the United States
Second, timing: The United States would be seen as dangerously
weak if it is mired in Afghanistan at the same time it is retreating from a
stalemate in Iraq Third, practicality: The global war on terror cannot be
fought by primarily military means as long as terrorists have an unending
supply of suicidal recruits.

CONCLUSION
Pashtuns of Afghanistan have resisted the occupation for six years
despite being no match to the combined military might of the so-called
civilized world. But they are still far from liberating their homeland,
history, however, tells us that they would not accept the defeat.
The Crusaders are not at all sincere in having a dialogue with
Pashtuns to find a just solution. They only want to restore a semblance of
normalcy in Afghanistan and to this end they aim at alienating as many
people from resistance groups as possible through the ploy of dialogue.
Pashtuns are shrewd enough to understand this and that was why they
refused to participate in peace jirga held at Kabul.
All the strategization carried out by Musharraf since the fateful
telephone call in September 2001, is now haunting not only his regime but
entire nation. The Afghan War has virtually transformed into Pakistan war.
Will he use his military acumen to re-strategize for path correction, or will
he still put himself before Pakistan?
16th October 2007

HELMET vs WIG
AFTERSHOCKS - VIII
306

British government acknowledged its involvement in Mushy-Pinky

affair. The US media criticized Bush for encouraging the deal and termed reelection of Musharraf a perversion of democracy. Musharraf, however, asked
Benazir to return after the Supreme Court verdict; she refused. Her security
was discussed in a high-level meeting in Karachi.
Chief Minister Sindh ordered removal of PPP flags and banners across
the province. Safdar Abbasi condemned the order and warned of violent
reaction. City Nazim Karachi declined to obey orders of Arbab Rahim. A
police officer was suspended by the CM Sindh, who became the first victim
in row over the PPP hoardings.
On the eve of her return to Pakistan, Benazir held a press conference
during which she played the Sindh card; said harsh words for the Supreme
Court; talked about terrorism in tribal areas; and criticized Dr A Q Khan.
The last two overtures were meant for expressing her loyalty to her foreign
sponsors.
Benazir returned to Pakistan after slaughtering seven goats in Dubai
and holding thanks-giving prayers. At midnight the carnival of celebration
turned into mayhem by two blasts near the vehicle carrying Benazir. At least
135 people were killed and hundreds were wounded.

EVENTS
Benazir moved a petition in SHC On 9th October to claim a seat
reserved for women in the National Assembly. Red notices against the royal
couple will be withdrawn and the state will provide the security. British
government acknowledged involvement in Mushy-Pinky affair. The US
media criticized Bush for encouraging the deal and termed re-election of
Musharraf a perversion of democracy. The bench hearing the case of
Musharrafs eligibility was once again reconstituted; one member was
dropped and two more added, making it eleven-member bench.
Next day, Musharraf asked Benazir to return after the Supreme Court
verdict; she remained determined to come on October 18. Prime minister
said general elections would be held in January. Shamsul Mulk was
appointed as caretaker chief minister in NWFP. NAB removed the names of

307

accused from its website. The royal couple may also escape Swiss trial.
Benazir wanted armed forces under parliaments control.
Interior Ministry asked the provinces to expedite tracing out missing
persons as 27 more persons had been recovered, who according to brave
commando had left their houses on their own accord to wage jihad. Jamaat
appealed for revision of the decision of dual office case and wanted the full
court to hear it.
On 11th October, following petitions filed by the royal couple and
others seeking acquittal in 11 cases of corruption, four accountability courts
issued notices to the relevant authorities. A US survey-poll revealed that
Musharrafs popularity was at all-time low.
The CJP reiterated during the hearing that the court has substantial
evidence that missing persons were in the custody of intelligence agencies.
We are deliberately exercising restraint due to the national interest and,
therefore, openly asking the government to regularize the custody of the
missing persons, the CJP observed.
On 12th October, 22 workers of PML-N were arrested in Lahore to
maintain law and order. Benazirs security was discussed in a high-level
meeting in Karachi. Musharraf again requested Benazir to delay her coming
back. The three-member Supreme Court bench declined to stay the operation
of the NRO, but declared that benefits drawn would be subject to its
decisions on petitions challenging the legality of the ordinance.
Next day, Qazi said MMA would make alliance with PML-N and PTI.
Prime Minister and Mushahid Hussain discussed strategy for general
elections. Ruling PML is afraid of my return, said Benazir. On 15 th October,
the government once again requested Benazir to delay her coming back to
Pakistan. Preparations for reception of Benazir by PPP were geared up. A
rally was held in Karachi to celebrate her coming back. Delegates from
Northern Areas reached Karachi and departed from AJK.
Chief Minister Sindh ordered removal of PPP flags and banners across
the province. Safdar Abbasi condemned the order; warned of violent reaction
and urged the government officials and police to disregard CMs orders. City
Nazim Karachi declined to obey orders saying the area from airport to
Bilawal House fell under jurisdiction of cantonment board.

308

Pervaiz Elahi said Nawaz Sharif could not come back and he would
keep lying to his party men for another three years. He also said that Q
League was in touch with Maulana Fazlur Rehman. Qazi said Pervaiz
Elahis statement was part of the propaganda and refused to say anything
about Fazlur Rehman.
On 16th October, five people were injured in firing on PPP rally in
Sanghar; the opponents called it PPPs own doing. Benazir slammed
clampdown on her supporters. PPP asked Sindh government to stop political
victimization and complained to the CJP against harassment of its workers.
A police officer was suspended by the CM Sindh for not
implementing his orders on the PPP hoardings. Interim governments will be
in place next month, said Minister Durrani. PML-N accused government of
giving leverage to PPP. Lawyers movement termed the NRO unlawful and
class-specific.
On the eve of her return to Pakistan, Benazir held a press conference
during which she played the Sindh card; talked about terrorism in tribal
areas; criticized Dr A Q Khan and the Supreme Court. The regime slammed
playing of Sindh card and PML-N criticized her remarks about the Supreme
Court.
Bhutto loyalists thronged Karachi to accord welcome to Benazir. PPP
sought helicopter for taking Benazir to Quaids mausoleum. Musharraf
chaired a meeting to sort our security arrangement on arrival of his future
political partner. Interior Ministry announced that she would be provided the
same security which is provided to the president and prime minister.
The Supreme Court announced detailed judgment in the case of Sharif
brothers in which their unhindered return to Pakistan was granted as per
Constitution. The judgment emphasized on the fundamental rights and gave
detailed observations on the circumstances in which Nawaz Sharif and
others gave an undertaking, resulting in remission/pardon in their jail term
and subsequent journey to Saudi Arabia.
The judgment said: Whatever terminology, i.e. deal, negotiation,
mediation, third-party intervention, undertaking or agreement may be used,
but there is no denying the fact that the petitioners had proceeded abroad at
their own.

309

The Supreme Court termed the replies of respondents, submitted in

contempt of court case of Sharifs second exile, as inadequate. The court
ordered the Secretary Foreign Affairs, who had reserved an aircraft for
deportation, to reply in three days.
The Chief Justice turned down the request of petitioners for
constitution of full court for hearing of their petitions against re-election of
Musharraf. The four judges who were objected upon by the Attorney
General were dropped from the court.
Justice Wajihuddin Ahmed filed a contempt of court petition in the
Supreme Court against CEC for flouting court orders by declaring the results
of the presidential election. Deployment of troops in northern tribal areas
was challenged in the Supreme Court by Sahibzada Haroon Rashid of JI.
Benazir returned to Pakistan with a bang; nay with twin bangs. She
had departed for Karachi after slaughtering seven goats as Sadqa; held
thanks-giving prayers at taking-off and disembarking; talked to media
frequently jubilantly; while reciting peoples raga all the way to Karachi and
road journey to Quaids Mazar.
The PPP leaders and jiyalas put up tremendous show for the welcome
reception of their party leader. Roads of Karachi were thronged by the
people dancing and singing on the beats of drums. By the sunset, the
message to the pigmies of PML-Q was conveyed loud and clear: Beware,
she has come back.
At midnight the carnival of celebration turned into mayhem by two
bomb blasts near the vehicle carrying Benazir. The road was littered with
dead and wounded. At least 135 people were killed and hundreds wounded;
the leaders escaped. Benazir was rescued by police and rushed to the safety
of Bilawal House. All scheduled activities were cancelled. Washington was
the first to condemn strongly and urged not to postpone general elections.
Swiss investigative judge said that he had completed a long-running
probe into alleged money laundering by Benazir Bhutto. Western media was
enthralled by the Return of She. Aitzaz Ahsan, counsel of Wajihuddin
Ahmed, argued before the court that General Musharraf was not eligible to
be a candidate for the presidential election and the current electoral college
was also not qualified to elect president for another five-year term.

310

VIEWS
National Reconciliation Ordinance became proverbial talk of
the town. Kamran Shafi wrote: Pakistan is so unique that with not a thought
for propriety or good sense or shame or embarrassment, the goal posts are
shifted every time the establishment gets it into its pretty little head to shift
them. It matters little that an inch can become 100 miles the next day, and
the 100 miles two millimeters the very next.
Consider: one of the main justifications of General Musharrafs
counter-coup was that the politicians were bad boys and girls who
indulged in, for one, horse trading. Inside of a little over a year, there he was
himself, gathering lotas and lotees by the dozen and clasping them to his
bosom.
All done with a straight face and when asked why, himself saying, It
was the pragmatic thing to do! Meaning of course, that what the politicians
did was dishonest, what the dictator did was pragmatic. In which nonunique country would an election commission first leave out millions of
voters from the voting lists, and then inside of a month find 27 million of
them?
In which country which is not very, very unique would the
appointment of the chief of army staff and chief of joint staff be headline
news in all the newspapers and TV channels, complete with pictures in
living colour? I have Indian and Brit and American friends who dont even
know the names of theirs.
This is not all. In which other country would be the chief of army
staff/president himself announce that the chief of army staff was one of
the three pillars (of state), the other two being the president and prime
minister.
In which country that is not truly unique will the sitting president
have five years to canvass support for his next election and his opposition
just 10 days; where else but in a country that is unique will the sitting
government shamelessly use billions (I kid you not) in state funds to
advertise the great leaps the country has taken, most of them imaginary,
during its tenure?

311

And last but not least, where else in this universe would
reconciliation be ordinanced by an army dictator? What were the
drafters of the National Reconciliation Ordinance thinking when they sat
down at their desks to blindly follow the juntas orders? That we, the
ordinary, lay people of Pakistan, were cattle that just did not have the sense
to make a distinction between a true reconciliation among all Pakistanis and
a sham concocted merely to make the sham of a so-called presidential
election seem less of a sham?
Did they not have the sense, at the very least, to be mindful of the
grave hurt we would cause the great South African people who when
through a true and heart rendering and sad and profound and, finally,
beautiful reconciliation to make peace between the beastly practitioners of
Apartheid and their victims?
We saw the moving spectacle of grizzled old men weeping like
children, and asking forgiveness. There were times when the oppressor was
ordered to wash the victimized persons feet and then apologies. This is
reconciliation, not the shamelessness contained within the NRO.
Tariq Fatemi opined: This effort to provide blanket amnesty to
those accused of massive corruption negates the very principles of
justice and equity, and has rightly outraged people all over the country. But
what is remarkable is that notwithstanding the absence of democracy and
many other major shortcomings, General Musharraf remains the Bush
Administrations preferred choice.
This is because he is still viewed as the best option to pursue
Washingtons primary objective, namely the war on terror, with
unflinching vigour and commitment. But since it was no longer possible to
sell the huge assistance package for Pakistan to an increasingly skeptical
Congress, Washington came up with the ingenious formula of a militarycivil compact wherein Musharraf would retain control over issues relating to
defence, national security, intelligence and foreign affairs, while the civilian
political leadership would confine itself to areas such as health, education
and social welfare.
It was this strong American desire, coupled with the Generals
own perception that he needed the support of a mainstream moderate
political party to cloak himself in the garb of legitimacy, that explains why
he was willing to disavow all that he had said and written about Benazir
312

Bhutto. Being a proud and stubborn man, this must have been deeply
humiliating to him, but then, power is an aphrodisiac which once tasted can
never be given up.
Even though believers in a genuine democratic dispensation and
the rule of law would be disappointed with the latest turn of events, it
would be wrong and premature for them to give up hope. What the lawyers
community, media representatives and members of civil society have
demonstrated has been remarkable courage and fortitude in the face of
tremendous pressure including physical assaults and the use of state agencies
to harass and intimidate them.
But they have stood their ground, demonstrating that the human spirit
can overcome tremendous odds, given conviction and resolve. What has
been gained may not have been enough, but its importance should not be
minimized. Pakistan is a strong and more vibrant society because of the
current struggle for democracy. The struggle must continue.
Sultan Ahmed Geelani from Karachi wrote: I wonder if Mushahid
Hussain, the Q-League general secretary, really believes that corruption
cases could not be proved against the dynastic couple of the PPP for so
many years. And that the PPP represents the significant enough section of
Pakistans order to merit reconciliatory measures, since the accusation
against Benazir Bhutto and husband, true or not, have remained unproven in
a court of law for long enough.
But many people know that the accusations are true. They do not
believe the propaganda of lack of proof. Anyone looking cursorily at the
evidence why their cases remained unproven for so long will find that the
couples lawyers did every possible legal/procedural manoeuvring to avoid
either spouses appearance in courts, and thus both were just not subjected to
proper court proceedings, so essential for conviction or acquittal.
Hence a great gasp of disapproval against the ordinance for
withdrawal of cases. For our collective moral good we must refuse the
American pressure to re-install such people in power. They must stand
trial.
Qamar from Karachi, after quoting excerpts from Musharrafs book,
said: It is clear from the above that Gen Musharraf has negated all the
principles that he seemed to stand for. The huge corruption and

313

misgovernance, the undemocratic ways of the former leaders as well as the

sound decision of not allowing anyone to run for a third time not only as
prime minister but also as president has been ignored even in his own case
just because it suited his desire to cling to power.
It would only be appropriate to end this comment with these words of
Edmound Burk: corrupt influence is itself the perennial spring of all
prodigality, and of all disorder; it loads us with more than millions of debt;
takes away vigour from our councils and every wisdom from our councils,
and every shadow of authority and credit from the most venerable parts of
our constitution.
Even Col Riaz Jafri from Rawalpindi, who usually supported
Musharraf, was unhappy over the NRO. The anti-Musharraf legal fraternity
and the combined opposition comprising the ARD, APDM, MMA, JI, JUI,
PML-N, AHP, BNP, BNDP, JWP, PTI, TI, PAT, PDP and others all put
together miserably failed in either stopping the election or the president
from winning.
They have not only failed in the assemblies but also in the streets
where the masses have given a clear verdict against them by rejecting them
and their calls for the shutter-down, wheel-jam, gherao of the assemblies
and the mass protestation, etc, which cause untold misery to the daily bread
winners of the family.
Barring a feeble ripple here and there, all was quiet on all fronts.
Does it not, Mr President, give you a real insight into the strength and the
following of the opposition political parties and for a need to reassess the
most unpopular and highly criticized National Reconciliation Ordinance
to be the unkindest cut that you can afflict upon them.
And, Sir, whether you like it or not, it will not only open the
floodgates of corruption once again in the country, it will also tell upon
your own very image of being scrupulously honest and determined to
eliminate corruption in Pakistan.
Haider K Nizamani talked of the motive and likely impact. An
assault on peoples intelligence, disservice to the English language and
insulting serious political undertakings elsewhere in the world are among the
three side effects of governance in a country where the ruling class is riddled

314

with contradictions. The recently issued NRO is the latest example of such
governance.
The ordinance joins the dubious line-up of its predecessors
including the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the National
Reconstruction Bureau (NRB). The word national is common to all three
entities. While the term is all too visible in nomenclature, in reality it is the
missing link between it comes to the rationale, practice and implications of
the NRO, NAB and NRB.
Lets take the NRO. First of all, some of its beneficiaries have the
audacity to compare it to the South African Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (TRC). Lets state the simplest of difference between the two.
Pervez Musharraf is no Nelson Mandela. We dont have Oliver Tambos and
Walter Sisulus among the cast of the characters making the rounds of
numerous television channels defending the NRO.
The TRC was aimed at looking at the causes and extent of the
gross violations of human rights committed during the period from March
1, 1960. Its granting of the amnesty applied only to persons who make full
disclosure of all the relevant facts relating to acts associated with a political
objective committed in the course of conflicts of the past. It was to offer
victims an opportunity to relate the violations they suffered. This arduous
path was deemed worth taking so that the restoration of the human and civil
dignity could be achieved and the nation could be informed about violations
and victims.
Transcripts of Amnesty hearings are available on the Internet and
even a random reading of cases would testify that the South African TRC
was one of the noblest and the most humane way to publicly come to terms
with the dirty and violent legacy of Apartheid.
The NRO that Musharraf has signed is neither national in scope
nor reconciliatory in spirit. It is, for all intents and purposes, a legal
indemnity by a military chief to a select number of individuals allegedly
involved in financial corruption.
To reconcile is to restore to friendship and harmony. If the present
set-up and its allies led by Musharraf is the side which wants to reconcile
with its opponents on the national level, the opposing party would have to
include, but not be confined to, FATA tribes, Baloch dissidents, people

315

allegedly kidnapped by the intelligence agencies, the lawyers community

and the political opposition in the shape of political parties. The NRO is a
misnomer because it does very little to extend the olive branch to any of the
above.
Put bluntly, the political bargain that has been struck is a fragile
understanding between Musharraf and the PPP where the former would
not block the way of Benazir Bhuttos future political plans in return for her
providing him political oxygen at this crucial juncture. In a divided society,
national reconciliation has to be a healing process where victims are heard
and perpetrators offer full disclosure of their deeds. This NRO prescribes
hiding and not open healing
The NRO is an off-spring of the NAB. Accountability refers to an
obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for ones
actions. The NAB process selectively targeted people and spared those who
threw in their lot with Musharrafs political system. Reconstruction as per
the NRBs activities was designed to come up with a political system that
would undermine the role of national parties and provinces in the name of
devolution.
At the end of the day, the deal she has got falls well short of her
stated non-negotiable demands. The cases against her have been
withdrawn but she couldnt get Musharraf to lift the ban on a twice-elected
prime minister running for a third term. She also did not get the written
pledge from Musharrafs side to have an independent election commission
to conduct the upcoming elections.
Does that mean that the party cadres would be accusing Ms Bhutto of
short-changing them? Barring isolated voices of political puritans within
the PPP most will be content with the deal. In the charisma-based party,
the person of Ms Bhutto is the biggest asset that the PPP has. Her absence
from the home front is acutely felt by the PPP leadership at all levels. If she
can come back without having to worry about being hounded by the NAB
operatives, the PPP cadres would love to have their leaders return as the
country gears up for elections.
Can she deliver the results? It is too early to say. Currently, her party
is not much different from the other main contenders of power as far as
offering a compelling programme of governance is concerned. She is a

316

tenacious campaigner and is fully capable of retaining 30 percent plus of

the popular vote in the partys bag.
Circumstances have made Musharraf eat his words of never allowing
Benazir to set foot in Pakistan as long as he was in power. The NRO should
be renamed the BRO (Benazir Return Ordinane) as that captures its
essence more accurately. That way it wont be misuse of the English
language and we wont be trivializing the South African TRC. Above all, we
would not be insulting the intelligence of ordinary Pakistanis.
Afiya Shehrbano compared it with a shiny apple with a worm inside.
One of the successes of political liberalism is that it can coerce consumers
to buy a shiny apple with a worm in its center and convince them that it is
still a delicious treat. Today, our political discourse has taken a post-modern
direction with such speed and lack of clarity that it has defied any sense of
due process or rational thinking.
Consider the language used to describe our political scenario. The
definition of national interest, which was the doctrine of necessity, has
been replaced overnight by, national reconciliation (without the truth bit); a
constitutional president in uniform will transition into constitutional
president (without uniform); the mother of all elections will give (re)birth
to the Daughter of the East (in a military hospital); and amnesty will be
granted for the rich (voluntarily disappeared) thieves, rather than those
suffering deprivation and state terror (who will continue to be forcibly
disappeared). To consume the apple, we must reconcile with and digest
the worms inside as well.
Africa has always been absent from the collective conscience of
Pakistan, yet now politicians are falling over themselves in reference to the
South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) process.
Similarly, the Latin American parallels we sometimes draw upon, have been
limited to dictatorships and disappearances. In both cases, the assumption is
that Apartheid or bad governance; marked by gross human rights abuses,
torture and excesses was simply dismantled by the removal of white
supremacist leaders or oppressive governments.
This ahistorical notion makes a mockery of the implications of the
process on two levels. First, it denies the painstaking process of truth,
tribunal hearings and testimonies that led to some form of imperfect social
reconciliation. Secondly, the central focus on transition in these cases was
317

not meant to be about leadership and governance or even about political

systems, but primarily about restructuring a discriminatory economic
system.
The problem with arbitrarily picking up language and terms without a
sound understanding or conceptual clarity is that it creates disconnect
between the meaning and application of the term. So long as those that
uphold liberal values in opposition to extremist ones, are willing to
reconcile to targeted air strikes of militants to secure their own sociopolitical futures, there can be no chance of the painful, long democratic
process towards a peaceful resolution of provincial crises.
So long as we tout the need for shock economic treatments and are
awed by the urgent need for being legitimate and acceptable global actors to
overcome our bad reputation as terrorist producing haven, we can have no
independent, introspective truth or reconciliatory process.
The issue of sovereignty lies not just in reference to American
influence on our internal political issues. There is a global team of
economists and experts who carry a made-to-order transition portfolio to
war-torn and crisis-racked countries. They work through the complicity of
amenable local politicians and foreign-educated native consultants.
We cannot seriously believe that an imported model of peacebuilding can possibly take place without some form of truth and
accountability of our systems. These include institutional scrutiny which
must figure in the military, but also corporate businesses and ownership of
land. Otherwise the transfer of power will simply mean swapping one form
of oppression for another more palatable one or, in other words, well all
still be eating the same wormed apple.
Rifaat Hamid Ghani was of the view that it is quite true that the cases
Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif initiated against each other were politically
motivated. It is also quite true the white-collar crime is hard to establish. It is
undeniable that many presently outraged liberals have themselves argued
repeatedly for amnesty to our political leaders. But it is also undeniable that
the mode devised by the NRO makes a mockery of public
accountability.
Indemnity conferred by an unrepresentative legislature remains
unrepresentative. Pakistanis minds have little respect and Pakistanis hearts

318

even less room for former prime ministers who approach the electorate
flashing tensile haloes and spilling rhetoric their actions have already belied.
Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif need to acknowledge their grave aberrations
and seek forgiveness from the people they failed to serve with democratic
fidelity.
As things stand, there is reason to fear the PPP in transit with a
retiring General Musharraf will be as democratically dysfunctional as
the PML-Q and MQM have been as the serving generals political alter egos.
For civil society to accept the regimes definitions of transitional politics
could be suffocating as any declaration of martial law. In fact, martial law is
at least recognized as such and justly excoriated and resisted.
It has been a Pakistani tradition to pin hope on military redress
and judicial underpinning when democratically elected leaders or
reinvented military leaders and their cosmetic legislature fail the people.
Precedents with regard to Ayub, Yahya, Bhutto, Zia, Nawaz, Musharraf
come to mind, but, no matter how slowly, democracy evolves.
This time we hope that the judicial underpinning and military support
is for constitutionality and the rule of law in a civil polity. The way to that
fine end demands a reconstituted election commission and a credibly neutral
caretaker government for the promised January elections. At present, the
electoral process General Musharraf promises is more than
transparent: it is blatant.
Momina Bilal from Lahore had an interesting observation on
Shujaats role in finalization of the NRO. Incidentally, the presidential
ordinance was promulgated on the eve of the presidential election, held on
Oct 6. Although it was not linked with the presidential election as such, still
it was dubbed as one to lure the opposition.
Shujaat Hussain and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, while talking to
newsmen in Islamabad the other day, said that the National Reconciliation
Ordinance was a political game played to divide the opposition, the
objective had been achieved and raat gai baat gai, meaning thereby that
the presidential ordinance has become redundant after the presidential
election, thus nullifying the good intentions of Gen Musharraf to promote
the idea of developing national reconciliation for resolving the matters of
national importance.

319

According to reports in newspapers, Chaudhry Shujaat later clarified

to the president that raat gai baat gai was said in a lighter vein. But by the
time the damage had been done. It was indeed a cruel joke played on the
president by the prime minister and the ruling party chief, intentionally
or unintentionally.
Ashaar Rehman wrote: For the shortsightedness of People Party
should have been alarmed when the government nominated Chaudhry
Shujaat Hussain to iron out a deal with the PPP. The fate met by Akbar
Bugti and Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi is instructive of what talking to
Chaudhry Shujaat as a Musharraf spokesman could lead the people sitting
on the other side of the table to annihilation.
In reality, the party would do well to leave others to their insecurities
and try and come out with explanations for the deal that are acceptable to the
people to secure itself against popular ire. Chaudhry Shujaat may be wrong
this time. He may have even qualified for reprimands from the highest
authority in the land for his remarks against the PPP. BB may or may not
emerge as a partner of General Musharraf in future. She may invite harm to
her party either way.
Kamran Shafi
reconciliation, instead
with the leaders of
Reconciliation. Not
promulgation of an
reconciliation.

was of the view that Pakistan needs a genuine

of NRO. Our Dictator has the gall to call his deal
the Peoples Party (and the MQM) a National
only that, he actually thinks all it takes is the
ordinance, and abracadabra, and there shall be

There are several problems here. If Musharraf actually means

national reconciliation when he says the words, does he not think that every
institution that has committed excesses must be held to count so that an
attempt can be made to repair fissures and the fractures that threaten to
destroy the very country today? That it is not politicians alone, but other
organs of state too that have misused, nay abused, their remits?
Lets start at the top, then, and since it is the most powerful
organization in the country not only by force of arms, but also because it is
immensely cash rich by virtue of being the biggest business conglomerate
and land-owner; and more than anything else because it has ruled the roost
for most of our countrys life, does the Pakistan Army itself not have to
reconcile with the people of the country who it has successfully conquered
320

much too often? Does it not have to say sorry for its many acts of omission
and commission which have repeatedly brought Pakistan limping back to the
same old crossroads over and over again? And which today force it to ban
the wearing uniforms by, in one case, students of the Armed Forces Medical
College in Rawalpindi Cantonment?
Does it not have to ask forgiveness from the Pakistani people for
their Kangaroo courts it ran during so-called corrupt police head constables
and revenue patwaris? Should it not beg forgiveness from those it cruelly
lashed in public, even journalists, after disrobing them almost to nudity save
a thin muslin strip covering their buttocks and trussing them up like animals
before slaughter and then setting huge brutes dressed only in loincloths upon
them who took a run of several steps before landing the cruel lashes upon
their poor bodies? Should the Army not accept its own part in bringing
Pakistan to its present sorry pass when we are at each others throats?
Witness: the Waziristan.
As a part of the process of reconciliation, should the highest officers
of the ISI and MI and IB and FIA and police not wash the feet of those
mothers and fathers whose sons have been made to disappear for years
without end, just as the practitioners of the cruelty under apartheid washed
the feet of their victims kin, as atonement? Dont mothers and fathers and
wives and sons and daughters, Pakistanis just like Musharraf and his junta,
have the right to know whether their loved one is dead or alive; well or
unwell; being tortured by the Americans in Bagram or Guantanamo, or by
Pakistani agents at Mangla or wherever?
This country needs to be reconciled; of course it does, just like
other violated countries; but not by the antics of the junta and its new
hand-maiden, the Pakistan Peoples Party. But who will head the
reconciliation effort? I hear many of you ask. We have people in this
country, friends, pristinely true people who will always do the right thing,
never anything unconscionable, who can well lead and make up the
commissionwe only have to have faith in ourselves and look for them.
Kunwar Idris opined that reconciliation is needed but not more than
fair elections. If the reconciliation ordinance, as Chaudhry Shujaat says, is
indeed a trick played on his old adversary and possible future nemesis
Benazir Bhutto, apprehensions must arise about the regimes intention to
rig elections to the assemblies. Such apprehensions cannot be unfounded.

321

Musharraf has defied both reason and common sense if not the
law (though that remains to be judicially determined) to secure another fiveyear term couldnt have risked losing it before it had really begun. To
Musharraf it made eminent sense to broaden the base of his support rather
than rig the polls which in any case wouldnt have been easy in the presence
of belligerent rivals, an alert media and a judiciary which is now inclined to
intervene on its own, even on stray petitions.
The ordinance may have achieved the regimes immediate purpose of
persuading the PPP parliamentarians not to resign from the assemblies but
Musharraf must now reconcile to the possibility of a resurgent PPP
replacing the weary Q League as the majority party in parliament. So it is
not all over yet, nor is it raat gai, baat gai as Chaudhry Shujaat would like
his unnerved followers to believe.
The first indication of the intention of the president, and also of his
old and new allies, about the polls being free or otherwise would come on
the selection of the caretakers at the centre and in the provinces and the
neutral administrators chosen to replace the political nazims in the district.
The replacement of the nazims, in a way, would make a bigger
difference to the quality of the polls as the officials who would be
conducting the ballot all work under them
The governments publicity blitz seems to be driving the voters
away rather than winning them over. There are two reasons for this: the
people know it is all at their expense (the opposition alleges it has cost four
billion rupees already); and the watch the governments doings closely and
know the facts too well to be misled by claims that are exaggerated or
outright false.
If the aim is national reconciliation it should not be sought only
for those politicians who are accused of crimes. The law should enable the
political forces of the country one and all, secular, parochial or ethnic to
freely participate in the electoral process. In no manner should the fairness
of the polls be called into question.
Now that Musharraf has chosen an unusual and devious course to
reconciliation, its limited scope should be broadened through
negotiations, followed by another ordinance if necessary, to secure the
unhindered participation of Nawaz Sharifs Muslim League as also of the
regional parties
322

The situation demands a national government. Since that does not

look likely in the prevalent atmosphere of mistrust, the government should at
least represent the majority emerging out of a fair ballot in which every part
of the country and every section of the population is free to participate. Only
with this outcome will the reconciliation exercise be taken to serve the
national interest and not Musharrafs own interest.
Finally, and crucially, Musharraf, after relinquishing the army
command, should reconcile himself to being the constitutional president and
let the parliamentary institutions grow and work. Thus, while Musharraf
embarks on his new career, his opponents have no reason to gloat over the
success of their campaign.
Ayesha Siddiqa termed it Mother of all deals. All stakeholders have
struck a deal to jointly serve their personal interests and also to fight the
common and greatest threat of extremism. However, what comes out of this
acclaimed reconciliation will be determined by how the mother of all deals
was struck, what are its essential components and who are the main
beneficiaries.
The deal is essentially three-layered. Contrary to what most people
believe that the greatest beneficiary is Ms Bhutto, it is the army that has the
largest stake in the new political arrangement. The deal is fundamentally
between Musharraf and his army which wants him to exit and create room
for the organization to breathe more normally. Military has come under a lot
of criticism. It was to save its tarnished image that it became important for
the institution to maintain a safe distance from the most controversial man at
the top.
The next important layer pertains to the understanding between
the military and its external patrons that an environment must be created
to allow the army to fight extremism in the country and the tribal areas in an
undistracted manner There are too many people critical of what is
happening in Waziristan and disowning the war as an American one mainly
due to their differences with General Musharraf.
The need to develop a consensus in Islamabad led to the third level
of the deal which was between Ms Bhutto and the now about to be Mr
Musharraf. In fact, a closer look will reveal a series of independently struck
deals with leaders in exile or within the country.

323

Such an intricate mother of all deals will have a bearing on

future politics. Since the ultimate objective is to keep the military strong
and intact and capable of delivering to its foreign patrons. The new political
design will be such that no single stakeholder is in a position to rock the
boat.
It is quite probable that the Sharif brothers will also be allowed
to return to the country, contest the elections and manage to capture central
or urban Punjab where they are most popular. Besides making Musharraf
look good in the eyes of his foreign patterns and domestic cronies, allowing
the Sharif brothers back would ensure that they stick to their bare minimum
role of keeping the PPP and others in check.
This, however, is not the only way of checking the PPP. The present
regime has achieved what Gen Zia could not with his hard coercion,
which is to break the PPP leading to its disintegration. This job is being
accomplished most successfully by playing on the fears of Ms Bhutto,
appealing to her natural instinct to survive and gain power and through
ingenious ways of maligning her. The discussions were dragged on for a
long time and allowed to become public so that the PPP leadership lost its
credibility.
In the name of political stability and the fulfillment of objectives of
the primary layers of the deal, the PPP would be transformed into a
regional party confined mainly to Sindh where it would share governance
with MQM, of course with some presence in the centre.
The role in the centre might be curtailed so as not to allow Ms Bhutto
a clear majority to form the government or to threaten Article 58-2 (b) of the
Constitution at some future date. Members of the regime desire to make
Bhutto and Sharif a phenomenon of the past.
Although many believe that Ms Bhutto will be the next premier, the
preference would be for some one more docile and manageable like
Shaukat Aziz who has no domestic constituency or ambition beyond
serving his masters loyally.
Both Washington and Islamabad should duly award Aziz for keeping
the books reasonably balanced and pursuing the neo-liberal agenda of the
state. He also does not pose problems which real politicians do, such

324

questioning the authority of the GHQ from time to time. A docile prime
minister is the key to the deal between Musharraf and the GHQ.
This formula is what the government considers the right recipe for
national consensus, which it claims will strengthen democracy. The formula
is highly undemocratic because it will mean an extremely weak and
fledgling opposition not conducive for democracy and good governance.
It would not be surprising if Imran Khan is the only person sitting in the
opposition provided he wins a seat.
Are we going to get reconciliation through this formula; perhaps not.
National reconciliation is not possible without its other essential
component, which is the truth. Unfortunately, the issue here is that all
prospective partners have come together to protect their loot and plunder and
personal power, and will not necessarily come clean on their past mistakes.
Each actor will try to get closer to the GHQ and win the army
chiefs favour or that of the president. Moreover, the formula for
reconciliation has its basis in the encouragement of criminality. The people
of Pakistan have now learnt that one can plunder and get away with it in the
name of saving the nation from the larger threat of extremism.
How will extremism ever end in a country where the elite have
ganged up against the people, the middle class is co-opted and there is no
room for realism? In a few years, the stink from a stagnated socio-political
system might become unbearable and encourage the wretched of the land
to look at other alternatives.
Najmuddin A Shaikh supported NRO without saying it so clearly.
The media has expressed moral indignation at the perceived blanket
amnesty to those who have looted the country It is not realized that a
selective recall of history is even more destructive for a nations moral fiber
than forgetting history.
That such an ordinance cannot be reconciled with the
Constitution is the main plaint in the petitions that have been filed in the
high court and Supreme Court. How will the courts handle this hot potato,
which, perhaps even more so than the presidents eligibility case, has the
potential for exacerbating the present political uncertainty?

325

How strongly will this ordinance be defended by a government

whose prime minister and the leader of the ruling party have dubbed it as a
ruse to divide the opposition and secure a credible re-election of the
president at the same time? How sincere is the denunciation by the
presidents spokesman of such ideas? Does such denunciation mean that the
president is also shedding his political alliance that provided a faade of
democracy for his authoritarian rule along with his uniform?
The attempt will be to manipulate the election rules to keep alive
the prospects of the same stalwarts who were allowed to contest the 2002
polls despite being clearly disqualified. This will enhance the public
disillusionment with the electoral process.
As hapless chattering members of civil society, all we can do is
entertain the forlorn hope that an energetically waged election campaign
will revive the magic of the rallies that reinstated the Chief Justice or threw
up charismatic leaders in the political era of yore.
S A Qureshi was more vocal in supporting the NRO. It strikes me that
in any system of justice such a law would be curious. The reason would
be that people would ask, why not resolve the issues through the established
judicial system. The root of the problem is that we do not have a judicial
system that can be trusted by anyone in this country.
When we talk about judicial system it does not refer to judges
alone. Actually, it means the criminal administration system which includes
the investigating agency, the prosecution and the judiciary. The judges
cannot do much if the evidence before them is fixed, forged and concocted
which can easily be done when the state is not neutral. The investigating
agencies in Pakistan are, therefore, replete with police officers who have
emulated our judges in pragmatism.
At a national level, one either gets police officers who in situations
like May 12 in Karachi avoid confronting killers or act in reverse in
Islamabad where they bully the press and the lawyers. Little surprise then
that the PPP, which has been at the receiving end of this justice system for
the past 30 years, wants another way. So what happens if you have a
criminal administration system which your countrys largest political
party regards as untrustworthy and workable?

326

Shorn of the traditional rightwing allies whose patronage structures

are under international investigation the military believes it can use the PPP
as its new front. The NRO appears to have been negotiated by it with this
intent. Clearly, the militarys friends have produced a badly drafted law
without sincerity of political purpose. The constitutional protection and wide
ambit that should have blanketed this law is missing. It is very likely to be
struck down by the judiciary influenced by the military.
The military still appears to believe that if the ordinance fails it is
home and free. This is short-term thinking. The long-term consequences are
unnerving. If PPP does not have the opportunity to articulate and then
implement a radical programme of social reform because of being stitched
up with cases and allegations there will be no good governance.
The people of Pakistan will have no option but to look at the
right-wing alternatives. These alternatives have neither the will nor the
political vision to implement much-needed reform. The military must buy
into the spirit of the ordinance and let the PPP, if successful at the ballot,
implement a programme of reform like it did in the 1970s. If the PPP fails,
then one can only hope that the dynamic of the failure will create political
parties which can rise to the challenge.

Presidential election continued to be commented upon. Zafarul

Hasan from Karachi observed: Abul Kalam had once said and Pakistan
is an experiment. True to his observation, we have witnessed Pakistan
undergoing all kinds of political dispensation all through its existence.
Now the presidential election of Oct 6 is remarkable evolution of
unprecedented system based on unethical manoeuvrings to perpetuate
and legitimize corrupt system and corruption committed in the past. Hats off
to our military, civil and political heavyweights with the prayers of survival
of the country and its 160 million teeming people.
Riaz Jafri from Rawalpindi expressed his views on PPPs abstention
from presidential election. My dear PPP wallahs; dont you know that
abstain is a valid form of vote. There are three types of votes yes, no
and abstain. If the PPP wanted not to vote, they should have boycotted the
election by not coming to the assemblies, or, cast the negative vote No.
Abstain, in the elections is a definite form of vote a neutral vote which
is generally taken to augment the party polling more votes. In this case,
obviously, siding with the most likely winning candidate; Musharraf.
327

And, this is what part of the deal was, not to oppose Musharraf in
uniform but stay neutral abstain; a tacit approval. Okay, if the assemblies
elect him in uniform we will have no objection to it also. Also, that we will
not resign from the assemblies and cause any legal impediments in the way
of your election. And further, by participating in the election (by casting a
valid abstain vote) we will legitimize the right of the dying assemblies to
elect a president for the next five years beyond their lives.
The debate on NRO had not yet died down as the date of Benazirs
return neared. Musharraf, for reasons best known to him, advised her to
delay her coming back to Pakistan. The Dawn wrote: Mondays statement
by the president sounds enigmatic, and the PPP, apparently taken aback, had
not reacted to the presidential request till these lines were being written.
People are bound to wonder whether the question of delaying Ms
Bhuttos return has anything to do with the fate of the National
Reconciliation Ordinance, which, apart from being controversial, has been
challenged in court.
Meanwhile, Mr Shaukat Azizs announcement on Monday that
caretaker governments will take over in the centre and the provinces after
Nov 15, and that the parliamentary election will be held in January assumes
that the Supreme Courts judgment will go in favour of the victor of the Oct
6 presidential election. We do not know what option the president will
exercise if the apex court upholds the petitions and declares his election
null and void.
One of the options the PML leadership has often talked about is the
extension in the present assemblies lives by a year. In such a case, a
general election will take place in early 2009. Can the nation afford to wait
that long given the gravity of the problems it is facing?
Ms Bhuttos return as scheduled will make no difference to the
situation. Let her return and run her party from here rather than from Dubai.
With the non-PPP opposition in disarray, her return will enable her to
mobilize the moderate political forces against the extremists now on the
war path. This is something that does not go against the military-led
governments own policy to develop a national consensus against fanaticism
at a time when it seems to be spilling out of thr tribal belt.

328

Jamal Abbasi from Karachi commented on BBs overtures to defeat

terrorism. Notwithstanding the fact that the biggest human carnage of
Pakistan, involving over 10,000 murders, as well the murder of her own
brother, took place during her premiership, and which she watched
helplessly, she has not outlined exactly how she plans to tame the
religious extremism and terrorism?
Rashida Saleem from Lahore talked about PPP-MQM patch-up. The
rumours of the PPP and the MQMs reciprocal reconciliation for the future
political set-up at Sindh level are floating on Pakistans political horizon.
Considering the experience of the MQM-PPP coalition in the past, any
further conciliation or an alliance, too, seems to be very uneasy.
While in previous alliances, the establishment used both the parties to
weaken the democratic process in the country or to pave the way for military
establishment is there, so it is hoped that the result could be good if both
parties behaved properly.
However, there is a possibility that in case of any threat to the
establishment, both the MQM and the PPP may be used to destabilize
the democratic norms in the country, leading to violence like in the past.
For real democracy and peace in the country, military interference in politics
must be curtailed.
Najmuddin A Shaikh observed: The preparations made by the
party stalwarts suggest that much of Karachi will be shut down as the
jiyalas from all over the country respond to the call to chalo to the airport
and provide a fitting reception to the returning leader and her entourage.
The important question however will be whether this display of
public support will be enough to eliminate or at least mitigate the damage
done to her image and that of her party by the American brokered deal with
Musharraf? Will she be able, in her first public speech on Pakistan soil after
many years of exile, to restore the Bhutto magic and to convince the
skeptical masses and the even more skeptical media that transitional rather
than transformational politics offered the best prospects for bringing full
democracy to Pakistan.
The Dawn wrote: The PML-Qs desire to make life as difficult as
possible for Ms Bhutto is perfectly understandable. The incumbents came
to power through an election whose authenticity convinced no one and

329

remained in office only by hanging on to the coattails of Gen Musharraf. The

rag-tag kings party never enjoyed legitimacy in the eyes of the public
indeed never cared whether it did or not and many of its leading lights
known they cannot win an election not tilted in their favour.
True, Gen Musharraf has also asked Ms Bhutto to delay her return.
But then he is the person who offered the NRO to the Peoples Party and,
pending a court decision, there is no knowing if he can live up to his word.
At the same time, the legality of his own re-election is still to be confirmed
by the Supreme Court. Of course his true motives are best known to the
president himself. But this much is certain: unlike the Q-League, the
president stands to benefit from a deal with the PPP and there is little reason
why he should jeopardize the alliance so late in the day.
In a subsequent editorial the newspaper added: The Bhutto charisma
in not yet over, as Benazir Bhuttos return home on Thursday amply proves,
whatever ones views about the political expediency her opponents see in the
PPP chiefs triumphal homecoming. The timing of her landing on Pakistani
soil after eight years of self-exile demonstrates political adroitness,
combined with realism besides courage given the threats to her life.
By rejecting the authorities advice to delay her return, she wanted
to prove she was on her own, though this fully not the case. That the
MQM looked the other way shows in no ample measure that her return
would serve to complete the jigsaw puzzle the generals have in their minds
for the future. Nevertheless, the reception she received at Karachi yesterday
and the way her party mobilized itself were in direct contrast to the fiasco
that Mian Nawaz Sharifs turned out to be in Islamabad.

Are the people going to be duped again after being roused

to new heights of expectations? In other words, is Benazir going to
prove that she has learnt her lesson and that the corruption charges
and horse-trading that stigmatized her earlier two terms will have
no place in her scheme of things this time? There is no doubt she is
a tenacious fighter.
Lacking democratic institutions and ruled by a semi-civilian
government, Pakistan today faces a host of problems, the most
critical being terrorism and inflation that is squeezing the people

330

dry. The national reconciliation she has been talking about

cannot be achieved by mere rhetoric or by means of ordinance; it
can be achieved by reaching out to political opponents, turning the
current political animosities into a result-oriented dialogue, and
developing a consensus on such issues as the war in FATA and
Sayed A Mateen from Karachi observed: As the general
election is fast approaching, the political temperature is also rising.
Ms Bhutto has served twice as prime minister but somehow during
her rule the fate of the poor remained unchanged. Let us see what
political agenda is she bringing this time with her to Pakistan?
Ayaz Amir proposed a game plan for Musharraf after Return of She.
Ruling Q League loudspeakers may shout as much as they want that
her arrival will make no difference. But it will, as they know in their
hearts. Gen Pervez Musharraf has supped alone at the table of power for
eight long years, challenged only by political pygmies, or collaborators
dressed up as rival knights, as in the case of holy fathers, masters of political
disguise.
Whatever the stigma of the deal she has reached with the
General and without the safe passage guaranteed by this deal she would
not have been returning the fact remains that the PPP is not a dummy party
like the Q League and Benazir Bhutto is not a smooth-talking dummy like
our gift from Citibank, Shaukat Aziz (which does not mean that her path to
the prime minister-ship is assured).
A uniform-less Musharraf, a reinvigorated Benazir Bhutto one,
moreover, laughing up her sleeve at the way she has managed to get a
blanket amnesty for corruption cases from the very man who denounced her
no end for corruption a Q League uncertain if not fearful of its future, a
pretty powerful media and an assertive judiciary: all this marks a change
from the monochrome colours of the past eight years.
Admittedly not the transition some of us were hoping for. When the
judicial crisis broke, threatening Musharrafs grip on power, I was convinced
it was curtains for him. Ah, the rush to judgment. We knew the stuff the
opposition parties were made of but we werent counting on them to be

331

so self-absorbed as to sabotage the larger objective (of preventing a phony

presidential election).
We are moving into new territory, the contours of which will become
clearer after the coming elections. The kind of one-man rule we have seen
these past eight years will have to be tempered. No matter who is the
prime minister, the new game in the town will be power-sharing, Musharraf
having to adjust to a new style of doing things.
The Q League is in for a period of adjustments and surprises.
There are elements within it which dont see eye to eye with party president,
Shujaat Hussain, or his cousin Pervaiz Elahi, chief minister of Punjab. Trust
such elements not to be too upset by a resurgent PPP. In fact, any cutting
down to size of the two Chaudries will be welcomed in those quarters.
So no surprises if Shujaat and Pervaiz are deeply worried. Their
body language shows it; their tone betrays their inner feelings. Until now
they have been the prime beneficiaries of Musharrafs militarized
democracy, wielding the kind of power they couldnt have imagined. This
was one clan I used to think who could do without making more money, so
rewarding were their many industrial undertakings. But even in monetary
terms they have made hay during the Musharrafs years.
The new chariot being put together by circumstances and our
American friends will remain unbalanced unless both of its wheels are of
equal size, and this wont happen unless Musharraf can see the wisdom of
allowing Nawaz Sharif to return to Pakistan. The Q League is no match for
Benazir. In fact, as time passes she will make porridge of the Q League.
To play the role of umpire, to divide and rule GHQs most
enduring political tactic Sharif has to be allowed home so that he and
Benazir, picking up from where they had left off, can return to the fray, at
each others throat immediately, enabling the army to retrieve lost pride, turn
up its nose and say once more: Look what a mess the politicians are
making.
Ayesha Siddiqa visualized the future political system in Pakistan. The
country awaits a new civil-military hybrid political system. The years
ahead will denote a mixture of various political parties all coming together
in the name of national reconciliation.

332

The new political structure recognizes two essential elements.

First, that the military is a reality in Pakistans politics and cannot be pushed
back to the barracks. So, politicians will have to work with some elements of
the military institution and this process will then be called a transition to
democracy. Second, the military will understand that the key political actors
cannot be pushed out of politics and that any new dispensation will have to
include the old faces which the regime claimed it would completely
eliminate.
Some analysts call this the best form of politics which will result in a
smooth transition to democracy. Their assessment is that the military and
General Musharraf, both of whom are deficient in political legitimacy, will
build a partnership with real political players such as the PPP and the PMLN. Since there is a bad blood between Sharif and Musharraf, Benazir
Bhuttos party will be the natural beneficiary of a deal between the GHQ
and the political leadership.
Surely, pragmatists will encourage the leadership of all parties to
hold their cards close to their chest before the elections so that the
applecart is not disturbed before the parties come into power or claim their
share of power. However, what is most essential is for all parties to
strategize about power and resource-sharing between the centre and
federating units and devolving democracy to the grassroots level.
Correcting the balance means bringing transparency to the
defence sector which would include an examination of the functioning of
intelligence agencies. Power will have to be negotiated gradually and
systematically but this really depends on whether the civilian partners of the
current political deal have the patience and willingness to push back the
military.
The list of essential policy issues is very long. How these subjects
are tackled will ultimately depend on the design of the political transition.
The fact is that this transition will strengthen the traditional patronage
system and not bring any fundamental change to the structure.
The transition would not necessarily be based on the principle of
free and fair elections but on proportioning power and influence on the
basis of the perceived popularity of a party, its significance for maintaining
the existing balance of power, the capability of its topmost leadership and its
relationship with the GHQ and external partners.
333

The existing strength of the process of transition is also its

inherent weakness. There is no evidence at the moment regarding the
existence of any political force which can look beyond its own power and
change the nature of relationship between state and society.
The analysts also discussed some other issues relevant to the
prevalent political situation. Khalid Jawed Khan wrote: The lawyers have
ignited the spark, not of violence but of hope and awareness. This should not
be extinguished. Either we rise to the occasion now or sink to the depths of
stagnation for years to come.
It is also true that lawyers have praised some of the decisions of the
court and criticized others. The lawyers being a conscientious and
enlightened segment of the society must always be courteous and respectful
to the institution of the judiciary as their respect and dignity depends upon
that institution. They must not lose sight of this basic tenet even when
evaluating a courts verdict critically. But it also be remembered that when
the issues before the court are not private rights and interests of their clients,
but larger national issues, the response of the lawyers is bound to be
critical.
Where lawyers are pitched against the ambitions of dictators and
entrenched establishments, and they seek vindication of principles of the
rule of law, independence of judiciary and supremacy of the Constitution,
they are entitled to praise the court when these principles are honoured and
criticize the court when the judgments are to the contrary. There is nothing
hypocritical or wrong about it.
The achievements of the summer of 2007 are remarkable and will
continue to enliven us for a long time to come. Yet as a nation we still have a
long way to go. At this crucial moment in our history, the lawyers must not
quit. To quote Robert Frost: the woods are lovely, dark and deep, but I have
promises to keep and miles to go before I sleep.
Anwar Syed, having gone by the letter of the law, even after calling it
a bad law, urged the Opposition to think about the real issues facing the
country. In a democracy, it is the function of certain institutions, such as the
legislature and a cabinet of ministers, to heed public feeling or opinion on
issues under their consideration. But that does not hold for the judiciary.

334

Courts are not put in place to cater to public opinion. Nor is it

their function to enforce the rules of morality. They are to say what the law
is and apply it, regardless of its ranking in terms of its virtue or efficacy, in
settling the issues that have come before them.
The Seventeenth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution
were bad laws. They altered its fundamental character and thus distorted
and corrupted it. Nevertheless, they form part of the Constitution as it now
stands and that must be followed until they are repealed.
Let us now address still another aspect of the matter. While he was
the army chief, as well as the president, General Musharraf could order the
nations armed forces to be deployed as he deemed fit, and he could order
the various intelligence agencies to go after his detractors, and his orders
would be obeyed. But once he has given up his army post, he cannot have
the same leverage with the military and the intelligence agencies.
Much of the authority General Musharraf has exercised in the
civilian sectors had been assumed arbitrarily in violation of the
Constitution as it stood after the Seventeenth Amendment. The prime
minister and the cabinet emerging from the next parliamentary elections will
be under no compulsion to allow the president roles which the Constitution
does not assign him. He will then be like an old tiger whose teeth have been
pulled out.
That being the case, it would be dysfunctional for the opposition
parties to spend their energies on ousting him. They have been organizing
street demonstrations to register their disapproval of his rule. Some of them
got their members of parliament and provincial assemblies to resign their
seats as a gesture of protest against his election.
In preparing for the election they must think through the real
issues facing the country and devise and publicize the strategies they intend
to adopt to meet them. it is not enough to say that the nations problems
would be solved if the replaced the present military-supported regime.
They must tell us specifically how, for instance, they will expand
employment, control prices, provide drinking water and healthcare to the
people, deal with the extremists militants and interact with America and
India. They should also say how and where they will find the money to do
all the good things they are promising.

335

I A Rehman wrote his views on laws and peoples will. Instances of

the law being used to impose on the people decisions that they held
politically unjustifiable, or to legitimize actions taken in an individuals or
parochial interest are common knowledge. Public opinion has hardly ever
been convinced of the justness of such legal settlements, and yet,
throughout Pakistans history the establishment has continued to rely
on legal-looking devices to cover up its politically indefensible actions.
The ground for taking exception to the anti-democratic laws created
or invoked by authoritarian regimes are well-known. Apart from the
reference to the peoples will being the basis of authority of the government
in Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, laws that are
not made by competent authorities are generally excluded from the
category of good laws.
Besides, laws that are not required in public interest and are designed
to serve the personal interest of a single individual or a few (the two offices
law, Reconciliation Ordinance) or assail the rights of a few (the law that bars
third term as prime minister) are by universal convention considered bad.
They also fail the test of the non-discriminatory application of laws.
There was a demand for a moratorium on politically-motivated
prosecution of public representatives. This purpose could have been
achieved by a politically defensible general amnesty or an amnesty for all
political figures for a limited period. The public support for them in the
general election would have been a better justification for reprieving popular
leaders and the decision would have been attributed to the peoples will.
A result of living under laws and legal processes that are held
contrary to the peoples aspirations is the decline of public trust not only
in such laws but also in the judicial forums that uphold them. Further, the
larger the number of anti-democratic verdicts, the greater is the eclipse of
democratic norms in a society.
It would be grossly unfair, however, to blame the judiciary wholly
for the legitimization of developments that are in clear breach of
governance by the peoples will. To a great extent they are bound by laws
and cannot always and forever protect people against tyranny by ignoring
the bad laws. That they have tended to avoid using the possibilities of
containing the disaster caused by disruption of representative governance

336

available to them may well be due to the failure of political parties and the
conscious citizenry to accept their role in resistance to authoritarianism.
The political parties must accept greater responsibility for
compromising the position of the judiciary as well as their own credit
with the people by looking on courts as the sole or even the most decisive
custodians of democratic political values. True, so long as there are courts
they will be approached for redress and some form of resistance to autocracy
is better than total acquiescence, but political groups that wish all political
issues to be decided at judicial forums undermine the sanctity of the peoples
will.
A Veteran Voter from Karachi urged: A time has now come when it
has become imperative for our free media to come forward, educate the
voters and ask them to vote for a person who promises to:
Continue to remain a human being after being elected and is not taken
away by ego centricity to behave like a king or queen but firmly puts
his/her foot down on VIP culture or any type of show-off to intimidate
those who elected him/her.
Retrieve all national wealth pilfered through looting, corruption, etc,
or getting the loans written off, irrespective of who is involved.
Utilize national resources to improve health, education technological
facilities instead of constructing lavish buildings for
As done immediately after independence in India and Bangladesh,
effectively banish all wadera shahi and remnants of princely states.
Ruthlessly proscribe the cruel and illegal anti-human customs of
swara, karo-kari, vani, marriage with the Book, and a host of similar
shameful practices, rampant despite objections by the courts of law.

REVIEW

337

The Mushy-Pinky affair culminated in the form of a legal document

called NRO. Majority of Pakistanis were unable to digest illegitimate and
illegal deeds in legal capsule of National Reconciliation Ordinance.
Mr Qamar quoted excerpts from the book In the Line of Fire, to
coax its author to refrain from striking a deal with a corrupt lady. He,
however, forgot that apart from authoring a book, Musharraf has also been
inside the Kaaba more than any Pakistani leader. He might have received
divine guidance to strike a holy deal during one of the inside incursions.
The observations of two of the analysts about Chaudhry Shujaat
Hussain were indeed quite interesting. His record as a mediator proves that
his break-through only meant elimination of the other side through use of
military force. It would be fair to call Shujaat, not a Mediator, but an
Exterminator.
The hype created by the PPP through publicity over Benazirs return
and the reception was quite similar to the publicity of film Mohabataan
Sachiyan, which was released almost concurrently. Both drew
unprecedented number of fans.
The turnout of PPP jiyalas proved all the experts wrong, in visualizing
that Benazirs deal with a dictator has disillusioned her fans. By turning out
in hundreds of thousands from all over the country, they proved that moral
issues have no place in Pakistani politics. For political parties, leaders and
workers included. it is all about reaching the corridors of power; no matter
how.
PPP and PML-Q have started behaving like Sautans. The difference
between new and old political spouses of the military dictator is quite similar
to the one encountered in normal life. The old-one feels embarrassed and
insulted; the new-one tries to be proud despite being the second. The
reception of Benazir must have shaken the Gujrati bride.
Benazir returned to Pakistani arena like a gladiator challenging all the
forces from al-Qaeda to Taliban to Dr A Q Khan to Q League. Her war-cries
were meant to please her US backers. This spoke of her compassion for
Pakistanis and Pakistans interests.
It was foolish on her part to assume that her war-cries would go
unheard and not responded. Apparently, the militant forces challenged by her

338

have received her messages and they reacted in manner they know well. She
and her party leaders were lucky to escape unhurt.
This episode should also be looked at from another angle. Terror
threats to Benazir were hyped from Washington to Islamabad in which
Baitullah was mentioned specifically, but militant leader had categorically
denied threatening the home-coming leader. Then, who carried out the
attack; the one mentioned in the PPPs letter to the uniformed bridegroom or
someone else has exploited the situation for his vested interests?
The US backers of Benazir must have also been shocked after seeing
the burning of flag bearing Stars and Stripes by the PPP supporters at half a
dozen places in a distance of couple kilometers during the journey towards
Quaids Mazar.
19th October 2007

HELMET vs WIG
AFTERSHOCKS IX
339

No terrorist group owned the responsibility of the attack; even the

most suspected militant, Baitullah Mehsud, categorically denied his
involvement in the blasts. The investigators were left to tread in almost
complete dark while Benazir kept insisting for services of investigators from
the US and the UK.
The world leaders sympathized with Benazir and so did the leaders
from within Pakistan, but there were some exceptions like Imran Khan, who
confined his sympathies to the poor victims of the tragedy. PPP, however,
seemed determined to capitalize on the opportunity. FIR of the incident
was filed in which Pervaiz Elahi was named as one of the suspect.
The Reconciliation too seemed to have fallen victim to the twin
blasts. PPP and PML-Q leaders resorted to the blame-game, a familiar aspect
of politics in Pakistan. This affected the consultations for the formation of
caretaker set-up. PML-N, however, was of the view that the row was mere a
Noora Kushti.
In the judicial arena, Aitzaz Ahsan kept urging the Supreme Court to
bury the Doctrine of Necessity; but remarks of the Bench gave impression to
the contrary. A lawyer-cum-politician of PPP from Rawalpindi area
predicted that the court would give split-decision in favour of General
Musharraf.

EVENTS
On 19th October, Baitullah categorically denied involvement in
Karachi blasts which claimed 138 lives and wounded another 554. Benazir
pointed at some within the establishment and strengthened her argument by
the mention of putting of jammers and street lights; capture of a man with a
pistol; and hearing fire shots just before the bomb blast. PPP blamed Zia
remnants for attack on the rally. The world and national leaders condemned
bomb blasts. Opposition leaders blamed the regime. Altaf Bhai offered
sympathies and cooperation to BB. Musharraf and BB vowed to fight
terrorism.
Farooq Leghari suggested national government for fair polls. Shujaat
wanted rallies to be banned during election campaign. The Guardian feared
340

deepening of political crisis after blasts. Islamabad assured Washington that

general elections wont be delayed.
Next day, another head was found which was believed to be of the
second suicide bomber. Mustafa Khar feared another attempt on Benazirs
life. He said the people who saw power slipping from their hands were
behind Karachi carnage. ANP termed it an attack on political process.
World leaders continued sympathizing with Benazir; Indian leaders
including Sonia also telephoned. White House wanted Pakistan not to take
any action that would undermine the democratic process in the country. The
Guardian said Musharrafs shelf life has ended.
Rice telephoned Benazir on 21st October. PPP rejected the report that
alleged that the blasts took place due to security lapses on the part of police
and PPP guards. Another report said that foreign security experts hired by
PPP had disappeared before the blasts. Benazir vowed to take on militants
and demanded a probe into suicide attacks by foreign experts. Mourning
across Sindh continued on third consecutive day and mourners lashed out at
Arbab Rahim.
Investigators said that both blasts were caused by suicide bombers.
The regime permitted registration of separate FIRs regarding the attack. A
delegation of MQM met PPP leaders to convey condolence. Sherpao said
electoral meetings would be allowed only at specified places. Shujaat
contacted political leaders for APC. Opposition parties and PPP rejected the
regimes suggestions to restrict electioneering activities because of the
security threats.
Tom Daschle, former US Senate majority leader, after visit to Pakistan
said, the polls must be held as per schedule and intelligence agencies must
be stopped from interfering. Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the US Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, said the US should secure Pakistans nuclear
weapons.
The talks between the regime and PPP for formation of caretaker setup were stopped by the government till announcement of the verdict of the
Supreme Court on eligibility of Musharraf for presidential election which he
has already won. PML-N opposed Musharraf-PPP talks on interim
government.

341

Pervaiz Elahi was named as main suspect in one FIR. The government
rejected Benazirs demand for probe by US and UK investigators, but the
top police investigators would be removed on PPPs demand. The US
supported the demand for credible probe. The UNSC condemned Karachi
blasts and asked all member countries to help Pakistan in the probe.
Afghan Taliban denied their involvement in Karachi blasts saying they
do not attack outside Afghanistan. MQM and Sunni Tehreek delegations
called on Benazir to convey their condolence.
Aitzaz Ahsan urged the Supreme Court to bury the Doctrine of
Necessity. The Bench remarked in a lighter vein that dead body has been
buried but the spirit continues haunting; the spirit or badrooh? City police
chief told the seven-member bench of SHC that he was helpless on May 12.
On 23rd October, Musharraf sent his top aide Tariq Aziz to Lahore to
calm down Chaudhry Shujaat in on-going war of words with Benazir. PPP
denied blaming CM and IB chief, but in a copy of the letter written to the
president attached with the FIR clearly named them as suspects.
Benazir said the attack on her rally should not be made a pretext for
canceling or postponing the general elections. She added that her party
might join the caretaker set-up if it was convinced that it would be for
holding free, fair and transparent elections. According to Benazirs lawyer
Farooq H Naek, she has received an assassination threat from al-Qaeda
through a letter. Benazir feared obliteration of evidence once again
demanded foreign involvement in the probe.
Ahsan Iqbal of PML-N urged the Supreme Court to take suo motu
notice of Rs 53bn write-off. This is yet another mega scandal of the
Musharraf regime, which has come out in public. There has never been such
massive write-off of loans in Pakistans banking history. Unfortunately, a
regime that had promised to make recoveries against stuck loans, has itself
granted massive write-offs to its favorites. Many in the government have
benefited through these write-offs.
Aitzaz Ahsan argued before the court that the Constitution does not
allow a candidate for presidential election in uniform. The Chief Justice said
deployment of police in plain clothes is illegal. The remarks were made
during hearing of the case of use of force against the lawyers on September

342

29. New York based Human Rights Watch urged Musharraf regime not to
intimidate the Supreme Court.
Probe officer, DIG Manzoor Moghal, was replaced on the dictation of
PPP. The party also demanded immediate removal of Sindh Chief Minister
and urged the CJP to take suo moto notice of Karachi bombings. Former
MNA of PPP from Faisalabad joined PML-N.
The proposed code of conduct was sent to all the political parties by
the ECP. Shaikh Rashid advised Benazir to forget about becoming prime
minister. PML-Q opposed giving major share to PPP in interim set-up. Imran
said electoral alliance wont be possible as long as Fazlur Rahman is part of
the APDM. He termed the ongoing PPP-PML-Q as noora kushti. Achakzai
urged interim set-up comprising retired judges, preferably those who refused
to take oath under PCO.
Karzai gazed through the US-made crystal ball and saw that Benazir
would be the next prime minister of Pakistan. The US weekly magazine
dubbed Pakistan as more dangerous place than Iraq.
Senior member of the Supreme Court, Justice Ramday, asked if the
judges who had taken the oath under the PCO could be blamed for deviating
from the Constitution. What am I if I took the oath under PCO an
impostor? ...I am not ashamed if I had taken the oath under the PCO. We
have made our country, its institutions and the Constitution a matter of
laughing stock in the world. He added that whatever burble and verbal
jugglery might be behind the changes made since 1977 in the Constitution,
the country had been ruled under the Constitution.
On 25th October, Benazir lashed out on what she described as political
madressahs which, she said, had become arsenal of weapons and retreat for
militants. Musharraf reiterated that Nawaz Sharif wont be allowed to return
before general elections. Condy said the United States wanted Musharraf to
work more closely with Benazir.
Aitzaz argued that wrong decisions cause revolts. The judge replied
courts are not revolutionary forums. At the end of days proceedings, Justice
Javed Iqbal asked Aitzaz Ahsan for a verse of poetry. When Aitzaz showed
reluctance the judge heading the bench said today I have one for you: Jante
thay hum dono magar; os ne bhi waada kar liya mein ne bhi waada kar

343

liya. PPP leader from Rawalpindi, a Supreme Court lawyer, predicted that
the courts decision would be split and in favour of Musharraf.
On 26th October, Benazir sent defamation notice to Arabab Rahim.
She once again demanded US and UK experts role in the probe. She also
demanded suspension of local governments before the polls. PPP allowed
electoral adjustments with PML-N at local levels. Sindh Criminal
Prosecution Service recommended withdrawal of 1,800 cases involving
leaders and workers of MQM.
Justice Javed Iqbal said that the decision on the petitions would be in
accordance with the Constitution. He criticized certain elements that were
making comments on court judgment which was yet to be announced.
Musharraf headed a meeting to work out strategy in view of the forthcoming
verdict of the court. Was it to intimidate the court or was it to deceive the
general public about the clues he had about the courts decision or was up
to some mishief? Justice Wajihuddin Ahmed alleged that the judges were
violating their constitutional oath by refusing to decide political questions.
On 27th October, Benazir arrived in Garhi Khuda Bakhsh amid tight
security. She said disagreement on 58-2 (b) persisted. Shaukat and Shujaat
met Pagara and called on Nine Zero and discussed electoral plan/alliance.
Initiation of efforts to unify PML-Q and PML-N were reported to save the
split of rightist vote bank. Aitzaz was elected as president of SCBA.
Next day, Shaukats hint at talks with PML-N indicated that the Q
League was wary of facing the PPP in general elections. PML-N termed the
on-going blame-game between PPP and PML-Q as Noora Kushti.
Reportedly, UK was keeping close watch on probe of Oct 18/19 bombing.

VIEWS
The return of Benazir was an event that no political observer
could ignore. Farah Onaid from Karachi had a pertinent observation. She
very candidly remarked that her children were busy taking their A and O
level examinations.
Would a peoples prime minister only be concerned about her
childrens examinations? What about the 5,000 children who had to take

344

an examination on the 18th of October here in Karachi? I am witness to the

pains and anxiousness that many students, teachers and parents faced that
fearful day.
Surprisingly, every TV channel covered her return, citing what an
admirable event in the history of Pakistan it was. I wonder what has
happened to the educated masses of our dear homeland. Can we not
prioritize what is more important, education or the welcoming of a
person?
Rehman from Berlin wrote: The return of former Prime Minister
Benazir Bhutto must not be seen as the first step toward democracy in
Pakistan. It was a mere political show prepared and masterminded by
General Musharraf to prolong his already deteriorating power in the
country It is also worth taking note of previous events that made Ms
Bhuttos return to Karachi possible. Even though it was greeted with
hundreds of thousands of her supporters, it is not adequate evidence of the
dictatorship regimes intention to return democracy to the people.
It is misleading to believe that there will be a significant change
in Pakistans political regime in the near future. What is happening now is
just new political power play that can lead the country to better or even
worse conditions. The most important message from this event is simple:
democracy cant be achieved by returning a political figure to a country. It
has to be built brick by brick by the one with the real political mandate: the
people of Pakistan.
Naushaba Burney expressed her views on the manner in which masses
turned out to receive her. I guess we have to accept that we, the Pakistani
people, are still struck in the piree muridee mindset. How else to explain that
the major metropolis of Karachi was cheerfully exposed to murder and
mayhem despite tall talk about security; and for what? A political leader was
returning to the city after a longish absence. The welcome she received was
the kind given only to a saint.
Perhaps Benazir thought this was still the Pakistan of 1986, having
been away for far too many years to understand that she was returning to a
country where violence has become endemic. But what happened to her
party people here in Karachi? Couldnt they smell trouble? All over the
world, leaders today race to their destination on city roads at top speed

345

to pre-empt murderous attacks Like her spell-bound admirers, Benazir too

must have been in a trance to agree to spend endless hours on Sharea Faisal.
How can we still go on living in our own make-believe world? In an
era when science and technology are in the process of creating a somewhat
more logical, rational and pragmatic mindset worldwide, we havent
budged an inch from our obsession with heavenly souls and others we
imbue with mystical attraction. The saints of Sindh have us in thrall deeply.
Love and romance figured large in BBs welcome.
A turbaned rustic said he had a dream. In his dream Shaheed Bhutto
asked him to go to Karachi to welcome his daughter, so here he was. Others,
when asked if they werent afraid of getting pushed around or hurt, shook
their heads with a smile. Their looks suggested that laying down their
lives for her was a small price to pay to be in her vicinity.
For a political leaders welcome, there was total absence of any
political slogans, nor did the banners and placards highlight issues and
problems. Instead, there was utterly uncritical and unquestioning adoration
for our Quaid. Even when provoked regarding her collaboration with a
dictator, groups of jiyalas happily answered: Shes doing it for democracy.
The crowd appeared lost in some dream world. What about their
heroines corruption cases? Questioned on this by curious reporters, not one
in that massive gathering bothered to counter the charges. Such mundane
matters were irrelevant to them and they remained rapt in the magical aura
that in their eyes surrounds their leader.
Only a strong spiritual fervor and abnormal veneration for their
leader can explain the fact that the massed public on the roads suffered the
sun, wind, hunger, thirst, lack of toilet facilities and other acute discomforts
for close to 24 hours. Yet their exuberance and excitement never flagged.
Benazir Bhuttos arrival was pure drama. The TV channels of course went to
town over it.
Abbas Jalbani wrote: The pragmatic people of Pakistan feel that
despite her weaknesses, Benazir Bhutto and the PPP stand for
democracy; and the masses and the rising middle class of Sindh who have
been trapped between the high waters of feudalism/tribalism in villages and
the fire of ethnic discrimination in the cities believe that only the PPP can
partially rescue them.

346

Benazir Bhutto has returned with an olive branch in her hand a

message of peace, reconciliation and accommodation for everyone.
Thursdays rally was an electrifying manifestation of peaceful peoples
power. But the enemies of peace used this happy occasion to convey their
message of death and destruction to everyone, including the PPP leadership.
Benazirs annoyed brothers reacted with public protests from Lyari
to Kashmor, reviving memories of the valiant movement for the restoration
of democracy in 1983. Shouldnt Benazir Bhutto realize that with the masses
who were the darling of her father, these fearless comrades and
uncompromising like Aitzaz Ahsan are the real power of her party? With
the start of her affair with the establishment, she has lost a good number
of true jiyalas and some respectable like Mubashar Hasan, each time she
had a brief stint in government after 1988. She must ensure that these
endangered species are preserved and not lost.
If Benazir Bhutto wants to survive politically, she should steer her
party to its origin by re-adopting her fathers programme Everybody
knows that she cannot become Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (who defied not only the
military but also had the nerves to confront the mighty US). But she could
and should at least become Benazir Bhutto of the 1980s.
Anwer Syed was the view that the reconciliation was cosmetic. The
ordinanceamends a 109-year old law (Section 494 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, Act V of 1889). A close reading of its text will reveal that
it does not require any withdrawal of cases. It only authorizes the
government to do so Second, the authorization (contained in sub-sections
2 and 3 which have been added to Section 494 of the PPC) is to be exercised
only if a review board has examined the case in question in its entirety,
concluded that the charges were bogus, and recommended their withdrawal.
This would seem to involve a long and tedious process. It is not
going to be easy for any review board to conclude that the charges in the
case under consideration were bogus to begin with. One might then have
suspected that the government did not seriously intend to withdraw the
cases against ire current or former opponents.
Recall in this connection Chaudhry Shujaat Hussains statement to
the effect that the ordinance was nothing more than a trick the government
played on the PPP, which is her gullibility Ms Bhutto had failed to detect. He
made it clear also that if the courts struck down the ordinance, the
347

government would not feel obligated to do anything about it and bring in a

more viable piece of legislation.
The cases could possibly be withdrawn under some other law too.
It is my understanding that in the Anglo-Saxon tradition the prosecution has
always had the option of dropping a case which at any stage of the
proceedings it finds to be untenable. This has been the case in Pakistan. It is
then not clear why National Reconciliation Ordinance was made at all.
The governments professed objective of bringing about
reconciliation, mutual trust and civility in national politics is just as dubious
as the ordinance itself. One will want to know what reconciliation means
and what the parties might be between whom it is sought to be made.
Reconciliation must then mean something else. I think it means
abandonment of abuse, intimidation, unlawful use of power and resort to
violence in dealing with opponents even as contests in the pursuit of power
remain. In Pakistani experience, ruling parties have, first and foremost, been
the ones to harass and oppress their opponents.
It is the Musharraf regime which has been tormenting the PPP,
PML-N, Jamaat-i-Islami and the Baluch nationalist parties, among others,
during the last several years. It is up to this regime to do what it will take to
bring about reconciliation between itself and those it has been persecuting.
There isnt a whole lot it has to do; its part will be done if it leaves them
alone, unmolested, and does not rig elections. But it should not expect them
to quit their positional roles and become its supporters.
She, on her part, is not willing to sit at the same table even with
Maulana Fazlur Rahman and Qazi Hussain Ahmad. Her participation in a
future government may serve other purposes, but it can have no relevance to
the enterprise of combating extremism or reaching national reconciliation.
The National Reconciliation Ordinance would seem to be window
dressing and possibly a farce. It was nevertheless impolitic of Chaudhry
Sahib to say so publicly. In politics some truths are better kept under wraps.
With Benazir came the bomb blasts. Ameer Bukhsh Bhutto, Vice
Chairman Sindh National Front observed. This incident throws up some
important questions. First, despite security measures unprecedented in
modern times, in which 20,000 Rangers and another 5,000 of People Partys
own security personnel were deployed, along with the most advanced high-

348

tech equipment imported exclusively by protecting the president and the

prime minister, how could such an incident occur?
Was there a loophole in the security plan devised for the event or was
there a lapse in the execution of the plan? If terrorists can execute their
threatened attacks even in such a tightly-controlled environment, then where
does that leave the unprotected and defenceless common man? Heads
should roll. But we all know they wont.
Second, if such an attack really was deemed to be as imminent as the
authorities seemed to be implying it was, then why did they allow the
procession to take place? On May 12, the Chief Justice of Pakistan was
not allowed to come out of Karachi Airport and was sent back to
Islamabad because the government felt they could not guarantee his safety
on the streets of Karachi If there was any occasion not to allow a rally in
Karachi for security reasons this was it. But, the exuberance for the newfound love with Benazir she could not be told not to come on the streets and
unfortunately, chief justice was taken and treated as a villain.
If the chief justice can be sent packing, then why was Ms Bhutto
allowed to proceed, putting so many lives in jeopardy? Was it so important
to make a display of public strength for the benefit of western benefactors,
on whose nod Ms Bhutto was returning, that the massacre of hundreds of
people was considered to be an acceptable loss?
Nawaz Sharifs returns to confront the Musharraf administration and
he is manhandled at Islamabad Airport and sent back to exile in violation of
the Supreme Court orders. Ms Bhutto arrives with the blessings of her
American overlords to promote their agenda and support a Musharraf
administration that was in deep trouble and the whole state apparatus is
put at her disposal, and her party men are invited to meetings in the
Governors House in Karachi to make arrangements for her arrival. That is
the difference which embedding with the Americans makes.
Bilal Hasan Minto tried to answer the obvious question: Who has
done it? Asif Ali Zardari very promptly issued his statement on the bomb
blasts in Benazirs procession attributing them to intelligence agencies.
Benazir, in her press conference, too, didnt name anyone but clearly hinted
that it was the work of someone from within the establishment.

349

Statements about a serious security threat to Benazir from terrorists

were appearing in the press on an almost daily basis since quite a few days
before her arrival. We are being prepared or convinced that if there
was an attempt on her life, it would be by terrorists.
Several things are quite puzzling about not just this assassination
attempt on Benazir, but about the overwhelming majority of what are
quickly declared terrorist attacks. One, no one claims responsibility.
Surely, a terrorist outfit wants its targets to be terrorized by itself and not
by anyone else.
Two, where we are told that responsibility has been claimed, it is a by
new outfit of which we have never heard before and never do again. Three,
the targets in these attacks the common people, middle and lower class
make little sense unless the sole purpose of the terrorists is to be hated more
and more by the populace.
This is unlikely since these terrorists are assumed to be Islamic
fundamentalists fighting for what they think is a cause. They should wish
for public sympathy, not hatred. Four, there are easier targets available
easier and likely to create a bigger impact. By all accounts, these terrorist
organizations have state of the art armament and they comprise highly
skilled, organized and clever people.
Who has been going about exploding anonymous bombs in
Pakistan in the name of terrorists, and in the latest instance, who is behind
the Karachi attempt? Lets venture a guess. It is quite clear that Benazirs
return makes none of the power players of Pakistani politics happy except
the United States and perhaps also General Musharraf, who, though
unhappily, might have had the sense to think that his own survival now
depends on this unholy alliance with Benazir. He would have had this sense
because he would know, one hopes, that there is quite clearly a part of the
establishment a powerful part which has consistently tried to destabilize
him for some time now.
Someone was surely up to something and this someone is
obviously part of a setup, if not setup itself, that has the wherewithal to
make all this happen. Earlier on, while the deal between Musharraf and
Benazir was being discussed and had not yet been finalized, these people
would have had to eliminate only Musharraf from the scene. Now, however,
there is another party: Benazir.
350

These people, with end goals that are perhaps not very different from
those of the fundamentalist terrorists, and obviously hard at work. But
while they may or may not be able to succeed, for all their campaign in the
press about security threats from terrorists, it seems that Asif Ali Zardari,
Benazir Bhutto and this writer will remain unconvinced.
Humera Alwani, MPA from Thatta had different views on possible
culprit and the motive. Basically, the tragedy happened because of
security lapse on the part of the provincial government. It appears that
the government intends to sabotage the election campaign and wants to keep
public leaders and democratic forces like Ms Bhutto away from the masses
and create panic and fear among people.
The main purpose of these tactics is to create possibilities to
shorten the election campaign and restrict public leaders from getting in
touch with people. Why all these terrorist attacks on PPP
rallies/demonstrations alone? It was attack on democracy and on unity and
integrity of Pakistan. The government must unmask the faces behind such a
heinous crime.
Adil Saleem Khan from Lahore advised Benazir to remain focused.
The attack on PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhuttos caravan may be an attempt
to set the agenda for the new government that she is expected to form. It will
be unfortunate for the masses if her pro-people agenda is hijacked by
the so-called war on terror.
There is a trend in the world wherein the newly-elected governments
or parties and persons expected to form new governments are targeted
through bombs or other violent means It seems that the powers that be
intentionally and unintentionally goad the new and the expected new
governments towards a tough policy against the Islamic militants by
influencing their thought processes through violent spectacles.
The attack on Ms Bhutto should be seen in this light. Reportedly, Ms
Bhutto has unemployment, inflation, education and other social issues as her
priorities. She is to become the nurturer in chief. The attack on her may
change all that. She may now rethink her priorities and may be goaded to the
tough stand against the insurgency in the tribal belt. I am sure Ms Bhutto
will see through the smoke and keep her priorities intact. However, the
danger will then remain more attacks to force her to change her policies and
priorities.
351

If Ms Bhutto does form the new government and her policies are
affected by the bombing incidents on Oct 19, then she will be playing into
the hands of the hands of those who carried out or prompted these incidents.
It is a tight rope that we as a nation have to walk
The Dawn wrote: No matter what the cost in terms of casualties and
human suffering, we have as a nation demonstrated to the people of world
watching the drama on Karachis streets that our resolve to stand up to
terror remains unimpaired.
Ms Bhutto, no doubt, showed courage, more so because her enemies
had threatened to kill her. But it must be asked of the PPP leaders, was the
slow crawl necessary? The authorities will, of course, be blamed for the
security lapse, and controversy already surrounds the jammers.
Basically there are two issues here: one, the government should
make no attempt to use the terrorism threat genuine though it is to curtail
the freedoms associated with campaigning Two, all political parties must
unite to reject religious extremism, led as it is in most cases by semi-literate
fanatics. All political parties, of course, have their own socio-economic
agendas and plans for the future, but they must realize that only a united
political front by all mainstream political parties can crush the monster of
terrorism.
Murtaza Razvi touched upon the accusations and counter accusations
that followed the blasts. What does Fridays attempt on her life leave
Benazir Bhutto with? Hopefully, a bit more than just more martyrs in her
partys fold, and a yearning for sympathy vote. Tragedies spanning her
turbulent political career and threats to her life need no repetition. It would
be the wrong foot to start on. Dwelling on accusations of the kind hastily
voiced by spouse Zardari, given his reputation for recklessness, too, will not
do the party much good either.
The task ahead is strewn with challenges, dangers and much
ambivalence, at the very best. Here is a party that claims to be widely
representative on national basis, which in turn makes it the only party to take
up the many challenges Pakistan faces today. That they hate our freedom
and democracy is an accusation easier leveled than practical steps
taken to ensure that they do not prevail.

352

There are chinks in Ms Bhuttos armour, but thats the armour she
has willingly donned. On the one hand stand the extremists with whom she
shares feelings of mutual disgust; on the other are her political adversaries
sitting in the power saddle which many of them now feel is slipping from
under them. That the latter have a soft corner for the extremists is no secret.
Closer home, the Sindh chief minister has made no secret either of
love lost for Bhutto or his affinity with rightwing views that he wears on his
sleeve. The MQM has yet to make its position clear on Bhuttos
homecoming, more so on her staying here, after the dust kicked up by the
goodwill shown by the party on Thursday at the instance of Mr Altaf
Hussains hosts in the UK settles. The signals of the mobile phones carried
by close associates of Ms Bhutto who were traveling in her truck allegedly
never went out, but street lights along the entire route did.
These are questions that should be asked and their answers sought.
The ballistic rhetoric emanating from Bhuttos political opponents in the
ruling party should have been, but was not, curbed. Instead, ministers and
chief ministers were let loose to voice their ire before and after Bhuttos
plane touched down. This, despite the federal cabinets, and hence the
governments approval of the conditions under which Gen Musharraf
accepted Bhuttos right to return to Pakistan. Is it now clear that the
General was alone in wishing her to return?
If so, he should find the attempt by his erstwhile colleagues at
making him feel lonely and stuck with his decision somewhat humbling, and
a foretaste of the politics they will subject him to once he doffs his military
uniform. What does this signal to the lonely man in khakis? Martial law?
Not if he keeps sanity, which is the best friend he may still have to count
on in the days ahead as the court juggles with the legitimacy of his
candidacy as the president for a second term in office.
For Ms Bhuttos part, it is now up to her to build on the symbolism
inherent in her triumphant homecoming to a rousing welcome by people
from across the country and the flagrant disrespect shown to it by the
extremists. The peoples jury, in her case, has spoken before the court
did. If she fails to build on this opportunity by henceforth restricting herself
to the secure confines of Bilawal House or TV studios, she might as well
take the next flight back to Dubai.

353

One says this because leading a people who have not seen hope in a
long time requires more than just protecting oneself from the dangers which
are all too obvious, and which everyone believed formed the necessary part
of Bhuttos political itinerary. Those in charge of her logistics should ensure
that she is able to make public appearances as often as needed without
stretching the limits of what the people must endure to catch a glimpse of
their leader. Instead of leading snail-paced rallies, for instance, she should
be conveyed to a security-combed venue for a public meeting at the
appointed hour. The security apparatus does so far the ruling party and the
president all the time.
The road ahead to democracy may be littered with potholes and set
up with booby traps. But there is no short cut to the destination it leads to.
The time is now to dismantle the discredited system presided over by
trigger-happy rulers who are part of the problem, not the solution to the
extremism and despondency staring Pakistan in the face. In both political
and financial terms, keeping the current set of rulers in power is a heavy
liability. The loss incurred by the people in terms of radicalization of public
discourse and debate, and the national exchequer, as the rulers show off their
achievements over prime time TV using taxpayers hard earned money,
should be checked and stopped forthwith.
The Dawn commented on the question-marks on the investigation.
Given the general lack of trust in the police and other security agencies,
no harm can come from an independent probe into last weeks carnage in
Karachi. This is also what Benazir Bhutto wants and she is becoming
increasingly difficult to ignore, although the interior minister has dismissed
the option out of hand. The PPP chairperson demanded on Sunday that
foreign experts be included in the investigation process, for two reasons:
their technical expertise and plus the fear that Pakistani security agencies
have, in Ms Bhuttos words, been infiltrated by militants and al-Qaeda.
Ms Bhutto added that she had already held discussions in this
connection with US and UK officials. This assessment implies that local
forensics experts and crime investigators are less skilled than their western
counterparts and more open to manipulation by vested interests. Both
scenarios are plausible, though care should be taken to not conflate the
possible with what is certain. It could well be that a wholly impartial and
professional investigation is already in progress, conducted by qualified
officials dedicated to bringing the culprits to book.

354

Take a look too at previous investigations into high-profile acts of

terrorism. They do not inspire confidence, even in those cases that the
authorities claim to have cracked, such as deadly bomb blast in Karachis
Nishtar Park in April 2006. It is also absurd playing the sovereignty card in
a matter such as this if help is needed or could positively supplement
existing resources, there is never any harm in asking for it.
While foreign assistance cannot hurt, it is questionable if it can
produce results at this late stage. The crime scene has been cleared and is
open to traffic. Any evidence found is already with the authorities, and there
is no knowing the level of professional care with which it was collected.
Also, if the investigation is to be deliberately sabotaged, it can be easily
derailed prior to the arrival of international experts. Key evidence can
simply go missing, as it did in the case of the probe into the stock market
crash.
S A Qureshi opined: An eminent intelligence expert, who requested
not to be named but whose influence in change of western political
orientation towards Pakistans military was marked, said: Whether this
attack is properly investigated or consigned to history with an epitaph (of
the unknown suicide bomber) will be a major indicator of how Pakistans
intelligence elite are orientated in this battle between the militants and the
progressive political forces.
Clearly, a fair investigation may lead to sacrosanct spaces and
figures. The burning question is: will Musharraf permit such an
investigation? If he does not, he runs the risk of arousing suspicious
regarding his own commitment amongst his allies in enlightened
moderation. If he does, his own power base may be under threat.
Assuming he agrees to a wide-ranging and fair investigation, the next
question would be who in the present scenario could be trusted with such
an investigation. The answer surely cannot be the police department of
Sindh which like all civilian structures in Pakistan now takes direct orders
from these agencies.
As a matter of fact, to be successful such a complex investigation can
only be undertaken after large-scale purges of the officers, middle-level
contractors and bureaucrats who have populated the offices of Pakistans
intelligence agencies and law enforcement for the last 30 years.

355

The arguments for such a purge go beyond the investigation

itself. The process and results of such a broad investigation would probably
also convey to Musharraf some of the key reasons behind the abysmal
performance of his intelligence agencies against the actual sources from
where this terrorism emerges.
Arguably, such a process is long overdue anyway. Accountability
for the analysis that resulted in all the failed intelligence doctrines of
strategic depth, insurrections in India and domestic ethnic and sectarian
strife may perhaps follow through this path. As a matter of fact, one does not
want to add nuclear proliferation but this is surely someones baby as well.
For a long time, no one has challenged either the strategic objectives
of the intelligence agencies or the diversion of the funds of the people of
Pakistan. The only thing that we know about such funds is that they are
apportioned loyally between the spymasters and their top civilian lieutenants
and their lackey bureaucrats the so-called elite. We need to know more;
any investigation has to track funds forensically to pick up the strands
of any conspiracy or dismiss it. This cannot be done when people
responsible for these fund flows are permitted to influence the
investigation.
If there is no purge, no forensic tracing of the flow of funds and no
replacement of people handling militancy then the Pakistan Peoples Party
should reconsider the framework within which it has decided to become a
partner in the process. If that happens, the United States and the West also
need to consider how they should interact with this Pakistani elite that would
then appear to be holding them, the people of Pakistan, and the militants
hostage to a conflict.
Intelligent questions could well lead to interesting answers
regarding the attempted assassination of Benazir Bhutto. A number of
operatives in the current establishment and the intelligence services look
towards people in this elite for guidance, financial largesse and political
sponsorship. Some interesting leads would definitely arise if a proper
investigation net is thrown for funds and personalities.
If a thorough investigation reveals more than that a militant from
the northwest was responsible, very few in Pakistan will be surprised. If,
as I hope, this is not the case, then purges in this elite would in any event do
no harm. Pakistan cannot be the loser if this elite as a whole is economically
356

and politically cut to size. Its main legacy is in any case incompetence and
human rights violations.
The future for Pakistan will be bright in the fight against
militants if these intelligence elites are replaced with possibly nave but
educated, analytical young people under new charters. Similarly, complete
incorporation of the tribal areas in Pakistans political system and an
overhaul of the religious system of education need to be high on the political
agenda.
S M Naseem touched upon the possible political impact of the blasts.
Whether she entered a deal with Musharraf or not, she has pre-empted
him and his allies from obtaining the electoral walkover they had
scripted, with her as a junior partner. Although critics have called her
decision to go ahead with her visit nave, shallow and insincere, it may turn
out to be a mighty blow for democracy.
What Ms Bhuttos return has achieved is to demystify the myth
that people are no longer interested in politics and to demonstrate on the
streets against the regime and in support of democracy. While the PPPs
claim of mobilizing three million people for act, most observers, except
Messer Durrani, Pervaiz Elahi and Shaikh Rashid, consider it as one of the
largest and most vibrant political gathering.
While conspiracy theories will continue to abound, the authorities
will never be completely absolved from being implicated for their
responsibility unless a high-powered inquiry points its finger at someone
else. The turning of the street lights and the non-effectiveness of the
jamming devices are all significant circumstantial pointers to the existence
of a security lapse if not overt collusion.
She refrained from blaming Musharraf and continued to repeat the
rhetoric about a militant minority keeping the whole country hostage in its
march towards democracy. But this is nothing short of mistaking the woods
for the trees. The real source of militancy is Musharrafs eight-year, oneman rule, which has provided it a high moral ground for political
existence.
By virtually banning all genuine political activity for the past eight
years, he has promoted a political culture where democratic institutions cant
thrive. But for the lawyers-led movement, which his regime tried its best

357

to suppress, he would have completely stifled democratic stirrings and

would have certainly prevented Ms Bhuttos return, as he did Nawaz
Sharifs.
What is even scarier is that the government intends to use the
tragedy as an excuse for limiting political activities for the election
campaign which Shaikh Rashid has already predicted will be bloody. This
is nothing but an attempt by the regime to absolve itself of its responsibility
for protecting human lives. Instead of using the intelligence services to
prevent suicide bombings, which are conveniently deemed unpreventable,
they are being used for political purposes to perpetuate the regime.
The regime is nervously awaiting the Supreme Courts nod for
Musharraf to be sworn in by the Chief Justice whom he sacked a few
months ago. If this nod is not forthcoming, the political scenario could
change dramatically and lead to any number of situations including the oftthreatened prospect of martial law.
Ironically, should Musharrafs election be declared ultra vires by
the Supreme Court, Ms Bhuttos return could prove providential for
paving the way towards a process of genuine reconciliation and enduring
democratic governance. In that case, all those who have criticized Ms
Bhuttos deal as capitulation to Musharraf, including this scribe, will have to
hang their heads in shame and marvel at her political skill and prescience.
In case the Supreme Court validates the Oct 6 election Gen
Musharraf, even if he redeems his pledge to doff the uniform, which is by
no means certain, is likely to call all the shots. As per his troika plan, the
prime minister will be at best a junior partner and Musharraf, helped by a
pliable COAS as an auxiliary, will be the lead horse.
Ms Bhutto, if elected prime minister which will be a big if under
those circumstances may enjoy more superficial powers in the troika than
a Shaukat Aziz, Jamali or Junejo, because of her larger vote bank and
genealogy, but she will remain on the presidential leash of Article 58-2 (b)
and will be as hamstrung, if not more, as she was during her previous two
terms. She can at best try to move the troika side-ways or drag her feet
to put a brake on the militarys misadventures
Ms Bhutto will thus have much to gain and little to lose, except the
unreliable crutches provided by General Musharraf at the behest of

358

Washington and London, regardless of the Supreme Court decision, if she

now offers an olive branch to all political parties formerly in the ARD to
launch a joint campaign to oust the Musharraf regime and to have an interim
all-party government for holding free and fair general elections.
The Dawn wrote: A ban on election rallies would no doubt save
the PML-Q the time and expense involved in renting crowds and organizing
contrived public meetings. It would have little adverse effect on a political
party with poor grassroots support and whose election strategy is dependent
heavily on the influence of incumbency and the cooperation of the official
machinery.
Clutching at straws for quite some time, the kings party is now using
the October 19 carnage in Karachi as an excuse to stifle the
electioneering process. Obviously the overwhelming public response
accorded to Benazir Bhutto could not have gone down well with the likes of
Chaudhry Shujaat and similar hangers-on who now feel threatened. No
obstacles were placed in the organization of the massive welcome received
by Ms Bhutto, thanks to her highly questionable deal with a military ruler.
An unpopular government such as the one in place today suits the
extremists. Their violence, despicable as it is, is perhaps not as roundly
condemned as it would be if the rulers enjoyed public legitimacy. When
usurpers are in power, even the most dastardly of acts can lose their
edge. When prolonged disinterest dulls the senses and when people expect
nothing of the state, shoulders are shrugged and resignation rules. Things
could be different with a government in which people have a glimmer of
hope.
We would still not advocate bans on public rallies. In these
dangerous times, what is required is greater caution in the organization of
such assemblies, by whichever party. The show must go on and Ms Bhutto
was right in her decision to return to the country and mobilize her
supporters. Thus alone can a message be sent to terrorists that the majority
of the people do not believe in the politics of terror.
Aqil Shah opined: The gruesome terrorist attack on Benazir Bhuttos
convoy in Karachi is likely to strain the mutual understanding between the
PPP and general Musharraf, given the suspected involvement of state
officials. The devastating human cost of the atrocity and the security threats

359

it has generated has also raised questions about the validity of holding
parliamentary elections.
The signs are not good. Regardless of the motivation behind the
suicide attacks, its adverse effects on electoral politics are not hard to
discern: an election campaign conducted in an environment of fear and
insecurity would harm the two mainstream popular parties and benefit
military hard-liners and their civilian proxies.
Karamatullah K Ghori was of the view that the tragedy has benefited
the BB. The establishment, her supporters claim, wasnt sincere in its
promise that her return would be made safe and secure. There are important
people larding the establishments top echelons some of them having
General Musharrafs ears who never wanted her to come back to Pakistan;
they set about sabotaging her triumphal return.
The blame game, thus started, is typical of Pakistans political
culture. Name-calling is an endemic in this culture as is an acute sense of
class and rank distinction. Enmities, once cultured, fester for long, very long
indeed, and dont leave much room for accommodation, or for a
democracys staple diet of forgive-and-forget. It leaves no room for
intelligent argument and discussion to determine what went wrong.
This is not to suggest that there is no merit at all in the arguments
being tossed around from both sides of the aisle. There is some logic in
them, no doubt. But the ambience is being sullied by the manner in which
each side is trying to tar the other with mal-intent and malfeasance. Its
the harsh and raucous tone of the detractors and flag-bearers of Bhutto,
alike, that is creating so much distrust all around and poisoning the
atmosphere.
The choice of Karachi as her launching pad could be open to
question. Who in Pakistan or abroad is unaware of what reputation this
bustling mega polis has been stuck with for so many years, especially since
it became notorious for being a crucible of terrorists and their sympathizers
in the wake of 9/11? Karachi is equated, at least in the West, with a culture
of violence, murder and bloodletting.
But these very arguments can also be turned on their head. Ms
Bhutto wasnt a non-descript tourist landing quietly at Karachi Airport. Shes
the leader of the largest political party of Pakistan and was coming back

360

after an eight-year absence. She had every right to expect legions of her
adoring fans and followers to turn up at the airport to greet her. It was nave
of anyoneto expect that she wouldforsake all that outpouring of popular
sentiment for her that only a slow-moving cavalcade of cars and trucks could
guarantee.
The choice of Karachi as her landing point was also justified. She has
her roots in that city. Sindh is the bastion of PPPs strength and mass
following. It was thus very natural for her to start her come back trail from a
footing of strength, where she could also make a spectacular show of her
mass appeal.
The blood spilled has, ironically, smoothed her passage back
exponentially. The wave of sympathy, triggered in her favour at home and
abroad, lands her smack at the epicenter of Pakistani politics. She couldnt
have imagined such a smooth and electrified transition from pariah to
princess, literally overnight.
The blame game is symptomatic of trust deficit that both
Musharraf and Benazir seemed consciously alert to papering over in their
deal. But its fragile and tenuous deal at best, and may not withstand the
kind of buffeting triggered, for instance, by Chaudhry Shujaats innuendo
that the tragedy was staged by Benazir herself to gain sympathies
That the PML stalwarts, movers and shakers, and king-makers are
feeling the heat unleashed by Benazirs return to the hustling in Pakistan is
understandable. They have had the field, entirely, to themselves for at least
five years without any challenge to their shenanigans mounted from any
corner. Her re-entry to the arena changes the whole dynamics of the
game, and this clearly unnerving the power barons of the kings party.
BB, on her part, seems seriously intent on not upsetting her
applecart with General Musharraf. She has equated her vulnerability to
acts of terrorism with Musharrafs own high security risks. Her party is also
sending muffled signals to Islamabad of its possible availability to joining
the government in transition to general elections.
But that sounds a bit nave and preposterous. Why should PPP be
part of any interim setup if its sure of its strength and popularity with the
masses? Why should it be inclined to risk its popular mandate for the sake of
securing a few berths in a temporary arrangement? These and other related

361

questions should be occupying BBs mind as she emerges from her current
honeymoon with the people.
Kamran Shafi observed panic in the regime. I have some little
experience of explosives (no, I did not learn how to make time bombs at FC
College like our commando did!) from my days in the army and know that it
would be near impossible for a suicide bomber to cause the kind of
damage anyone notice the mangled car? or the number of casualties.
The possibility that it was a remote-controlled bomb planted in
the car simply cannot be ruled out at this early stage of investigations.
Which would lead us elsewhere: while it would still be possible for al-Qaeda
to have carried out the bombings due to its effective tentacles in virtually
every urban centre in Pakistan, particularly Karachi, the blame could as
easily be that of the extremists nurtured and used when needed by the
agencies.
To tell the truth, the bombs in Karachi came as a veritable blessing
for the junta at this fraught time for it, made even more fraught by the
arrival in the country of the leader of Pakistans largest political party as
demonstrated by the crowds that welcomed her.
Just see how immediately afterwards Shujaat Hussain, whose kings
party could never manage to gather even one-sixth as many people in all the
six years that it has played second fiddle to the dictatorship, suggested to
Shaukat Aziz that political rallies be banned across the country.
One can imagine the size of the cat let loose in the Gujrat
dovecote by the quite nonsensical statements coming out of Pervaiz Elahi
too. Be which as it may, and no matter how opposed one was/is to Benazir
even talking to an army dictator and thereby giving the army a further inch,
she is back and bully for her.
This leads me to say that all who believe in the supremacy of civil
society and rule of law and Constitution must stand up and tell the junta and
its hangers-on that we have had enough of mudslinging on opposition
politicians alone.
She must now insist that Nawaz Sharif and his brother be
allowed to come back to their country and lead their party in the coming
elections. The political parties must get together on one platform and take

362

immediate steps that would forever consign the army to its barracks and
training areas.
Ms Bhutto should say that it is her fervent desire that peace
return to the tribal areas, and that henceforth, judiciousness rather than
gun-slinging will determine the governments policies of applying the states
writ in FATA. Incidentally, I agree absolutely that foreign terrorism and
forensics experts be called in to investigate the Karachi bombings.
Najmuddin A Shaikh talked of tasks ahead. She has asked for a
thorough investigation and has even suggested that foreign experts be called
in to help with the investigation a demand that may in part have been
prompted by the offer of assistance made by the American Ambassador.
As has happened in the past in Pakistan no such assistance will be sought on
the ground that this would be a slur on our sovereignty.
No result will emerge from the local investigation for which a
special team has been constituted. But that would be attributable not to any
deliberate government effort at a cover-up, it would be linked to the
difficulties attached to finding definitive proof while deploying ill-equipped
and poorly trained personnel for a difficult task.
The finger will, however, point in the minds of the PPP strategists
and a large part of the general public at the Pakistan Taliban leader
Baitullah Mahsud and his Lal Masjid cohorts or in other words the same
people who had made attempts on the life of President Musharraf, and who
have been responsible for the death of numerous Pakistani soldiers.
This could be seen as creating another tie, albeit a tenuous one,
between two people who by all counts are not particularly fond of each other
but must at this time look for and find enough common ground to overcome
the alleged antipathy.
Decisions from the Supreme Court on the questions raised about the
presidents eligibility to continue in his present office and about the
Reconciliation Ordinance have yet to be answered. But assuming that the
decisions do not upset the applecart and that the new partnership genuinely
works, what should be the tasks that lie ahead?
First, both must recognize that the return of Nawaz Sharif is going to
be essential if the forthcoming elections are to have credibility. Neither need

363

be apprehensive about the recent poll figures that suggested a higher

popularity rating for Nawaz Sharif than for either of them.
Second, the apparent dangers notwithstanding, all political parties
that are willing to do so must be allowed to campaign in the tribal agencies.
Their campaigns must be aided by an all-out effort by the current or the
caretaker government to publicize in these areas the availability of Rs18bn
annually for at least the next five years for the development of the area.
Third, the caretaker government, comprising one assumes
technocrats with no future political ambitions, should be entrusted with the
task of taking the stern and unpopular steps needed to cut down on the
smuggling of contraband goods and drugs into Pakistan.
Promulgating an ordinance on money laundering, approaching our
friends in the Gulf to prevent the flow of funds to dubious recipients in
Pakistan, enforcing the registration of all madressahs and getting them to
provide a modern education along with religious instruction are other tasks
that should be undertaken.
In other words, is it to be a joint civil-military struggle against
extremist forces, it need not wait for the conclusion of the electoral process
but can be started earlier and the political cost, if any can be borne at least in
part by the caretaker government.
Masud Mufti felt the need for effective tackling of extremism. Only
time will tell whether it was the spontaneous welcome of committed
followers for a charismatic leader, or a stage-managed coronation of a
puppet under an international canopy, with the local help of a desperate
Musharraf, obliging coalition partners, irresistible army, skilful agencies,
political opportunists and invisible American money.
The carnival-like reception was indeed a grand show but intrinsically
it was as deceptive as the empty rhetoric of enlightened moderation, powersharing and national reconciliation. The declared objective is to harness
moderate elements in the country to defeat extremism. It appears to be
laudable objective but the underlying reality is quite different. It is related to
some crucial questions: how do we define and identify the extremists
and the moderates? What is meant by we? Does it mean (a) the people
of Pakistan, (b) the ruling elite of Pakistan, or (c) American interests in
Pakistan?

364

The obvious answer gives this sovereign right to the people of

Pakistan but the ground realities show that this right has been snatched away
from the people by our own kind. Without our permission, Gen Musharraf
surrendered this inalienable right to Washington soon after 9/11,
resulting in the mysterious rise in the number of missing persons in Pakistan
and the detention of a sizeable number of Pakistanis in American prisons,
secret and otherwise, across the globe.
In addition, Gen Musharraf himself extended the definition of
extremist to include all those who were opposed to his rule, and his
relentless pursuit of enlarging the armys permanent role and the ultimate
goal of constitutionally uniting the two offices of the president and the army
chief after his re-election by the dying assemblies. All those who supported
him were defined as moderates.
Benazir has never declared in London, Washington, Dubai or on the
soil of Pakistan that she was returning to get this right restored to the
people of Pakistan. On the contrary, she has repeatedly and loudly endorsed
the American definitions of the extremists and the moderates, thereby
confirming the role of the US as ringmaster for the Pakistani stage and for
herself as an obedient performer. A stage-managed grand reception was thus
essential to install her with the appearance of a great and popular leader to
dupe the people of Pakistan into fighting an American war.
A stage-managed explosion could possibly be a part of this
strategy with a view to including Pakistan in the proposed extension of the
ongoing massacre of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan. In this explosion,
engineered at a safe distance from her carriage, Benazir was to survive for
sure, but hundreds of people were bound to die or suffer injuries.
That is the only role assigned to the people of Pakistan in the
affairs of the state by the American interests and the Pakistani ruling elite.
They keep dying in significant numbers due to suicide attacks, the guns of
robbers, in road and rail accidents, in strikes from the air, in security
operations and as a result of stray bomb explosions.
But the prospect of any proof vanishes quickly at the premature
declaration that every bomb explosion is a suicide attack even before
preliminary investigations a favourite method habitually employed by the
government ever since it started abandoning its responsibilities towards the
citizens. The ruling elite has learnt to rule and forgotten to govern.
365

The most pressing reason for Benazirs return is to save the sociopolitical governing system which is being challenged by civil society since
March 2007. Carved out of the mullah-military-wadera collusion against
democracy, this is a system of the corrupt, by the corrupt, for the corrupt.
All three of them thus saved the system in its worst hour, when
even external help had to be mobilized. The US and the UK brokered the
Musharraf-Benazir deal, and Saudi Arabia helped in securing the second
exile of Nawaz Sharif. Benazir got the best price and has now returned to
lend her shoulder to the tottering system.
But the Musharraf-Benazir deal is destined to fail for its major
built-in defect, among other reasons. The non-transparent hush-hush
arrangement totally excludes the people of Pakistan, who are the biggest
moderate element in the country and are the only force capable of
neutralizing the violent extremists.
The Musharraf-Benazir deal will thus be run by such characters as
are designed, or programmed, by this system to betray for petty self-interest.
For 60 years, they have plundered the national wealth and the people of
Pakistan by constitutionally and financially strangulating them.
After indemnity in the form of the National Reconciliation
Ordinance they are now regrouping with greater vigor for a bigger kill.
They will implement the deal in the only way they have known and
benefited, and will enjoy the fruits of American charity by killing the people
of Pakistan.
Benazirs grand return, therefore, is a good omen for the
American agenda and may act as a life-saving elixir for the besieged
system, but it does not raise any hope for the repeatedly jilted people of
Pakistan. They will have to reorganize themselves for a long fight against
the system on constitutional, legal, political and moral fronts Are they up
to the task? A very thin slice of time from March 9 to July 20 has revealed
that they are fully up to it provided there is no doctrine of necessity or
doctrine of exigency in our judicial dictionary.
Mahir Ali wrote: One can hardly disagree with Benazir Bhutto when
she argues that militant Islamists must not be allowed to determine the
political agenda in Pakistan. To a certain extent, however, they have already
been doing so.

366

Arguably the most important question before the country today is

how the national agenda can be wrested back from the extremists. It is
hard to see how a tawdry cohabitation deal between Bhutto and Gen Pervez
Musharraf can possibly serve as a suitable answer. Cooperation between all
forces that are sincere in their desire to roll back obscurantist trends and
starve off the terrorist threat is a sine qua non of progress, but it can only
succeed in a truly democratic context.
The tumultuous reception that awaited her apparently exceeded
the Pakistan Peoples Partys expectations, and much of the popular
enthusiasm was genuine Their expectations of an improved livelihood and
generally better conditions under Bhutto would probably have been kindled
even if she hadnt decided to revive her fathers populist slogan of food,
clothing and shelter.
Possibly out of desperation, they tend to forget that during her first
two stints as prime minister, hardly any effort was made to honour such
promises. Furthermore, given her reliance on foreign sponsorship, it
seems the faith of the masses in Bhutto is inadequately reciprocated.
There are those who suggest that in the light of Musharrafs advice
and other warnings, Bhutto ought to have postponed her return. But are
there any grounds for assuming that conditions would have been propitious a
few weeks or even several months hence? Its not as if efforts to defang
the militants and the terrorists are on the verge of success; in some parts of
the northern territories, for instance, the self-proclaimed Taliban are
seemingly able to kidnap government troops at will.
In the circumstances, it was arguably brave rather than foolhardy of
Bhutto to opt for the role of homecoming queen. This is a trait that she has
undoubtedly demonstrated before, particularly during the years of
victimization under Gen Ziaul Haq. It does not necessarily follow,
however, that the good of the nation was paramount in her mind,
notwithstanding all the rhetoric about democracy and the social justice.
It is also worth recalling that this is not the first time Bhutto has
relied chiefly on external assistance. Washington was, forever, a crucial
port of call even in the 1980s. this time, the process of coming in from the
cold began with a conversation in 2004 with Jack Straw, Britains foreign
secretary at the time, and Musharrafs first conciliatory message to Bhutto
was reportedly conveyed by the British High Commissioner in Islamabad.
367

Lately, Condoleezza Rice has been doing her bit for the Bhutto cause.
London and Washington have attempted to play down their role, but the
level of micro-management is illustrated by the manner in which diplomats
leaned on to Altaf Hussain in an effort to prevent his Muttahida Qaumi
Mahaz from stirring up trouble in Karachi.
If they feared a repeat of the carnage of May 12, we now know that
much worse lay in store, and chances are it emanated from parts of the
body politic that US and British representatives cant reach. It is
interesting to note that in commenting on last weeks bomb blasts, the State
Department deemed it necessary to point out that Musharraf, too, had
condemned them. It would have been considerably more useful if it had
acknowledged, instead, the crucial role that the US has played in spurring
Islamic extremism in Pakistan since the late 1970s.
Musharraf is not keen to revisit his categorical statements against her
and Sharif, nor the period when he was straining at the leash in his eagerness
to mount provocations against India on the Kashmir front. Neither of them
is prepared to reflect on their respective roles in unleashing the Taliban
into Afghanistan in the mid-1990s, when Bhutto was prime minister and
Musharraf director of military operations.
A willingness to be more open about the past would help to build
confidence that some lessons, at last, have been learned from the more
egregious follies of yesteryear. As things stand, whatever happens over the
next couple of months, a Pakistan in which faith returns to the personal
sphere, the army goes back to the barracks, politicians are no longer
obsessed with what the country can do for them, and the dominant
superpower plays a role as a friend rather than as a master will remain
a mirage.
That doesnt mean its time to abandon all hope. But it does point
towards a need to be considerably wary of self-proclaimed saviors,
regardless of whether they are attired in khaki or in green.
The Daily Dawn wrote on clean politics. Unfortunately, reticence is
not one of the PML chiefs strong points, and the PPP leadership has not
helped matters by adopting what appears to be a maximal approach.
Even more unfortunate has been the PPP leaders bid to involve some
leading PML personalities in the Oct 18 carnage and demand the IBs chiefs

368

dismissal. This is in addition to the differences between the government and

the PPP over the latters demand for foreign experts to probe the bombing.
Mr Shaukat Aziz told pressmen in Quetta that the National
Reconciliation Ordinance will, among other things, promote clean politics.
Does the prime minister really expect us to believe in this non-sense?
Have the plethora of legal nostrums and tricks adopted over the last five
decadessucceeded in giving us clean politics?
Let the people decide who is clean and who is not. Special laws and
tribunals are not needed for cleansing the body politic; ultimately, it is an
uninterrupted democratic process that will serve as an instrument of
accountability and ensure clean politics.
From across the border Kuldip Nayar opined: Benazirs return marks
a new chapter in Pakistans history because there will be a viable nonreligious opposition to Musharraf and his supporters. But it is difficult to
believe her words that her return means the return of democracy when she
herself has accepted joint governance with the military.
The khaki cannot be mixed with the sherwani in a peoples
government. Even otherwise, normal rights are going to be hard to establish
in a country where the pre-eminence of military rule has come to be
accepted. The word democracy has been mutilated, and because of a
series of dictatorships in Islamabad has come to mean guided democracy.
It is no secret that Benazir had to compromise with the military junta
to return home. This understanding will come in the way of forming a truly
democratic government. She will soon find that the military is more
entrenched than before and that military foundations command a huge
proportion of Pakistans economy, both business and industry.
The only bright spot in her return is the declaration that she
would fight terrorism, al-Qaeda and the Taliban with all her might if and
when she is returned to power. It is going to be difficult job because
religious parties have widened and deepened their influence. Musharraf is
not going to allow their elimination because he may use them as a
counterforce to curb Benazir.
Still, whatever she can do to combat terrorism is welcome because
the entire region faces the danger of extremists emerging at the top. New

369

Delhi will specially welcome it because it perceives Pakistans ISI to be at

the back of terrorism in the world If she can curb terrorism in Pakistan she
will be forgiven all her sins. Here too Washington is watching her closely
because it has stitched the arrangement between Musharraf and Benazir. Yet,
the deal alone is not enough.
M P Bhandara focused on the US factor in the deal that made BBs
return possible. Musharraf, a proven ally, is to be matched and interfaced
with Ms Bhutto, a putative ally. She has the right fit from the US point of
view a leader of a political party with a vote bank, liberal pro-US views
and gender appeal. The unwritten assumption is that President Musharraf
needs a wider and more liberal political base.
A coalition between the president and Ms Bhutto has been brokered.
All irritants in the way, such as Bhuttos corruption cases, having been swept
under the rug in an amazing volte-face. Is the Musharraf-Bhutto coalition
likely to hold? The first real test is: terrorism.
The western forces in Afghanistan, and by extension Pakistan Army,
are perceived to be a foreign occupation army. The West and the
Pakistan army are fighting a losing war. It boggles the imagination as to
how Ms Bhuttos government, I fancy, will better enable the Pakistan Army
to better fight this war.
The nationalists know all the nooks and crannies of their land, and
have the support of the population. For them, guerilla warfare is a centuriesold inheritance and being a Shaheed a heavenly prize; for the Americans, it
is half a million dollars compensation for a dead soldier.
The Pakistan Army must prove its fighting mettle to overwhelm the
nationalists in Waziristan, albeit for a temporary period, for a negotiated
face-saving truce. The Americans should forget about exporting
democracy and gender rights to Afghanistan and mind their business.
Their missionary zeal for pontificating about vice and virtue is as jarring as
that of the Taliban.
If the US is not prepared to seriously consider a compromise agenda,
Pakistan should officially opt out of the terrorism war. There is limit to
helping an ally. We have lost over 1,000 troops in the war, and yet an
ungrateful US says do more. Our answer is: no more. Any attack on

370

Pakistani soil by the US should be considered a hostile act and prompt

retaliation by the Pakistan Army.
The second area of uncertainty relates to the elections. Given the
phenomenon of the suicide bomber, will it be possible to hold large-scale
campaigns in an election year? On polling day, how many voters will
venture out for fear of the suicide bomber? Even if each voter is screened,
who will screen the camps? Holding elections in most parts of the
Frontier today is near impossible. Would a turnout of 15-20 percent
constitute a credible election?
A peaceful election is only possible after Pakistan signals an exit
from the Afghan war. It might be useful to hold an all-parties conference to
try to reach at some consensus on the spill over of US war aims and the
future governance of the tribal areas. For those who fear the revival of the
old Taliban-al-Qaeda nexus, remember the Marxist saying that history enacts
itself as a tragedy but repeats itself as a farce.
The US assumption that Ms Bhutto can garner sufficient votes in
the 2002 election to be prime minister is also highly questionable. Her
ratings in the opinion polls have fallen steeply ever since she wanted her sins
of pelf to be whitewashed by the grandiloquent sounding National
Reconciliation Ordinance; yet another sad day for Pakistan.
Masood Haider observed: The violence that greeted Ms Benazir
Bhutto on her return after eight years in exile and the finger-pointing
between her camp and General Musharrafs after the attack has raised
questions about whether the tenuous deal that the United States helped
midwife can survive, said the New York Times.
The Times said: Bush Administration officials on Friday publicly
played down the potential for a deepening rift between General
Musharraf and Ms Bhutto, pointing out that the opposition leader herself had
praised the rescue efforts of Pakistans security forces after Thursdays
attack and that General Musharraf has called Ms Bhutto to make sure she
was safe after the blast.
The Bush Administration began quietly nurturing the accord Now
they worry that Ms Bhuttos re-entry to Pakistans political scene will
complicate their lagging efforts to pursue insurgents from al-Qaeda and the
Taliban, the newspaper added. It is said that the State Department

371

bureaucrats also fret that her turbulent past will further inflame an
already volatile country.
Before she left for Pakistan and since her return, Ms Bhutto has
publicly pressed an agenda that should please American policy makersin
words more forceful than those normally used by General Musharraf, the
Times noted adding: still, there is concern among American officials that,
given rising anti-Americanism inside Pakistan, eventually she and General
Musharraf could compete for public support by showing who is less
beholden to the White House especially in matters like attacking alQaedas haven in Pakistans tribal areas.
The newspaper said that unresolved questions about the attack have
added a new layer of distrust to relations between Ms Bhutto and the
government, as well new uncertainties for the Bush Administration policy.
On Friday, American officials told the Times that there was no clear basis for
confidence that the two leaders could work cooperatively.
Humair Ishtiaq talked of emerging MQM-PPP nexus. When a
delegation of Muttahida Qaumi Movement arrived at Bilawal House earlier
this week to condole with the provincial leadership of the Pakistan Peoples
Party over the tragic incidents of Oct 18, it was a major step forward on the
rather tricky road to mutual coexistence that the two sides seem to be
building over the last month or so. The nascent love affair, for sure, is
making heads turn.
In the lead-up to the long-awaited return of Benazir Bhutto, the
MQM has clearly had a major role to play. So delicately poised is the
situation in the PPPs home province that Ms Bhutto had to first land in
Karachi to make her statement of political intent.
So anxious was Ms Bhutto about her political base that she
actually played the so-called Sindh card on the eve of her return. She
could have easily avoided being so unnecessarily blunt while taking on the
Supreme Court, accusing it of a certain provincial bias in its verdicts.
The big question here is, whether or not she could have laid this fresh
and potent claim without an understanding with the MQM. With the backing
of the West, she could have a deal with President Gen Pervez Musharraf. In
turn, she could have the protection of the National Reconciliation Ordinance,
and, under the protection, she could have landed in Pakistan; so far so good.

372

But Karachi? That was one decision she could not have made on her
own or even in consultation with her newfound uniformed ally without
the MQM being on board.
Behind the faade of facilitating the forces of enlightenment and
moderation, there have been a string of soft vibes coming out of the MQM
camp towards the PPP, and it surprised no one when Ms Bhutto publicly
thanked Altaf Hussain and Karachi Nazim Mustafa Kamal in the same
press conference where she committed the folly of going hyper about the
Sindhi-Punjabi divide. Whatever be the reason, the effort to begin afresh is
visibly mutual at this point in time.
The distant history is that hostility, recent history has not been any
better. The infamous May 12 bloodbath is no more than five months old. The
atrocities had the two parties on either side of the divide and it was as
bloody as it has ever been in the city and even more. Today the two parties
are rivals in judicial proceedings as a result of suo moto action by the courts.
That makes the current honeymoon even more interesting.
It may be reflective of some newfound wisdom on the part of the two
parties, but, more than that, it is reflective of the power of the Pakistani
establishment to create the strangest of bedfellows. There is hardly any
other way of rationalizing such a seminal change of heart in such a short
span of time.
In the context of provincial politics, the PPP and the MQM happen
to be simultaneously the most natural and the most unnatural allies.
Both draw their strengths from the same province; one does it from rural
Sindh which is bigger in mass and the number of constituencies, while the
other does it from urban Sindh which may not have the mass, but certainly
has more say in both provincial and national politics.
The MQM will always find it easier to form governments in Sindh
with the Muslim League, be it Q, N, F or any other variety, as they have no
concerns in respect of appeasing their supporters because there are
practically none. With the PPP, it is an entirely different story. With the two
partners trying to dominate each other in terms of power, resources, jobs and
everything else, the coalition is doomed even before it is formed on
paper.

373

At the end, excerpts from articles of Ayesha Siddiqa and Ayaz Amir
are reproduced. The former offered some tips to BB and other leaders if they
were really interested in democracy. First, there is no surety that the
attack was perpetrated by religious extremists. In our hurry to hold
religious extremists responsible for every act of violence in the country, we
are not even listening to what they are saying. Baitullah Mehsud had denied
threatening Ms Bhutto or attacking the procession. Could he be lying? But
then he does not have to seek popular elections to make politically correct
statements. If he had attacked her he would have owned it. Perhaps the deed
was done by political fundamentalists rather than the religious ones.
Second, political rallies are the lifeline of the political process which
should not stop just because the Chaudhries or others do not have the
capacity to take out a procession as big as the PPPs. The procession by a
party which was out of power for more than 11 years must have been
unnerving for the Chaudhries and other PML-Q leaders who seem to be in
disarray despite being in power.
Leaders such as Benazir Bhutto are now confronted with two
choices. First, to buy the government version and further strengthen the deal
with Gen Musharraf and the GHQ. The benefit of this option is that she will
get a lot of support from the US and others who see extremism as the only
threat to the country. The cost is that eventually the middlemen in the form
of power-brokers and intelligence officials will stand between her and her
party people in the name of providing the ultimate security.
Second, she needs to understand that a change will not take place
unless some transformation of the political system takes place. She opted for
the easy way of doing an agreement which is approved by a lot of
pragmatic intellectuals as the best way of effecting a transition of
democracy. However, the recent attack on her procession shows that a
transition will not be possible and she cannot expect the other side to
play fair until she can up the ante and demand at least a minimum degree
of transformation. In fact, without transformation she cannot expect to
remain in politics and feel safe doing so.
Benazir Bhutto has to be part of the process of change which has to
begin with the politics of reconciliation. She has to ask for other political
leaders to return to the country and participate in the coming elections. She
neednt fear the elections like her father did in 1977. Keeping others out of
the political process will not make her safer or more powerful. She
374

would become more vulnerable and find herself being held hostage to the
establishment which has partners like Maulana Fazlur Rahman.
The other important issue relates to demanding transparency and
accountability of government and all political institutions. The fact of the
matter is that Pakistans politics will never be normal unless the agencies are
opened up for inspection by a neutral body. It is useless blaming any one
individual for empowering the intelligence agencies. But it is essential that
these institutions are opened up and their political role or involvement in
policy-making is stopped.
Transparency and accountability are not being suggested here for the
sake of some idealism but due to the fact that this is an essential building
block of the process of empowerment of the political leadership and of
civilian institutions. Thus, these are essential components of transformation.
After Oct 18 we stand at a crossroads yet again. Depending on the
choices made by the top political leaders, we will either have a normal
political process in which people can freely pursue their options, or witness
a senitised version of politics where politicians will wear space suits, and
there will be distance of a thousand light years between them and the
people.
And what a good-hearted man like Imran Khan must realize is
that leaders like him should actually encourage civil society and the people
to rally together and show their strength to all religious and political
fundamentalists.
Ayaz Amir wrote: No army general in power has ever been removed
by a popular upsurge in Pakistan As long as he (Musharraf) enjoys the
armys backing he will remain in power. But he faces a general election
and there is pressure on him from Washington to cut a power-sharing deal
with Benazir Bhutto, which makes her (paradoxical as it may sound) his
possible Mohammad Khan Junejo.
Admittedly, there is much cynicism around and the political parties
are falling back into their traditional mode of mutual vituperation and
mudslinging. But if they are not to make a harsh of things again, if they are
not to play, they have to be realistic and see what the possibilities for
expanding democracy are in the current situation.

375

Benazir must know that Washington may have brought her back
to Pakistan but Washington cannot fix the coming elections for her. The
powers-that-be under which rubric fall Musharraf, Q League president,
Chaudhry Shujaat, Punjab chief minister Pervaiz Elahi, Sindh chief minister
Arbab Rahim, and all those who are congenially averse to a PPP comeback
will do all in their power to ensure that the PPP is cut down to size.
A PPP majority in the elections may be Washingtons heart-felt
desire. It doesnt suit Musharraf or his allies. Benazir can come close to
winning the elections only if she has the support of other opposition parties,
principally Nawaz Sharifs PML-N.
Simply unbelievable, isnt it? The N League supporting the PPP? But
what options does Nawaz Sharif have? He can rave from the sidelines and
see his party repeat its lackluster performance in the 2002 elections or he
can play a subtler game not by entering into an open alliance with Benazir
Bhutto because the establishment wont allow it but a seat-adjustment
formula at the district level.
Not a national alliance with drums beating and flags flying because
that would scare Musharrafs inner circle out of its wits but loose seatwinning alliances across the country the PML-N supporting the PPP
where it is strong, the PPP backing the PML-N where it is the other way
round.
The obstacles along this path are formidable but they are mostly
in the mind, a mix of mistrust and prejudice lingering from an era long
since over. The Alliance for Democracy may have fallen apart and Benazir
may have cut a deal with Musharraf but Pakistans political landscape today
is not what it was in the 1990s when the PPP and PML-N were at each
others throats. Today their enemies are different, putting them under the
necessity of looking for few friends.
Who are Nawaz Sharifs deadliest rivals? Not the PPP for the times
have changed but Shujaat and Pervaiz Elahi. Doesnt this point to a
convergence of interests between Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto? Dont
both share a common interest in reducing the power of the two Chaudhries?
Musharraf cant be assaulted frontally. He presents too strong a
line of defence for that but whether in love or war a frontal assault is seldom
the best policy. That is why down the ages the best captains of war have

376

favoured the indirect approach: rolling an enemys flank or taking him from
the rear. So if Musharraf is not to be assaulted frontally, the next best thing is
to whittle away at his satellites in the Q League.
Both parties should put up a single candidate against Moonis in
Lahore and against the Chaudhries in Gujrat, and so on. As the elections
approach, my reckoning is that voices from the grassroots calling for a
seat-to-seat adjustment between these two major parties will grow
louder.
The holy fathers (of the MMA) are sincere only to themselves.
Only a fool will trust them. Any party taking them on board is likely to find
it an unwelcome bargain in the end. They should be left to stew in their own
juice. Indeed, no outcome should be more welcome than for Maulana Fazlur
Rehman to be hoisted on the petard of his own cleverness.
But Imran Khan and others of his ilk to train all their guns at
Benazir Bhutto is to bark up the wrong tree. There will be a time and
place for opposing the Daughter of the East. But that is not yet because
todays problems are different.
Benazir is the camel who with American help has entered the
Bedouins tent. It is in the national interest to see that the camel occupies
more space, leaving progressively less space for the Bedouin. But for that to
happen, our political parties will have to chuck the baggage of the past
and leave their adolescence behind.
So why not cool down the overheated rhetoric regarding deals,
betrayal of ideals and the dry-cleaning of corruption? Let us concentrate on
essentials, on the first things first. Lets see Musharraf getting out of
uniform and the Chaudhries confined to Gujrat where they belong. The
long march to idealism and high principles can be resumed later.

REVIEW
Musharrafs strategy to make Benazirs return possible was aimed at
achieving multiple objectives. One of the objectives has the roots in his
vindictive psyche; he wanted to punish the PML-Q for their sin of letting
him down in crises he faced since March 9. It seemed working well so far.

377

Benazir and her party leaders launched a concerted offensive putting

the Gujrati Brothers and their companions on the back foot right at the
outset. Tables seemed to have been turned creating an impression as if PPP
was in power and PML-Q was in the opposition. When Benazir claimed that
three million people had gathered to welcome her, Shujaat remarked that if
her claim was correct then it was larger gathering than the Haj congregation.
From the remarks exchanged between the two rivals it could be
inferred that Musharraf has provided himself an alternative; instead of going
all the way to Saudi Arabia, he can now go to Bilawal House for divine
guidance. Prudent pundits might still be pondering but the clever
commando has set the Gujrati pigeons fluttering by throwing a cat among
them.
Musharraf must have been enjoying the new episode of the drama
scripted by him, but it would be foolish on his part to think that the cat
would be satisfied with pigeons. Who knows that she has been brought back
to Pakistan by the Crusaders with evil intention of cooking his own goose
(or gender) to punish him for his failings in the war on terror? It would not
be too long when the cat would turn onto him.
The tragedy of bomb blasts fitted well in her ambitious plans. She
seemed fully inclined to take full political mileage from the tragedy as was
evident during press conference a day after the blasts. Though she conveyed
heart-felt condolences to people killed, yet her composure failed in hiding
her joy over midnight victory. Winning sympathies matters a lot in politics
of the Subcontinent.
In the press briefing, she pointed finger at three persons; one of them
was chief minister of Punjab who could be her potential political rival. She
availed the tragedy as opportunity to knock out the obstacle in the largest
province in Pakistan to consolidate her politically.
In one of the FIRs, Pervaiz Elahi has been named as suspect. SHOs in
Karachi registered FIRs only after clearance from MQM; it meant that
Gujrati Brothers have been accused with the approval of Musharraf and
Altaf Bhais. Chaudhries are now pitched against a real challenge.
Benazir repeatedly expressed her dissatisfaction over investigations.
Her apprehensions were not unfounded in view of the track record of official
investigators. They seemed to have perfected the head-and-crater theory for

378

blaming the suicide bombers. In this particular case there were about half a
dozed heads according to Edhi Foundation. As regards the non-existence of
a crater, Hamid Guls point that the attackers might have used jumping-mine
technology is worth pondering about.
The Islamic extremists almost invariably own the attacks carried out
by them; in this case no group owned it. If they are not involved, the list of
suspects could be very lengthy in which the foreign hands can also be
included. It can also not be ruled out that BB has some clues and that was
why she has been insisting for acquiring the services of the foreign experts.
No doubt the foreign experts are good at tracing out the culprits, but they are
equally good at detracting the probe away from the real culprits.
The tragedy of bomb blasts also confirmed the power of media.
Almost every political leader in power or in opposition, while condoling the
deaths remembered only one victim by name; cameraman Arif Khan. The
motive behind this humane gesture was too obvious; to win favours of the
media mafia.
29th October 2007

NO END IN SIGHT

379

The release of Osamas taped message on the eve of 9/11 has become
a routine. This time the US received the taped message before it was
released by al-Qaeda. In this tape al-Qaeda chief urged his followers to step
up the battle in Iraq. His deputy, Zawahiri urged Muslims to fight against US
and its allies around the world.
Palestinians remained hostage of the US and Israel through their frontman Abbas. On 10th October, he and Olmert held a meeting and agreed to set
up teams for peace talks. Nine days later, Rice met her Israeli counterpart
and Israel declared Gaza Strip enemy territory. Next day, she met Abbas to
demand more from him.
The Lebanese Prime Minister, another front-man in the region, has
come up to the expectations of the Crusaders. This allowed Israel to think of
beyond Lebanon. During second week of September it launched an air strike
inside Syria and claimed destroying weapons provided by Iran.
War-mongering against Iran continued, but Iran remained undeterred.
On 25th September, the United States declared Irans Pasdaran as terrorist
group. The growing ties between Tehran and Moscow, however, kept
causing worries to Washington.

IRAQ
Bloodshed in Iraq continued unabated. Seven US soldiers were killed
in various incidents on 7th September. Next day, at least 45 people were
killed and more than 50 wounded in violence across the country.
On 9th September, 26 people, including one US soldier, were killed in
various attacks. Next day, nine US soldiers were killed in attack/accident.
The US forces killed three Iraqis in a raid in Sadr City. Mahdi Army decided
to restart attacks on occupation forces.
Iraqi army killed 18 and captured four suspected militants on 11 th
September. Next day, six policemen and soldiers were killed. In another
incident an army officer and his father were shot dead. At least twenty Iraqi
were killed and 51 arrested in various incidents on 13th September.
Seven policemen were killed in truck bomb in Baiji on 14 th
September. A pro-US tribal head of Anbar province was shot dead. Iraqi
380

governments official report said, about 400 people were killed every week,
140 attacks were reported every day, and 90 suicide car/truck bomb attacks
per month.
At least ten people were killed in suicide bombing southwest of
Baghdad on 15th September. The US forces claimed killing 14 al-Qaeda
suspects. Next day, at least 39 people were killed in bombings and shootings
across the country. The US forces claimed capturing the killer of tribal
leader of Anbar province.
Occupation US forces claimed killing seven al-Qaeda men and
capturing 31 suspects on 17th September. Three persons were killed in a blast
in Baghdad. Next day, 18 people were killed and 63 wounded in a bomb
blast in Baghdad; three US soldiers were killed in a blast in Diyala province.
Three US soldiers were among 28 killed in various incidents of
violence on 19th September. Next day, at least 43 people, including 18 dead
bodies, were killed. An Iranian trader was arrested by US forces.
On 21st September, 12 people, including two US soldiers, were killed
in various incidents of violence. Next day, at least 24 people were killed in
violence. On 23rd September, the US troops killed ten Iraqis and arrested 22
others. A US soldier was killed in a separate incident.
On 24th September, at least 63 people were killed in various incidents
of violence across the country. Next day, a US soldier was among 11 killed
and 20 were wounded in blasts in Basra and Baghdad. On 26 th September 31
people, including a US soldier, were killed in incidents of violence.
At least 46 people, including women and children, were killed on 28 th
September in US air strike and other incidents of violence. Occupation
forces claimed killing a top al-Qaeda leader. Next day, at least 18 persons
were killed in violence.
The US and Iraqi forces claimed killing more than 60 insurgents on
30 September. The month of September saw sharp fall in killings in Iraq.
Strong ties of Blackwater with Bush Administration were reported. On 3 rd
October, convoy of Polish Ambassador was attacked using three roadside
bombs; the envoy was wounded and two persons were killed.
th

At least 28 people were killed in various incidents of violence on 4 th

October. Bush said leaving Iraq could embolden Iran. The US Congress
381

passed a bill under which employees of private security contractors

operating in Iraq and other countries would be tried for committing war
crimes.
The US forces killed 25 Iraqis on 5th October; one US soldier was
killed in a separate incident. At least 17 people were killed in bombing in
Baquba. Next day, ten people were killed in a bomb blast in Kirkuk. At least
20 people were killed in violence across the country on 8th October.
At least 55 people were killed and a hundred wounded in violence on
9 October. Two women were killed by the private US security men. Next
day, four people were killed in a blast in Baghdad.
th

On October 11, US forces backed by attack aircraft killed 19

suspected militants and 15 civilians in an operation northwest of Baghdad.
At least 11 people were killed and more than fifty wounded in bomb blasts
in Baghdad and Kirkuk. The survivors sued the US private security
personnel over killings. Next day, five people were killed in two bomb At
least 32 people, including a US soldier, were killed in violence on 14 th
October. Next day, two more were killed and 19 wounded in a bomb blast in
Baghdad. At least 27 people were killed in various incidents on 16 th October.
Next day, nine more were killed in violence.
At least 15 Iraqis were killed on 18 th October. Iraqi government urged
the US to pullout Blackwater mercenaries. Two Marines were finally picked
up for trial over Haditha killings. US ground forces and attack helicopters
killed at least 49 militants in Sadr City on 21st October; Iraqi officials said
many civilians were among the killed.
The US gunship helicopters struck house of a farmer near Tikrit on
23 October and killed 16 people. Four days later, at least eight more Iraqis
were killed and thirteen wounded in a bomb blast in Baghdad. On 28 th
October, seven people were killed and 25 wounded in a bomb blast in
Kirkuk and 18 more were killed in various incidents of violence. Militants
kidnapped 11 people from Diyala area.
rd

On 29th October, 38 people were killed in various incidents of

violence out which 28 were killed in suicide attack in Baquba. A brigadier of
US forces was wounded in roadside bombing. The security of Karabala was
handed over to Iraqi troops making it the eighth province to be handed over.

382

Three US soldiers were killed in roadside bombing on 30 th October,

and 11 Iraqis were killed in other attacks. Next day, ten persons were killed
and 40 arrested during an operation in Kirkuk and 14 dead bodies were
found elsewhere in the country.
At least 42 people, including three US soldiers, were killed in various
incidents on 1st November. Next day, 14 more, including three US soldiers,
were killed in various incidents. Five US soldiers were killed in two
roadside bombings on 6th November; six policemen were gunned down in
Mosul; two persons were killed elsewhere and 22 dead bodies were
recovered from a mass grave.
Out of the other aspects of the occupation of Iraq, was the continued
opposition to the seemingly never ending war. On 15 th September, thousands
demonstrated in Washington against Iraq War. About three weeks later, a
report in Britain termed the war on terror as disaster and urged change in the
policy.
On 13th October, General Richardo Sanchez termed situation in Iraq
nightmarish. There is no question that America is living a nightmare with
no end in sight. Putin said Iraq invasion was aimed at controlling oil. Antiwar protests were held across the United States on 28th October.
In mid September, Bush announced partial pullout from Iraq by mid
2008. In all, 21,500 soldiers would be withdrawn; the same number of
troops had been inducted as part of the surge strategy. During first week of
October, Britain decided to pullout 1000 soldiers from Iraq before
Christmas. Winners in Polish elections also pledged to pullout troops. In
fourth week of October, US diplomats, who showed reluctance, were told:
Go to Iraq or face dismissal.
Sectarian conflicts and the rifts within sects played major role in
adding to the sufferings of the Iraqis. On 8 th September, Sunnis ended
boycott of the parliament and a week later, Moqtada Sadr pulled out of Shia
political coalition. Shia and Sunni leaders, however, dismissed the US plan
to partition Iraq. On 6th October, Sadr and Hakim forged a deal to end
rivalry.
The News Wrote: More than a million Iraqi civilians are reported
to have died from war-related causes since the US invasion in March 2003,
including those directly killed by American soldiers. At least another 14

383

civilians lost their lives before dawn yesterday when US helicopter-gunship

pounded a neighbourhood in western Baghdad. The attack, which
completely destroyed many homes as well as badly damaging others, began
at about 3 am, when victims were asleep. It went on for three quarters of an
hour.
In one of his speeches following the September 11 attacks, Mr Bush
had accused terrorists despising the United States because they hate our
freedoms. The truth of the matter, however, is that the increasing hatred of
the Americans in most part of the world has more to do with US double
standards and policies, especially vis--vis the Muslim World.
Jeremy Scahill talked of a new phenomenon in warfare. I have spent
the better part of the past several years researching the phenomenon of
privatized warfare and the increasing involvement of the private sector in
the support and waging the US wars I have attempted to share the results
of my investigations, including documents obtained through FOIA and other
processes, with members of Congress and other journalists.
Over the past six days, we have all been following very closely the
developments out of Baghdad in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of as
many as 20 Iraqis by operatives working for the private military Blackwater
USA. The Iraqi government is alleging that among the dead are a small child
and her parents and the prime minister has labeled Blackwaters conduct
as criminal and spoke of the killing of our citizens in cold blood.
It is the premiere firm protecting senior State Department officials in
Iraq, including Ambassador Ryan Crocker. This company has been active in
Iraq since the early days of the occupation when it was awarded an initial
$27 million no-bid contract to guard Ambassador Paul Bremer. During its
time in Iraq, Blackwater has regularly engaged in firefights and other
deadly incidents. About 30 of its operatives have been killed in Iraq and
these deaths are not included in the official American death toll.
While the companys operatives are indeed soldiers of fortune, their
salaries are paid through hundreds of millions of dollars in US taxpayers
funds allocated to Blackwater. What they do in Iraq is done in the name of
the American people and yet there has been no effective oversight of
Blackwaters activities and actions. And there have been absolutely no
prosecution of its forces for any crimes committed against Iraqis.

384

What happened last week was by no means an isolated incident.

Nor is this is simply about a rogue company or rogue operators. This is
about a system of unaccountable and out of control private forces that have
turned Iraq into a wild west from the very beginning of the occupation, often
with the stamp of legitimacy of the US government. What happened is part
of a deadly pattern, not just of Blackwater USAs conduct, but the army of
mercenaries that have descended on Iraq over the past four years.
Active duty soldiers who commit crimes or acts of misconduct are
prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the court martial
system. There have been scores of prosecutions of soldiers some 64 courts
martial on murder-related charges in Iraq alone. That has not been the case
with these private forces. Despite many reports, some from military
commanders
US contractors in Iraq reportedly have their own motto: What
happens here today stays here today. That should be chilling to everyone
who believes in transparency and accountability of US operations and
taxpayer funded activities not to mention the human rights of the Iraqi who
have fallen victim to these incidents and have been robbed of any semblance
of justice.
What we do know is that in just the past nine months, Blackwater
forces have been involved with several fatal actions. Last Christmas Eve, an
off-duty Blackwater contractor allegedly killed a bodyguard for the Iraqi
vice president. Blackwater whisked that individual out of the country.
Iraqi official labeled the killing a murder and have questioned privately as
to why there has apparently been no consequences for that individual.
Blackwater says it fired the individual and is cooperating with the US Justice
Department. To my knowledge no charges have yet been brought in that
case.
The actions of this company, perhaps more that any other private
actor in the occupation, have consistently resulted in escalated tension
and more death and destruction in Iraq from the siege of Fallujah,
sparked by the ambush of its men there in March 2004, to Blackwater forces
shooting at Iraqis in Najaf to the deadly events of the past week.
The conduct of these forces sends a clear message to the Iraqi people:
American lives are worth infinitely more than theirs, even if their only crime
s driving their vehicle in the wrong place at the wrong time. One could say
385

the Blackwater has been very successful at fulfilling its mission to keep
alive senior US officials. But at what price?
Blackwater represented the uglier face of the privatized warfare. The
News wrote: Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq has accused the
United States of directly violating Iraqi sovereignty. Speaking on Sept 23
in an interview in New York, where he is on a visit in connection with the
62nd session of the UN General Assembly, Mr al-Maliki criticized the Sept
16 killing in Baghdad of at least 11 people by personnel of the Blackwater
USA security firm as unacceptable in terms of that sovereignty, the little
that still remains with his supine country.
Three days after the prime ministers remarks, his government
stated that it expected to take Blackwater to court over the killings,
while the Iraqi Interior Ministry detailed six other incidents involving the
American company under the ministrys investigation. Blackwaters
infringements of Iraqi sovereignty have ranged from its helicopters
repeatedly buzzing the compound of the Ministry of Defence to the shooting
of a body guard of one of the vice presidents of Iraq. The suspect, a
Blackwater guard who was off-duty at the time of the murder, was flown
back to the United States, where no charges were framed against him.
What is cause for equal concern for Iraq as far as its sovereignty
is concerned are the kidnappings of visiting Iranians by US troops since
the end of last year. They were all government invitees. The government of
Iraq is an elected one and sovereign, Mr al-Maliki reminded the Americans.
when it gives a visa, it is responsible for the visa, he said in reference to
last Thursdays arrest of an Iranian official in the town of Sulaimaniyah near
the Iranian border, in Iraqs semi-autonomous Kurdish region.
But will America heed the demand of the president of a country
where gun-slinging personnel of a private US security firm are pretty
much free to do what the like? At the very least, the US administration
needs to devise a mechanism where employees of private contracting firms
in places like Iraq can be held accountable for their actions. The current
situation under which they are not subject to US military law or to Iraqi law
is untenable and will only lead to a repetition of such incidents.
Mahir Ali dwelled on this issue. At around noon on Sunday, Sept 16,
an Iraqi doctor was on her way to pick up her pathologist husband from a
Baghdad hospital. Her 20-year-old son was behind the wheel. When they
386

reached Nisour Square, a bullet out of nowhere struck and killed the young
man. The car kept moving forward, until a barrage of gunfire cut short his
mothers agonized screams. Within moments, a grenade launcher was
deployed to incarnate the vehicle.
Thereafter, bullets began flying in every direction. Shortly
afterwards, the shooting spree was repeated some 500 meters from the
square. At the end of it, 17 Iraqis lay dead and at least as many were
seriously injured. Callous as it may seem to point this out, thats not an
enormous toll by local standards But what sets this particular incident
apart is the fact that the perpetrators were neither insurgents nor, strictly
speaking, US troops.
They were employees of Blackwater USA, one of the scores of
private security firms that are, quite literally, making a killing in Iraq. The
estimated 180,000 private contractors exceed by 20,000 the American
troops strength in the country. Of them, at least 50,000 are designated for
combat roles. Blackwater enjoys an edge because it is favoured by the US
State Department.
As a consequence, when the Iraqi administration of Nouri al-Maliki
reacted to the Nisour Square bloodbath by revoking Blackwaters licence,
that effectively halted excursions outside the Green Zone by US diplomats.
The ban was quietly lifted after three days, following a muted expression
of contrition from Condoleezza Rice and promise of a transparent
investigation.
Less than a week earlier, the US Ambassador in Iraq, Ryan C
Crocker, had praised the efforts of private security firms, singling out
Blackwater for an honourable mention. If this wasnt embarrassing enough
for the State Department, it subsequently turned out that the departments
first comment on the massacre was drafted by a Blackwater employee.
And when an FBI team traveled to Iraq to investigate the growing scandal,
guess who was responsible for their protection?
In its first report on the incident, Iraq has officially demanded that the
US government sever links with Blackwater within six months, that the Sept
16 gunmen be handed over for trial in Iraqi courts, and that $8m be paid in
compensation to each bereaved family. It is unlikely that the US will heed
this wish list

387

A rule promulgated by Bremer in 2004 gives Blackwater

employees and all other private contractors immunity against Iraqi
laws. The occupying military forces enjoy the same privilege, but they can
at least be court martialled. In practical terms, this does not mean very much:
most of those who face charges for conduct unbecoming get away with a
slap on the wrist.
Immunity, not surprisingly, encourages impunity. The only
disciplinary consequence for highly paid mercenaries is that they can be
sacked and sent home. Thats what happened last year to Andrew Moonen, a
Blackwater guard who, while drunk, killed a bodyguard of Iraqi vicepresident Adil Abdul Mahdi. He promptly found employment with Combat
Support Associates, another firm with an Iraqi presence.
It is widely acknowledged that only around 15 per cent of shooting
incidents involving private firms in Iraq ever get reported.
Notwithstanding such limitations on transparency, Blackwater employees
have developed a reputation for particularly egregious conduct which may
have something to do with the fact that Erik Prince, the companys cofounder and boss, is a certifiable Theo-con: a Christian fundamentalist who
contributes generously to the Republican Partys coffers. Thats sensible
investment from his point of view, given that federal contracts account for
90 per cent of the revenue earned by Prince Group holdings, the parent
company of Blackwater, and the latters earnings from such contracts have
grown hundred-fold since 2001.
Recent congressional hearings suggest that some US legislators are
seriously concerned about the conduct of private contractors in Iraq. A
United Nations human rights officer, meanwhile, has hinted that Blackwater
could be investigated for war crimes. A more standard legal test also looms,
after a man injured in the Nisour Square mayhem and the families of three
other victims last week filed a suit against Blackwater in a US federal court.
The Nisour square massacre is a reminder of the dangers inherent
in the privatization of war. Yet its vital not to lose sight of the fact that the
Blackwater scandal is a side show, one of the innumerable avoidable
consequences of the aggression against Iraq, which has led to what retired
lieutenant-general Richardo Sanchez described last week as a nightmare
with no end in sight?

388

The News commented on the impact of the surge of troops. Of

course, one cannot expect too much impartiality from General David
Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crockers assessment of the so-called surge
in Iraq. The General is said to be a thorough professional as is apparently the
ambassador, but the fact remains that they are in the service of the US
government and cannot be seen to be contesting too much the policies set
down by their political boss and commander-in-chief, the US president.
Ambassador Crockers assessment that there had been progress on
the domestic political front in Iraq but which was not necessary visible from
Washington may be interpreted as putting a positive spin on an otherwise
negative situation. After all, in terms of security and attacks and casualties,
2007 has been no less deadly than last year.
General Petraeuss remark that he was not sure whether Iraq made
America any safer is something that much of the rest of the world has been
saying ever since the US military invaded and occupied that country.
However, now, especially with the reality of over 3,700 dead soldiers in Iraq
and growing pressure, within America to exit Iraq, it remains to be seen just
how Mr Bush will respond. If the past is anything to go by, he will ignore
all these concerns, ride rough-shod over them and go about fighting the
war on terror his own (read Texan cowboy) way.
A more cynical view of the recommendation to continue with the
current military and diplomatic approach to the country for at least another
six months is that this means both the general and the ambassador have
played it safe. If a re-assessment of this strategy, one of the implications of
the above recommendation is to be made in March 2008 then that would
leave just a few months before America elects a new president. And surely
no major change could be expected from March 2008 till a new president is
in office.
In another editorial the newspaper added: Insurgents in Iraqs Anbar
province assassinated Abdul Sattar Abu Risha, a tribal sheikh in Iraqs Anbar
province, just ten days after Mr Bush had held a much-photographed
meeting with the collaborationist in a surprise visit to the area. Abu Rishas
murder was a twist to Iraqs sectarian conflict, in that the tribal chieftain
was a Sunni who revolted against the Sunni group al-Qaeda in Iraq, a
phenomenon that mirrored the growing violent rift among Shia factions.

389

So dangerous is the sectarian crisis tearing the country apart that the
Americans have begun building a high concrete wall to separate some Sunni
and Shia neighborhoods in a part of Baghdad. A day before Mr Bush made
the speech; members of the two communities marched against the barrier
and demanded that it be dismantled. If the surge, intended above all to
stabilize the situation in Baghdad, were working, perhaps the wall
wouldnt have become essential.
There is bound to be much wrangling on this whole issue because the
withdrawals as indicated by the president would bring troop levels back to
the pre-surge status, which is what they were when the Democrats took a
clean sweep of Americas both houses of parliament. They are hardly going
to want to be seen as doing nothing, especially since much of their gains, it
could be argued, came because Mr Bushs now discredited strategy in Iraq
and the growing overall negative perception by Americans of how he has
already come from some House Democrats who have begun talking about
introducing provisos that seek to amend the Bush Administrations
measures on the troop withdrawal one has been to increase the length of
time that a soldier can stay at home while returning to the US from a tour of
duty.
Seumas Milne commented on overall situation since the surge. Most
Iraqis believe that security has deteriorated during the six month US
military surge, according to opinion polls. But the impression of success
given by Petraeus has helped blunt the political pressure for early
withdrawal on Capitol Hill. It has also fed a renewed spirit of triumpalism
among a few brave outriders of the discredited neocon project who now
claim the Iraq war is turning into a success after all.
Its true that the number of American soldiers killed in Iraq last
month, at 66, was well down on this years peak, but higher than the
figure for August last year. Attacks on British troops fell much more sharply
last month, but that followed the British withdrawal from Basra city and a
prisoner release deal with Sadrs Mahdi Army, which is in any case now on a
six-month national ceasefire.
No doubt the ability of resistance groups to operate freely has been
hampered by the flood of US troops and the carve-up of their cities with
Israeli-style walls and checkpoints. Just as serious have been the divisions
on both sides of the sectarian divide, fostered by the US since the surge
began as it tilts this way and that in a classic divide-and-rule strategy.
390

In a Sunni camp, that has been achieved mainly through US

arming and financing the tribal awakening movement against al-Qaeda,
which has spread from Anbar province and drawn in some on the fringes of
the resistance who now regard Iran rather than the US as the main enemy.
Its the principle reason why the launch of an alliance bringing together all
the main Sunni-based resistance groups has been delayed.
Supporters of the Iraq War have consistently underestimated the
resistance campaign, which has in the words of a Brigades statement this
week demonstrated that a self-sufficient movement can destabilize the
most powerful opponents. Its hardly surprising that more US troops and
better tactics would have at least a temporary impact on the resistance. But
the idea that its about to fall into an American embrace because of an
occupation-sponsored vigilante movement is as preposterous as the pretence
that a prime minister who says he cannot move a single company without
coalition approval is in charge of an independent democratic government.
Jashua Partlow discussed sectarian strife and reconciliation efforts.
Iraqi leaders argue that sectarian animosity is entrenched in the structure of
their government. Instead of reconciliation, they now stress alternative and
perhaps more attainable goals: streamlining the government bureaucracy,
placing experienced technocrats in position of authority and improving the
dismal record of providing basic services.
The acrimony among politicians has strained the Shia-led
government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki close to the breaking point.
Nearly half of the cabinet ministers have left their posts. The Shia alliance in
parliament, which once controlled 130 of the 275 seats, is disintegrating
with the defection of two prominent parties.
Legislation to manage the oil sector, the countrys most valuable
natural resource, and to bring former Baath Party members back into the
government have not made it through the divided parliament. The US
militarys latest hope for grass-roots reconciliation, the recruitment of
Sunni tribesmen into the Iraqi police force, was denounced last week in
stark terms by Iraqs leading coalition of Shia lawmakers.
Iraqi leaders say there are few signs that Malikis government is
any more willing to share power now than 15 months ago, when he
unveiled 28-point reconciliation plan. A key proposal then was an amnesty

391

for insurgents an olive branch, Maliki said at the time to bring

members of the resistance into the political fold.
Some politicians remain hopeful. Hashimi, the Sunni vice
president, recently drafted what he calls the Iraqi National Compact, 25point statement of principles that condemns all types of extremism and
sectarian discrimination.
Hashimi said he sensed no fundamental willingness from Malikis
government to reconcile with the Sunnis. It has been two months since the
largest Sunni coalition walked out of the cabinet when its list of 11 farreaching demands was not met.
Sunni leaders sense that their Shia counterparts believe the era of
Sunni leadership in Iraq is gone for good that Humpty Dumpty had a
fall and cannot be put back together again as one senior Iraqi official put it
and Sunnis should accept the new reality. Sunni leaders, however, tend to
express more limited goals than reclaiming the government.
To Shias, reconciliation is a process fraught with risks that Sunni
supremacists will attempt to seize their former position of authority over
the majority Shias. Many Shias believe that reconciliation requires
punishing those who, during Saddam Husseins government, ruthlessly
killed and repressed Shias and Kurds.
Most of the US-backed benchmarks for Iraqi political progress
intended to push along reconciliation have so far not been reached. The
government has not passed legislation that would govern the countrys oil
resources or allow former Baath Party members to reclaim government jobs,
nor has it completed a review of the constitution or enacted an amnesty
program.
The resulting Shia, Sunni and Kurdish blocs emerged as the
dominant political actors, with individual politicians subservient to the
group. Leadership positions were parceled out in a de facto quota system to
achieve at least nominal balance among the rivals. Iraq cannot be ruled by
this notion of a national unity government because that has been a recipe for
paralyses, said Salih, the Kurdish deputy prime minister.

PALESTINE
392

Killings of Palestinians by Israelis and through their Fatah agents

continued unabated. Following incidents of atrocities and retaliation were
reported during the period:
Twenty people were injured when Hamas police dispersed crowds
gathered for prayers at banned open places on 7th September.
On 18th November, Palestinian and an Israeli soldier were killed in
Israeli raid on refugee camp near Nablus. Next day, one more
Palestinian was killed in Nablus.
Three more Palestinians were killed on 20th September. Three days
later, Israel agreed to release 90 Fatah men.
On 26th September, Israel killed nine Palestinians in Gaza. Next day,
Israel pulled out of Gaza as Hamas vowed revenge; 11 Palestinians
were killed in last two days.
Palestinian militants fired a rocket deep into Israel on 7 th October; no
damage was caused. Next day, seven Palestinians were wounded in
Israeli air strike.
Israeli troops killed a Palestinian in West Bank on 10th October. A
week later, one Israeli soldier was killed and four Palestinians were
wounded.
On 25th October, Israel approved electricity cut in Gaza. Two days
later, Israeli Defence Minister, Ehud Barak said Israel has planned to
cripple Gaza Strip completely. Two Palestinians were killed in a blast
in Gaza Strip.
Israel cut fuel shipments to Gaza on 28th October. Two days later, four
Hamas men were killed in Israeli air strike.
One Hamas man was killed by Israeli troops on 2nd November. Two
days later, four more Palestinians were killed by Israelis.
Olmert continued improving working relationship with Abbas. Israel
freed dozens of Fatah men on 1st October. Two days later, both the leaders
agreed to bridge the gaps. Two weeks later, however, Abbas accused Israel
of sabotaging the peace process and refused to attend Middle East
393

conference. He also demanded release of thousands of Palestinians held in

Israeli prisons.
On 5th October, Bush said the US supports Palestinian democracy;
obviously he said it only after ousting the democratically elected Hamas.
Rice arrived in Israel on 14th October on four-day tour of Middle East. Next
day, she met Abbas and said time for creation of Palestinian state has come.
A few days later, Olmert said there would be a breakthrough in US
sponsored forthcoming Middle East conference.
Ian Black wrote: Israels declaration that the Gaza Strip is an
enemy entity is yet another alarming development in the ever fractious
situation in the Middle East. The move is intended to warn of, and ostensibly
to justify, a cut-off of fuel and electricity to the territory home to 1.5
million people already living in appalling conditions which have been fully
described in a succession of UN and other reports.
The timing of the announcement by Israels powerful security
cabinet, following extensive legal consultations, came during the latest
visit to Jerusalem by Condoleezza Rice though few Palestinians will
draw comfort from the fact that the US secretary of state was assured by the
Israelis that such steps would not affect the humanitarian situation in the
territory. How could they not? Gaza is already virtually sealed off from the
outside world, a fact identified only this week as the main cause of its
misery, malnutrition and massive unemployment.
Part of the story is that there is mounting pressure inside Israel to
do something decisive about Gaza, abandoned unilaterally by Ariel Sharon
in 2005 after 38 years because the disadvantages of holding on to it
outweighed any possible benefits. But the retreat from the Strip, in the
absence of any agreement with the Palestinians, has not brought Israelis the
security they crave.
Israel may also be calculating that punishing ordinary Gazans
will turn them against Hamas, although it could well have the opposite
effect. Hamas itself has been isolated since taking control of the Strip in
June. It rarely carries out rocket attacks, which are largely the work of the
more radical Islamic Jihad, though it has done little to halt them and Israel
still holds it responsible.

394

Watching gloomily from the West Bank town of Ramallah, Mahmoud

Abbas, the Palestinian president, is still seething at the Islamists but
desperate to avoid a new Israeli offensive. That would cast him as an
outright collaborator and set back efforts to restore some kind of Palestinian
unity, as well as bury the admittedly slim hope for Novembers planned
peace conference.
The irony is that Hamas, which often displays a canny pragmatism,
has been signaling in recent days that it is ready to respect ceasefire. Israels
latest threat makes it ever more urgent to achieve one, and to make it
stick. Only then can there be any hope that negotiations might one day
end this corrosive conflict.

OTHER FRONTS
Lebanon front remained quiet during the period except one incident
in which an MP and eight others were killed in a bomb blast near Beirut on
19th September; Saad Hariri was the first to point finger towards Syria. A
week earlier Israel had launched an air strike inside Syria and claimed
destroying weapons provided by Iran.
The News wrote: The Syrians believe that the Israeli jets could have
been on a reconnaissance mission when they were engaged by Syrian
warplanes, and were forced to drop their extra fuel tanks as well as bombs in
a desert. If the Syrian accusations are correct and they range from official
statements from Damascus to eye-witness reports by villagers in the area in
question up north near the Turkish border it is a very grave matter
indeed. More so in view of the fact that the alleged violations did not
take place across the Israel Syrian frontier, but were carried out via the
Mediterranean. If the reports are confirmed, this would not be the first time
that Israeli warplanes violated Syrian air space from the sea, nor the first
serious provocation.
Last month the official Syrian newspaper Tishrin had said the United
States was encouraging Israel to start a war with Syria and give up any
plans for peace with it. It cited the recent US supply of weapons to Israel, as
well as aid package of $30 billion to the Zionist state as a means of
encouragement to launch war against the chief component of Israels own

395

axis of terror Hopefully, the reported incident wont develop into

something even more serious.
Simon Tisdall opined: Claims that Syria may be developing nuclear
weapons, possibly in collaboration with North Korea, look highly suspect
Even Syrias worst enemies have not previously counted it as a serious
or current nuclear proliferation risk. President Bashar al-Assads
government is usually portrayed as too weak, too technically deficient, too
poor and perhaps too sensible to mount such an effort. Far from seeking
to escalate tensions with Israel, the Syrians have extended cautious (and
mostly unreciprocated) peace feelers since last years Lebanon war.
The improbable nature on initial claims about a Syrian bomb may
have prompted the fallback suggestion in Washington that Damascus could
have agreed to hide and stockpile proscribed North Korean nuclear
materials. Under its disarmament deal with the US earlier this year,
Pyongyang forswore nuclear weapons.
US hawks, who say the north cannot be trusted and oppose the deal
in principle, are already pointing to the supposed Syrian connection as proof
they are right. This line of thinking, going well beyond specific concerns
about Israeli or Middle Eastern security, serves a wider, darker, neocon
agenda.
Another so far unsubstantiated theory is that Syria is, or may be,
somehow acting as a nuclear conduit to its ally and close neighbour
Iran. There is simplistic symmetry to this idea, given that North Korea and
Iran were founder members, along with Iraq (but not Syria), of George
Bushs 2002 axis of evil. And despite Irans denials, the US is, of course,
convinced that Tehrans clerical oligarchs are racing to acquire nuclear
weapons.
Among the less convoluted explanations for Israels action that
it was testing Syrias new, Russian-made air defences, that it was intent
on destroying terrorist training camps, or (as Syria claims) it was trying to
destroy the peace process the suggestion that the target was Iranian
missiles and other arms stores bound for Hezbollah in Lebanon rings most
true.
Iran says it offers only moral and financial support to its Shia allies.
But there are persistent, credible reports predating the Lebanon

396

summer war of Iranian weapons supplies transiting Syria via northern

Iraq, and occasionally being interpreted by anti-Iranian Kurdish guerrillas.
But, while cutting Hezbollahs lifelines and reasserting its regional
deterrence capabilities after last years humiliations may have been Israels
aim, its dramatic action and its unusual silence since suggests another
purpose. The raid represented a deadly serious, silent message of intent
literally, a warning shot to Tehran, fired with Washingtons evident,
equally tacit approval.
Stories about Korean-made nukes secreted in the wastes of
northern Syria will look like fairytale material to many. The real-time
targets are, potentially, Irans nuclear, military and command facilities. And
Israel, no longer content with trial runs up and down the Mediterranean, just
demonstrated how easily it could hit them.
There was no let in war-mongering against Iran, but Tehran
remained undeterred. On 22nd September, Ahmadinejad said, sanctions and
threats wont intimidate Iran. Three days later, US declared Irans Pasdaran
as terrorist group. Bush termed Iran, North Korea, Syria and Belarus as
brutal regimes. The same day, Ahmadinejad questioned 9/11 and Holocaust
during his address in Columbia University.
On 26th September, US warned Iran that it is badly mistaken in
believing that its nuclear programme issue is closed. Iran will defy further
UN sanctions on its nuclear plan, said Ahmadinejad at the United Nation.
Two days later, six nations agreed to delay new UN resolution to impose
further curbs on Iran.
Iran summoned French Envoy on 3rd October over French Foreign
Ministers remarks on its nuclear programme. Two days later, Ahmadinejad
said the existence of Israel is an insult to human dignity. Reports of Bush
adventure against Iran were abuzz; OIC warned that military action against
Iran would lead to disaster.
On 13th October, Khamenei asked Muslims to boycott Middle East
Conference. Next day the Western media reported uncovering of a plot to
kill Putin involving Iranians; Iran termed it totally baseless. On 16 th October,
Putin during his visit to Tehran warned against attack on Iran. Next day,
Bush warned Iran must be barred from nuclear weapons to avoid the

397

prospect of World War III and dismissed suggestions of a US-Russia rift on

the crisis.
Irans nuclear negotiator, Larijani resigned on 20th October. Analysts
believed that his exit would harden Irans stance on nuclear issue. Three
days later, Olmert met Brown in London to seek help for his plan for Iran,
but the host reportedly refused to oblige. Iran refused to budge from its
nuclear programme as talks began in Rome. Next day Rice said, Iran is a
greatest security risk to the US.
On 25th October, US imposed new sanctions on Iran. Next day, oil
price shot up to $92 a barrel. Experts feared that the price might go beyond
$100 a barrel. Irans new nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili brushed aside US
sanctions saying they would have no effect on the countrys nuclear policies.
On 28th October, ElBaradei said IAEA has no evidence that Iran is making
nuclear weapons.
Pierre Celerier expressed his views on resignation of Larijani. Five
months ahead of crucial elections, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has
tightened his grip on Iranian politics after the resignation of his top
nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, analysts say In August, Ahmadinejad
reshuffled his economic team, sacking his oil and industry ministers and
then accepting the resignation of central bank head to strengthen his say over
economic policy.
Analysts in Iran believe the replacement of Larijani by Ahmadinejad
loyalist Saeed Jalili will give the hardline president more influence over
nuclear policy at a time of mounting tensions with the West. It is a step
towards consolidating the camp of Ahmadinejad and shutting the door to any
kind of differences, said political analyst Mohamad Sadegh al-Hosseini.
Ahmadinejad, who has packed his government from the start with
allies and even close friends, has made a conspicuous move over the past
three months to consolidate his power further. This could be seen in the
context of the March parliamentary elections, where reformists are
hoping to launch a comeback and which could be decisive in determining
the future direction of the country.
Analysts have speculated that Larijani may be seeking to stand in
the parliamentary elections and even be eyeing another crack at the
presidency Despite his demeanor of apparent unshakable confidence,

398

Ahmadinejads government has been under pressure from reformists and

conservatives alike, especially over its handling of the economy.
He has been criticized across the political spectrum in Iran for
the countrys high inflation and ploughing extra revenues from high crude
oil prices into high-spending infrastructure projects. Criticism has even
come from judiciary chief Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi but the
government has repeatedly defended its policies as popular and effective.
The Dawn wrote on ElBaradeis remarks on Irans nuclear
programme. It is time for the US to listen, to the IAEA, and not to push
forward its own point of view in a belligerent way. Whatever its real
intention, there is no doubt that its manner has not only hardened Tehrans
posture on the nuclear issue but has also caused anger among ordinary
Iranians who have been disenchanted with US policies
The recent appointment of Saeed Jalili as chief nuclear negotiator has
not been taken well, especially as he has replaced the less hawkish Ali
Larijani. Mr Jalilis stance can be judged by his recent accusation that the
US is supporting terror groups in the Middle East. By not toning down such
rhetoric, Iran will only weaken its position even in the eyes of countries
like Russia that, despite supporting sanctions against it, do not take an
inimical view of Tehran.
Dr Moonis Ahmar focused on Russo-Iran ties. Bushs warning, a
sign of desperation, comes at a time when realignment of forces is taking
place in the international arena. The visit of Russian President Vladimir
Putin to Tehran, the first by a Russian head of government after Second
World War, is of crucial significance. And his warning to the West against
attacking Iran on the pretext of Tehrans nuclear programme is a contributing
factor to anxiety in Washington.
Bush at his White House press conference had said: We have got a
leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel. So I have
told people that, if you are interested in avoiding World War III, it seems
like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the
knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.
Washington suffered a significant setback when the Russian
president, despite threats to his life, decided to visit Tehran. Putins visit,
on the occasion of Caspian Sea Council meeting, was seen as a turning point

399

in global political scene because of two main reasons. First, it was the first
visit by any Kremlin chief to Iran in the last 64 years and, second, Putin
showed determination to help Iran in the event of any western attack on its
nuclear programme.
The US knows that the growing Russo-Iranian relations have
given Tehran enormous space to effectively deal with the western pressure
on the nuclear issue. Putin categorically told the four-state Caspian Sea
summit that it is important that we not only do not use any kind of force but
also do not even think about the possibility of using force.
Iran and Russia now share a common approach towards the
United States because of their grievances and reservations against
Washington for different reasons. It may be more like a marriage of
convenience. Russia has strong reservations on the US missile defence
shield spread over the former members of Warsaw Pact like Poland and the
Czech Republic.
Iran has long list of grievances against the United States. But RussiaUS row over the missile defence shield provided a golden opportunity to
Iran to seek rapport with Moscow. It seems, in a bid to serve their
interests, Iran is playing the Russian card while Russia is playing the
Iranian card. Both the countries think that their newly found rapport would
put the US in a defensive position.
Bushs warning of World War III is a strange idea. Historically
speaking, the two world wars broke out when some ambitious powers
wanted to have a greater share in the global power structure. If there is a
likelihood of Third World War it may be because of the way the US has
been holding things after the end of the Cold War and Israels high-handed
approach vis--vis the Palestinians and its Arab neighbours.
Mahir Ali viewed Israels violation of Syrian airspace in the context of
Iran. Even the pilots had been kept in the dark. At least some of them are
likely to have assumed that they were headed for Iran. Once they were
airborne, they were informed that there target was in Syria.
What the F-15s did next is open to conjecture. There is evidence that
they dumped their supplementary fuel tanksIsrael has been unusually
coy about the aims of Operation Orchard, as the mission was dubbed. In

400

the nearly two months since then, no Israeli in a position of authority has
offered an official comment.
At the moment, the threats of military action are directed not at Syria
but against Iran, which clearly has nuclear programme, albeit one that
Tehran insists is geared towards peaceful purposes. If, as widely suspected,
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has nuclear weapons in mind, he is more
likely to be encouraged than deterred by the unilateral sanctions imposed
last week by the US.
Given Israels attitude towards Iran, especially in the light of
Ahmadinejads thoroughly misguided comments about the Holocaust and
about Israels right to exist, it is certainly possible that Operation Orchard
was a dry run for planned attacks on Irans nuclear facilities. Most
Israeli analysts insist that their nation cannot coexist with a nuclear-armed
Iran; they tend to ignore the consideration that if Tehran is indeed bent upon
nuclearising its arsenal, this may something to do with Israels WMD.
There can be little question that an attack on Iran, regardless of
whether its carried out by the Pentagon or the Israeli air force, would
prompt cataclysmic consequences. The complex mess in the Middle East
grows more dire by the day. The Bush-Cheney administration isnt
scheduled to bite the dust for another 15 months. Unfortunately, that means
it has time enough to further aggravate the situation, with a little help
from Israel, Turkey, Syria and Iran.
M B Naqvi was of the view that Iran wont be a pushover. Iran isnt
the only danger spot in the world. The great human tragedy that is perhaps
beginning in the Gaza Strip and in the West Bank areas is by no means a
lesser danger. This long-festering Arab-Israeli dispute is the mother of all
disputes in the region. Even the Iranian crisis has the dimension of Irans
inflexible support for Palestinians in general and opposition to Israeli
policies in Gaza in particular. These ding-dong emphases are confounding
the situation.
While there are many pressure points in the Middle East, Iran seems
to demand immediate attention. After a hiatus of several months, American
criticism of the Iranian nuclear programme has again reached a high. The
new French Foreign Minister chipped in with his bit about the threat of war
being serious. Meanwhile, the Israelis have continued to insist that the
ultimate threat to their security comes from Iran
401

An element of clarity has entered the situation soon after the Iranian
air forces Number Two disclosed the existence of his own plan to aerially
bombard Israeli territory, if Israel strikes first. While the Israelis have
continued to feign threatened even more, President Bush quickly climbed
down and said that the US policy is still to resolve the issue of Irans nuclear
programme through diplomacy. Granted that there is such a thing as
psychological warfare and the West could think that Iranians can be
bamboozled by threats. But diplomacy of threats can go only so far and
the choice has soon to be made between staying content with words or
going on to implement the threats.
It is clear that the potential of America and that of its friends, if the
friends do stick to the last, is so overwhelming that there can be no
expectation of an Iranian victory. But Iran will not be a pushover like
Iraq. While there is no comparison with the US, the Iranians do have some
bits of modern war technology.
On the question of fundamentals of strategy, one can be certain that a
war with Iran is at the heart of American strategy. It ensues from the
strategic aim of America not being opposed by a hostile Iran in the Middle
East; it has to be eliminated if America has to remain Number One. But the
practical difficulties in doing it are so great that implementing it may take
one to two presidential terms.
There are other crises in the region. None of these contradictions are
likely to go away tomorrow. The Middle East is chockfull of crisis points:
Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and of course Iran and Israel in a different sense. Any
of these crises can go on erupting after what the Americans have already
done in the area. What the Americans have done in Palestine is
fundamental; it would never let them sleep without nightmarish jolts; but
much of the mischief they could do has been done.
The US has implanted Israel as the sheriff of the West in the
Middle East and on Arab soil by virtually dispossessing the Arabs by
deception and violence, thus completing the mendacious schemes of Great
Britain. Doubtless, Palestinians are in a most vulnerable position today,
facing an uncertain situation largely because they have lost their unity and
resolve to win back Palestine. How did they reach this pass? By relying on
American promises they began to travel the treacherous road of pragmatism
and moderation while Israel, with full American support, has been
committing gross aggression against their lands and confining them into
402

separate and unconnected cantons and frequently killing them on slight or no

provocation.
Realistically, the only time peace will return to Israeli occupied areas
is when either Israel succeeds 100 percent in its designs or fails completely.
Neither its 100 percent success not its total failure is a practical proposition.
Therefore, everyone has to remain ready to meet new crises The future
is truly uncertain.
Bill Richardson wrote: Saber-rattling is not a good way to get the
Iranians to cooperate and work with us for peace. But it is a tried and true
method of laying the groundwork for another war a war that would be
a disaster for the Middle East, for the United States and the world. Saying
that were on a path to diplomacy while imposing these sanctions and
increasing the war rhetoric only strengthens hard-line elements in the Iranian
leadership and increases the risk of violence breaking out.
Further, a policy of unilateral sanctions will actually diminish
our diplomatic options. Unilateral sanctions are both ineffective and
porous, and they will undermine the effort to get meaningful multilateral
sanctions that the Iranians would possibly pay attention to. Diplomacy
continues to be the path not taken by the Bush Administration.
I know this region. I spent 80 percent of my time as ambassador to
the United States on Iraq and the Middle East issues. If we want to succeed
in the region, we have to get all of our troops out of Iraq. We have to talk
to the Iranians and back that up with global diplomacy to build strong
support for tough sanctions. That is how we will be successful, not with the
presidents saber-rattling. Congress needs to stop him before he goes too far.
Of course, Congress just had a chance to stand up to Bush with
an unequivocal no war with Iran vote. But they squandered the
opportunity just as they, time and time again, have missed chances to stand
up to Bush on Iraq. Now is not the time for a wait and see attitude not on
ending the war in Iraq and not on starting a war in Iran.

403

CONCLUSION
There were no signs of an end to the sufferings of Iraqis. The
bloodshed will continue, mostly at the hands of sectarian militants and US
mercenaries hired as private contractors to save the casualties of Americas
regular soldiers.
Abbas, like other puppets of the Crusaders in Lebanon, Iraq,
Afghanistan and Pakistan, has been and will continue serving the interests of
his masters with complete disconnect with the miseries of Palestinians.
Israel will continue focusing on Hamas and Gaza Strip.
Situation in Lebanon has been brought under control to the liking of
Israel. Iran, however, will persist as pain in the neck of the US and Israel. It
seems that Bushs dreams about Iran wont be realized, but one can never be
sure as the devil has still more than a year in the White House.
7th November 2007

404

KNOCK-OUT PUNCH
The Team-Wig having won a glorious judicial victory on July 20,
took it for granted that it marked the end of the duel with the Team-Helmet.
It was wrong in assuming that the legally defeated commando would act
rationally, constitutionally and lawfully.
This amounted to be complacent keeping in view the track record of
the military dictator, who in his own words had been a bully from his
childhood days. The prudence demanded that various benches of the apex
court should have decided various petitions with urgency in which the
petitioners had prayed the court to rein in the dictator who had been
violating the Constitution and the law of the land at will.
On 3rd November, the captain of Team-Helmet imposed martial law in
the country in the garb of emergency rule. He issued Provisional
Constitution Order with the sole aim of knocking out the captain of TeamWig and his team-mates. The knock-out punch was celebrated by Shaukat
Aziz by distributing sweets among the staff of prime ministers house.
Having knocked out the Team-Wig, Musharraf defended his
despicable foul-play in his address to the nation. He accused the judiciary
and the media of aiding and abetting terrorism in the country. He specifically
accused the CJP of setting free 61 terrorists.

EVENTS
During hearing of the case on 29 th October, the CJP vowed going to
any length to secure recovery of missing persons. Before another bench,
Attorney General questioned the very maintainability of the petitions and
argued that the court cannot annul the presidential election.
On 30th October, Interior Ministry directed the provinces to ensure
safety of Benazir. Benazir said the Pindi blast was to scare her from holding
a public meeting there. Musharraf said nobody would be allowed to derail
the process of transition to civil rule.
The court hearing the contempt case in connection with re-exile of
Nawaz Sharif was told by foreign secretary that prime minister had told him
405

on 9th September to arrange a special aircraft to take Nawaz to Jeddah. Chief

of protocol and chairman PIA endorsed foreign secretarys statement.
The court asked Attorney General to tell as to who should be named
for the contempt; he asked time for consultation with the high-ups who
happened to be the real culprits. Meanwhile, leaders and workers of PML-N
held a rally on Constitution Avenue. Before another bench the counsel of
Prof (Dr) Anwarul Haq told the court that Generals were still making all the
decisions.
Emergency rumours were abuzz across the country on 31st October
and Benazir delayed her departure to Dubai. PPP asked the regime to explain
mysterious incidents which took place during its rally on Oct 18; eighteen
incidents related to pre-blast period and fifteen to post-blast period.
The regime assured Benazir that the NRO would be honoured. Tariq
Azeem clarified that NRO wont apply to cases against BB pending in courts
abroad. PPP alleged that case file was moved once again by Swiss judge on
the behest of the government.
Pervaiz Elahi termed BB and Zardari as international criminals.
Musharraf discussed vital issues with Q leaders in Prime Minister House.
Results of yet another survey poll were released to project Benazir as the
best leader for Pakistan.
The country was abuzz with rumours of emergency and martial law.
The AG argued that High Court was the proper forum for the petitions. The
bench said the Supreme Court can intervene when polls are not free and fair.
The CJP asked ECP to continue updating voter lists. Relatives of missing
persons staged a protest outside the Supreme Court.
On 1st November, Benazir went to Dubai; the importance of
consultation with foreign sponsors over-ruled her earlier decision to stay in
the country amid rumours of emergency. There were widespread rumours of
the regimes decision to impose Emergency Plus, in case verdict of
Supreme Court was delayed. The Bearish trend on second consecutive day
was reportedly engineered to have an additional justification for imposition
of emergency rule.
The Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Rana Bhagwandas
announced the sentence of imprisonment in the case of manhandling of the

406

Chief Justice; IGP, SSP and three subordinates got 15 days simple
imprisonment while CC and DC were sentenced to sit in the court till its
rising.
Justice Javed Iqbal said that the apex court could neither be taken
hostage nor be influenced by the threats of martial law or imposition of
emergency in the country. The court hoped to announce its verdict after 12th
November.
Aitzaz Ahsan observed that the delaying tactics adopted by the
counsel of Musharraf indicated after having read the mind of the judges on
the bench the regime, perhaps, has decided to go for Emergency Plus option.
He apprehended that something might happen over the week-end.
In the case of missing persons the CJP served the last warning to the
government agencies. The Supreme Court summoned the report on
investigation of Karachi blasts in 7 days. A four-member bench ordered
immediate arrest of the management of Jinnah Medical College for
fraudulent practice.
During the proceedings of the petition on 2 nd November, Justice Javed
Iqbal remarked that imposition of Martial Law would not affect the working
of superior courts; they would continue to dispense justice at the touchstone
of Constitution. The court changed the schedule of hearing to erase the
impression that the court was involved in delaying finalization of the case
and decided to hear the case on Saturday, Monday and Tuesday.
Aitzaz submitted an application before the bench seeking an assurance
from the government not to take any extra-constitutional step including
imposition of Martial Law or Emergency. The court refused to issue any
order, as requested in the application.
Next 48 hours are crucial in the context of emergency, reported
Nadeem Syed. JI and lawyers vowed to resist PCO and Martial Law. In the
wake of rumours about emergency, Altaf asked party leaders to keep the
people informed about the facts. America is opposed to martial law, said
Rice. Tariq Azeem blamed the US interfering in Pakistans internal affairs.
Faisal said the government was aware of Benazirs short return to
Pakistan, as she came to go back. He also said that putting off general
elections for one year and imposing emergency could be the Constitutional

407

solution to the current deteriorating law and order situation prevailing across
the country. PPP and PML-N established high-level contact for seat
adjustment. Prime Minister discussed the concerns raised by the contempt
case related to exile of Nawaz Sharif.
On 3rd November, COAS imposed Emergency Rule in the country and
issued PCO. Constitution was held in abeyance; suicide attacks, rocket firing
and bomb blasts were quoted as justifications. Some judges were blamed for
working at cross purposes with the executive. Shaukat Aziz distributed
sweets among the staff of prime ministers house.
Telecast of all the private and foreign channels was stopped with the
imposition of emergency. Newspapers were barred from printing material
aimed at ridiculing and defaming the head of the state, members of armed
forces or executive, judicial or legislative organs of the state.
Musharraf in his address to the nation defended his extraconstitutional act. He accused extremism, judges and the media of adding to
the uncertainty (which has been created by his own illegal and immoral
actions). He specifically accused the CJP of setting free 61 terrorists.
Amin Fahim rightly termed it Martial Law, because under the
Constitution emergency is proclaimed by the president and this was imposed
by the COAS for the reason that measures taken are more than those allowed
under the Constitution. APDM termed it a crime against the nation. Labour
Party said the move exposed Musharraf.
Intellectuals, educationists and literary segment of the society
condemned the imposition of emergency. Might is tight, Mansha Yad said.
Dean of Islamic University said people are desperate and disappointed.
Political process should have been continued. This is cheating. They are
behaving like children cheating when they see they can foresee failure.
A senior professor of AIOU requesting anonymity said it would
initiate mental revolt amongst people. They cannot justify the imposition of
emergency or martial law as they are themselves responsible for this entire
situation. It is a well thought out plan, which will throw us back instead of
heading forward.
Washington criticized the imposition of emergency. Rice called it
highly regrettable. Pakistanis in New York staged an angry demonstration

408

at a very short notice. Nawaz said Musharraf should quit and BB called for
regime change. Crackdown on political leaders and activists was initiated as
part of the war on terror.
Nadeem Syed in his report said the move was primarily directed
against judiciary and media. Only hours before the imposition of Emergency
Plus, Aitzaz Ahsan and newly elected office bearers of SCBA called on
Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry who vowed to maintain
credibility of the judiciary.
Shortly after the proclamation of emergency and issuance of PCO, the
CJP, along with six judges namely, Rana Bhagwandas, Javed Iqbal, Shakir
Ullah Jan, Nasirul Mulk, Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Ghulam Rabbani ordered
the government, including President and Prime Minister, not to take any
such action that is contrary to the independence of the judiciary.
The text of the verdict said appointment of the Chief Justice of
Pakistan and the judges of Supreme Court and chief justices of high courts
and judges of provincial high courts under new development shall be
unlawfull and without any jurisdiction. It was too little, too late. President
of SCBA, Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan was under Maintenance of Public Order.
Justice Hameed Dogar was sworn in as new Chief Justice of Pakistan
and new chief justices of high courts were also sworn in. The details of
judges who took oath under PCO were: 4 out of 17 in SC, 13 out of 31 in
LHC, 4 out of 28 in SHC, 7 out of 13 in PHC and 5 out of 5 in BHC.
The regime rounded up nearly two thousand terror operatives in the
massive crackdown. Javed Hashmi, Khawaja Asif, Mahmood Achakzai,
Asfandyar, Hamid Gul, Ali Ahmad Kurd, Munir A Malik, Hamid Khan,
Bhoon, Tariq Mehmood, Abrar Hasan, Asma Jehangir, Iqbal Haider and
Saleema Hashmi were some of the prominent terror leaders arrested on dayone after the proclamation of emergency. Aitzaz Ahsan was barred from
seeing his family after a brawl with authorities of Adiala Jail.
Shaukat addressed a press conference and said timeframe of the
emergency has not been decided as yet; elections could be postponed; and
emergency would ensure establishment of the writ of the regime. Musharraf
mulled retaining uniform till 2012.

409

Rice said the US might review aid to Pakistan. Pentagon did not
support suspension of military assistance. Shaiq Hussain reported that
emergency was imposed after the approval of Bush Administration. This was
also confirmed by the return of Benazir who did not rule out talks with
Musharraf. Asghar Khan said BB was fully involved in Emergency Plan.
The judges of Supreme Court who refused to take oath under PCO
were placed under house arrest. Justice Rana Bhagwandas vowed to go to
office on Monday because he considered himself to be constitutional and
legal judge. The Supreme Court cancelled hearing of all the cases which
were pending before it before the issue of PCO.
Having routed the Bench, the regime launched all out offensive
against the Bar. On 5th November, 1,500 lawyers including office holders of
the Bar were arrested In Lahore. Ex-judge Fakharunissa was among scores
of those who were physically thrashed and injured. At other places 60 were
arrested in Islamabad, 90 in Rawalpindi, 15 in Quetta and 150 in Sindh.
After having been decontaminated of viruses called justice, the Bench did
not take any notice.
Chief Justice Iftikhar said imposition of emergency and proclamation
of PCO was attack on the judiciary. Justice Rana Bhagwandas complained
that their houses were locked. Shaukat said there would be no delay in polls
but some cases pending before the apex court have to be decided
(favourably) before the elections.
Stock market hit 17-year low in KSE history. Hunt for terrorists on
PML-N and TI continued. Students of IIU protested imposition of
emergency. Punjab government issued orders for 90-day detention for all
those arrested as part of the holy war against terrorists of all hues; political
workers, lawyers, rights activists and journalists.
Musharraf talked to foreign diplomats and told them that the extraconstitutional measures taken by him were necessitated because judges and
media were helping terrorists. He seemed sure that any action taken in the
name of war on terror would be gleefully accepted by the West. He termed
the rumours of his house arrest as a joke.
Bush urged Musharraf to free detainees; strangely, he showed concern
for the terrorists captured by his brave buddy. EU also sought release of
political prisoners. Gates said all aid programmes were being reviewed.

410

Netherlands held back aid to Pakistan. BB asked Musharraf to shed uniform.

Pervaiz Elahi said the term of assemblies would not be extended and Nawaz
Sharif would stay away for another three years.
Transparency International expressed deep concern over imposition of
emergency and called for urgent restoration for rule of law and democratic
process. Committee to Protect Journalists and International Federation of
Journalists demanded Pakistani regimes hands off media.
Crackdown against terrorists amongst lawyers and political workers
continued on 6th November; fifty were arrested in Lahore and about the same
number from other cities across the country. LHC premises were virtually
rendered no-go-area for lawyers.
Opposition parties miserably failed to show off their presence on the
street. However, ANP and PMAP put up a reasonable show in Peshawar
where Bashir Bilour, Aqil Shah and others were arrested. BB asked
Musharraf to keep promises as she met presidents top aides in Islamabad.
PPP called for ARD meeting and PML-N decided not to attend. PPP got FIR
registered against Pervaiz Elahi and IB Chief in Karachi bombings.
Five journalists were freed to win hearts and minds of the media.
Journalists boycotted the weekly briefing by Ministry of Interior. Shaukat
and Shujaat said elections wont be postponed, but their boss seemed
reluctant. The US started studying the options on aid to Pakistan.
Commonwealth called for urgent talks on emergency. Musharraf rejected
worlds outcry over emergency.
The enlightened and moderated Supreme Court repealed the decision
of seven obscurantist judges which had declared imposition of emergency
rule illegal. Four more enlightened judges were sworn in to complete the
deficiency of the apex court. Ousted chief justice urged the masses to stand
up for supremacy of Constitution and independence of the judiciary. He said
time for sacrifice has come.
Next day, National Assembly endorsed the clamping of martial law
under the garb of emergency rule. It must have been the only incident of its
nature wherein democratically elected representatives endorsed imposition
of martial law. PPP held a token protest outside the Assembly building and
police desisted from using forces unlike elsewhere in the country.

411

Benazir called for mass protests. She asked Musharraf to announce

polls schedule before 13th and quit army role by 15th November. She
demanded release of all detainees but made no mention of the routing of the
superior judiciary. She took over ARD Chairperson from Amin Fahim.
Nawaz ruled out teaming with Benazir. Musharraf refused to announce
timeframe for polls.
MQM made full use of the emergency rule and by arresting at least
1000 JI activists. LUMS students continued their protest on second day; one
student was arrested and media men were not allowed to enter the university.
CPNE rejected amendments in press laws. APNS asked the regime to
suspend the amendments.
Bush said he has discussed the situation with Musharraf in friendly
atmosphere and saw Pakistan on way to democratic rule. Ban Ki Moon
condemned emergency rule, the regime rebuked him and he insisted that he
stood by his statement.
Chief Justice Iftikhar, in reply to a question asked by CNN said
Musharraf is a dictator who did not believe in independence of judiciary and
norms of the law. US showed concern over arrest of judges, despite the
fact that it was part of Musharrafs journey to democracy.
Lawyers protest and boycott of courts continued on third consecutive
day. The baptized judiciary, however, claimed that courts carried out their
routine work. Charge-sheet against ex-Supreme Court Registrar was being
framed. PILDAT termed it naked Martial Law.

VIEWS
The imposition of emergency rule and promulgation PCO gave such a
twist to the events that analyses and comments of the post PCO period
became somewhat redundant. However, these remained relevant for
understanding flow of the events; some of which are reproduced.
The Nation wrote on the contempt case in the context of re-exile of
Nawaz Sharif. Now that three responsible officers have divulged the
identity of the person ordering the aircraft for deporting the former PM to
Saudi Arabia, it would be better for Mr Aziz to explain his position to the

412

court rather than being summoned by it The bench headed by Chief

Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry has made it clear to the AG that it
would not be proceeding against any sub-inspector or lower-ranking police
officer.
The court meanwhile directed Mr S M Zafar representing the Punjab
Government that the highest functionaries of the province should refrain
from issuing statements against Mian Nawazs plan to return home because
the matter is sub judice. This was an obvious reference to Punjab Chief
Minister Ch Pervaiz Elahi. The courts direction should also serve as a
warning to ministers like Dr Sher Afgan and Sh Rashid Ahmad who seem
to be committing contempt of court by making irresponsible and threatening
statements.
Raoof Hasan opined: The bruised and battered country needs a
healing touch. This could only come through a process of national
reconciliation. In spite of his failings in the past, Nawaz Sharif remains the
most appropriate, credible and potent force to initiate this process. It is not
going to help either the existing system, or the country, to keep him out. He
needs to be back here immediately to lead the movement for national
reconciliation and to heal the wounds that have been lacerating through
decades of misrule.
Potentially, he alone commands the support from all sections of the
society that is a primary pre-requisite to build consensus around the basics
that should be put in place without any loss of time. Instead of
contemplating further divisive moves, General Musharraf should submit
before the edict of the Supreme Court and allow every one to return
without any impediments. Nawaz Sharifs presence in the country is critical
to the evolution of a progressive and mutually tolerant political culture and
for the ultimate survival of Pakistan.
Israrul Haque was of the view that Benazir has no love lost for people
of Pakistan. She has been telling her audience soon after landing in Pakistan
that even while in exile she has always remained concerned about the fate of
the people of Pakistan and that it was entirely wrong to say that she has
come back because of the deal. If she had not come to Pakistan because of
deal but because of her devotions to the people of Pakistan then why did she
not come back when such a devastating earthquake rocked NWFP and
Azad Kashmir in which tens of thousands men and women and children

413

perished many more lost their limbs and millions of others were rendered
homeless majority of whom are still living in make shift shelters.
Benazir Bhutto thus suffering from such an acute image problem
and in view of her highly outrageous statements namely expressing her
willingness to invite the NATO troops to Pakistan to capture Osama and
earlier on expressing her tacit approval of the US direct military action
inside Pakistan to combat terrorism is not likely to promote any healthy
political climate nor make any dent into the Islamic militancy and if any she
would be only adding fuel to the raging fire of Islamic militancy.
Khurshid Anwer from Lahore Cantt wrote: Even a village idiot
knows that PPP, PML and MQM cannot cohabit. But there is the
government trying to put three swords in one scabbard. However, he too
will find out soon enough that playing second fiddle is not, and will never
be, a part of Benazir Bhuttos orchestra. Ask Ghulam Ishaque Khan and
Farooq Leghari. Hang on with your 58-2 (b) powers, General!
Wajahat Latif talked about US factor. In spite of this sorry state, the
regime is in constant praise of itself through buoyant statements and the
media at public expense. Such an ostrich-like attitude of the government can
only be appreciation, very close to living in fools paradise. The
disconnection between this regimes perception and the reality of Pakistan
can be partly attributed to the US factor in Pakistani politics.
The reputation of those in authority is down in the dumps and the
public opinion in the US is turning against them. Being challenged in a
reinvigorated Supreme Court, General Musharraf has had serious reverses at
home, likely to worsen, Americans, clearly conscious of this decline, have
forced Ms Benazir Bhuttos return on him. They have seen the war on terror
is spinning out of Musharrafs control and are now forcing an election on
him that he is reluctant to hold in a free and fair manner, his lip service to the
concept notwithstanding.
The US factor, thus, figures in Pakistani politics as a popular
perception, but Musharrafs belief that the Americans will save him is
apperception, a wish imposed on perception. They have to watch their own
interest and will not support him today when the US Congress and the media
consider him the liability and the US administration too is fast coming to
that conclusion.

414

Musharraf having outrun his mileage, restoration of democracy

is now up on US agenda for Pakistan, sure in the knowledge that the
cooperation in the war on terror will continue to be forthcoming after he
leaves. No heavens will therefore fall, to quote Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, if a
decision in the Supreme Court goes against the President.
Humayun Gauhar wrote: American interference in our country has
reached such a climax that they are now telling us who are our next
government should comprise and who our prime minister ought to be. In
fact, they sent her to us on October 18
They dont realize that by weakening our best available leadership
option and by promoting Benazir Bhutto they are strengthening our worst
possible leadership option. Relaunching a person like Benazir is akin to
aiding and abetting corruption promoting cronyism and non-governance
under the lie of promoting democracy and moderation in the Muslim world.
They say she is a panacea for Pakistans woes. It is like prescribing 40
cigarettes a day to someone with lung cancer. But who cares?
Americas promotion of Benazir amounts to laundering $1.5 billion
of the peoples money she stole allegedly, of course and ignoring the
corruption cases against her in jurisdictions other than Pakistan. Her
investments in France, Florida, Dubai, the UK and many other places are
staring Pakistanis in the face. Our interpretation is and it is a correct
interpretation that corruption thrives under the protection of the US
umbrella provided that such corrupt leaders deliver their countries to
America on a platter.
However, the people of Pakistan are much wiser now and
Americas efforts will not succeed. Gone are the days when any route to
power passing through Washington was seen as strength. Such a leader
immediately gets stamped with the word Reject. Far from being an asset,
US support in such a situation is a grave liability. Benazirs investments in
US lobbyists may have produced of temporary illusion of advantage in her
mind, but soon she will find that these advantages will hurt her and her
cult.
America should try and understand why Third World people
criticize it so. We appreciate US values, which is why many of us make a
beeline for the country when we can. There are one million people of
Pakistani origin living in America pursuing the American dream and doing
415

very well. When the values that America so cherishes at home is not applied
abroad, the duality becomes painfully obvious. What America thinks is
criticism is actually a cry of anguish against this duality. What they want is
that America genuinely and honestly promotes those same values that it so
cherishes at home in Third World countries as well
Bush is now in legacy mode. It could have been ending American
duality and turning it from the most hated to the most liked country in the
world. Now, failure will be his legacy: a trashed foreign policy, three lost
wars (Afghanistan, Iraq and on terror); killing countless innocent people,
including Americans; wasting trillion of dollars and damaging the US
economy. But most demoning part of his legacy will be seeding terrorists
and terrorism and making the world a far more dangerous place than it was
before 9/11, thus endangering the lives of Americans even more.
Dr Haider Mehdi observed that Pakistan was in the clutches of mythmakers. Ben Okri, the eminent Nigerian poet and novelist, once wrote, the
magician and the politician have much in common: they both have to draw
our attention away from what they are really doing. Marshal McLuhan,
communications theorist and guru of the media culture, held a similar view
by saying: Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
will be only too happy to abdicate in favour of his image because the image
will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
In reflecting on the recent developments and events in Pakistan, the
observations of both Okri and McLuhan seem to be perfectly fit the
unfolding political scenario in the country. The international and national
political magicians along with media image-builders are bent on
drawing the publics attention away from what they really intend to do
and consequently impose a further political impasse on the Pakistani
people.
In leading this crescendo, the Bush Administration is attempting to
paint both General Pervez Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto as the two perfect
moderate forces whose combined ideology will bring a new dawn to the
political landscape of the country and to the rest of South-East Asian global
politics The irony of the situation is that the chief patrons of this political
endeavour in themselves are the true apostles of the ultimate political
extremism of our times.

416

Indeed, it would be an intellectual folly to believe that the US

President and Secretary Rice are by any means politically moderate
themselves, or they are even able to remotely define the parameters of
political moderation. This is the duo who has touched the epitome of
extremist policies and set an agenda of the US atrocious global foreign
policy based on fabrications, deceit and blatant lies, and the outright use of
military force resulting in death and destruction to seek illegitimate
American economic and political objectives.
The fact of the matter is that the US President and his major
spokesperson, Condoleezza Rice, are pursuing their doctrine of war on
terror and extremism as a camouflaged policy to extend the American neoimperialist reach in the world. In searching for partners in this ill-conceived
global endeavor, they have identified Gen Pervez Musharraf, an eight-year
ally, and Benazir Bhutto, life-time chairperson of Pakistan Peoples Party, as
willing actors. The political magicians and image-makers are now busy
in giving the final touches to their theatrical portrayal of this self-serving
creation.
Let us consider the Musharraf Governments up-to-date political
policies, performance, and credentials to ascertain if it can be judged as a
moderate force. General Musharraf has run Pakistan as one-man powershow, violated democratic principles and in absolute essence has depended
on American support and carried out the US given political agenda inside
Pakistan. This regime has been overtly threatening the Supreme Court and
civil society with an impending martial law should the apex courts
judgment go against the Generals candidacy for the presidency.
If experience is an element of our judgments, we know very well
that those in authority do not allow a level playing field. No hard-core
anti-moderate anti-democratic dictator wishes to trade in his power position
to the higher ideals of democratic leadership. Why should we expect
Musharraf to do so? Especially if the worlds only Superpower is determined
to support him and have the world and the Pakistani people believe that
Musharraf is, indeed, an enlightened moderate force.
In another gimmick of the same image-building exercise, the
apologists for Benazir Bhutto claim the BBs re-entry to Pakistani politics
and her deal with General Musharraf, now proven to be planned and
brokered by the Bush Administration, is intended purely for a peaceful
transition to democracy in Pakistan. These apologists also wish to convince
417

the Pakistani public that the political move made by Benazir was the only
option available. However, those Benazir supporters conveniently and
deliberately forget to consider that the American agenda of war on terror
and extremism is as flawed and erroneous as the US wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan
The fact of the matter is that these are essentially political issues and
there is a whole window of opportunity to deal with them politically. The
only legitimate course is to resolve these issues through political
reconciliation discourse a concept that America is not willing to
undertake and Musharraf and Benazir are not in favour of.
Secondly, merely going through the motions of holding elections
does not guarantee a transition to true democracy. A military rulers
possible political legitimacy is a dangerous omen for the future of this
country because Pervez Musharraf with or without uniform remains
involuntarily entrenched in the military establishment, come what may. Why
hasnt Benazir pondered on this aspect?
Thirdly, hasnt the PPP Chairperson considered that an 8-year tenure
of power for a countrys leader, military dictator or not, is enough? On what
logistical, ideological, political or logical grounds is another tenure for
General Musharraf essential? This regimes US-centric agenda has failed to
bring peace and tranquility to Pakistan; in fact, the law and order situation
has worsened
Fourthly, albeit the use of emotionally-laden sloganistic rhetoric;
Benazir has offered no detailed policy platform to back her claims of
roti, kapra aur makkan. How she intends to do it Not a word. What has
she done in the last eight years to contribute to the nations political and
economic emancipation? Not a thing. Magical imagery-building, yes.
Profound contributions, no.
Fifthly, Benazir has personally benefited, financially and
politically, from the American-brokered arrangement with General
Musharraf. The problem here is that BBs personal good clearly contradicts
the Pakistani publics good. Does she remain credible?
Sixthly, couldnt the restoration of full democracy be
accomplished by Benazir joining all other pro-democratic parties and
making it possible to oust the military regime completely out of Pakistans

418

political landscape? But that might not have assured the PPP Chairperson a
slot for Prime Minister-ship a possibility that Benazir would not have
remotely considered because of her power-centered political psyche.
Ambition drove many to become false; to have one thought locked in
the breast, another ready on the tongue, wrote the ancient Roman historian,
Sallust. Centuries later, John F Kennedy said, the great enemy of the truth is
very often not the lie deliberate, contrived and dishonest but the myth
persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Pakistan is now in the clutches of
two ambitious myth-makers, General Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto, aided
and assisted by the most powerful country in the world, the US.
In another article the analyst added: Present-day Pakistan has
imbecilic foreign friends who are wielding a long stick in its internal
affairs. Tragically, this countrys political establishment and the chairperson
of the PPP are caving in a blunder that has already caused irreparable
damage to Pakistans body-politics (worsening the law and order situation,
civil unrest and political chaos) and will certainly bring further chaos to this
nation.
Let us look at the fundamentals of the self-deceptive and
aberrational politics of conscientious insanity that is being deliberately
promoted by the British and US establishments. In a recent address to a
distinguished audience in New York, including the New York Mayor and
right-wing media tycoon, Rupert Murdoch, the former British prime minister
and the Quartets new peace envoy, Tony Blair, compared Islam to Nazi
Germany and held Iran at the centre of this future East-West confrontation.
Surprisingly, Blair received four standing ovations. What does this reveal
about peace-maker Blair as well as the audience itself?
Tony Blair, who should be facing an international tribunal for crimes
against humanity (genocide of millions in Iraq, Afghanistan on false pretext,
and unleashing aerial bombardment of Lebanons civilian population last
year), is instead receiving standing ovations for his newest plans warmongering and creating hatred amongst Westerners and Muslim people.
The racist hype and Muslim-bashing and hatred do not stop with
Blair and Sarkozy. Bush has warned of a Third World if the US-West does
not prevail illegitimately over Irans development of nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes. Also, what is being said in the US political circles by
some of the presidential hopefuls is beyond belief.
419

The fact of the matter is that Islam fascism is a figment of the USWests imagination deliberately exerted to extend their historical
imperialistic control globally to take possession of Third Worlds natural and
economical resources. But in the contemporary global political era, there is
another psychological dimension to the America-Western approach towards
Muslim nations.
Fearful of the growing Third World economic power and exploration
of natural resources, most particularly in the Muslim countries, and the
visible resolve of the general public in all these countries for greater selfdetermination in their internal affairs as well as seeking a greater say in
global relations, the US and European establishments are getting
increasingly afraid that the historical equation of inequality between the
white and the coloured nations and people might be at its concluding
stages.
In fact, it is this fear of equality that has triggered the massive USWestern onslaught against Muslim nations and has given birth to the
fabricated notion of Islam fascism. In this way, the new wave of Muslim
peoples will to greater self-determination can be rolled back to traditional
inequality. It is precisely for this reason that America and Europe continue to
support dictatorships in the Muslim World and are fearful of democratic Iran
for that matter of any fully democratic Muslim nation. Unfortunately, the
Pakistani incumbent political establishment and now Benazir Bhutto are
willing partners of the US-West ideological battle against its people.
The present regime cannot seem to accept the equation of
equality with the Pakistani public or anyone else. Benazir, on her part as
PPP Chairperson for life, is unwilling to surrender her ancestral claim to
power. Both of them make perfect partners of the covert US-driven plan to
subvert Pakistani civil society. Unfortunately, both are unwilling to serve the
people of Pakistan. They serve only their foreign friends and themselves.
Dr A H Khayal opined: Rulers are of two kinds. There is a ruler
who commands power. And there is a ruler whom power commands.
The former uses power for the masses. The latter is used by power for
crushing the masses. Obviously, the power-commanding ruler is an angelic
soul whereas the power commanded ruler is a demonic evil. The luckiest
masses are the masses of a country which is under a power commanding
ruler

420

Lets call a power-commanding ruler a benevolent ruler and a

power-commanded ruler a malevolent ruler. When a benevolent ruler,
because of certain reasons, is unable to serve the masses benevolently he
flings his power into a gutter, apologizes to the masses and flies away into
oblivion. But when a malevolent hears the masses crying because of their
economic misery, he becomes more malevolent to make the crying more and
more musical.
Under a benevolent ruler, every citizen determines his own
destiny, his own life-objective. The ruler is there to bless him. The rulers
benevolent wishes become the citizens wings. He flies like a missile
towards his destination.
Under a malevolent ruler, the destiny of the masses is determined
by the ruler. They must breathe as the ruler wills them to breathe. They
must suffer as the ruler wills them to suffer. And they must die as the ruler
wills them to die.
For sixty years, our masses have been blaming the rulers for their
misery. The blaming is ethically untenable. The rulers are not to be
blamed. It is the masses themselves who are blameworthy. They have
committed an offence for which there is no atonement. The offence is that
they let themselves be born as masses. When they were being sent to this
world, they ought to have sued God. Please God, do not send us into the
world as masses. You may send us in any other form.
The masses must know that in every individuals history and in every
nations history accidents are more vital than planning. Did we plan the birth
of the Quaid? Or was it an accident? Did China plan the birth of Mao? Or
was it an accident? We need a gigantic leader who would liberate the masses
from their misery. Lets pray that a gigantic accident blesses us with a
gigantic leader!
Because of the current warfare amongst the politicians, the country is
politically ablaze. American is fuelling the fire. According to our history, a
similar warfare split the country into two parts. History is watching.
Probably it is watching to repeat itself. Only the politicians can stop it
from repeating itself. And they can stop it by stopping themselves from
flying at each others throats the countrys throat shall remain in danger of
being split.

421

Inayatullah was of the view that it was time to quit for the rulers.
Little does the administration realize that, to a large extent, their own acts
of omission and commission are responsible for the present state of
affairs What is also not realized is that the government has hugely
weakened itself by taking certain unwise decisions; the destruction of the
well-established district administration system, for one. By politicizing the
office of the head of the district who is dependent on his beradari and
supporters for the election to the office, the impartiality of the administration
and to a large extent the rule of law has suffered an irreparable damage.
A similar serious mistake was to demolish the time-tested political
agent system in the tribal areas replacing it with militarization and direct
dealings with local Maliks or adventurers. The result of this folly
compounded by blindly following the American agenda dreadful and
bloody as they are are spiraling into a virtual war fought by the army and
paramilitary forces against its own people.
It is time for the present rulers to realize their failure, offer apologies
for mis-governance and quit. Any further coercive steps to save vested
interests will sooner or later backfire. It is time the people of Pakistan are
blessed with democracy a system which is self-corrective if allowed to run
for a reasonable length of time.
Sarmad Bashir wrote: As the tribal conflagration has gripped the
entire NWFP the government contemplates launching a full-fledged war to
defeat militancy. General Musharraf now grappling with his own legitimacy
will love to do that. So would his foreign backers. The Bush Administration
may think that approving extraordinary powers for the General would
definitely be the best bargain to help him deal with the situation effectively.
But the fact remains that any resort to emergency would further deepen
resentment against the present regime.
If General Musharraf is at all prepared to make an honest assessment
of the situation facing the country today he can do it by addressing the
nation with some minor changes in the speech he delivered five days after
staging the coup. It may read as: Pakistan today stands at the crossroads of
its destiny Fifty-nine years ago, we started with a beacon of hope and
today the beacon is no more and we stand in darkness. There is
despondency, and hopelessness surrounding us with no light visible
anywhere aroundwe have lost our honour, our dignity, and our respect in
the comity of nations. And that must entail a bold announcement by him:
422

I voluntarily step down to let Pakistan be governed by the elected political

leadership, which can pull the country out of the quagmire.
Imran Husain also felt that Pakistan needed a fresh beginning. The
belief that perhaps BB had learnt some lessons from her long exile,
interacting with people in an environment that encourages free and fair
thought and shuns diabolical governance is, sadly, shattered. This deal
could have been done five years ago. There was ample opportunity.
Instead of much needed significant solutions, each day springs a new
demon. Mysterious men and women haunt PPP ladies; Sherry first, now
Benazir. Come off it. It is being blown out of all proportion. This is all pass;
it is time they come up with something novel to evoke a popular response.
There is a predominant fear that the terrible status quo will
continue over the next five years. No concrete solutions are on offer by any
side just elect us and have faith, the magic wand is long dead, it exudes no
magic anymore. The desire to occupy office overrides any other fact. Rule
by all means, someone will have to.
In response to a question someone relevant asked, yes, the only right
way forward is to come together, bring new ideas, devise creative means and
put to pasture the drivel that occupies our mind, thoughts and actions.
Pakistan demands a fresh beginning.
The stinking smell of emergency plus was deliberately spread by
the regime since the final days hearing of the presidential reference against
the CJP primarily to intimidate the superior judiciary and all those were
considered a threat by Musharraf. Sheikh Rashids services were fully used
for this purpose. As the garbage of regimes misdeeds kept piling up before
the apex court the stink became more offensive.
The Nation smelled it and thought it indicated postponement of
elections. While some of General Musharrafs advisers might think a delay
in polls would help them, it is in fact likely to create more problems for
the government and the country than they are currently facing. One of the
excuses being advanced by the lobby proposing a one-year delay is the
deteriorating law and order situation in the NWFP coupled with a spate of
suicide attacks all over the country.

423

Any move to postpone the elections would be strongly opposed by

the opposition parties and could lead to agitation and instability. There is
need for the powers that be to desist from engineering elections according to
their choice. The government should proceed with preparations for elections
beginning with a caretaker government acceptable to the opposition.
In a subsequent editorial the newspaper added: As certain quarters
are busy peddling rumours about the imposition of emergency, PPP
Chairperson Benazir Bhutto abruptly put off her visit to Dubai for a day
while warning the government that any attempt at retarding the process of
transition to democracy would be strongly resisted by the nation Ms
Bhutto meanwhile pledged to lead a public protest if the government
resorted to any extra-constitutional measure.
Shujaat Hussain and his other colleagues have been hinting at the
extension of assemblies tenure as well as delay in the holding of general
elections for one year. Obviously, they do not relish the idea of any
adverse verdict by the Supreme Court on General Musharrafs eligibility to
contest the presidential election. The ruling leadership is also not
comfortable with the idea of giving a level playing field to the two
mainstream opposition parties in the coming general elections.
It is however difficult to say whether the ruling leadership and
members of the federal and provincial cabinets are being prompted by the
backstage players to make such statements or whether General Musharraf
has actually lost the initiative that was aimed at bringing together the forces
of moderation to effectively meet the challenges facing the country. Those
in authority should better adhere to their commitment to hold free and
fair elections rather than lending an ear to those advising them to impose
emergency or resort to any other extra-constitutional measure.
The Dawn wrote: What puts off the government is the
independence being shown by the Supreme Court currently hearing
petitions against the election of General Musharraf. Important issues raised
by the petitioners lawyers have presumably added to the worries of those
depending on the President to retain power. The action taken against high
government officials on Thursday by the court must have conveyed the
message to those in power that they can no more claim immunity if the
committed illegalities.

424

The argument that the government needs wide powers to

circumvent the authority of the courts to deal effectively with terrorism does
not hold ground. Terrorism no doubt needs to be rooted out and extremism
contained. The highly complex issue however cannot be resolved by
deploying Cobra helicopters and jet fighters, and the taking of ruthless
action by ground forces.
Any resort to martial law or a state of emergency or attempt to curb
the powers of the courts or put restrictions on the free media would unite the
entire opposition and civil society against the government. The strong
statement against any possible constitutional measure by secretary
Condoleezza Rice and her insistence on going ahead with the elections
indicates that General Musharrafs foreign allies also do not see eye to eye
with him on the issue.
A day before the imposition rule, Dr Farooq Hassan wrote: The
General is plainly wrong when he maintains consistently that there is
democracy in Pakistan! In his conception of democracy there is the
consolidation of offices of the army chief and the presidency. Even more
bizarre is the realization that in any living democratic country these two
offices are really powerless to determine the outcome of any contentious
matter involving political issues.
General Musharraf has fundamentally become quite transparent.
He is further fooling nobody when he says that every thing is done
according to the Constitution. His conception of a Constitution is the
document through which his rule became personalized no wonder his
immensely talkative once Information Minister and now in-charge of
running the nations railways said on November 01 that the Constitution is
like a nose of wax that should be moulded as one pleases.
Cooley, according to many authorities the greatest jurist author in the
field on constitutional law has said that constitutions were made to limit
executive authorities of despotic European monarchs over three hundred
years ago. The retention or fixation of the tenure of constitutional posts
cannot as such be left, as a matter of constitutional principle, to the wishes
of the current incumbents.
I have not come across such provisions in any written constitutions
examined by me to evaluate the comparative integrity of this strange
assertion that it is for the incumbent of a military post to determine when he
425

would say it is enough! Even the constitutions of Adolph Hitler and

Mussolini did not give them any such powers to hold on to any post
regardless of any limitations!
No definition of any age by any philosopher or jurist worth his
name, can possibly justify such a fallacious assertion that a serving army
general is the best guarantee of democracy The oddest aspect of this
controversy being that while talking of democracy and national interest
the simple truth is that the General has never been elected himself under
the popularly understood conception of this matter.
In a country where the Constitutions displacement itself is often
protected by resorts to theories such as public or state necessities, it is not
realistic to contemplate that such niceties of civilized peoples would be
observed. Talking of civilized brings to mind a statement that should
forever haunt Musharraf. As COAS and the president he labeled the present
parliament uncivilized in 2002.
One must also mention that it is widely reported that the government
may now impose emergency, if not martial law, if the Supreme Courts
verdict is somehow unconformable for the General. Several ministers have
said that the government is all set to enforce emergency in case SC
announces its decision after November 15, when the assemblies will be no
more there and president also will be required to shed his uniform it is also
said that there is a greater likelihood of emergency imposition before the
SCs decision.
What about the spirit of the constitution even if it is arguably possible
under the current Constitution to impose an emergency? The government has
by one school of thought taken the US government into confidence over the
imposition of emergency in Pakistan in view of the uncertainty and
prevailing law and order situation in NWFP
To compound the murky national political landscape on November
01 Benazir Bhutto too has left the country for Dubai, probably
foreseeing what is in store in Pakistan; or is her departure based on the
realization that if the Reconciliation Ordinance is declared unconstitutional
by the Supreme Court next week she may well be arrested as the countrys
junior information minister has recently said.

426

If however the SC verdict is against Musharraf then he well take

some extra constitutional steps to buy some time for political manoeuvring
to secure his stay in the presidency for the next five years all such steps
would be immediately challenged in the Supreme Court.
Thus, the only certainty I see is that lawyers and the law is destined
to play a continuing role in the body politic of this country. Musharrafs
actions would be challenged qua any bar to the enforcement of fundamental
rights or an emergency imposition per se or any other step that the General
may take to undercut the prospect of free elections or his own departure
from this country or at least from his current self assumed responsibilities
Ikramullah wished: God forbid that such a tragic development
may actually take place. The national and international media is painting
different scenario pointing towards the impending imposition of an
emergency in Pakistan. Some are openly predicting the clamping down of
martial law
According to press reports, there are other reasons being attributed
for the impending showdown between the judiciary and the executive.
Many important cases are pending with the Supreme Court of Pakistan and
are in the last stage of hearing, the outcome of which is bound to have a far
reaching effect on the general elections.
The honourable judges are no doubt aware of the unusual
situation prevailing in the country. I have no doubt that the learned judges
do glance at the daily press where there daily observations and remarks are
quoted. Similarly, they must also be aware of the reporting and comments
being offered by reporters on various channels. These make headlines and
add to make the prevailing confusion worst confounded.
On top of this the Supreme Court Bar has announced that the judges
taking oath under any new PCO would be blocked to hold court and the
legal fraternity will oppose with force any interference in the present set-up
by the present parliament. Is it too late to save the situation and avert the
awesome crisis that is threatening to wreck whatever progress has so far
been made in the arduous journey towards democracy?
Everyone appears to run the state in accordance with his or her
way of thinking. What then is the difference between Nek Muhammad,
Baitullah Masood and Maulana Fazlullah of Swat and various other

427

champions of democracy and rule of law? If each one of the political,

military and religious leadership wishes to have the cake and eat it too, God
help Pakistan.
The inevitable happened on 3rd November. Musharraf clamped martial
law in the garb of emergency rule and in doing that he played the terror card
to impress the Crusaders. As he tried to justify his extra-constitution action,
it would be appropriate to see how much of his argument was bought by
bandits backers.
The Wall Street Journal wrote: President Pervez Musharrafs
imposition of emergency rule this weekend is the latest setback. It runs the
risk of making Pakistan even less stable than it already is and makes it
harder for Mr Musharraf to restore democratic legitimacy, as he says he still
wants.
Mr Musharraf defends his emergency decree as a response to rising
Islamic militancy and political instability caused by an interfering judiciary.
But the timing of his sacking of the chief of the Supreme Court suggests that
the General was mainly interested in pre-empting a ruling on his recent
re-election, which the opposition boycotted.
The violence is not the product of democratic opponents of Mr
Musharrafs rule. It is the work of the same Islamic extremists who have
also tried to kill the General more than once. Thanks to some of Mr
Musharrafs own mistakes, such as a 2006 truce, those forces have been able
to build safe havens in the tribal areas
A more effective way to defeat the extremists is by respecting the
rule of law and introducing a democratic government that reflects the
wishes of Pakistans most moderate population. This is the course Pakistan
had been on in recent weeks. With encouragement from Washington
The main US interest here is a stable Pakistan that can help
defeat the jihadists. That interest wont be served by precipitously moving
to sever ties with Mr Musharraf, or with the Pakistan military the way the
US did in the 1990s. That would only reduce whatever leverage the US
continues to have with Islamabad, as well as reduce the prospects for
cooperation in pursuing the al-Qaeda safe havens.

428

The Bush Administration will have to speak clearly to Pakistanis

that its support for its government is not limited to Mr Musharraf, and
to loudly and publicly urge the General to honour his pledge to relinquish his
military commission and hold elections as soon as possible.
The New York Times observed: By imposing martial law, Gen Pervez
Musharraf has pushed nuclear armed Pakistan further along a perilous
course and underscored the failure of President Bushs in the war on
terrorism. The events should not have come as a surprise to administration
officials. This is what you get when policy is centred slavishly on a single,
autocratic ruler rather than more broadly on his country.
The General, Pakistans President, justified his crackdown as a
defence against Islamic militants, but his desperate and reprehensible actions
suspending the Constitution, rounding up judges, beating and jailing
lawyers and journalists will embolden extremists. They will also fuel
anger and mistrust among Pakistani moderates.
Returning Pakistan to civilian government has been a declared goal
of the United States since General Musharraf seized power in 1999 in a
bloodless military coup. He has repeatedly broken promises to move in that
direction. Most of the time, Mr Bush who says he cannot win the antiterrorism war without General Musharraf but clearly cant win it with
him either, acquiesced.
The United States is increasingly left with bad options. Cutting off
aid would only make it harder to enlist Pakistans military in the antiextremist fight and renew doubts about Americas reliability as an ally. The
United States should at least condition that money on Pakistans
performance in the anti-terrorism fight, on some form of accountability and
on shifting more of it toward building political parties, courts and schools.
Ultimately, democracy not authoritarianism is the best hope for a
stable Pakistan. Reviving General Musharrafs back-room deal with the
former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, however distasteful, may be a way
back from the abyss if it includes real commitment to elections by the
General, if Ms Bhutto insists that the elections be open to all parties and
if Mr Bush gives her strong backing.
Los Angeles Times wrote: As the law enforcers used clubs and tear
gas to crush pro-democracy demonstrations, arrested several thousand

429

lawyers and human rights activists and muzzled the media, President Bush
the chest-thumping, self-proclaimed defender of freedom everywhere
bravely declared that he hoped Musharraf would take my advice and hold
elections soon. It was a grotesque finale to the now-abandoned doctrine
that Bush advanced in his second inaugural address, when he argued that
democracy is the panacea of all ills.
The Bush administration now see itself forced to choose between
US interests and American principles, between fighting terrorism and
preserving stability in a nuclear weapons state, and promoting if not
Jeffersonian democracy then at least semi-enlightened governance under
civilian, though authoritarian, law.
With its best democratic and legal minds under house arrest or in jail,
Pakistan is no closer to being able to hold free and fair elections than it was
when Musharraf seized power in 1999. If Bush can do no more than call
on Musharraf to restore civilian rule, Congress must. The US has a
profound interest in good relations with Pakistan, a nuclear armed country of
165 million, But the US can neither help build a stable society in Pakistan
nor undermine terrorism by continuing its prevalent policies.
The Boston Globe opined: General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistans
President, fooled nobody when he declared a state of emergency over the
weekend because of what his official proclamation called an ascendancy in
terrorist activities. There has indeed been an increase in violence by
extremist groups as well as large-scale operations by the Pakistani military
against those groups. But the target of emergency is not the radical Islamists;
it is the secular opposition represented by Supreme Court judges, lawyers,
independent television channels, and democratic political parties: Pakistans
constitutional order.
Musharrafs obvious motive for suspending the Constitution is a
desire to preserve his own power. He had gotten word that the Supreme
Court was about to rule that his recent re-election by the federal and regional
assemblies which had originally come to office in partially rigged elections
was invalid. The ruling may have been based on the fact that,
constitutionally, one person cannot hold both posts of army chief and head of
state.
It is also possible the court was about to rule that Musharraf was
seeking a constitutionally prohibited third term, since he ruled from 1000
430

to 2002 without being elected and then was elected to a five-year term that
just ended. Musharrafs refusal to cede his powers over the government or
the military has placed the United States in a compromised position.
Beyond the public statements of dismay already emanating from
Washington, Bush ought to lean hard on Musharraf to release detained
judges, lawyers and opposition politicians, and also to permit parliamentary
elections to go forward in January, as originally planned. For the longer
term, the United States should be as solicitous of Pakistans civilian political
parties as it has been of Musharraf.
In the same newspaper Shuja Nawaz wrote: Claiming to put
Pakistan first, the General appeared to be putting himself first, in the
face of a likely Supreme Court ruling against his eligibility for re-election.
By imposing a state of emergency, setting aside the Constitution, issuing a
new Provisional Constitutional Order, ruthlessly decimating the judiciary,
and attacking the fledgling broadcast media, he set back Pakistans quest for
democracy and its fight against terrorism within its borders.
In his speech Saturday rationalizing the state of emergency,
Musharraf described many threats to the stability of Pakistan but
highlighted terrorism. Yet the concrete measures he took were aimed at
removing recalcitrant judges, imprisoning opposition politicians, and
silencing the media.
If the state of emergency does not allow Musharraf to control the
insurgency or reduce terrorist attacks in Pakistans cities, the army may
sadly become the key to effecting yet another change: to restore the
transition to democracy that Musharraf once promised.
The General could still retrieve the situation somewhat by
shedding his uniform, setting up a neutral caretaker government, allowing
both Bhutto and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to participate in the
political process, and holding the promised elections within the next 90
days.
But Musharraf seems to be digging in his heels in favour of the
status quo, relying on military muscle to keep him in power. If he does not
move to live up to his past promises to Pakistan and the world, the United
States and other allies could take a firmer stance.

431

Spiegel compiled a report on the viewpoint of German print media.

As Pakistan teeters on the verge of chaos, the West looks on nervously
and prays that the countrys nuclear weapons dont fall into the wrong hands.
German commentators feel that the West and the US in particular share
part of the blame for the mess.
Although the West had been hoping that Musharraf would continue
with tentative steps towards democracy, it is nervous about condemning the
military leader too strongly now, for fear he may be toppled: The thought of
Pakistans nuclear weapons falling into the hands of Islamist extremists
is the stuff of Western politicians nightmare.
Now the US has to be wary about being seen to be supporting a
dictator who is against democracy especially considering its vocal support
for democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US is now trying to put pressure
on its ally to pull back from the brink.
With an apparent eye to his standing abroad, Musharraf met with
foreign diplomats on Monday in an attempt to justify his actions. But reports
suggest the diplomats were unimpressed by Musharrafs claims his
emergency rule decree was necessary to fight terrorism. Most observers
believe the move is just a desperate attempt by Musharraf to cling to power.
Commentators writing in Germanys main newspapers on Tuesday
put at least part of the blame for Pakistans sorry state on the US and
contemplate the doomsday scenario of the countrys nuclear weapons falling
into the wrong hands.
The conservative Die Welt writes: Since (the Sept 11, 2001 terror
attacks) Musharraf has been fundamentally linked to the success of the West
in Afghanistan. But the reverse is also true: If Pakistan becomes
ungovernable, the Afghanistan is lost It seems unlikely that Musharraf
will pretend in a few months time that nothing has happened and allow
elections to take place or to accept their result, which will probably not be
in his favour.
But the protests of educated middle classes against the state of
emergency should not be underestimated. Can the West betray those who
stand for democracy? The West has long hoped for a soft landing for the
regime. The state of emergency has not improved the chances of that
Pakistan must be prevented from sliding into chaos.

432

The left-leaning Berliner Zeitung writes: A state of emergency has

been imposed in Pakistan, and normalcy prevails in the country once
again. That may sound cynical. But the military has been openly in power
in the country for well over half of the period since independence
Todays Pakistan with all its problems is the result of yesterdays
American foreign policy. Islamists and the Taliban have the country in their
clutches with their regime of suicide attacks. The border regions with its
many ethnic groups and complicated tribal structures are ungovernable.
The formula Musharraf or democracy is meaningless. It is more
likely that, should Musharraf be deposed, Pakistan would join the list of
failed states with implications for India as well as Afghanistan. Radical
Islamists would perhaps not take over power, but their representatives in the
army and secret services could appropriate the keys to the nuclear weapons
bunkers. That is not a plea on behalf of Musharraf, but a horror scenario
and the rejection of a (US) foreign policy that only knows blind pragmatism
or hypocritical condemnation.
The business daily Handelsbatt writes: Pakistans President Pervez
Musharraf has abandoned his democratic faade and has ousted himself
as a dictator. Is this really a surprise? If we are honest: no. No one seriously
expected that Pakistan would develop into a true democracy under
Musharraf.
The logical consequence (of recent setbacks to democracy in the
Middle East and Pakistan) would be that the West retreats into realpolitik,
instead of demanding the impossible. This applies especially to a
superpower like the United States. Whoever wants to create global policies
has to get his hands dirty once in a while. That may seem reprehensible
and immoral to many. But the alternative would be a retreat into isolation a
path that would also not please a majority of countries in the West.
The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung write: At first
glance, the easiest option would be to withdraw all support from Musharraf
and install a representative successor. But even if this were done, the
successor would suffer from the stigma of having been installed by
foreigners namely, the United States. And not even Musharrafs bitterest
enemies want that.

433

The West cannot rely exclusively on Musharraf in the medium

and long term. But neither can the West drop him, because otherwise
Pakistan complete with its nuclear arsenal would slide into the final
abyss. Direct action is impossible, for a variety of reasons. So in the end, the
only thing that remains is the hope expressed often enough in the case of
Pakistan, albeit in vain that the country is able to summon up sufficient
political self-healing to at least prevent the worst.
Ahmed Rashid in The Guardian wrote: By imposing these draconian
martial law-type measures, President Pervez Musharraf hopes to ensure his
own political survival. But the move is more likely to lead to much greater
political confrontation, protests and larger territorial gains by the extremist
Pakistani Taliban.
General Musharrafs primary aim was to cleanse the Supreme
Court bench. That he has achieved all its judges have been forced to
resign and several, including the Chief Justice, Iftikhar Chaudhry, are under
arrest. The Supreme Court had become a major irritant for military rule, and
was due to rule on a petition whether Gen Musharraf could remain president
for another five years.
Thus the emergencys first target is not the extremists terrorizing
northern Pakistan, but the democratic, secular elite. Dozens of judges,
lawyers and human rights workers have been arrested while more have gone
underground to avoid arrest. Journalists and the media are being targeted and
harassed in an unprecedented manner.
In his actions and his speech to the nation on Saturday night, Gen
Musharraf treated the Supreme Court with absolute contempt a move
that has devastating long-term implications for the ever-widening gulf
between an unaccountable army and a public that wants an independent
judiciary, the rule of law and respect for the Constitution.
Gen Musharraf and the army have once again decided they are
above the law or international obligations, even though his political support
collapsed months ago after four months of non-stop demonstrations by
lawyers, professionals and political parties.
Gen Musharrafs first concern is his own survival rather than
combating the extremists, while the army is deeply demoralized and
unwilling to fight a never-ending war against its countrymen. So we can

434

now expect a flurry of truces and shaky peace deals with the Pakistani
Taliban, which will leave them in place for the time being.
As a sop to the US military, who are living in Pakistan, and possibly
even an al-Qaeda leader or two? For the long term the extremists know that
the Pakistani state has been irretrievably weakened and this is the moment to
push home their offensive.
The dramatic lack of public support for Gen Musharraf will mean
that his rule, and the emergency, is unsustainable for long, and could
trigger even worse political chaos. The West has a vital stake in seeing
stability in Pakistan, but so far its response has been too tepid to make a
difference to the generals.
The Times observed: General Musharrafs insistence on retaining his
uniform while standing for re-election was taken by the Chief Justice,
Iftikhar Chaudhry, as a challenge to the Constitution. His opposition, and illjudged dismissal, helped to turn much of the judiciary against the President,
goading many lawyers into an appropriate role as a self-appointed
opposition. The emergency declaration was thus intended to pre-empt a
ruling of the Supreme Court that would have annulled the Presidents reelection on October 6.
General Musharraf has now sacked seven justices and stacked the
benches with new judges. This paves the way for a judicial endorsement
of his election, which in turn, would allow him to reopen talks with Ms
Bhutto, end of the controls on Pakistans courageous media and hold
parliamentary elections in January. There is a clear path out of this mess and
he should take it. Indeed, although to constitutional purists it still looks like
a fudge, it is by the best way to restore stability and reassure Pakistans
friends abroad.
Britain and America have been embarrassed by a step that looks
like and anti-democratic coup. Neither country is ready to break with a
leader who has played a vital role in the struggle against extremists, in
ending Pakistans pointless feud with India and in cracking down on
jihadists schools and centers of exporting terrorism. In truth also, there is no
immediate alternative to President Musharraf, nor is the stabilizing of the
crucial border with Afghanistan possible without him. While restraint is
being exercised on all sides, he must swiftly start outlining a return to the
rule of democracy and law.
435

Stanley Kurtz opined: The danger is that varying shades of

Islamist opinion in all sectors of society will coalesce. Ziaul Haq, who like
Musharraf, once ruled Pakistan militarily for years, was himself an Islamist
sympathizer. Pakistans military takes most of its recruits from Punjab but
also from the Pashtun northwest (that is, from tribal areas now controlled by
the Taliban.
If the jihadists fail to use the emergency as an opportunity to widen
the incipient civil war that in itself will tell us something important about
their limitations. On the other hand, holding back from a major offensive
while Musharraf is pre-occupied with his democratic opposition might
actually allow Osama to consolidate a permanent sanctuary in the tribal
regions. Come to think of it, that could be the cagiest move of all.
No one really knows whats about to happen in Pakistan. The
possibilities are many, and laying out scenario is more likely to help us make
sense of what eventually does happen than to precisely predict it. Yet I fear
we may soon be looking at something more than a replay of Pakistani
politics past. The real jihad may be just about to begin.
Con Coughlin wrote: It is never a clever idea to upset the worlds
leading superpower, particularly when you are supposed to be a key ally
fighting a common enemy General Musharraf should be under no illusion
about the anger he has provoked within the Bush Administration over the
decision to impose martial law and round up hundreds of political activists.
Gen Musharraf has a reputation for living dangerously, and by
ignoring Washingtons advice and in effect staging a coup against himself,
he has incurred Americas wrath. The mounting political instability in
Pakistan has been worrying Washington policy-makers since the summer,
when Gen Musharraf ordered the army to end the siege of Islamabads Red
Mosque, which had been seized by Islamic militants.
Pakistan, it should be remembered, is the father of the Islamic
atom bomb and, given its proximity to Iran, and its murky history of
cooperation on Irans nuclear programme, the prospect of Pakistans nuclear
arsenal falling under the control of Islamic fundamentalists is truly
alarming.
Gen Musharraf will no doubt argue that by imposing martial law,
he is curtailing the activities of Pakistans militant Islamists But when

436

Gen Musharraf first intimated to America and Britain last month that he was
considering such a drastic course of action, he was told that what
Washington and London really wanted to see was the return of Pakistans
democratic process, starting with the national elections scheduled for
January.
Immediately after the martial law declaration, there were mutterings
that the State Department might withhold the billions of dollars in aid that
goes to support Gen Musharrafs regime each year. But as most of the
money is used to equip the Pakistani military, such action would be selfdefeating Nor is there any great confidence in the West that restoring
democracy will necessarily lead to greater political stability.
Democratic government in Pakistan has chequered history, and both
Miss Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, the other opposition leader who was
unceremoniously deported to Saudi Arabia by Gen Musharraf on his return
to Pakistan in September, had their respective terms of office as prime
minister curtailed amid allegations of corruption and unbecoming
constitutional conduct. Gen Musharraf might be forgiven for thinking that
he outwitted the Americans because Washington needs him as an ally to
defeat the Islamic terrorism.
Richard Bulliet said: In a classic Mexican standoff, groups of
enemies point their guns at each other, but no one fires because no one
knows who will win. The coming days and weeks will tell whether
Musharraf has just fired the first shot, and there is little the United States
can do but wring its hands and watch.
A Musharraf tactical victory will further fray the threadbare
fabric of Pakistani democracy and set the scene for ongoing protests and
disorder. A reversal of the measures he has announced may please the
democracy crowd, but exhaust the patience of others. Pro-democracy
agitation and/or aggressive intervention will spread the sort of disorder that
favours Muslim militancy and sap the determination needed to control
terrorist activities on the frontier.
The worst scenario imaginable visualizes a Taliban-like movement
wreaking havoc in the streets and somehow getting its hands on a nuclear
weapon, or even on the presidential palace itself. And this is a country that
with a population half the size of that of the United States is far too large
for the Iraq-depleted American forces to attack.
437

The immediate peril of an imploding Pakistan will not drive talk of

war with Iran from the presidential debate in the United States. The Bush
Administration has proven again and again that it holds all the cards in
telling Americans whom to be afraid of. But in the real world where people
demonstrate and die, todays Pakistan is surely a far greater threat to
American interests than tomorrows Iran.
Gary Leupp wrote: I think the New York Times has this one right:
For more than five months the United States has been trying to orchestrate a
political transition in Pakistan that would manage to somehow keep Gen
Pervez Musharraf in power without making a mockery of President Bushs
promotion of democracy in the Muslim World. On Saturday, those carefully
laid plans fell apart spectacularly.
Washington forced Musharraf into his present position. Hes the
leader of a nation in which the Talibans presence and popularity grows. This
results from no fault of his own but as a result of the regime change
exercise in Afghanistan six years ago and its failure to destroy either the
Taliban or al-Qaeda. Hes the leader of a nation in which Osama bin Ladens
popularity is far greater than his own.
The US State Department, having reportedly discouraged Musharraf
from declaring martial law in the past, pronounces itself deeply disturbed
by the extra-constitutional actions he has taken. Maybe the move received
prior authorization from Musharrafs friends in Washington. Quite possibly
the Vice Presidents office has a different reaction from the State
Departments and feels a stronger Musharraf will be a more useful ally when
the missile hit Iran. Surely we will soon see how sincere the US
expressions of support for the Pakistani Constitution and democracy
really are.
King Features Syndicate was of the view that Musharrafs lurch back
toward dictatorship, with the Bush Administrations doctrinaire commitment
to democracy-promotion. It shows how the primal geopolitical instincts,
such as simple fear of the unknown (who would replace Musharraf if he
fell?), necessarily trump a preference for the ballot box.
Musharraf has been touted as one of President Bushs most
important ally in the war on terror, but he has made mockery of the youreeither-with-us-or-against-us polarity of the Bush Doctrine. Like other

438

nettlesome US ally, Saudi Arabia Thus, Bushs black-and-white principle

founders in a morass of gray.
As a general matter democrats are likelier to be friendly to the
United States. Even in the particular case of Pakistan, the administration
was right to push Musharraf to open up the political system and reach out to
the secular opposition. He is basically being asked to wage a tough, bloody
civil war against Islamic extremists entrenched in the northwest of the
country. Without broad political support, the fight will be unsustainable.
Already, the army has been eagerly surrendering to, rather than battling,
extremists.
Pakistan is a microcosm of the difficulties of establishing liberal
democracy in the greater Middle East. Its institutions except for the army
are weak, its politics traditionally have been clan-based, and it is riven by
ethnic divisions. This is the worst possible starting point for establishing a
true transitional democracy, but is basically the same cultural material we
have to work with in Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority.
This is the reason that the Bush Administrations Middle East policy
so often has sunk to abject hopelessness. There is always a chance that key
local players your Malikis and Musharrafs will act responsibly and in
the interest of greater political openness, but old habits usually triumph
over hope.
Our ability to dictate their political development was always
going to be limited. Something for Bush to contemplate as he watches an
ally he has done so much to support string barbed wire up around his
Supreme Court and jail political opponents.
Maureen Dowd expressed his views in lighter vein. Condi was very
worried about Musharraf suspending the Constitution, but Vice says
Constitutions are sissies. He doesnt see anything wrong with
Musharrafs press blackout. He thinks we can learn a few lessons from
him.
Vice says if we had someone decisive like Musharraf in Iraq instead
of those floppy Iranian puppets we put in power, wed be a lot better off. All
who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will
ignore your oppression and excuse your oppressors. When you stand for
your liberty, we will stand with you.

439

The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know:

To serve your people you must learn to mistrust them. Stop your journey of
progress and justice, and America will not only walk at your side, well give
you billions of dollars and lots of big-ticket stuff, like F-16s no strings
attached. And well take you at your word that you have no intention of
using them against India.
Jane Perlez, Helene Cooper and Salman Masood opined: The move
appeared to be an effort by General Musharraf to reassert his fading
power in the face of growing opposition from the countrys Supreme Court,
civilian political parties and hard-line Islamists. Supreme Court had been
expected to rule within days on the legality of General Musharrafs reelection last month as the countrys president, which Opposition groups have
said was improper.
After Pakistani news stations began reporting rumours of an
emergency declaration, independent and international television news
stations abruptly went blank in the capital, just after 5:30pm. Soon after
dozens of police officers surrounded the Supreme Court building, with
justices still inside, as well as the chief justices home. Later, they blocked
the main roads in the capital, surrounded some independent television
stations and disconnected phone service to the justices homes.
Seven of the courts 11 justices who were inside the court rejected
the order, according to an aide to Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad
Chaudhry. The justices called the order unlawfull and urged military
officials to not abide by it. By 9:00pm, Chief Justice Chaudhry and the other
justices had gone to their homes, where they were surrounded by police
officers. The police blocked journalists from entering the area.
Analysts said the emergency-rule decree was a blatant effort by
General Musharraf to use the specter of terrorism to prolong his hold on
power. The order, in effect, was the declaring of martial law, because there
were no constitutional provisions allowing for such an order.
Senator Enver Baig, a leading member of Ms Bhuttos party, stood in
front of the countrys Supreme Court building and called on the United
States and its allies to rein in General Musharraf. The only answer to all
these problems is a fair election and a civilian government, he said.

440

Musharraf earned a distinction by twice clamping the military rule in

Pakistan. The second Martial Law has been quite unique because it was a
coup against forces which threatened his rule. The real sufferers of this
act were people of Pakistan; hence the need to know their views.
The Nation called it a Draconian step. It is obvious that General had
enough of what can be considered as meddlesome Supreme Court. The
decision came at a time when he was awaiting a Supreme Court verdict
on the petitions challenging his candidature for presidency. The move
however did not come as a surprise
As reaction from mainstream opposition parties has not yet come, the
Supreme Court Bar Association in its emergency meeting decided to defy
the extra-judicial and extra-constitutional measures taken by the
government. SCBA President Mr Aitzaz Ahsan has been detained. Legal
experts however keep grappling to find an answer to some important
questions. Can Chief of the Army Staff proclaim a state of emergency? And
can assemblies continue to function when the Constitution has been held in
abeyance? Is it not a virtual martial law?
General Musharraf may have to do a lot of explaining on all these
issues. But he has sent the country into a tailspin just to save his job as
president by a process which the apex court was widely believed to declare
as ultra vires. The move came at a time when he was under immense
domestic and foreign pressure to expedite the process of the countrys
transition to democracy. This government having lost its focus on crucial
issues should not ignore the serious consequences of the extraconstitutional measure it has finally resorted to.
Next day, the newspaper added: The proclamation of emergency
contained a long charge sheet against the superior judiciary blaming
some of its members for working at cross-purposes with his government and
the legislature in the fight against terrorism and extremism.
But whatever justification he gives, the drastic action he has taken is
being viewed as an attempt at reasserting his waning authority. The move,
which came less than two weeks before the expiry of his term as President,
and at a time when he was awaiting a Supreme Court verdict on the petitions
challenging his candidature was met with strong condemnation at home
and from the international community.

441

The assertion that the country would be governed, as nearly as

may, in accordance with the Constitution is hardly convincing
especially when seven of the articles related to fundamental rights would
remain suspended and the president been empowered to amend the
document as is deemed expedient.
There would be few takers for the view that the judiciarys
interference in the functioning of the executive has weakened the writ of the
state and demoralized the security agencies, which are fast losing their
efficacy to fight extremism. Judicial activism may not be condoned. But then
the courts are the only effective check on the executive when it is not
performing its basic responsibility of providing protection to the citizens
against excesses committed by the coercive state apparatus.
General Musharraf said that his guiding principle had always been
Pakistan first and that he was sure that the whole nation thought on the same
pattern. But one would like to take issue with him when he says so. The
authoritarian move that has led to the dismissal of the Chief Justice of
Pakistan and imposed restrictions on the media, might further push the
country towards instability.
The newspaper especially criticized the clamping of media. The pity
in the imposition of emergency with its restrictive ordinances so far as they
impinge on the freedom of expression is that one of the principal symbol of
democratic governance a vibrant, independent media the regime would
flaunt as unprecedented in the history of Pakistan has been removed with a
single stroke. As has turned out, the freedom was a temporary faade put up
to hide the governments real credentials, and the moment it felt that the
media had become too critical of its policies and that this attitude constituted
a threat to replace it with a truly democratic order, it was summarily
withdrawn.
As a rule, newspapers and TV channels in the country have tried to
present before the public both sides of the coin: op-ed columns containing
views for and against the government have appeared on the same pages, and
anchor-persons have interviewed official representatives and as well as
opposition leaders in the same programmes. The curbs imposed on the
media would in no way serve the countrys long-term interests.
In another editorial the newspaper added: The imposition of
emergency has been greeted with glee by a shortsighted ruling alliance
442

while there is resentment against it throughout the country. The

postponement of elections is likely to add to the public anger. What is more,
it would expose the claims that the country is preparing to enter the final
stage of a full-fledged democratic order.
The reckless way the administration machinery is being used to
settle dissent will only add fuel to fire. Protests over the last two days
indicate that there is little likelihood of the bar, the media and civil society
accepting curbs on the freedoms gained through decades of struggle. With
political uncertainty caused by social turmoil continuing to deepen,
investments are likely to fall and trade and industry suffer
On 6th November, The Nation wrote: A massive crackdown leading to
the arrest of opposition politicians, members of the legal fraternity and
human rights activists followed a brutal police action on lawyers, who were
protesting against the imposition of emergency across the country on
Monday. Police stormed the Lahore and Karachi High Court premises,
lobbed teargas shells and baton charged the demonstrators to prevent them
from coming on the roads, if they had come in the first place. Lahore
witnessed the worst police action since the recent judicial crisis.
While the legal fraternity has once again taken a lead in holding
rallies, major opposition parties seem to be disturbingly inactive in the
whole process. PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto remained non-committal,
except for paying lip-service by terming the imposition of emergency and
PCO yet another martial law and demanding reversal of the decision
Despite the demand from other opposition parties to launch a joint struggle
for the restoration of democracy she has not so far given any call to her own
party workers. She may or may not give a call for protest, but the critics
must know that Zulfikar Ali Bhuttos daughter would never like
independent judiciary and media.
This will only strengthen the perception that she has returned home
under some arrangement with the powers that be rather than to join hands
with the rest of the opposition to ensure the countrys return to civilian rule,
as reported by some foreign channels on her arrival in Karachi. But she
needs to be reminded that any attempt at drawing personal gains will
further push the country towards instability.
Next it took on the US. Not much effort is required, as one goes
through the criticism of General Musharrafs imposition of emergency that
443

has come out of Washington, to sense that it is more of rhetoric than

rebuke. President Bushs observations urging President Musharraf to
restore democracy as quickly as possiblewe expect there to be elections
as soon as possible and that the president should remove the military
uniform hardly carry the stamp of real criticism. That is particularly so
when Mr Bush juxtaposed his statement with the remark, all we can do is to
continue to work with the president as well as others in the Pak government
to make it abundantly clear the position of the United States, something that
is more or less suggestive of helplessness in the situation.
There is also little chance of any substantial cut in American aid,
despite Secretary of State Condoleezza Rices remark that the US was going
to review aid. Defence Secretary Roberts Gates, who is currently in Beijing,
pointed out that the US wanted to be mindful of the fact that Pakistan
continues to be an extremely important ally in the war on terror. There are
reports about the suspension of the US-Pakistan defence talks scheduled to
be held soon, but it is doubtful whether this would be for all that long.
No doubt, the war on terror ranks at the top of the US foreign policy
agenda for which it feels justified in making compromises. But the issue of
democracy for 160 million people whose support it would gain by putting
pressure on the president to enforce it, is a matter of extreme importance
for their future.
On 8th November, The Nation commented on regimes plans for
further clipping of judiciary. The latest observation by Attorney General
Malik Mohammad Qayyum is bound to exacerbate the crisis triggered by the
promulgation of emergency and issuance of the PCO that led to the
dismissal of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and detention of
many other members of the superior judiciary. Talking to newsmen in
Islamabad on Wednesday the Attorney General confirmed that the
government had decided to reduce the number of judges in the Supreme
Court from 19 to 12 and in High Courts to 20. In fact, as long as Musharraf
acts as supreme judge, there is no need to have the institution of superior
judiciary.
There would be few takers for Qayyums assertion that a
reduction in the number of judges would not affect the performance of
the superior judiciary since much of its time was being wasted in undue
cases. The Attorney General should have elaborated which cases he was
referring to. If it was about the courts taking suo moto action, then it should
444

not be ignored that the judiciary is well within its rights to do so when the
executive is not fulfilling its primary responsibility of providing protection
to the citizens.
Considering the current situation where the government is being
perceived as trying to suppress the judiciary the move is likely to add fuel
to the fire. A strong reaction is likely to come from the legal fraternity,
which is already protesting against the draconian decisions the government
has recently resorted to. Those in power would be well-advised to review
their decision as it would create problem for the courts to clear a huge
backlog of cases.
Nadeem Syed observed: President Musharrafs late night speech on
Saturday after proclamation of emergency and PCO was sufficient to
understand the mindset behind the whole exercise. The move is nothing
short of a gamble of lifetime he played once again, if we recall the
resistance the lawyers, political activists and members of civil society put up
when he sacked Chief Justice Iftikhar Ch. This time he sacked several
judges, rather all of them who opted not to take oath under the new PCO.
The mood of lawyers and political leadership whether they take up cudgels
against President Musharraf will be clear sooner rather than later. But
through the enforcement of PCO the President has made his intentions, loud
and clear he and his aides wanted to see the back of all judges who hauled
them over the coals in recent times and henceforth they do not cause any
irritant in the way of their scheme of things.
This is the time period in which the Executive-Judiciary relations
touched rock bottom. Even President Musharrafs own survival was at
stake with the government smelling something foul coming out of the
SC on the eligibility of President to contest presidential election. With the
proclamation of PCO and fresh oaths taken by the judges, it seemed the
government was visibly relieved. According to one report in the print Prime
Minister Shaukat Aziz distributed sweets.
The PCO seems to be a move seen as more judiciary and media
specific the President blamed judiciary for not only hampering the smooth
governance, but also in implementation of his political agenda, which he
cherished since taking over in 1999.
President Musharraf while disabling the judiciary left his political
agenda untouched. He made it clear that everything will continue to
445

function as normal, the assemblies, the governments in centre and provinces.

Probably, he did not want to open up too many fronts at a time. But he did
not mention anything about the future elections in the country in his speech
whether they will be held on time or as per different reports will be
delayed for a year.
The smooth transition towards democracy is a call he cannot
ignore given the stakes of both internal and external forces, especially when
the US and Europe did not approve the idea of emergency or PCO in
Pakistan at a time when elections were only a couple of months far. With the
enforcement of emergency and PCO now Musharraf is expected to make
mammoth decisions in days to come.
The question is whether the lawyers together with political
leadership allow Musharraf to get away with PCO and emergency? Last
time when he sacked the Chief Justice, the lawyers turned out to be a
nightmare for the government. They brought the whole government to
standstill for months with their massive rallies and strong showing in the
street till the time they got him restored in the exalted office.
Return of Benazir has raised many eyebrows in the political
circles cutting short her visit to Dubai, dashing back, the night the President
clamped emergency The reports are that government has sent a highpowered delegation to her place immediately after her arrival in Karachi to
take her into confidence. A renewed bid at reconciliation could be seen
between the government and PPP in days to come.
Muhammad Sami from Khuzdar was of the view that regimes
crackdown would fail in controlling the violence. At the end of the day, the
whole responsibility for the present spate of violence rests on the shoulders
of those individuals or groups who use the states power blindly, brutally and
indiscriminately in order to linger their de facto rule. This state-sponsored
violence has eventually been producing the violent suicidal minds. Until
and unless the political, economic and cultural issues of the masses are
addressed in purely democratic way rather than in a controlled style, suicidal
attacks will continue.
Dr Faisal Bari opined: If all this was not enough to complicate the
current picture for us and make our future unpredictable and uncertain, we
are also in a situation of the state or society, and very few individuals even,
command any respect from the trust of the people of Pakistan.
446

Institutions created to ensure law and order in the society, the police, the
intelligence agencies, the NABs of Pakistan and so on, are the ones that are
among the principal accused after any bomb explosion. The guardians of
public interest, the politicians and bureaucrats, are seen as morally,
ideologically and financially corrupt.
The media, though relied on for news, is not taken to be as an
objective and disinterested party. The courts are, at best, seen as ineffective.
The wearers of uniforms stand discredited, and now even the custodians of
religion, the supposed spiritual guardians, stand exposed. If any institution
or grouping starts to take shape in a way that is perceived to be a threat to
existing institutions and groupings, say the lawyers outburst over the last
few months, other institutions do their best to undermine the new grouping
before it can become a real threat. Where will predictability come from in
this environment, and where will the impetus for change come from?
The next few years look to be those of turmoil and struggle for
Pakistan. But this is not new for most Pakistanis. It has been a sixty year
struggle for the non-elites in Pakistan, the majority of Pakistan in fact. But
the coming years are going to take the struggle to the elites as well. At the
same time, it seems, there are few well-springs of hope that one could look
towards.
Husain Haqqani wrote: While effectively placing Pakistan under
martial law (though the government calls it to be an emergency) last
weekend, General Pervez Musharraf used words similar to those used by
another military ruler, General Yahya Khan, when he ordered the 1971
crackdown against civilians in erstwhile East Pakistan. Musharraf said that
he had imposed martial law for the good of Pakistan and to preserve the
unity of Pakistan the exact words used by Yahya Khan thirty-six years
ago.
Like Yahya Khan he insisted that the country faced a critical and
dangerous situation and argued that extremists are becoming confident and
security forces demoralized. And as if quoting directly from Yahya Khan,
Musharraf said: It would have been suicidal not to act.
For those who remember Pakistani history, Yahya Khans decision to
ignore the results of the December 1970 elections and instead to use force
against popular political forces led, nine months later, to the transformation
of East Pakistan into the independent state of Bangladesh. Things might not
447

turn that dire this time around but Musharraf has risked dividing an
already polarized nation further.
In the past Pakistans generals have suspended the Constitution to
remove from power unpopular rulers, usually weakened civilians who have
previously been discredited by the propaganda machine of Pakistans
ubiquitous intelligence agencies. This is the first time an unpopular military
ruler has suspended the Constitution to save his position.
It is apparent to most people that the Generals action was motivated
by his desire to keep himself and his civilian cronies in power and had little
to do with saving Pakistan from terrorism or internal chaos. If the
Musharrafs position was not threatened by the prospects of an adverse
Supreme Court judgment against him holding the dual offices of president
and chief of army staff, he would most likely not have acted.
Ironically, Musharraf has turned to the army and his position as army
chief to bail him out of a crisis created by the bad advice of his civilian
advisers. Even now, the virtual imposition of martial law appears aimed at
protecting the interests of the unelectable Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and
the Kings Party, Pakistan Muslim League (PML-Q).
But for the president the weakness of his argument hardly matters.
His actions reflect the calculation that he can get away with anything as
long as the Pakistan Army remains behind him. The General also seems to
assume that the international community would not go beyond ritual
condemnation of his decision.
Pakistan is being described by some around the world as the most
dangerous country on earth. That characterization can be contested by
Pakistanis only if Pakistan moves along the path of certainty. A sudden
suspension of the Constitution, and images of mistreatment of judges and
lawyers, adds to the doubts already being expressed about Pakistans
future.
Aziz-ud-Din Ahmad observed: The anti-Musharraf movement is
likely to turn into an anti-US agitation unless Washington moves beyond
what is widely seen to be more than huffing and puffing. What it needs to do
is to match words with action to force the General to reverse the antidemocratic measures he has taken.

448

The General is used to routine criticism not followed by

meaningful action and cares little for it. While off and on criticizing him for
not fully cooperating in the suppression of the Taliban and the al-Qaeda,
Washington has nearly always looked the other way as he took measures that
violated normal democratic principles or human rights.
So far none of the Western democracies has gone beyond urging
and pleading. None has announced any strong action. The EU has only
created noises. Britain has requested him to doff the uniform. The
announcement of Washington of the suspension of defence parleys, rather
than their cancellation, is an empty threat and would scare none particularly
when followed by statements like Pakistan is a country of strategic great
importance to US and a key partner in the war on terror, and that too from
Defence Secretary
The General had proclaimed emergency on the excuse that abnormal
measures were needed to fight terrorism. He had accused the SC of releasing
certain extremists connected with the Lal Masjid. While dismissing the CJ
and a number of other judges and putting them under detention, he
reinstated two judges who had actually freed the alleged extremists.
Those who are being beaten up and arrested for staging protests
against emergency are neither extremists nor terrorists. They include
practicing lawyers, former judges and prominent human rights activists.
They advocate rule of law, oppose violence and terrorism
In case the US continues to give preference to security over
democracy, it will end up having neither With American popularity on
the decrease, political parties seen to be pro-US, like the PPP, are losing
ground. The incident in Lahore High Court on Tuesday wherein two
prominent PPP leaders were stopped from addressing the lawyers and shoed
out the meeting hall indicates the turn things are taking.

REVIEW

449

At last, the brave commando delivered the knockout punch and sent
the Team-Wig reeling. The bully had come true to his words, for a change. It
was a great victory and Shaukat Aziz had reasons to celebrate by
distributing sweets amongst the staff of prime ministers house. He set an
example for the uniform-obsessed politicians how to rejoice over imposition
of martial law.
Before clearing the scene of knocked out members of Team-Wig the
judges, who had stepped on to the side of the Team-Helmet, were sworn-in.
Two of the three judges who took oath along with the new CJP were those
who were seen enjoying a feast with Sharifuddin some months back.
The occasion of swearing in lacked the usual pomp and grace and
instead signs of shame were quite visible on the faces of the participants.
There was however an exception; Ijazul Haq had a smile on his face, or was
it to do something with Papas denture?
Musharraf claimed that delivering of the knockout punch had become
necessary because of the recent spread of terrorism. Therefore, the first
target he chose was the terrorist-in-chief, who happened to be the Chief
Justice of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
In his address to the nation Musharraf justified his extra-constitutional
act on the pretext of deteriorated law and order situation and rampant suicide
bombings. By delivering a punch below the belt, he knocked out three major
terrorists which had been terrorizing his regime. The CJP and the judges of
his ilk in Supreme Court and High Courts were sent packing; leaders of the
Bar who led the troublesome lawyers community were captured; the door
was shut in the face of the noisy channels of electronic media.
Three developments inside the apex court forced the cornered dictator
to resort to foul play; one, the punishment awarded to senior police officials
by the bench headed by Justice Bhagwandas; two, naming of the Prime
Minister as the main accused in the contempt case by foreign secretary and
CJPs desire to call him; last but not the least, getting the clue about
impending unfavourable verdict on Musharrafs eligibility for presidency.
Musharraf and his cronies reached the conclusion that illegal perpetuation of
his rule could not be saved by mere intimidation of the apex court. Threat
must materialize as he could no more survive through fair-play.

450

Under the provisions of the Constitution the emergency rule can be

proclaimed by the president, Musharraf who holds two offices decided to do
it as COAS. The reason to resort to this unique imposition of emergency rule
by the General was quite clear; the Constitution does not permit the kind of
emergency he has imposed. It is Martial Law, not an emergency rule as
envisaged in the Constitution.
By resorting to this course he tried fooling the world that there was
still a civilian rule in Pakistan. To this end he included quite few funny
measures in the PCO; a concoction of MLO. For example, the assemblies
would continue functioning, but the Constitution under which these came
into the existence was held in abeyance.
Nevertheless, it was quite clear to everyone that by imposing the
concealed martial law he has blocked the dispensation of justice. His
pointing towards the punishment awarded to senior police and civil officials
and alleging that the court order had adversely affected the efficiency of law
enforcing agencies amply proved that they, like many others, had been
acting under the direction of the brave commando.
Apparently, Team-Helmet has scored a great victory. Politically, it is
great victory because the regime defeated all those forces in one blow
which threatened perpetuation of the Musharrafs rule. As regards victory in
war on terror, all the top terrorists were hauled up in a massive crackdown,
which have been operating in the guise of political opponents, bench, bar,
journalists and human rights activists.
The battle has been won, but the war on either front has not yet ended.
This victory of the regime should also be viewed from a different angle. The
proclamation of emergency in itself is an acceptance of defeat by the regime
as it was convinced that it could not win through fair play under the existing
rules of the game.
In a contest in any walk of life a mean player when pushed on to the
back foot and brought to the verge of defeat cannot resist resorting to foul
play; Musharrafs move is proof of it, if there was any need to have one. He
framed new rules and shifted the goal posts by promulgating the draconian
PCO.
Musharraf has undoubtedly won a victory against the Chief Justice of
Pakistan. But he as a soldier must know that all the fallen soldiers cannot be

451

taken as defeated. Historians would be the ultimate judges in this case; they
might place the knocked-out CJP on the victory stand and there were
plenty of reasons to do so.
By resorting to foul play, Musharraf has caused grievous hurt if not
completely knocked out to his own doctrine of Enlightened Moderation,
transition to democracy, and above all the faith of Pakistanis in the entire
system of justice. In fact, it is a coup against the system of justice.
He also set a dangerous precedence by the manner in which he
overran all civilian institutions of the state. In future any general, who
harbours slightest lust for power, would follow this precedence believing
that he would encounter no problem in toppling any civilian regime.
It would not be fair to blame Musharraf or the Army for all the wrongs
committed by the regime. Majority of the politicians abetted and aided
Musharraf in commission of these crimes; those in power did it by consent
and the opposition parties aided by complacence or by design.
Political leaders in the opposition, with odd exceptions, fall into two
categories when sifted according to popular phrase in vogue: Moll pao ya
matti pao. Benazir and Maulana Fazlur Rahman belong to moll pao category
and the rest are matti pao brand. It was no surprise that in initial thrust of the
crackdown no leader belonging to moll pao category was arrested.
Benazir first executed a clean-break and went to Dubai and on second
thought she rushed back to share the spoils. Some observers were right in
stretching their imagination and suspecting that what Musharraf did on 3 rd
November was done after taking Benazir and the Crusaders into confidence.
But, Mushy-Pinky marriage of convenience would not be quite
convenient in the presence of so many media peepers observing and
reporting obscene reconciliatory acts and so many political analysts ready to
pass judgments on illegality of the marriage of convenience.
In the wake of the issues of legality and morality, the Mushy-Pinky
honeymoon wont be pleasant. In fact, both of them are mis-match even to
make an odd couple, despite having quite a few common traits. She will
make things difficult for him; accompanied or not accompanied.
There is, however, a brighter aspect in the gloom that has engulfed the
nation with the knocking out of the judiciary. Of late, the politicians had
452

started using the pro-active judiciary as crutches. Musharraf has now

snatched these crutches, therefore, the opposition parties have been left with
no option but to stand and walk on their feet.
In his briefing to the foreign diplomats Musharraf emphasized that
emergency rule was necessary to take hold of judiciary and media involved
in aiding and abetting the terrorism. This blatantly lie was necessary to win
favours the United States which is at war against Islamic fascism. The
Crusaders must have felt proud of the brave mercenary who dared taking
actions which even Bush and Blair could not take in their respective
countries, but they were shrewd enough to see the hollowness of his
argument.
Musharrafs overtures/outbursts telling the world that he imposed
emergency to curb increasing terrorism, made it amply clear that he is truly a
worthy disciple of Bush. The US Presidents definition of terrorist is very
simple; anybody threatening or contemplating to threaten American interests
is a terrorist. Musharraf has made it even simpler; anyone who criticizes him
is a terrorist.
Therefore, he kept crying hoarse in blaming some judges of the
judiciary for promoting terrorism through their orders to release captured
terrorists. He seemed to be convinced that his backer, Bush, would agree
with him that any system of justice which creates obstacles in the ongoing
war on terror in ought to be eliminated.
Quite ironically the people released by the Supreme Court were the
same whose presence in the illegal custody of intelligence agencies was out
rightly denied by Musharraf more than once. According to the forthright
General they had left their homes on their own accord to wage jihad.
Another astonishing coincidence was that when Bushs mercenary came into
action against presumed terrorists, Baitullah released 213 soldiers held by
him since mid August.
Despite the hollowness of Musharrafs claims, the Crusaders still
prefer to stick with him, primarily due to absence of the choice. The attitude
of White House has once again confirmed that America is not the friend of
the people of Pakistan, but of a man who has been serving their interests
remarkably well.

453

As regards Western media and analysts, when they saw the signs of
chaos they gleefully stared at nuclear assets of Pakistan. There was hardly
any one who did not express his concern about possibility of these
weapons falling into the hands of Islamic extremists; why? The answer is
too obvious.
8th November 2007

454

PEACEMAKER MERCENARY - III

The frontline mercenary of the Crusaders, Musharraf, found the going
hard in war against Islamic fascists inhabiting the tribal areas of Pakistan.
True to his habit of passing the buck, on 12th October, he accused the
battalion commander of the Baluch Regiment of acting unprofessionally,
which led to the capture of well over two hundred soldiers in South
Waziristan.
He preferred to tell yet another lie to cover up the real cause of the
capture of the soldiers in mass. He lacked the moral courage to accept that
many in rank and file of Pakistan Army were not prepared to kill their own
brethrens for few dollars. Nevertheless, the newly selected VCOAS, Gen
Kiani vowed to continue war on terror despite having many unprofessional
officers and soldiers under his command.
On the eastern front, Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh said
India was waiting for the situation in Pakistan to settle down. The docilelooking Sardarji was cheeky enough to pinch the bottoms of the brave
commando. Only a couple days earlier the naughty Sardar had told Bush that
India was not ready for nuclear deal.
At home, the regime remained preoccupied because of the happenings
in the courts and political arena which have been covered separately.
However, the nationalists movement kept simmering in Baluchistan and
Operation Silence also kept echoing.

WESTERN FRONT
Fighting for the peace of the Crusaders in occupation of Afghanistan
continued. Air Force warplanes were used in Waziristan on third consecutive
day bringing the death toll of tribesmen to more than 250. On 9 th October,
the residents started fleeing Mirali and nearby villages. The regime rejected
the appeal for ceasefire. Gen Mirza Aslam Beg said casualties in Waziristan
were much higher and urged the regime to withdraw troops and resolve the
issue through talks. In Peshawar, 25 people were wounded in bomb blast.

455

Tension prevailed in Mirali as 60 of the victims of air strike, including

women and children, were buried on 10th October. Four policemen were
wounded and 11 CD shops were destroyed in an explosion in Kohat. A
driver was wounded when a vehicle carrying female staff of an NGO was
fired upon near Mansehra on 10th October.
On 11th October, DG ISPR claimed than 50 foreigners were among
those killed in the ongoing bombing and strafing in North Waziristan. He
also claimed that operation was necessary to create conducive atmosphere
for dialogue. Jamaat alleged that NATO was supervising the ongoing
operation. ANP called for halt to military action.
Tribesmen in South Waziristan alleged that the government wasnt
serious about the release of troops. Militants killed six criminals in
Mohmand Agency. Rocket was fired at Shabqadar bazaar. CD shops in
Karak were attacked.
On 12th October, masked militants beheaded six criminals near
Ghalanai, who were captured in a clash in which five Taliban had been
killed. In Swat, Maulana Fazlullahs men flogged three criminals in public
after the shura found them guilty of kidnapping two women. Amir of
Tablighee Jamaat was killed and others wounded when they came under fire
from a military convoy. A blast caused damage to a police station near
Kohat. Next day, four people were killed by militants in an ambush in Swat.
Ulema and elders continued their efforts for ceasefire and lifting of
curfew in Mirali area on 14th October. Next day, two militants were killed in
Waziristan. The regime agreed to remove four posts and lift curfew in
Mirali. On 16th October, five tailoring shops and music centers were blown
up in Mian Mandi Bazaar near Ghalanai. Islamabad criticized the UN over
delay in closure of Afghan refugee camps.
Six FC soldiers were released by the militants on 17 th October. Blast
damaged CD shops in Kohat. At least 15 cell-phone shops were destroyed in
Khar. Musharraf ordered expeditious release of captured soldiers. Ismail
Khan reported that the government has planned a phased operation against
militants in NWFP.
On 19th October, FC soldier was killed and three other wounded in
bomb blast in D I Khan. A man was seriously wounded in a blast in
Peshawar. Next day, two pro-government elders were shot dead in Bajaur. A

456

girls school was blown up in North Waziristan on 21 st October. Militants in

police uniform kidnapped a man in Lakki Marwat. Next day, five militants
were arrested from Gul Kach area north of Zhob town. Barber shop was
destroyed in a blast in Buner. Dawar tribe in North Waziristan raised a
Lashkar to expel foreigners.
On 24th October, soldiers were killed and two wounded in roadside
bombing near Miranshah. Jirga held fresh talks with militants. Two people
were injured in a blast which targeted government officials in Buner.
Massive deployment of troops was carried out in Swat for crackdown
against Maulana Fazlullah. Next day, at least 17 FC soldiers and three
civilians were killed and 34 wounded in a suicide car bombing near Police
Lines in Mingora. Maulana Fazlullah went underground. Naib Imam of Lal
Masjid supported Fazlullah.
On 26th October, 11 people including 7 soldiers were killed in an
encounter which took place as security forces closed on to Imam Dehri
mosque and madrassa. The militants publicly executed four FC men on
Matta-Mingora Road. The militants, while chopping the heads said: Let this
serve as a warning to all those who spy for the government or help the
government. All sons of Bush will meet similar fate. In a major crackdown
in northern Baluchistan the security forces rounded up 430 Afghans and
Uzbeks for entering Pakistan illegally. Two people were arrested while
planting explosives on Bannu-Miranshah Road.
Next day, nine more dead bodies of people killed in crossfire between
security forces and militants were found bringing the toll to thirteen.
Militants attack on Kabal police station was repulsed and sporadic fighting
continued throughout the day. Chief Minister refused to talk with militants;
the government decided to take strong action. JI opposed use of force in
Swat. ANP blamed governments mistakes for lawlessness.
Security forces backed by artillery and Cobra helicopters launched
offensive against militants along Mingora-Kalam Road on 28 th October. Ten
militants were reported killed in Kot and Manglor areas and large number of
people was wounded. Benazir asked terrorists to lay down arms.
Shaukat denied any military operation in Swat; only FC was trying to
restore law and order (with its artillery and gunship helicopters). Jirga was
formed to hold talks with Maulana Fazlullah. Militants in Waziristan
suspended peace talks in protest against Swat operation. ANP blamed
457

agencies for triggering law and order problem in Swat. FC check posts in
Upper Dir were removed. A woman and her two daughters were wounded in
an explosion near Khar. A rocket narrowly missed US Consulate in
Peshawar and police foiled an attempt to attack the airport.
Tension prevailed in Swat despite the truce holding on 29 th October.
Hundreds of people left their homes in troubled area. Two Azeris, a Turk
and two local were arrested while traveling from Bannu to Peshawar.
Pakistan planned and Afghanistan objected to installation of biometric
system at crossing points.
Swat remained calm but tense on 30th October. Dead bodies were
recovered by both sides. All political parties having some influence or
interest in this region helped the jirga to find a peaceful solution. Fazlullahs
men appealed for financial support and at one place the people contributed
Rs1.5m within three hours.
Six people were killed in an explosion in NGO office in Battagram.
Four soldiers were wounded in roadside bombing near Mirali and one was
wounded when five rockets were fired on a convoy. A suicide bomber
walked into a police check post in Rawalpindi Cantt; the explosion killed
seven, including three policemen, and wounded 31 others. Musharraf held a
high-level meeting to discuss security in the wake of Pindi blast. The US
condemned the suicide attack.
Army gunship helicopters operating in pairs hunted militants in Swat
on 31 October; at least 20 people, including Naib of Fazlullah, were killed.
Militants fired rocket at Frontier House in Kabal and snatched ambulances.
Two persons were killed when a shell hit a hotel in Miranshah during a clash
between security forces and militants. The regime complained to the US that
strict controls over supply of equipment were impeding the hunt for Taliban.
st

On 1st November, extensive use of gunship helicopters resulted in

killing of 70 militants in Upper Swat. The militants claimed killing two
government spies, capturing 40 security men and two foreigners suspected
to be Americans, and besieged 80 more. A suicide bomber rammed his motor
cycle into PAF bus in Sargodha; nine people including air force men were
killed and 40 wounded. A powerful blast near Eidgah Miranshah disrupted
the jirga proceedings. Four suspected Taliban were held in Chagai district.
UNHCR suspended repatriation operations.

458

A missile fired from a drone killed ten and wounded 11 tribesmen on

2 November at Danday Darapakhel area in North Waziristan; Pentagon
denied its involvement. Militants in Swat showed 48 captured security
personnel to media before setting them free. Protest was held in front of the
Supreme Court against operation in Swat. Security forces were accused of
bombing civilians.
nd

On 4th November, Baitullah Mahsud ordered release of 213 soldiers in

exchange of his 28 fighters. Next day, Chief Minister ordered re-evaluation
of security plan for Swat and other sensitive areas of NWFP. Security forces
shelled militants positions in Swat. All parties Peace Conference in
Peshawar blamed agencies for Pashtuns bloodshed. One soldier was killed
and another wounded in roadside bombing in Dattakhel area. Two soldiers
were wounded in a similar attack near Cherat. In Lower Kurram, militants
attacked a post and kidnapped five security personnel. SHO was wounded
by militants in Bannu.
Two CD shops were blown up near Mardan on 6 th November. Next
day, Kalam also fell to fighters of Fazlullah. Pakistan flag was removed from
all government buildings in areas in control of Shaheen Commando Force.
Four persons were killed in firing at a van near Terri Mangal in Kurram
Agency. An oil tanker was damaged in a blast in Landi Kotal.
Sixty FC personnel manning a post surrendered to Fazlullahs fighters
on 8 November after negotiations at the level of local commanders. Dead
bodies of three out of four abducted earlier were found in a nullah in North
Waziristan. Several shops were gutted in a blast near Mardan.
th

The pressure on the mercenary was maintained through use of stick

and the carrot. On 9th October, the US termed Pakistan a safe haven for alQaeda. Next day, the US Congress was told that battle against terrorism in
FATA has been lost.
On 22nd October, the US Ambassador handed over 30 helicopters to
Pakistan Army. Next day, Bush sought $60m for the uplift of FATA. On 1 st
November, Commander CENTCOM arrived in Islamabad to discuss
performance of the contractor-in-chief in the US war against on Islamic
fascists.
Next day, the US offered its assistance to Pakistan to counter the
recent spate of suicide attacks and worsening security situation in Swat. JUI-

459

F accused the regime of toeing the US agenda. Six days later, Zalmay
Khalilzad wanted external Taliban sanctuaries eliminated.
The Dawn wrote on the use of fighter planes in tribal areas. Where
one is fighting against a highly motivated and bigoted guerrilla force on
ones own soil, the fighting gets mixed up with a number of political, moral
and ethical issues that defy an easy solution. The government is caught on
the horns of dilemma. If it does not take military action, or does so halfheartedly, it is accused of kowtowing to the religious extremists. If it raises
force level, and there are civilian casualties, it is accused of human rights
violations.
If the air strikes by the security forces kill civilians, the vast majority
of the victims of suicide bombing by the Taliban are civilians, too, (not that
there is a moral equivalence between the two). In spite of the constant
increase in troop level from an initial 50,000 to nearly 100,000 now the
Taliban have not been weakened and are showing renewed vigour.
Let us accept it: the FATA situation is inextricably linked to the war
in Afghanistan, there can be no local FATA peace without there being
normality across the Durand Line It is time Islamabad probed the
possibility of getting in touch with the Talibans moderate wing, if there is
any, and developed a modus vivendi. The government has to keep its
nerve in dealing firmly with the militants as it explores ways and means
to move towards a negotiated settlement.
Ayesha Azfar took exception to Musharrafs utterance about lack of
professionalism. While it may be only too natural to hit out when the chips
are down, surely the target should not include team members without whose
support no degree of success is possible. Gen Musharraf has not yet
relinquished his post of army chief, and it still becomes a man in his
position to publicly criticize those he commands.
To attribute the capture of 200 soldiers in Waziristan by militants to
unprofessional behaviour on the part of the troops may not have been wholly
untrue, and Gen Musharraf is known to be given to plain speaking. But to
say as much on BBC is not only to publicly pass on the buck, it almost
amounts to a betrayal. This is not the first time that Musharraf has passed
the buck; the habit seems to be chronic.

460

Imagine the effect on the morale of the 200, who sit huddled in
Taliban camps, not knowing their fate. Their captors have already made it
clear that the military is not pushed about securing their release. Gen
Musharrafs comments on the troops professionalism would only reinforce
such fears and feelings of being let down even if there is a darker truth
about the manner of their capture that he prefers to conceal.
Last week, experts summoned by the House of Representatives
Armed Services Committee in Washington provided a telling view of the
Pakistan army which, they said, suffered from a weakness of training, a
weakness of equipment, anda weakness of motivation plus low morale.
Add to this the trauma of being made to fight against ones own people, and
it is easy to see why professionalism is lacking, and why desertions, as
reported, are taking place.
Unfortunately, where professionalism is concerned; Gen
Musharrafs own record is poor on this count. Instead of breaking out of
a system where politics and the military have continually merged, he has
chosen to perpetrate it The General, as a leader, has sent out a wrong
message to the army rank and file that politics and military matters are
perfectly compatible. Obviously, this has not helped shape professionalism,
especially at a time when his engagement with power play in civilian matters
has left him little time to focus on his other job.
But to come back to initial point, Gen Musharrafs open criticism of
his troops was in poor taste. Following orders of superior officers, the
soldiers were on a difficult mission in a hostile terrain controlled by an
implacable enemy and among embittered civilians living in a conflict zone
where many are killed.
The battle-hardened Taliban have no qualms about executing
captured soldiers, and the top brass in the military should be concentrating
on these odds. A better target within the military for Gen Musharraf would
have been those who, taking advantage of their ranks and authority, have
indulged in pursuits far removed from defence matters, making millions in
the process. If professionalism is what he wants he should begin by
sorting out those at the top and then make his way down.
The Nation wrote after the release unprofessional soldiers. One
would have wished that the deal had been concluded much earlier, the
soldiers friends and relatives spared of anguishly long wait and the
461

government circles their worry. If MNA Mirajuddins reported statement that

the two sides have agreed to faithfully abide by the Sararogha peace
agreement, the nation can look forward to the return of calm and tranquility
to the tribal region, as the conditions prevailed there before the American
military intervention in Afghanistan.
The newspaper had also commented on the suicide bombings. Two
days after a suicide attack in a high-security area in Rawalpindi, another
suicide bomber rammed his motorbike into a PAF bus, killing at least eight
and wounding 40. The bus was carrying to the air base unsuspecting air
force personnel not directly involved in hostilities. The act is highly
deplorable and it is difficult to find words to condemn it.
There is a likelihood of fingers being pointed towards Maulana
Fazlullah, the militant commander in Swat, this time, the suicide bombing is
likely to be portrayed as an act of revenge for the attacks on militant
hideouts in Swat by gunship helicopters. While this might or might not be
true, it will not help to make accusations stand alone.
The armed forces have in the past enjoyed the trust of the nation
to an extent unimagined in many countries. It was once a common sight to
read slogans like Salute to Pak Army inscribed on the back of private
trucks and buses. There is need by the militarys higher command to
undertake soul searching as to why it no longer enjoys the previous
admiration and prestige.
There is a fairly wide perception that two things have contributed
to the slippage in trust in the armed forces i.e. military takeovers leading
to prolonged rule of army generals and the deployment of troops by them
against sections of the civilian populace. In the interest of stability and peace
on the domestic front and to avert foreign dangers to the countrys integrity,
it is extremely necessary for the armed forces to concentrate on their
professional duties and let politics of the state be managed by those whom
the people give the mandate to rule.
The Dawn wrote on recent escalation of fighting in Swat. Blaming
religious extremists for this carnage is stating the obvious; there are many
who share the responsibility for the violence. Thus there are people like
Maulana Fazlullah, also known as Maulana Radio because of the illegal FM
radio station he runs, who upped the ante in Swat and thus instigated this
violence by turning Islam into fitna public mischief.
462

Commanding a well-armed militia, Fazlullah, a semi-literate man

with obscurantist views, has terrorized the local people of Swat and the
governments writ has virtually ceased to exist. As the NWFP home
secretary and the provincial chief said at a press conference, Fazlullah has
set up a 4,500-strong Shaheen Force and his volunteers run courts. In other
words a parallel government a la Lal Masjid, but on a larger scale, has come
into existence in Swat.
The phrases used by the editor for the Maulana, have become
common to the enlightened sections of the media and intellectuals, which
ooze out monotonously when they write or speak. The semi-literate
Fazlullah, is in fact more literate than many of Pakistans law-makers. He is
obscurantist because he demands imposition of Sharia.
He is accused of terrorizing the people with his Shaheen Force
comprising about 100 volunteers from each village of his area of influence.
His version of terrorism include anti-drug drive, stopping of timber-mafia
activities, punishing women-abductors and so on; for which he has been
blamed for challenged the writ of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
The reason for the militancy which has been termed as Islam turned
into fitna and strongly condemned by the editor was aptly printed on the
front page of the news paper. The militants, while chopping the heads of four
soldiers said: All sons of Bush will meet similar fate.
The editor added: The bombing of the bus carrying FC personnel in
Mingora came a day after the provincial government deployed thousands of
paramilitary troops and police in the 59 villages where Fazlullah runs his
kingdom in the name of religion.
The NWFP government has no choice but to restore its authority
to the area and crush what could turn out to be re-enactment of the Lal
Masjid drama There is no doubt that innocent civilians will get caught in
the crossfire when the crackdown is finally launched, and there will be
justified protests from the media and the rights groups. That is where the
government has to realize that it cannot go it alone.
M A Niazi traced the history of the cause behind the standoff. The
movement in Swat district is not really about the Taliban; it is more
about the abolition of the princely states in the NWFP and the consequences

463

of that. Swat was once a princely state of that name, ruled by the Wali, who
belonged to the Miangul family
There was one big difference between the Miangul and Pakistan,
about which old timers felt that the Miangul had the rights of the matter: the
advanced justice system. Apart from the different behaviour of the police,
there were the courts; the first Miangul had known how the locals were to
be controlled, so he used his new powers of session to convert all courts to
Qazi Courts, which were ordered to implement the Shariah from henceforth.
They did, only they interpreted their local custom as the Shariah. But
Pakistan does not follow the Shariah in any form, though the family laws
followed are Muslim except as amended by the enforcement of Shariah
Ordinance 1967, which made some of the matters against Shariah legal.
After some decades of having the local custom treated as Shariah,
the tribesmen (mostly Yousafzais) found that now they would be governed
by Pakistani law, which was not Islamic in origin but was rooted in the Two
Codes, Criminal and Civil, which the British Raj had left to the Subcontinent
even though they themselves had left defeated.
The judges appointed under the Code, were not Islamic either, so
there was a general unease not relieved by Ziaul Haqs Islamic pretensions,
and which resulted in a generalized rebellion under Soofi Nek Muhammad
which was put down with the guidance (that is, total control) of the Army,
and with a terrible slaughter. This took place during Benazirs second
government, so the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Fiqhe Muhammadi was quite
afterwards, when the NWFP government of Aftab Sherpao hastily passed an
enabling Act of Customary Law dressed up as Shariah to be implemented in
the district. It wasnt, and the Sherpao government fell with the Benazir, and
the Shariah of the TNSM, remained unimplemented.
Before the TNSM could take any further action, the 9/11
incidents took place, and the TNSM found itself in the role of the only
forces who were ready to support the Taliban against the Americans. Sufi
Nek Muhammad took over thousands of volunteers who suffered a hard
time, mainly at the hands of the Taliban, but were only killed or imprisoned
by the Dostum and Masood militias that provided the bulk of the antiTaliban forces. Most damaging for Pakistan, they were produced whenever
there was proof needed of Pakistani involvement with the Taliban.

464

Meanwhile in Pakistan two developments took place. First, the

Taliban became suddenly unpopular, and second, it became possible to run
FM stations at the district level. The TNSM started to run an FM radio
station. It propagated their demand for a Sharia-based (or rather custombased) legal system. When the Taliban arrived on the scene, the TNSM
adopted them because it seemed they were working for the same goals
So they managed to convince the TNSM to join with the Taliban
and move into open rebellion that left all the parties horrified, because this
they had not intended. Particularly the MMA panicked, first because their
agency handlers panicked and then because whatever representative
institutions there are, are in their hands, but they are at the end of their
tenures. The MMA is not the first party to want talks, they all do.
But the PPP will not talk to those who have on their hands the
blood of fellow Muslims. This is a high-sounding way of saying no talks,
but military action. We have all seen the result of military action: the much
vaunted truce has collapsed amid rocket fire by gunship helicopters. The end
of the militancy will involve killing of those who want the Shariah imposed.
And the killing will have to be done by the members of the armed forces
The purely airborne forces of the helicopter forces may be good for
disputing possession, but they are no good for holding ground, which is the
need of the hour
With elections just around the corner, the significance of Swat
has increased. If the locals manage to achieve success, it can be portrayed
by the caretaker Shamsul Mulk government as a success story which should
be preserved. If not, it will just be a problem which the new elected
government will inherit. In either case, the talks will be about the terms of
surrender, certainly not the implementation of the Shariah, not even in the
customized version popular in Swat. And all the parties will back this.
Shehr Bano Khan described the nature of terrorism perpetrated by
Mulla Fazlullah. Every Friday, the local mosque at Imam Dehri is teeming
with people who listen to Maulana Fazlullahs hair-raising sermons
condemning the Pakistan Army and appealing for donations so that the
under-construction Imam Dehri seminary can be quickly completed.
A huge volunteer force called the Shaheen Commandos, the local
version of Mulla Omars control in the tehsils of Matta, Kabal, Charbagh
and Khawazkhel, outmatches that of the local administration. Each night,
465

after 8pm, the Shaheen Commandos patrol the four tehsils where
checkpoints are installed to curb timber and drug smuggling.
Since Maulana Fazlullahs commandos took over, the law and order
situation has improved, smuggling is controlled, something which the
government failed to do. The people of Malakand Agency feel deprived of
their basic rights and the government has failed to pay attention to
development, says a local resident of Swat.
All efforts to get Maulana Fazlullah to explain his defiance towards
the government failed because the voice on the other side of the telephone
said he did not talk to women The danger lies in sitting back, waiting for
the situation to touch critical levels as witnessed during the Lal Masjid
debacle. Bano considers curtailing activities of timber and drug mafias a
challenge to the writ of the state.
After beheading of four soldiers the Dawn wrote: Will Fridays
public beheading of four security personnel in Swat unleash a wave of
shock and revulsion that will be felt across the country? The answer is
chillingly clear-cut: no, it will not. And that, with the deepest of respect for
the families and friends who are today mourning their dead, is the real
collective tragedy.
Ordinary citizens are mired in deep problems of their own and to
internalize every external trauma would be an invitation to madness. But
where is the sustained uproar from our glorious leaders who portray
themselves as saviours and the champions of tolerance and fair play? At
least they make the odd noise, even if the show of denunciation is largely
that a show.
The Islamists have assumed the authority of the state and occupy
what for them is the moral high ground. The code they follow allows them to
act as judge and executioner for their mission, in their twisted minds, is
blessed by God. Societys silence encourages public submission to the
militants unholy acts. Some go so far as to defend beheadings on humane
grounds.
Humayun Gauhar wrote: What we are fighting is the real strength of
Fazlullahs extremists who control Swat. That real strength is not gun
power but people power: if the people of the area sympathize with the
guerrillas of a revolutionary movement, more than half the battle is won.

466

They sympathize with Fazlullah not so much on religious grounds but

because he gives the ordinary people exactly what I have been harping on
about for years.
He gives them what they want simple things. That his rhetoric is
couched in religious jargon makes it all the more acceptable, for it is a
language people understand, unlike the allied liberal jargon of the West and
the westernized. The women of Swat support him totally because he has
made them aware of their rights under Islam.
There are many dynamics operating in Pakistan. Each dynamic is
spinning in its own orbit without any connection to the other dynamics
The most powerful dynamic of all is Talibanization (for want of a word
a better-understood word). It has a life of its own. It is fed primarily by
injustices against Muslims and Americas mistakes.
Aziz-ud-Din Ahmad opined: Mullah Fazlullah is an extremist and his
followers have committed excesses. There is however a need to deal with
them tactfully rather than through force alone. Fearful of being outnumbered
and outgunned the security forces are increasingly relying on distant
attacks from gunship helicopters that can kill more innocent people than
the extremists. This has displaced hundreds of people who are running
around for shelter.
In a society where revenge is a social value, relatives of innocent
victims are likely to join Fazlullahs Shaheen Force or worse still turn into
suicide bombers. Continuous use of indiscriminate force is likely to give a
boost to violence. Unless meaningful attempts are made to improve the
overall governance, it might not be possible to cope with extremism.
When the militants released the captured security personnel The
Nation observed: The freed persons remarks before the media were
quite revealing, and even given the circumstances under which they spoke
i.e. the presence of militants, there hardly appears to be any doubt that the
observations projected their inner feelings. Among the justifications of their
surrender, they counted the call from Maulvi Fazlullahs activists to the
effect that they were fighting for the enforcement of Shariat, which led them
to decide that they should not be up against such right-minded people.
It is undeniable fact that a sizeable number of people in different
parts of the country would hold the opinion that the Islamic law should

467

prevail in the country, though the number of those supporting recourse to

arms in order to pressurize the authorities to accept that point of view would
be much smaller. However, the population in Northern Areas, NWFP and
Baluchistan consists of far more conservative bent of mind than the rest of
Pakistan.
Most of the captured security personnel coming from these areas are
part of the conservative stock and could be expected not to disagree with the
militants logic. The other two points made by the freed hostages
shortage of foodstuff and lack of official support suggest how poorly
planned the Swat military intervention is and could be easily redressed.
According to Maulvi Fazlullahs representatives, they have made about 100
government security men hostage so far, besides having 52 Arab nationals in
custody.
The insurgency-like scenario, with all its destabilizing implications
for the country, is highly disturbing and the two sides have not dared retrieve
the bodies of their dead from the hills of Khawazakhela for fear of each
other. All efforts ought to be directed at defusing it. Sending
reinforcements to the area while the militias want the existing men to
withdraw is not the solution; rather it will inevitably further provoke them
to react with a vengeance.
In a subsequent editorial the newspaper added: Three weeks after
deploying paramilitary and law enforcement personnel the government has
not been able to contain militancy in Swat. The atmosphere of fear still
pervades the area with militants continuing their advance in the valley.
Madyan is the third town to come under the effective control of the
followers of Maulana Fazlullah, who hoisted their flags over government
buildings and guarded important sites on Wednesday after security forces
surrendered.
News reports indicated that policemen gave up their weapons,
vehicles and abandoned the police station after being assured by the
militants that they would not be harmed. Earlier they seized Matta and
Khawazakhela towns as the police and security personnel offered no
resistance even though the ground operation was being given air cover with
gunship helicopters targeting the militant hideouts in the troubled area.
The growing conflict in Swat reflects badly on the governments
counter-insurgency strategy that has not been very successful in the
468

troubled tribal region where the troops fighting militants have suffered
heavy losses over the past four years.
Those in authority however seem to have lost focus on crucial
issues and remained largely preoccupied with political infighting. The
deepening conflict in Swat reflects the potential for heightened instability
that can be contained only through peaceful engagement.
Syed Saleem Shahzad wrote: A local television station has shown
footage of people collecting money for what they call the mujahideen. The
station reported that at one place in Swat Valley, people collected Rs1.5
million in just three hours. Such popular support for the militancy forces
Islamabad to question whether it should continue this losing battle or launch
a full-scale war against terror.
However and this is crucial should Musharraf decide on the latter
approach, he would need to do so under special powers, such as martial
law or a state of emergency. Asia Times Online contacts confirm that in the
past three days Musharraf has held several high-level meetings that included
all four provincial chief ministers. The discussions centred on the issue of
extraordinary powers.
A senior security official speaking to Asia Times Online on condition
of anonymity, said: Major surgeries are essential in cases like Lal Masjid,
but such extraordinary events need extraordinary powers. If the courts
intervene in such matters, the security forces will stop working and nobody
will be able to stop the march of the Taliban into the bigger cities of
Pakistan.
The official continued: This is a major crossroads in the war on
terror at which Washington will have to approve an all-powerful
government, even at the cost of democracy. Otherwise, it can say goodbye to
Pakistan as a war on terror ally as it would simply not be able to bear
results.
The massive engagement of the Pakistani armed forces in the
Swat Valley has disrupted controls along the Durand Line that separates
Pakistan and Afghanistan, with the result that in a matter of weeks, hundreds
of fresh fighters have reached southeastern Afghanistan to bolster the
Taliban-led insurgency from Jalalabad to Khost.

469

This returns Pakistan to the dilemma described above, of whether to

go for all-out war, and if so, how to go about it as the countrys judiciary has
over the past several months steadfastly blocked any high-handed
government moves And a full frontal war would be unpopular among the
masses, where Musharrafs standing is already low Against this
backdrop, Musharraf has to decide whether Pakistan can afford to ditch
democracy in the fight against terror, or whether Pakistan safeguards
democracy and closes its theatre of the war on terror.
The Dawn warned against increasing threat of Taliban. There seems
to be no dearth of soul-searching going on in American politics regarding
US policy vis--vis Pakistan in the war on terror While there is no doubt
that regular and comprehensive discussions are necessary to inform
American legislators and the public about the course of conflict has taken, it
is equally important to note that time is running out as the Taliban
continue to extend their writ inside Pakistan.
In Pakistans context, it would help matters if Washington were to
maintain a low political profile and refrain from giving the impression that
it is issuing instructions to the regime on how to conduct its domestic
politics. The attitude will alienate even those with liberal inclinations and
who are against religious extremism.
There is no denying the fact that American aid has been generous to a
country with staggering socio-economic problems. But even this largesse is
perceived as going to the wrong quartersAs an immediate step to lessen
hostility, Washington would be well advised to take a back seat and limit
its public visibility. This, coupled with sincere attempts to reduce poverty
through aid judiciously distributed, might still win its image a temporary
reprieve.
Najmuddin A Shaikh wrote: Notwithstanding the deployment of
100,000 troops, the situation in tribal areas is now beyond the armys
capacity to control. A well researched article by the respected Guardian
reporter Jason Burke appearing in last Sundays observer paints an alarmist
picture of a complex situation in which fractious warlords, flushed with drug
money and contributions from sympathizers appear united only in
opposition to the Pakistan government and where al-Qaeda appears to
flourish with the help of some local support obtained partly through
ideological sympathy.

470

According to him, NATO officers in Afghanistan concede that there

is a danger that the south and east of Afghanistan, already well beyond the
authority of Kabul, will effectively translate de facto autonomy into
independence.
That raises the specter of the confederation of warlord states that is in
the process of emerging on the Pakistani side of the border effectively
trebling in size with the addition of the Taliban-controlled zones in
Afghanistan. It would be the United Taliban Emirates It would be the
biggest and most defensible terrorist safe haven the world has ever seen, he
quotes one observer as saying.
M Shahid Alam observed that the US was trying to effect regime
change in Pakistan after having been disappointed with mercenarys
performance. Why was Pakistan not being targeted? This question has
gathered even greater force over the past two years: and for two reasons.
After being stalled for a while by the ferocity of the Iraqi resistance, US
plans for war against Iran are once again gathering steam.
At the same time, there are reports that both al-Qaeda and the Taliban
have found a safe haven in Pakistan. Both organizations are operating from
territories in Pakistans Waziristan. More ominously, last July, local allies of
the Taliban dared to challenge the authority of the state in Pakistans capital.
And since their rout there, they have continued to mount deadly attacks on
the Pakistan Army.
Yet, even today there is no talk of adding Pakistan to the axis of
evil. Why is there no clamour in the United States or Israel to invade
Waziristan, to attack Pakistans nuclear facilities, to punish it for nuclear
proliferation, or to launch covert operations to seize Pakistans nuclear assets
before they fall into the hands of Islamists, the Taliban or al-Qaeda? This is
the Pakistan paradox.
This paradox has a simple explanation: simple but also indicative of
the malaise that afflicts nearly all the Islamic World. In Pakistan, the US
affected regime change without a change of regime. There was no need
for an invasion, no need to fire a shot, no need for covert operations. At the
first American touch, almost overnight, a terrible beauty was born. Instantly,
the US had drafted the Pakistani military, nay the Pakistani state, to wage
war against Islamic extremism. The US had gained an army: and
Pakistans military dictator had gained longevity.
471

The aping and mimicking of the diseases of foreign masters is far

easier than the cultivation of the virtues that distinguish them, that are the
sources of their power over their dark subjects. Yet, resistance survives in
some troubled hearts. At some point, this wholesale degradation of a
society, this prostitution of national institutions, this miscegenation of
foreign and native elites, produces revulsion in a few sensitive hearts. It
gives birth to angerand hopes for regenerating society.
But this regeneration is arduous. The mongrel elites have raised many
barriers, the have strung barbed-wire fences with watch-towers across the
countrys landscape. They have trained a mercenary military and perfidious
police, led by officers schooled in the arts of repressing dissent. However, it
is not these overt forces of repression alone that weaken and deflect the
resistance.
The resistance can stand up to repression if it resonates with the
people, if it can engage, stir, and mobilize them behind the cause of justice.
But the alienation in society is so deep, the demoralization and apathy so
complete that the few sensitive souls who choose to resist are left to twist in
the wind, unsupported, unshielded, to be singled out and decapitated by the
repressive military and police.
Yet, in one corner of Pakistan, resistance comes from the sons
and daughters of the mountains, yet uncontaminated by western
civilization, firm in their faith, clear in their conviction, proud of their
heritage, and ready to fight for their dignity. They stood up against the
Soviet marauders: and defeated them. Today they are standing against
American marauders and their allies.
Javed Naqvi from across the eastern border observed that the cure
prescribed by the US has proved worse than the disease. Whether we really
need American help and blessings to fight al-Qaeda and Taliban in our own
backyard and if so for whose benefit? Why should we listen to Bush and not
to Denis Healy, WW II veteran and ageing but still lucid Labour Party
ideologue instead? Mr Healey was very clear in an interview on BBC last
week that there was no military solution to what the American call terrorism.
His counsel was to talk to terrorist leaders instead. If to end terrorism we
do not talk to its leaders who are we to talk to? he asked.
Afghanistan was not quite the basket case it became, breeding
fundamentalist rebels. Nor was ISI hatching mujahideen in Saudi and CIA472

funded incubators at the behest of Zbigniew Brezenski. And when Brezenski

was asked in the context of the Taliban why he had fanned religious
extremism in Pakistan and Afghanistan, his cynical reply was: What is
more important demise of the Soviet Union or a few stirred up
Muslims?
The other factor is that to confront the stirred up Muslims we now
have stirred up armies that are armed to teeth. They have vested interest
to ensure that Healeys counsel falls on deaf ears. In fact it is baffling that
the very people who are appalled at the sight of blood and gore, like the one
we saw in Karachi on Thursday night, merrily endorse bloody-mindedness
on other occasions. There is no other way to explain our obeisance to the
holy cow we euphemistically call military might and another recently added
deity to our fundamentalist pantheon of unbending nationalism we know as
nuclear weapons.
Another country that instantly expressed solidarity with Ms Bhutto
was the United States, which too mourned the loss of innocent lives. How
hypocritical these condolence messages sound when their authors on other
occasions show no qualms about their willingness to annihilate millions if
they feel like it. The Karachi bloodbath was traumatic not just for Pakistan.
It has been chilling message for India. If Afghanistan falls to the Taliban,
for example, India will feel the heat in Kashmir and elsewhere. Have no
doubts about that. But there is an even worse nightmare looming on our
heads in the form a wayward American president threatening to annihilate
the entire planet with World War III? Is there anything to choose between the
two?
We do not know whether Benazir Bhutto will go along with Denis
Healey or George Bush in her promise to remove the forces of medieval
barbarism in Pakistan. But she said something else on her arrival in Karachi
that may hold the key to everyones security in the region. She spoke for the
impoverished people of Pakistan, the underdogs. She will notice from
Nehrus speech in 1930 that not much has changed to improve their lot
despite all the populist slogans of her party and of her counterparts in India
and elsewhere.
Lessons from history may still hold some answers for the future as
we dust ourselves back on our feet from the blood and gore of daily
terrorism. One such lesson is that there is little to choose between global
terrorism and an increasingly cynical imperialism.
473

Gangly Khan from Mandi Bahauddin opined: This deal was

promulgated in the form of National Reconciliation Ordinance. But now the
events are changing at fast speed. Armed forces are pitted against own
people resulting into casualties on both sides. Frequency of suicide attacks
has increased after return of Ms Bhutto.
One thing is very clear. It is beginning of the end of US supremacy
in Pakistan. Days are not far off when all the evil forces poised against the
Muslims will be buried in the Hindukush. Freedom fighters from NWFP and
elsewhere are fighting war of liberation of the Muslims from exploitive
forces. They are fulfilling the will of Allah, who is the master of the whole
universe.

EASTERN FRONT
Never ending composite dialogue with India had to continue. On 19 th
October, talks on nuclear CBM began in New Delhi. Two days later,
Pakistani team arrived in New Delhi for talks on anti-terrorism mechanism.
On 22nd October, Pakistan and India shared terror information.
During first week of November, Indian media reported that Pakistan
has withdrawn thousands of troops from eastern border and deployed those
in tribal areas. ISPR promptly denied Indian media report. What does
moving troops from Okara or Gujranwala mean? All these troops have
operational tasks on the eastern border.
Acts and statements negative to confidence building were in plenty.
On 12th October, Manmohan Singh passed the buck by blaming Pakistans
internal situation for marring the bilateral talks. Two days later, seven people
were killed in a blast in a cinema in Ludhiana and India wasted no time in
blaming Pakistan.
When a Pakistani delegation arrived in New Delhi on 17th October for
sorting out nuclear CBMs, India accused ISI for blasts in Hyderabad, Ajmer
and Ludhiana; Islamabad rejected Indian allegation. A week later, India
tested nuclear capable missile and boasted that the missile can hit anywhere
in Pakistan.
On 30th October, a court sentenced eight and freed others in cases of
murder, gang rape and arson during anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat. On 7 th
474

November, Indian High Commission was summoned to Foreign Office for

deny visa to Sheeda Tally.
Perpetration of state terrorism by occupation forces and retaliatory
actions by freedom fighters continued. Following incidents were reported:
Five Kashmiris and two Indian soldiers were killed in an attack on
para-military camp in Srinagar on 11th October. Next day, two fighters
were killed when they stormed into a police camp in Srinagar.
Protests were held in IHK on 20 th October after Indian army killed a
teacher. A week later, protests were held to mark 60 years of Indian
troops in the Valley.
Five civilians and a policeman were killed in various incidents on 1 st
November. In the month of October 73 Kashmiris were martyred.
Indian troops martyred three villagers on 2 nd November. Barrister
Sultan feared that Pakistan and India have come close to some kind of
agreement to divide Kashmir by converting LoC into international
border; Foreign Office rejected his claim.
Next day, four Kashmiris, including a woman, were martyred by
Indian troops. Five innocent Kashmiris were martyred by Indian
troops on 5th November and Yasin Malik was detained by police.
Six more Kashmiri youths were martyred by occupation forces on 7 th
November. Next day, six more Kashmiris were martyred.
The media and analysts found nothing worthwhile to comment upon
except Indo-US nuclear deal. The Dawn wrote: Regardless of the real
motives behind New Delhis suspension of its civilian nuclear accord with
Washington, the move is bound to elicit comparisons between the foreign
policy stances of India and Pakistan. It is obvious New Delhi is not
troubled by the prospect of annoying Washington when, as pointed out by
critics, its sovereignty is compromised by the accord Unfortunately,
Pakistans record on this score has left much to be desired.
Nevertheless, it would be unfair to protect the Indian decision to
defer the deal as one stemming from a solely principled stand, especially
as one does not know whether it is a political ploy at this stage. Also, it is

475

rather strange that a deal so vigorously pursued by the Congress government

for two years and that was until recently touted as good for India, and good
for the world should now be on the verge of collapse, especially after
pressure from the Left coalition partners. Does the government really think
that Indias energy demands can be put on hold or has it succumbed to
political expediency at the prospect of losing its power in a snap poll if the
Left withdraws support, the question continues to be debated.

HOME FRONT
Subversive activities of nationalists in Baluchistan continued at low
key. Following incidents were reported:
Railway track was blown up in Dasht area on 12th October. Next day,
four power pylons were destroyed in Dera Bugti area. Seven persons
were killed in Kalat firing on 14th October. Two days later, gas
pipeline was blown up in Pir Koh area.
Five people were killed and 16 wounded in a bomb blast in a wagon
in Dera Bugti on 20th October. BLA said at least 12 tribesmen were
killed by security forces in an operation in Bambor area. Tehran said
that a Japanese kidnapped by bandits has been taken to Pakistan.
Three suspected militants were killed by security forces near Dera
Bugti on 23rd October. Salim Bugti of JWP was released from police
custody.
On 25th October, security forces carried out an operation in Naushki
area and arrested undisclosed number of militants. Next day, blasts
rocked Kohlu and Hub. Gas pipeline was blown up near Dera Murad
Jamali on 28th October disrupting supply to Uch power plant. BNP-M
observed token hunger strike.
Seven persons were killed and eleven wounded in a landmine
explosion in Dera Bugti on 2nd November. Six days later, gas supply to
Quetta was disrupted after a pipeline was blown up near Kolpur.
On ideological front the Lal Masjid kept echoing. On 9 th October,
Ministry of Interior planned to appeal to the Supreme Court to review its
476

decision on opening of Lal Masjid and related matters. The same day
hearing of Lal Masjid cases by anti-terror court was adjourned till 25th
October.
Next day, court deferred hearing of 11 cases related to Lal Masjid. On
12 October, all Masjids in the neighbourhood announced holding of Eid
prayers in Lal Masjid. Two days later, more than fifteen thousands people
assembled at Lal Masjid to offer Eid prayer and moving scenes were
reported.
th

On 17th October, Women Action Forum expressed concern at the

Supreme Courts orders on reopening of Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa. Next
day, the Supreme Court ordered the government to pay Diyat to the heirs of
the victims of Operation Silence.
On 22nd October, hearing of two Lal Masjid cases, forcing closure of
CD shops and abduction of Chinese massagers was adjourned. Three days
later, ATC adjourned hearing of 21 cases against Maulana Abdul Aziz. On
26th October, Naib Khateeb of Lal Masjid denied links with Maulana
Fazlullah as reported in the media. Ijazul Haq said people wont allow
Benazir to crush seminaries; he and Musharraf can do it better.
The Dawn blamed Lal Masjid for the standoff in Swat. The setting up
of a law and order force is the latest from Maulana Fazlullah, the selfproclaimed, virtual ruler of Swat. The country-mullah has been
emboldened to take this step because the government has been looking
the other way all this time when he was busy broadcasting threats to the
local people to abide by Shariah laws or face his wrath.
The withering away of the state is no more a Marxian axiom in parts
of Pakistan today; but the state has been withering for all the wrong
reasons While North and South Waziristan may be the extremists
outposts huge tracts of settled areas such as the Peshawar-KohatBannuTank belt and now Swat falling to home-grown Taliban rule is a serious
cause for concern.
The shadow of Lal Masjid operation in the heart of Islamabad, too,
still lingers. It is far from over as far as the cousin-cleric of the slain
firebrand Abdur Rashid Ghazi is concerned, who has been made the
custodian of the mosque under Supreme Court directives. The rhetoric
coming out of the place is as lethal and laced with threats as to remind one

477

of Ghazis intolerant ways of imposing Shariah Ignoring the emerging

radical threat will bring no bliss, much less order to the chaos spreading
all around.
Ghazi Brothers of Lal Masjid were demonized by the regime and
media by leveling various accusations. Out of those, the accusation of land
grabbing was frequently quoted and that had led to brutal military assault
and subsequent demolition of the affiliated madressa. Will the enlightened
media and the civil society demand similar actions against those who have
grabbed acres of lands across the country? Q Isa Daudpota in his article has
mentioned two of them.
For those who have missed the breaking news emanating from the
capital, lets recap the sordid details. A local journalist broke the story on Oct
10 about Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhrys directive to the Capital
development Authority to cancel allotment of all farms in Chak Shehzad,
which are being used for residential purposes.
These plots were initially allocated during the 1970s through the
1990s at highly subsidized rates for growing vegetables and poultry
farming, ostensibly, to meet the growing demands of the twin cities of
Rawalpindi and Islamabad.
The CDA later modified its by-laws to enable some powerful
people to resell these plots at many times their throw-away cost price.
According to this report, President General Pervez Musharraf and Prime
Minister Shaukat Aziz about their five acres and 2.5 acres at Chak Shehzad,
respectively, in 2003. The divulged list of 499 owners of these plots
predictably includes top military officers, high-ranking officials and
bureaucrats, who in all won 2,500 acres of land currently priced at Rs 75bn.
The second case is of grabbing the land through stark dadagiri and
obviously pertains to Karachi and MQM. The Asian Human Rights
Commission (AHRC) has received information from the Urban Resource
Centre, Karachi that one person was shot dead and more than 10 were
injured by thugs, with the help of the police, during an illegal demolition
on Oct 3, 2007.
Twelve police jeeps from the Korangi Township came along with
bulldozers to the 300-year old village, the Juma Kalmari Goth, Ibrahim
Hyderi town, Karachi. About 50 to 60 armed people, some in police

478

uniform, emerged from the jeeps and started demolishing the houses. Juma
Kalmari Goth comes under Bin Qasim town. Individuals from Korangi
Township carried out the demolition, which is a stronghold of the ruling
MQM Party.
After the incident, the nazim of Korangi town, Jan Alam Jamote,
vehemently denied that his town office conducted the demolition of the
village. However, witnesses identified that the demolition vehicles and
police jeeps were marked as originating from Korangi Township.
It is regrettable that the investigation into the killing of Mr Sultan
Janejo and those injured by gunshots has not been launched yet. This
case also illustrates how easily the police can be arbitrarily mobilized in
such an illegal operation, for an ulterior purpose or interest, instead of
protecting a citizens life and property.
AHRC naively asks concerned people to write letters of protest to the
president, the chief justice of Sindh, Registrar of the Supreme Court,
governor and chief minister of Sindh and a few others to the email addresses
provided. People who do send in letters will almost certainly not have their
notes attended to.
Nevertheless, the Chief Justice remains the only recourse for
justice for the uprooted fisher folk of Juma Kalmati Goth. Along with
disposing off the scandal of the legalized land-grabbing by Islamabads
sophisticated land mafia, may he also focus the courts attention on the
plight of the poor Sindhi fisher folk who have been illegally ousted from
their homes by the muscle-men of the politically powerful MQM.
The Dawn was critical of the Supreme Court decision on payment of
Diyat for those killed in Operation Silence. The Supreme Courts latest
order vis--vis the Lal Masjid makes for disturbing reading. In a decision
that raises more questions than it answers, the SC directed the
government on Thursday to pay compensation to the legal heirs of the
innocent victims of the deadly Lal Masjid operation in July. For one thing,
how it to be is determined who among the 94 civilians killed in the operation
was indeed innocent and who died as a result of taking up arms against the
state.
While some students may have been confined within the mosque
against their will, there is sadly no way to distinguish between them and

479

the terrorist. For these reasons it is worth asking if all those who died
deserve to be portrayed as victims. They may have been brainwashed from
an early age but there is no getting around the fact that many of the students
were armed to the teeth and posed a grave danger to society.

CONCLUSION
The recent escalation of the standoff in Swat is clearly an extension of
the Bushs war on terror. The enlightened regime argues that imposing
Shariah with the use of forces is not allowed in Islam, but it considers
absolutely fair to use state force for imposition of secularism.
The regime relied upon the same strategy which it had used against
Lal Masjid. It waited for months by design to demonize Maulana Fazlullah
and his Shaheen Force with the hope that there would be no hue and cry over
the killings once the state forces were unleashed.
Gunship helicopters were used by the secular regime to inculcate
moderation amongst Islamic extremists who demand imposition of Shariah.
While doing so, it complained to the Crusaders about the checks on supply
of spares for the moderation-inculcating machines gunship helicopters.
Ironically, as the gunship helicopters pounded the Islamic extremists
in Swat to punish them for demanding promulgation of Shariah, Chief
Minister announced that the regime has decided to enforce Shariah in the
district. He practically crossed over to Fazlullahs side. The justice
demanded that some gunship helicopters should have been dispatched to
pound chief ministers house in Peshawar.
The Media in the ongoing clash between Obscurantist and
Enlightened has always toed the propaganda theme of the regime, in which
it has been claimed that only a handful of misguided people were bent
upon creating law and order problem by challenging the writ of the state.
The so-called silent majority opposed these militant forces. The recent
events in Swat totally belied this propaganda.
It must have been a shocking surprise for the media men like Talat
Hussain. He tried his best to vindicate the propaganda theme of the
Enlightened forces by asking leading questions from the residents of the

480

Valley. He and other seculars must have been utterly disappointed from their
answers to the questions asked.
Common people in the Valley vehemently rejected the colonial
system of British Raj imposed in Swat after its declaration as administered
area. They accused the regime of cheating e.g. mere changing the
designation of magistrate to Qazi Court does not mean that Shariah has
been enforced.
They denied categorically that the CD and barbershops in the region
were attacked by Maulana Fazlullahs men. Mullas men never objected to
the dress of the foreigners who visited the Valley as tourists. All this was
hyped by some unknown people or by the agencies.
They held the regime responsible for aggravating the situation to its
present state. Even those who were prompted to put some blame on Mullas
militants, held the regime equally responsible. Hardly anyone out rightly
blamed the militants.
Those who went to Peshawar as part of the jirga, accused Chief
Minister of lying, who had said that the government had not called for the
jirga; only a few elders had come at their own. Because of the frequent
double-talk on the part of the officials of the regime, people were not
prepared to trust the regime anymore.
It was also revealed that in almost every instance of taking over
government buildings, including police stations and dispensaries, the
militants were helped by the government employees. Every takeover was
accomplished without firing of a single bullet. The people had also
responded generously to the militants appeal for donations. The fact is that a
vast majority, not only in NWFP but across the country, hates the regime
siding with the US in its war on terror; or the Crusades.
The media, like the enlightened intellectuals have been inclined to
condemn anything and everything that relates to Islamists The Daily
Dawns editorial on Diyat is the proof. For media, Shaukat-Condy incident
was far less grave in tarnishing the image of Pakistan and Islam, as
compared to Jamia Hafsas stick-wielding girl students.
9th November 2007

481

KNOCK-OUT PUNCH - II
Justice Ramday held Pirzada and Qayyum responsible for imposition
of emergency rule. Chief Justice Iftikhar in his first ever interview to BBC
since his ouster and second detention, said linking judiciary with terrorism
was baseless.
Protests by lawyers community continued. Journalists and students of
some universities also joined in protests against imposition of emergency
rule. The protests by political parties failed to make a visible impact mainly
because of the disunity and arrests of their leaders and activists.
During this week, crackdown was extended to PPP workers as Benazir
insisted on holding rally in Rawalpindi on 9 th November which was
successfully foiled by Pervaiz Elahi. When she vowed to hold a long march,
she was detained in Lahore for seven days.
The brave commando received a telephone call from Bush and
announced that elections would be held by mid February. This was a hasty
act of obedience which was changed on the advice of his aides. On 11 th
November, he held a press conference and announced dissolution of
assemblies and asked ECP to hold general elections before 9 th January, 2008.
The aim was to give minimum time to his opponents.
The religious forces struck back with vengeance. Imran Khan, whose
arrest was erroneously reported on the first day of emergency, was finally
got hold by intelligence agencies in collaboration with IJT and Punjab
University administration when he went to address the students.
The regime maintained information blackout. It quietly imposed ban
on sale of dish antenna which had soared after closure of private channels.
The news starved people looked for other sources for information. Daily
newspapers sale increased by 25 percent and BBC increased timings of its
radio programmes by more than one hour.

EVENTS
On 8th November the ongoing crackdown was extended to PPP
workers as Benazir insisted on holding rally in Rawalpindi on 9 th November.
482

The tally of arrested people went well beyond three thousand, rendering jails
overcrowded. MQM continued perpetrating terrorism of its own brand. More
than one thousand political rivals and lawyers had been arrested. The
terrorist party also got registered two separate cases of treason against six
leading lawyers and four political leaders.
Within 24 hours after receiving the telephone call from Bush,
Musharraf announced that elections would be held by mid February and he
would peel-off his second skin after the verdict of Kangaroo court. Benazir
said that ousted judges should decide Musharrafs case.
The regime was contemplating amending the Army Act so that
civilians attacking soldiers could be tried by military courts and persons
involved in terrorism could be detained for indefinite period. The regime
quietly imposed ban on sale of dish antenna which had soared after closure
of private channels. The news starved people looked for other sources for
information. Daily newspapers sale increased by 25 percent and BBC
increased timings of its radio programmes by more than one hour.
Students of LUMS continued their protest; QAU students also staged
one. In Peshawar, IJT planned to launch movement. White House lauded
Musharrafs election plans. US Senators demanded release of Aitzaz Ahsan.
UNESCO chief urged Pakistan to lift curbs on media.
Chief Justice Iftikhar in his interview to BBC, first ever after his
second detention, said linking judiciary with terrorism was baseless. He
justified Supreme Courts decision to release the so-called missing persons
because no agency of the regime could produce any incriminating evidence.
Justice Ramday held Pirzada and Qayyum responsible for imposition
of emergency rule. Three benches of Supreme Court adjourned all cases
pending before them due to the absence of lawyers. Government decided to
seek validation of PCO from Supreme Court.
Pervaiz Elahi, acting on behalf of the regime, foiled Benazirs attempt
to hold rally in Rawalpindi on 9 th November. She was placed under house
arrest for three days and more than hundred workers of PPP were arrested.
Benazir asked the government to arrest bombers instead of stopping her
from going to rally. She vowed not letting Pakistan become Iraq and
announced holding long march.

483

Protests by lawyers community continued; political parties protests

failed to make a visible impact. Nawaz preferred independent judiciary over
polls. Journalists observed Black Day against curbs on media. Police
surrounded Imran Khans cancer hospital as he announced setting up of
Save Judiciary Fund. The regime did not allow Markazia Majlis-e-Iqbal to
hold Iqbal Day function in Alhamra, Lahore.
The West continued showing concern over continued emergency.
Robert Gates said the unrest could distract Pakistan from war on terror.
Move to suspend sale of F-16s was initiated. National Democratic Institute
of America urged restoration of Constitution and freedom of media.
International Bar Association urged restoration of constitution and judges.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry vowed to stand by lawyers. The
regime planned to shift the deposed CJP to Quetta. A delegation of PMA was
denied permission to meet Justice Ramday. Justice Khokhar went to Justice
Ramdays house; the justice under house arrest refused to meet him.
On 10th November, Benazir declared Justice Iftikhar as real Chief
Justice, but her gimmick attempt to meet him was foiled by police. She
addressed rally of journalists and sought support for free and fair elections.
Bush said he expected Musharraf to lift a state of emergency and return to
constitutional rule as quickly as possible. Nawaz presented four-point
agenda in a letter to Benazir; PPP Chairperson expressed willingness for
joint struggle.
Journalists observed Black Day to protest press ordinance. Ban on TV
channels was challenged in SHC. Three British journalists were expelled and
asked to leave Pakistan within 72 hours. Ex-wife of Imran Khan, Jemima led
a protest rally in front of 10 Downing Street.
Lawyers continued their protest. There was no relaxation for detained
terrorist judges. Deposed Justice Javed Iqbal was shifted to Quetta. Fifteen
labour unions of Karachi demanded lifting of emergency. Pakistan Army Act
was amended through an ordinance granting sweeping powers to intelligence
agencies. Hunt for political activists continued.
On 11th November, Musharraf wearing a look of an arrogant wrongdoer held a press conference and announced dissolution of assemblies and
asked ECP to hold polls before 9th January 2008. He did not talk of lifting
the emergency rule, but reiterated the vow to take oath as civilian.

484

He claimed that he did not violate the Constitution; accused Justice

Iftikhar of wrongdoing and said the judges who refused to take oath under
PCO were now history. Musharraf told media to fall in line and demanded
an apology from Daily Telegraph. He also observed that support of Benazir
has dropped.
Benazir arrived in Lahore and asked Musharraf to do more. Focus of
crackdown shifted to PPP; Rabbani and Qaim were among hundreds arrested
in Sindh. Opposition parties rejected polls announcement in the presence of
emergency rule. Justice Iftikhar said the courts were targeted to rig the polls.
In a public rally in Attock, Pervaiz Elahi said the people were capable
to judge wrongdoings of PPP. MMA activists presented bouquets to deposed
judges in Karachi. The US and UK welcomed Musharrafs plan to hold
general elections, but insisted on end to emergency rule.
On 12th November, Benazir was detained for seven days and was
likely to be deported to Sindh. More than one thousand policemen were
deployed outside her residence in Lahore. She vowed to go ahead with long
march. Punjab government feared suicide attack on her rally.
Shaikh Rashid said that the row with Benazir is part of the master
plan. Raza Rabbani claimed that PPP was not a friendly opposition. A
PML-Q MP when asked by an anchor on a PTV programme about arrest of
hundreds of political workers said arrests and releases are part of the
political process. Pervaiz Elahi claimed that emergency rule would promote
democratic process.
Commonwealth gave deadline to Musharraf to restore Constitution,
repeal emergency rule, ensure independence of judiciary and quit as army
chief by 22nd November or Pakistan would lose membership. Responding to
American media reports on external contingency plans for Pakistans nuclear
programme, Foreign Office Spokesman warned that Pakistan possessed
adequate retaliatory capability to defend its nuclear assets. US Counsel
General met Benazir in Lahore.
Lawyers boycott of courts continued. They rejected amendment in
Army Act terming it draconian law. In Islamabad, police arrested protesting
students. Journalists also continued their protest. Musharraf urged media to
uphold national interests.

485

An eight member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief

Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar, admitted for hearing a couple of petitions
challenging the imposition of emergency rule in the country and issuance of
PCO. Iqbal Tikka, a former PPP leader from Punjab and Wattan Party had
filed the petitions. Two more judges joined the PCO club in the apex court
bringing the membership total to eleven.
On 14th November, Benazir was not allowed to lead the long march.
She announced that the deal with Musharraf was over; President must quit
and was ready for alliance with Nawaz Sharif. PPP contacted all opposition
political parties for alliance against Musharraf regime.
In his interview to The New York Times, Musharraf complained of
difficulties in the marriage of convenience. The official of the marriage
bureau, Negroponte planned to visit Pakistan to save the marriage between
dictatorship and democracy.
Journalists struggle for freedom of press seemed gaining impetus as it
entered fifth day. Lawyers protest, having absorbed the initial thrust of the
regimes crackdown, was also gaining momentum. Arrested lawyers were
being treated as hardened criminals in various jails. Political parties
continued protesting individually. Afrasiab and Hoti were arrested in
Peshawar and Liaqat Baloch was arrested in Islamabad.
The regime banned use of dish antenna and import of broadcast tools.
International Commission of Jurists flayed the imposition of emergency rule.
The regime rejected Commonwealth deadline saying that its Ministerial
Action Group was ignorant of ground realities.
Imran Khan, whose arrest was erroneously reported on the first day of
emergency, was finally got hold on 14th November in Punjab University by
IJT and handed over to law enforcers. He had gone to address students from
where he was abducted, thrashed and locked in a room till handing over to
police. IJT must have acted with the consent of university administration.
Protests by lawyers, journalists, political parties, students and human
rights activists continued, and so was the crackdown launched by the
regime. Shah Mehmood was arrested from Faisalabad. Benazir frantically
worked to forge a united opposition front to isolate Musharraf. The regime
published an ad to defame Benazir; PPP denounced the use of old tactics.
ECP invited political parties to finalize code of conduct for elections. The

486

US said fair polls wont be possible under emergency. Switzerland held back
the sale of anti-aircraft system to Pakistan.
Musharraf ordered the PCO-brand judges of the apex court to reject
petitions and instead validate the imposition of emergency rule. The hearing
of the petitions was rendered to a ritual that has to be performed to come out
with the dictated verdict. SHC issued notices to the AG and PEMRA.

VIEWS
It has been said in the previous article that imposition of the
Emergency Rule has been a direct consequence of the war on terror in which
the brave commando has proudly served as mercenary. In view of that it is
appropriate to first look into the Wests viewpoint on his acts.
David Rohde wrote: Amid a deepening crisis in Pakistan, Bush
Administration officials have begun pushing President General Pervez
Musharraf on several fronts to reverse his state of emergency, quietly
making contacts with other senior generals and backing PPP Chairperson
and former prime minister Benazir Bhutto as she carries out back-channel
negotiations with him.
Military attaches from the United States and several other Western
nations are discreetly contacting senior Pakistani generals and asking them
to press President Musharraf to back down from the emergency decree he
issued Saturday night, according to a Western diplomat.
On Wednesday, President Bush telephoned General Musharraf for
the first time since the crisis began and bluntly told him that he had to
return Pakistan to civilian rule, hold elections and step down as chief on
the military, as he had promised. Bush called him from the Oval Office at
11:30 am Washington time, and spoke for about 20 minuets, according to the
White House.
A senior White House officialsaid Bush still held out hope that
American pressure could persuade General Musharraf to reconsider his
moves. That approach, the official said, was Option No 1, No 2 and No 3.
Deputy Secretary of State John D Negroponte told a House Committee on

487

Wednesday that the bottom line is, theres no question that we Americans
have a stake in Pakistan.
But American support for General Musharraf is not limitless,
several administration officials said privately. We want to believe he will
come around, and are giving him every opportunity to change his actions,
but our verbal support is not going to last for very long, a senior
administration official said.
Western officials have also begun praising Gen Ashfaq Parvez
Kayani, General Musharrafs designated successor as army chief. General
Kayani, a moderate, pro-American infantry commander, is widely seen as
commanding respect within the army and, within Western circles, as a
potential alternative to General Musharraf.
He declined a request for an interview, but is believed to favour
decreasing the armys role in politics. Twice in Pakistans history, senior
generals have asked military rulers to resign when their popularity faded and
their rule was viewed as damaging to the army as a whole, according to
American and Pakistani experts on the Pakistani military. They said General
Musharraf could find himself in that position too.
In a sign of the closeness between Benazir Bhutto and Washington,
the Opposition leader met after a news conference with the American
Ambassador to Pakistan, Anne W Patterson. The perception among
Pakistani analysts is that Benazir is being guided by Washington. Shes
listening to the Americans, no one else, said an analyst.
Benazir Bhutto also runs a risk of being perceived as too close to the
United States, and too accommodating of General Musharraf. Many
Pakistanis, weary of General Musharrafs military rule, are skeptical of
Benazirs drive to end the emergency and believe the two leaders will
eventually strike a deal.
How General Musharraf will react to her challenge and the new
pressure from the United States is difficult to gauge, diplomats and analysts
here said. Discontent among Pakistanis has been rising throughout the
year, particularly after General Musharraf tried to remove the countrys
chief justice from the bench.

488

Roger Cohen observed: There are hopeful signs. Only a sophisticated

society could produce an opposition so grounded in constitutional law.
Unlike Palestine-dawning, Pakistani democracy does not equal Islamist
electoral victory: radical parties are weak. The US mediated MusharrafBenazir pact that brought Benazir home suggests civilian-military
compromise is possible.
Given the nuclear-charged risks, the US must stick with Musharraf
and maintain aid for now, but with the insistence he move rapidly towards
promised elections, restore an independent judiciary, work with Benazir and
get real about quashing the Taliban.
US failure to harmonize Afghanistan and Pakistani policy has
been disastrous. You cant beat the Taliban in Afghanistan alone. You cant
stabilize Pakistan within a democratic system guided or not while
developing Islamism for export and alienating the professional middle class.
These lessons must be learned by Musharraf and Bush; as Khalilzad put it
to me: Afghanistan and Pakistan need each other. The moderates of both
countries must work together.
M Ilyas Khan contributed for the BBC: Will Benazirs ultimatum
throw this high-stakes game off track? And if so, what are her chances of
success in a situation in which the government appears determined to quell
all dissent. There are two schools of thought on what her strategy is and
what she is trying to achieve through these actions.
The first view is that she has decided to go for the kill. Adherents
of this view believe that President Musharraf is already facing mounting
criticism from most Western capitals that are reviewing their economic and
diplomatic ties with the country.
With Benazir adopting the course of confrontation, Gen Musharraf
stands to lose the only credible political ally that the international
community believes could be instrumental in the countrys crucial fight
against militants.
The second view is that Benazirs move is aimed at driving a
wedge between President Musharraf and the ruling PML-Q party, his
ally of eight years. Benazir is now threatening to take the fight for
parliament to the PML-Qs home turf in the Punjab, the adherents of this
view say. They believe the PPP also has substantial support in the Punjab,

489

and unlike other Opposition parties, it will be able to mobilize its workers
despite the fears of a crackdown by the administration.
Either way, the PPP appears to have decided to flex its muscles
and take the long-awaited plunge to bring about regime change. Benazir
Bhutto has already said that even if she is arrested, the campaign will go on
until her demands are met.
Whether President Musharraf will survive this battle is anybodys
guess, but the predominant opinion is that ousting him would not suit the
PPP, which has so far focused on rolling back the armys involvement in
politics in phases rather than with a single blow.
How Benazir charts a middle course that would lead to free and fair
elections without harming the position of President Musharraf remains to be
seen. The question also remains whether Gen Musharraf would be willing
to see the pliant and subordinate ruling party replaced by Benazirs
resurgent and assertive PPP as manager of the countrys political affairs.
Anatol Lieven was of the view that by Pakistani standards, Pakistani
elite politics are unusually genteel especially when compared to the
latent savagery of mass ethnic and religious politics in that country. The
elites are closely inter-related and share a common set of basic assumption
and interests including not allowing their rivalry to reach the point where
they would start killing each other.
Musharrafs intentions to date have been relatively limited. His
declaration of a state of emergency was a move on the political chessboard;
not an attempt to kick over the whole table. It took place in the context of a
process of negotiation with the PPP-led government under Musharrafs
continued presidency. Musharrafs declaration was a pre-emptive counter to
an apparently imminent move by Supreme Court to tilt the terms of that
compromise radically in favour of the PPP by declaring Musharrafs reelection as president illegal.
However, Musharrafs offer of a deal to the PPP still seems to be
on the table. He presumably hopes that it can still be struck on his terms
rather than hers. Elements of the deal may include, for example, Musharraf
being able to pick another PPP leader as prime minister, rather than being
forced to change the Constitution and accept Benazir herself in this role.

490

A parliamentary majority means building coalition Since the other

parties have good reason to distrust the PPP and each will demand a
disproportionately large share of the government cake. Benazir would also
need military support to keep her coalition together.
Alternately, a parliamentary coalition could be put together against
the PPP. Such a move would be completely democratic and constitutional. It
would also have to include the moderate and not-so-moderate religious
parties. What, one wonders, would the US administration make this product
of Pakistani democracy? Pakistani-style democracy, as presently
constituted, may mitigate some of the dilemmas, though even that is
doubtful. It cannot possibly solve them.
Jo Johnson expressed his views on Musharrafs briefing of the foreign
diplomats. Western diplomats say the armed setbacks in the north illustrate
how Gen Musharrafs protracted struggle to hold on to power is
providing a costly distraction from the fight against pro-Taliban
insurgents. It has been very difficult to get his attention for quite some
time, says one.
Granted an audience at the presidents palace on Constitution Avenue
on Monday morning, several of the 100 or so members of the international
diplomatic corps confronted Gen Musharraf, demanding that he explain how
deploying thousands of troops in Lahore and Karachi to arrest secular,
progressive Pakistanis would contribute to the battle against extremism.
Asked by Robert Brinkley, the UK High Commissioner, whether he
intended to keep his pledge to step down as army chief by next Thursday
and hold elections on schedule, Gen Musharraf provided only slender
reassurance. It remained his intention to take those steps, he is said to have
responded, but the timing could no longer be guaranteed.
One person present described Gen Musharrafs presentation to the
diplomatic corps as a rant against Chaudhry that was astonishing in its
violence. The army chief barely mentioned the war on terror. Another said:
Ninety-six percent of the justification was about judicial interference.
He genuinely believed the Supreme Court was to block his re-election as
president and was therefore putting his survival at stake. And his personal
survival, in his mind is myth, is now one and the same as the survival of
Pakistan, which is why it proved impossible for the US and others to
dissuade him from imposing a state of emergency for a second time.
491

Even as the government publicly pile on pressure and threaten to

review their aid programme to Pakistan, US and UK officials privately
admit that their ability to exercise leverage over Gen Musharraf is
limited. One senior official says that all western countries with a stake in
bringing stability in Afghanistan and protecting their own publics from terror
networks linked to Pakistan are struggling to reconcile their short-term
interests in securing maximum cooperation from Islamabad with their longterm desire to help in the development of a stable, inclusive and democratic
society.
Philip Gordon, a US foreign policy expert at the Brooklings Institute
in Washington, says Americas leverage, even though it is by and far the
most important influence should not be exaggerated: We have lost control
in Pakistan, to the extent that we had any in the first place. We did threaten
Musharraf that there would be consequences for aid, so now the situation is
worse. You dont want to pull the trigger, although you said that you would
do it. All indications are that the administration is reluctant to cut off
Musharraf and cut off aid because they still see him as a necessary partner in
the war on terror.
He adds: Its not just Musharraf against the lawyers, against the
people. We could end up we are ending up turning the majority of the
population against us as the strongmans supporters. Thats just not a great
place to be.
Joe Biden wrote: Ive been saying for some time that Pakistan is the
most complex country we deal with and that a crisis was just waiting, to
happen. On Saturday night, it did. President Musharraf staged a coup against
his own government.
It is hard to imagine a greater nightmare for America than the
worlds second-largest Muslim nation becoming a failed state in
fundamentalist hands, with an arsenal of nuclear weapons and a population
larger than those of Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and North Korea combined.
To prevent that nightmare from becoming a reality, I believe we
need to do three things. First, deal pro-actively with the current crisis.
Second, and for the longer term, move from a Musharraf policy to a Pakistan
policy that gives the moderate majority a chance to succeed. And third, help
create conditions in the region that maximize the chances of success, and
minimize the prospects for failure.
492

Weve got to move from a transactional relationship the exchange

of aid for services to the normal, functional relationship we enjoy with all
of our other military allies and friendly nations. Weve got to move from a
policy of concentrated on one man President Musharraf to a policy
centered on an entire nation Here are the four elements of this new
strategy.
First, triple non-security aid to 1.5 billion annually; for at least a
decade. This aid would be unconditional: its our pledge to the Pakistani
people. Instead of funding military hardware, it would build schools, clinics
and roads.
Second, condition security aid on performance. We should base our
security aid on clear results. Were now spending well over $1 billion
annually, and its not clear were getting our moneys worth. Id spend more
if we get better results and less if we dont.
Third, help Pakistan enjoy a democracy dividend. The first year of
democratic rule should bring an additional 1 billion above the $1.5 billion
non-security aid baseline. And I would tie future non-security aid again,
above the guaranteed baseline to Pakistans progress in developing
democratic institutions and meeting good-governance norms.
Fourth, engage the Pakistani people not just their rulers. This will
involve everything from improved public diplomacy and educational
exchanges to high impact projects that actually change peoples life.
This plan would fundamentally and positively shift the dynamic
between the US and Pakistan. This new Pakistan policy cannot succeed in
isolation. Conditions in the region and in the broader Muslim World
conditions that the United States can affect will make a huge difference,
for good or for bad. Weve got to connect the dots to be, as I suggested at
the outset, smart as well as strong.
First, theres what we should do. To increase the prospects that
Pakistan will take the lead in the fight against the Taliban and al-Qaeda, we
should rededicate ourselves to a forgotten war: Afghanistan. When we
shifted resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq, Musharraf concluded the
Taliban would rebound, so he cut a deal with them.

493

Redoubling our efforts in Afghanistan not just with more troops

but with the right kindand with a reconstruction effort that matches
President Bushs Marshall Plan rhetoricwould embolden Pakistans
government to take a harder line on the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
I believe that Pakistan can be a bridge between the West and the
global Islamic community. Most Pakistanis want a lasting friendship with
America. They respect and admire our society. But they are mystified over
what they see as our failure to live up to our ideals. ]
The Economist observed: Within 48 hours of launching his second
coup on November 3rd, General Pervez Musharraf had compared himself to
Abraham Lincoln and Napoleon Bonaparte. Like Americas president he
told Pakistanis in a televised address, shortly after he had suspended the
Constitution he had been forced to intervene to prevent his country falling
apart. I will not let this country commit suicide, he said. Gen Musharrafs
identification with the little French corporal seemed more apposite
Perhaps unwillingly, General Musharraf confessed to 80 foreign
diplomats in Islamabad on November 5th that his intervention was merely a
matter of self-preservation. The judges were rumoured to be preparing to
deliver their verdict this week.
The General told the diplomats to thank Mr Chaudhry for his
coup. He was then asked by Britains envoy to confirm that he would
nonetheless quit the army and hold an election as promised. General
Musharraf said he aimed to do these things. But he could not say when.
His coup is a direct affront to his most generous supporter. Only
two days before he launched it, Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state,
personally warned General Musharraf not to do so. She has since told him
publicly to quit the army and hold the election as promised, or risk a cut in
American cash.
America is not short of potential leverage. Its walloping aid to his
regime includes $5.6 billion given in cash transfers to the Pakistani defence
ministry from a war-chest known as the Coalition Support Fund. This money
is intended to underwrite the costs of his four-year campaign in the tribal
areas, a crucial American concern. Yet it is nonetheless extraordinarily
munificent, with no strings or stringent accounting requirements. If America

494

wanted to give the General serious pause, it might add both. But this is
unlikely to happen.
Helene Cooper opined: General Musharrafs sweeping crackdown
over the last week has raised questions about that strategy, not least when
he sent thousands of police officers on Friday morning to prevent Benazir
from leading a protest rally against his imposition of emergency.
The images coming out of Pakistan of police forces blanketing the
site of a planned rally by Benazir and then barricading her inside her
residence were hardly consistent with the kind of cooperation the US
promoted. But Bush Administration officials and Pakistani experts say they
still believe that a power-sharing agreement between President Musharraf
and Benazir can survive. We hope were seeing a little bit of political
theatre here, a senior State Department official said.
By that the official meant Benazirs insistence on holding a rally,
General authorities decision to barricade her in her house, and the
subsequent speech by Benazir that was broadcast on official Pakistani
television. But the danger, Bush Administration official said, is that the
longer the public conflict whether choreographed or not continues, the
more likely the chance that the proposed power-sharing deal collapses
completely, leading to even more chaos.
Anne W Patterson, the United States Ambassador to Pakistan,
urged Benazir not to go ahead with the rally because of safety concerns,
and General Musharrafs subordinates told their American counterparts that
they stopped the rally because they were concerned that Benazir might be
attacked by suicide bombers, as she was on the day of her arrival in Karachi
last month, the senior State Department official said.
Events in recent days have underscored fragility of the powersharing plan, administration officials concede. For one thing, if Benazir
cannot hold a rally in public without risking a suicide bombing, how would
she be able to campaign in an election, if President General Musharraf ever
gets around to scheduling one?
In continuing to support General Musharraf even as he has cracked
down on political dissidents and the Press, the Bush Administration has
acquiesced to his argument that he is a bulwark helping to guard his
country, and the US, from extremists in Pakistans frontier provinces.

495

The fear that American officials convinced that General Musharraf is

their only option, will eventually accept half-measures from the
President. In that case, they said, the Pakistani leader would retain his post
as army chief, the central source of his power, and win tightly controlled
elections. The US is underestimating popular discontent with military rule,
they say, and the ability of open elections to stabilize the country.
Ultimately, administration officials are counting on their belief that
President Musharraf and Benazir need each other to survive politically.
Benazir Bhutto desperately wants to be the prime minister, and Musharraf
needs her vis--vis the United States, said Robert Oakley, a former United
States ambassador to Pakistan. Oakley added: Now I dont think theyre
going to make that work. But I dont think that doesnt mean they wont try.
The Wall Street Journal wrote: Whatever Pervez Musharrafs failings
in Islamabad, his impact in Washington has been nothing short of
miraculous. With his declaration of emergency rule, the President has
single-handedly revived the Bush doctrine. The same people who only
days ago were deriding President Bush for naively promoting democracy are
now denouncing him for not promoting it enough in Pakistan.
There are exceptions to every foreign policy rule, and sometimes
democracy promotion must compete with other American interests, such as
the need to pursue al-Qaeda. In the Cold War, Americans often had little
choice but to support authoritarian rulers who were allies in the larger
struggle against Communism. Sometimes the alternatives are worse, and
Pakistan is a hard case.
Clearly, however, this calculation has to change after Musharrafs
emergency declaration. The arrest of lawyers, human rights activists and
political opponents shows that his main targets arent extremists He is
believed to have taken this step to avoid a Supreme Court ruling against
his recent presidential election.
Times observed: President General Pervez Musharrafs
announcement that he would, after all, schedule elections by midFebruary More neutral observers, however, believe that he has been
forced into this concession by growing pressure in Washington, especially
US President George W Bushs frank telephone call, and the streak of
pragmatism that usually succeeds the Generals initial hasty and
histrionic announcements.
496

His preoccupation has been how to overcome the hostility of the

judiciary to his determination to keep his uniform, while returning the
country to a semblance of civilian rule. This is what lies behind his dismissal
of the Chief Justice and other judges, as well as the brief house arrest order
imposed on Benazir Bhutto. Both were intended to deal with immediate
challenges, and General Musharraf has been frank in admitting the link.
If she had attended the Rawalpindi rally she might have felt under
unwelcome pressure to ratchet up her rhetoric, and to call on her supporters
to defy the emergency. President Musharraf, for his part, needs to show
his supporters that he is still very much in charge and is not allowing
Benazir to dictate political developments.
In their wary circling of each others positions, both are conscious of
the need to respond to internal tensions and external pressure. The danger is
that their supporters are far less ready to avoid confrontation. If Benazir
plays the martyr too effectively, her party will feel emboldened to mount
a campaign of civil disobedience and join forces with those embittered
lawyers who have already turned their backs on compromise.
For his part, General Musharraf clearly feels the need to reassure
the army and has taken some steps that are disquieting. The release of
some militants is probably intended to reduce the opposition in the tribal
areas. But it sends a wrong signal to middle-class opponents of the
emergency, who are still being rounded up, and to Washington, whose
support for the President is largely determined by his value as ally in
fighting extremism.
Lyse Doucet said: I often have this strange sense of dj vu in
Pakistan, a feeling of having been through this before seen it, and done
it. There is a sense, at moments, of a place where time has stood still This
is a nation that goes round and round in political circles.
It has struggled for decades and still struggles to get the balance
right between the army and the politicians, on a spectrum running
somewhere between a boisterous democracy and iron-fisted dictatorship. In
a place which has been ruled by the military for about half of its 60-year
history, I have seen captains become colonels become generals and then
retire but, even then hover in the wings.

497

Politicians grow older, greyer, and sometimes fatter but the same
one have dominated the political landscape ever since I started coming
here nearly 20 years ago. And human rights activists, whose bravery can be
nothing short of heroism, have campaigned against one military ruler and
discredited political leader after another.
So once again this week I found myself standing in front of coils of
razor wire and police barricades blocking the main avenue leading to the
parliament, blocking the protesters. Many years ago, I cannot exactly
remember when, I had recorded a report on that spot which talked about a
country at war with itself. And this week I found the words coming back
into my head, as events on the ground repeated themselves.
Sumit Ganguly in Newsweek wrote: Once again Pakistan is in the
vortex of another self-inflicted crisis. President Pervez Musharrafs
decision to declare a state of emergency had little or nothing to do with the
reasons he has given, namely growing lawlessness and mayhem sweeping
across the country. Instead it has much to do with his desire to stay on in
public office.
What will transpire in Pakistan in next several weeks and months
will depend on the choices of key domestic and external players. To
begin with, President Musharraf himself still holds one or two last cards.
Faced with mounting foreign criticism, he could, should he choose to,
overturn this latest decree and proceed forthwith towards free and fair
elections. He will try to find some way to hold an election in January, the
result of which is all but a foregone conclusion. What he apparently still fails
to understand is that even if the Bush Administration is prepared to bless
such a move, his own countrymen are in a much less forgiving mood. An
election of dubious validity will only deepen and worsen the current state of
political disarray and upheaval.
Two or three pivotal factors could shape the future course of
events. At home, if Benazir Bhutto and her principal advisers in the PPP
finally shed their propensity for rank opportunism and throw in their lot with
the beleaguered (and battered) lawyers, President Musharraf may have to
devise another strategy than simply packing the nations jails. She has, after
a suitable pause, stated that unless Musharraf promises to shed his uniform
soon and affirms the mid-January election, her party will take to the streets.

498

The other two critical players who could help resolve this crisis are
the United States and, to a lesser degree, the United Kingdom. Thus far the
criticisms from both Washington and London have been muted and mixed.
The Pentagon and US State Department have sent out seemingly conflicting
signals. The Pentagon is apparently unwilling to even temporarily suspend
military assistance to Pakistan. The State Department has been a bit more
critical, but its leverage over the Pakistani military is distinctly limited. If
President Musharraf is to be prevented from plunging his country into a
deeper abyss of political disarray and possibly even civil war, the White
House will have to concentrate its mind.
Fareed Zakaria in the same magazine wrote: In a meeting with some
80 foreign envoys in Islamabad last Monday, Musharraf revealed the real
reason for suddenly declaring a state of emergency on Nov 3. Gone was the
fiction that he was acting to save the country from the menace of terrorism.
Speaking to the diplomats he seemed to have one target in mind the
countrys activists Supreme Court, which he blamed for aiding terrorists
and targeting his presidency.
Musharraf never tried to build a political base of his moderate
approach and ally with other mainstream, secular parties, such as Sharifs
Muslim League or Bhuttos Pakistan Peoples Party Musharraf disdains
politics. In 2004, when he was riding high in the polls, I asked him why he
wouldnt run for presidency in a direct election. I am not a politician, he
said. He never realized that to rule his country, he had to become one.
Can he last? Much depends on the Army, which remains the
dominant force in Pakistani life. For now it seems to be behind him. He has
placed all the right people in the right positions, retired Pakistan Army Lt
Gen Talat Masood says of the recent reshuffle of the Armys high command.
But the emergency regulations and the widespread arrests of Supreme Court
judges, lawyers, and civic and political activists are so unpopular that the
strong public backlash is bound to influence the armed forces.
It remains crucial to keep the Pakistani military completely involved
and comfortable with the changes that are taking place like it or not,
Pakistans military runs the country. And the Army believes, with some
accuracy, that it has already been abandoned once by the United States and
the West.

499

Many observers are frightened by what is happening in Pakistan. The

country is seen as a collapsed state, filled with jihadi, nukes and badlands.
Chaos there can only be bad news. While there are reasons to be concerned,
they can be exaggerated. The Pakistani military is a professional and
disciplined organization with control over nuclear program. And what is
happening now could be seen as a sign of progress. The fact that the first
crowds to take to the streets to protest emergency rule were pinstriped
lawyers is a testament to the strength of civil society in Pakistan.
The task of the United States and other friends of Pakistan is to guide
it on the path that keeps the country stable and the jihadis at bay, pushes the
political system toward greater legitimacy and openness, and keeps the key
forces within the society working together. This means that the military and
the major political parties must be drawn together to help govern the
country. If they become unalterably opposed to one another, Pakistan will
once again crumble.
If Pakistans transition is worked through carefully, keeping all
mainstream forces in society invested in its future, the outcome could be
greater stability and security. Badly managed, Pakistan will lapse once more
into misrule, corruption and extremism. Either way, Pakistan eventually had
to move back toward civilian rule, to return to politics. That time, whether
Musharraf realizes it or not, is now.
Anne Gearan observed: A shrewd leader who has manoeuvred out of
tough spots before, Musharraf may find a way to tamp down internal
resistance, offer the West sufficient democratic concessions and stay on.
That would be a relief to many in the Bush Administration who see few
good alternatives to a continued bargain with a leader pledged to fight
extremism and keep nuclear weapons under effective lock.
The Bush Administration hopes tensions and street protests
subside, avoiding massive unrest in a nation on the fulcrum of the US effort
to fight terrorism and extremism in the Muslim world. US officials do not
rule out a revival of a US and British proposal for Musharraf to share power
with Ms Bhutto.
Sensitive to the perception that the United States is dancing to one
mans tune, the Bush Administration has started referring broadly to the
Pakistani leadership and contacting other senior military leaders. The

500

back-channel contacts include some who may have pull with Musharraf or
even pose an alternative to his rule.
To US relief, Musharraf has pledged to hold elections early next
year. There is no guarantee he will do so, nor that he will follow through
on a list of other US demands including that he give up his post as head of
the army and govern as a civilian.
Bush had a blunt talk with Musharraf on Wednesday, but officials
including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have indicated it is unlikely
that the US will make any significant cuts in the mostly military aid that
flows to Pakistan Musharraf relies on the money in part to improve his
own standing, but the basis of the aid his alliance with the United States
threatens his power as well and is broadly unpopular in Pakistan.
Simon Jenkins urged: President Musharraf should pull his socks up,
Miliband warned in tones of a house master. If Iran is on the Wests axis of
evil, Pakistan is on its axis of dread. Such has been the incompetence of
western intervention in this region that American and British diplomats have
been left with a dwindling number of allies.
The Wests patronage of Musharraf was initially successful in
propping up a likeable strongman who might resist the then not serious
threat that Islamists might get their hands on a nuclear weapon. Indeed, part
of the pact between Islamabad and the Islamists power base in the tribal
lands near Afghanistan was that each would keep off the others turf. Were
it not for the poison of Afghan war, Pakistans anarchical federalism
was probably sustainable, with even some hope of ferreting out Osama bin
Laden.
Every risk was taken by the West in Pakistan. Its outrageous nuclear
ambitions were appeased. Its support against the Taliban was bought without
thought of the impact on its turbulent politics. The cooperation of the army
was assumed. The discipline of dictatorship was harnessed to the cause
of anti-terrorism. Everyone played with fire.
It is by no means self-evident that anything after Musharraf must be
better, least of all for British interests. Londons record in projecting
post-dictatorial utopias is not good at present. Pompous lectures on the
virtues of democracy might be appropriate in the abstract, but from a nation
losing not one but two wars in its cause these lectures might come amiss.

501

Musharraf may have gone too far down the road to hold his country behind
him. It may be that a more benign military ruler will follow him or that he
will peacefully transfer power to a new, uncorrupt and enlightened
parliament under Bhutto and her allies.
All that seems certain is that Miliband is unlikely to be a better judge
of how to rule Pakistan than are Pakistanis, whether in or out of uniform. He
and his colleagues have done enough damage in this region already.
Pakistan has enough on its plate without being lectured by the political
curators of Baghdad, Basra and Kabul. It should be left to its own
devices.
The Washington Post wrote: Despite his promises to Washington and
back-channel negotiations with opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, Mr
Musharraf has not altered the course he embarked on last weekend
when he suspended the Constitution. He still intends to dictate his own
continuance in power and to curtail the influence of the countrys moderate
political elite the judges, journalists, human rights activists and secular
politicians who ought to be his armys allies in a war against Islamic
extremists.
Musharrafs insistence on fighting rather than working with the
countrys civilian political centre dooms the battle against extremism.
Though his government pledges to lift emergency rule, it clearly does not
intended to restore the rule law, which would mean reinstating the
Supreme Court judges whom Mr Musharraf has placed under arrest.
The only way to preserve US interests and the cause of
moderation in Pakistan is to eliminate the obstacle of Mr Musharrafs
hold on power. Mr Bush must now insist on the second demand he made in
Thursdays phone call, which is that Mr Musharraf retire from the army. His
likely successor, Gen Ashfaq Kiani, the next army leader, rather than Mr
Musharraf, should be encouraged by the United States to lead the
negotiations with the Pakistani moderate opposition and not just Ms
Bhutto.
US military aid should be linked to a restoration of the
Constitution and reinstatement of the judges who have been removed
from their posts. If a restored Supreme Court rules that Mr Musharraf was
legally elected president last month, he could retain that position; otherwise
he should be obliged to retire to private life.
502

Pakistans crisis unquestionably poses serious risks to US national

security. But the Bush Administrations practice of clinging to Mr Musharraf
is increasing rather than lessening the danger. Pakistan can defeat Muslim
extremism only through the empowerment of its moderate secular civil
society with the full support of the army and the United States. Mr
Musharrafs actions in the past week have dimmed any chance that he could
play a leading role in that process.
For the same newspaper Bashir Goth contributed: I agree with David
Ignatius conclusion in his latest column that changing Pakistan is a job for
Pakistanis, and history suggests that the more we meddle, the more likely
we are to get things wrong. In the Muslim World, it is history that shapes
peoples perceptions of political situations. Unlike people in the West, who
view emerging political scenarios through prisms of economics and of selfinterest, Muslims and Arabs turn to history for explanations of western
conspiracy in every situation they face.
The best scenario Washington can adopt in Pakistan is to let
things sort themselves out. The less the US interferes, the more
comfortable Pakistanis will feel about their future. Most Pakistanis hostility
towards Musharraf is rooted in his support for Bushs efforts to topple the
Taliban. Any US interference in Pakistani affairs at this critical juncture of
their history well be unwelcome.
Supporting Benazir Bhutto and the masses protesting against
Musharrafs totalitarian rule wont help things, either. American support
for future should be in line with the Pakistani peoples choice, even if
Islamists win the upcoming elections. As developments in Afghanistan, Iraq
and Somalia have proven, America has lost many hearts and minds in its war
against terror. If the US wants any future Pakistani leader to earn a measure
of legitimacy, it must adopt a hands-off policy there.
Even Pakistans die-hard anti-Islamist politicians, who once saw
America as a savior, would understand the Bush Administrations desertion
of Musharraf. They might think the General has dug his own grave by
putting too much faith in America, against the strong anti-American
sentiments of his people.
Ahmed Rashid wrote for the Yale Global: The US response is
muted. President George Bush continues to support Musharraf, saying on 11
November that his election date was positive and that he trusts Musharraf.
503

Musharraf asserts that he expects no cuts in more than $1 billion of annual

US foreign aid, 80 percent of which goes to the Pakistani military.
Washington has presented its dilemma over Pakistan in a nave
either-or paradigm either the US supports the democratic process and
civil society or it supports the army to battle terrorism. Sadly, the Bush
Administration has co-opted much of the mainstream US media to accept
that options are few and the US must side with the army.
`In reality, no government can conceivably wage a successful war
against terrorism without stability, a degree of political legitimacy and the
support of a majority of its people. Political stability is the sine qua non
for fighting terrorism, but Musharrafs actions have destabilized Pakistan
like never before while Bush has overturned common sense and long term
US interests with his support for Musharraf.
The Americans tried to broker a deal with Bhutto However,
Musharrafs heart is not in power sharing, and the emergency leaves her
in a difficult position. Her Pakistan Peoples Party and the public demand
that she unite the divided opposition and lead a campaign to topple
Musharraf, while the Americans insist she cooperate with Musharraf. If she
dithers, she will lose public support and her vote bank.
Anti-Americanism now run rampant in Pakistan most markedly
in the educated middle classes who have borne the brunt of the crackdown.
With local and foreign TV news channels off the air, the brutalization of
women and students in the streets, spiraling inflation and a dramatic
economic downturn, the middle classes who should be the governments
natural allies in the war against terrorism become sympathizers of the
Islamists
US pressure, mass mobilization of civil society and pressure from the
Establishment remain the main tracks for convincing Musharraf to step
down Without greater international pressure to restore normalcy,
Pakistans growing instability is likely to affect the entire region and
eventually the safety of nuclear weapons.
Thomas R Pickering, Carla Hills and Morton Abramowitz opined:
The Bush Administrations aims of securing support for the war on terror
and stability for a nuclear power will continue to be right, but as a nation of

504

160 million people rapidly frays under repression, it will only become
more obvious that authoritarianism is not the answer.
This realization is already setting in. Many in Bush Administration
and Congress have been sending clear messages of disapproval to
Musharraf. The Pentagon, however, has been more ambiguous, and it is
unclear whether military aid will continue as if nothing happened on Nov 3.
The United States must go beyond verbal condemnations and show with
actions that it believes Musharraf is on the wrong track.
The alternative to Musharrafs military rule is not a mob of
radical Islamists this is not Iran of the 1970s. The alternative, as in the
Philippines, is a moderate, secular, political opposition organized into
political parties. Both the Pakistan Peoples Party under Benazir Bhutto and
the Pakistan Muslim League under Nawaz Sharif are opposed to the
Islamists Poll after poll has found that if fair and free elections were held
under constitutional protections and monitored by national and international
observers, the result would be a moderate, pro-Western, anti-extremist
government in Pakistan.
In a fair vote, extremists dont stand a chance. It is only
government that props them up out of fear of what a democratic election
would bring. Indeed, the same Republican Institute poll showed that 74
percent oppose Musharrafs re-election.
The United States must make it clear to Pakistan that our
relationship including military cooperation, training, support for the E-16s
Washington allowed Pakistan to purchase and other aid not directly linked to
counter-terrorism will fundamentally change unless there is a return to
democracy.
This means revoking the declaration of martial law; restoration of
the Constitution, the judiciary and fundamental freedoms; and the release of
all political detainees. Musharraf must give up his post of army chief and
abide by any Supreme Court decision on his eligibility for the presidency
The Bush Administration and Congress urgently need to make clear that the
United States will not support a repressive regime that inevitably will
threaten Pakistans stability as well as US security.

In Pakistan, the observers wasted no time in scratching their heads

to reach the conclusion that imposition of emergency rule by Musharraf was

505

aimed at removing the only hurdle in his self-perpetuation. This hurdle was
the superior judiciary which had shown the courage to be independent of
executives influence. The independence of the judiciary was supported by
the lawyers community and the private media and thus they had to be
treated as part of the obstacle.
Dr Ijaz Ahsan was of the view that Musharrafs extra-constitutional
action was aimed at having judges of his choice. Nelson Mandela, in his
celebrated autobiography entitled Long Walk to Freedom has described the
time when he and other members of the African National Congress were put
on trial for treason The trial lasted a year. Ultimately, the white judges
acquitted all the accused. This came as rude shock to the apartheid
government. The authorities then decided that they would not hold any trials
of a similar nature until they had judges of their own choice. This shows
how important it is for any government that seeks protection for its
arbitrary and unjust actions to have judges of its choice.
This shows why Benazir Bhuttos government brought in judges who
earned the name of jiyala judges. Similarly, Mian Nawaz Sharif brought in
his matwala judges, each of whom obliged with judgments that suited Mian
sahib. The latest situation after the fresh oath after the PCO is that those who
suited the government have been sworn in In the context of Musharrafs
doctrine of enlightened moderation they can be called ujiyala judges.
It is widely felt that the emergency has been imposed because it
suited both parties to the infamous Deal, because the Supreme Court
was about to decide against Musharraf in the case dealing with his eligibility
as a presidential candidate, and against Benazir in the National
Reconciliation Ordinance case. Mohtarma would appear to have complained
to the Americans from Dubai that the government was not honouring their
pledge that they would withdraw both local and foreign cases against her.
The emergency is really martial law, because in the former there is
no concept of a new oath under a Provisional Constitutional Order, with
those judges who refuse to take oath being dismissed. It will intensify the
involvement of the armed forces in politics, keeping the troops away from
their real job of defending the countrys frontiers, where God knows they are
badly needed.
What can the people do? If they want to show solidarity with those
struggling for the restoration of the ruler of law and democracy, the very
506

least they can do is to place bouquets of flowers outside the homes of the
thousands who have been arrested or whose houses have been raided in
every town and city across the country.
Wajahat Latif termed the crackdown against judiciary unthinkable.
The most significant case before the Supreme Court was that of General
Musharraf himself. His eligibility as a candidate for election as the president
was questioned by Justice Wajihuddin and Makhdoom Amin Fahim, the
two other candidates, before the Supreme Court As the hearing proceeded
from one day to another, the remarks and observations of the judges
seemed to suggest a decision against the General.
Most of the people and the legal community, in large, believed that
Musharraf was not qualified, and should be disqualified as a candidate to
contest the presidential election. The Constitution and the law on their side,
eminent lawyers like Aitzaz Ahsan, Hamid Khan and others argued
brilliantly with complete mastery of the law and remarkably persuasive
orations.
The government team, on the other hand, was insipid. The Attorney
General, a former High Court judge who was forced to resign in the past,
was inarticulate. Last Friday, as I followed the proceedings in the court and
spoke to several eminent lawyers during the breaks, the impression that the
case was going against Musharraf was palpable. The court was to meet
again on Monday, but on Saturday Musharraf declared martial law and
issued the PCO.
The same day, the CJ constituted a seven-member bench and
passed an order declaring the proclamation of emergency and the PCO
illegal. A copy of his order was shown on the TV screens of private channels
before they were shut down by PEMRA
The emergency has thus nothing to do with extremism: it is aimed
at Musharrafs opponents. The dissenting judges are under house arrest,
incommunicado. The president of the Supreme Court Bar Association and
thousands of lawyers, political leaders/workers and members of civil society
have been bunged in disreputable jails like Mianwali and Jhang.
Doing the unthinkable, Musharraf has isolated himself as never
before. Domestically his popularity has been declining, especially this year
when it went into nose-dive. With this attack on the judiciary and the

507

gagging of the media he has lost all credibility in the eyes of the world. It is
democracy not extremism that worries him, says Vali.
Dr Faisal Bari regretted the molestation of judiciary and stressed upon
the need for its restoration. General Musharraf has pushed us back by
decades if not more. With that act he has negated the Constitution, made the
legislature and judiciary ineffective and created a legal havoc by imposing
the executive, under the military command, as the supreme power in the
country. This is not only a very poor outcome for today; it will have
repercussions for us for a long time to come.
And his excuse for doing so: that the judiciary was getting out of
hand. But what is it that the judiciary was saying? It was questioning
whether he had the right to be the president while in uniform and whether he
was eligible to contest elections, it was questioning whether the prime
minister and the government had the right to forcibly deport Pakistani
citizens when the court had explicitly said that they did not have such rights,
it was questioning whether security agencies had the right to detain people
without due legal process for infinite or very long periods, and it was
questioning whether the state could declare citizens to be terrorists without
sufficient proof. Are these things bad? Was the judiciary pushing the country
in the wrong direction by asking these questions? Clearly, General
Musharraf thought so.
And what had media done? It had reported facts, it had given
peoples opinion on facts and it had debated facts. General Musharraf felt
that the media was irresponsible. He clearly does not know that freedom
of expression matters only when someone has a difference of opinion with
you. If they agree with you, you are obviously happy with them, and the
General was too, with the same media, till the beginning of this year but now
that media is telling him that almost all of his recent moves have been
unpopular, which independent opinion have also confirmed, he has become
unhappy with the media. Media has become irresponsible and freedom of
expression is no longer a good principle.
After November 3 there have been thousands of arrests, hundreds of
people have been beaten up mercilessly and tortured, judges who had a
conscience and had some concern for law have been sacked, constitution is
held in abeyance and we are being forced to live in a state of anarchy and
repression. With every passing day we are moving further away from

508

where we were prior to November 3 and the journey back is looking more
and more difficult.
The day a more representative government comes, it will have to
confront the demand for accountability for what the General has done. He
will have to answer for taking away the basic rights of people, for arresting
thousands, for beating thousands and for undermining almost all
independent institutions. Even if he is somehow able to manage the
legitimacy issue, if the judges that have been sacked in the last week are not
brought back, we will never be able to go back to the place where we were
and the General will never be able to legitimize himself in the true sense.
He can always get his cases decided by a new court, and the
Attorney General tells us that such a court should be in place by Monday or
Tuesday, but that will never give him the legitimacy that he is looking for.
Can he bring back the same court, and can he hope to be in power even after
that? That is the crux of the matter.
But if he decides not to restore the higher level judiciary and does
indeed try to get himself and his martial law legitimized by new courts, he
could get away with it for sometime and he could create the illusion, for
himself and his coterie of sycophants, of legitimacy, but not only will it not
last, it will also have severe long term negative consequences
The General and his aides have to understand this. By making the
judges take a new oath under the PCO, by making them subservient to the
will of the establishment, by reducing their powers to hear cases regarding
human rights abuses and other acts of the executive and by introducing more
stringent checks on the judiciary the only result will be an ineffective
judiciary: a judiciary that will not have the confidence and the trust of the
people. And without the trust you can never have rule of law and a working
democratic system.
So, even if the General gets himself legitimized from a
gerrymandered court and a subservient parliament, and even if he can extend
his rule for a year or a few years (and with sufficient repression he can do it)
it will never be legitimate in the eyes of the ordinary citizen.
A judiciary that fears sacking when debating cases, judges who fear
that they will not be hired and promoted if they do not tow the line and
judges who fear that they will be fired if they do not listen to the executive,

509

judges who do not have the power to take suo moto action and judges who
are selected on the basis of loyalty to the King, what kind of justice can
they deliver, and what kind of trust can they create in the minds of
citizenry? And if that cannot create that trust, what kind of government and
democratic rule can we develop in the country? General Musharraf can
repress opposition all he wants, but he will never have legitimacy this way
and he will never be able to live up to his slogan of Pakistan first this way.
It is all about self-preservation or self-perpetration, observed
Inayatullah. Reminded of a perspective Micky Mouse saying what we see
depends on what were looking for. If a ruler is looking for selfpreservation or self-perpetration he is bound to take steps to achieve his
objectives and negate all that stands in the way of securing his goals. No
great surprise, therefore, the regime taking recourse to recent drastic
measures.
After all, the end sometimes justifies the means. If the end is to bring
in a special brand of democracy, anchored on a partnership with the
military, in the larger interests of the country and the people, there is
everything right for swallowing the bitter pill of a temporary suspension of
the Constitution. The country needs the leader and the country comes
first.
If some meddlesome and misguided judges stand in the way, they
need to be replaced with those who are willing to respond to the wisdom of
the leader. If the lawyers protest, they should be restrained from breaking the
law in force which prohibits the taking out of procession and rallies as for as
some mischievous politicians and their stupid followers as well as the
thakedars of human rights, they can be picked up and jailed to provide them
with an opportunity to rethink their follies.
The students, however, a different lot; they are immature and
unwise. They were not expected to agitate especially those studying in such
enlightened universities as the LUMS and Beacon house the latter might
have taken a cue from the so very wise FM Kasuri. Surely, they will be
watched closely and hopefully till a few days pipe down. Dont they see that
the kings party has unanimously approved of the promulgation of
emergency plus as appropriately dubbed by the honourable Rashid Ahmad.
More worrisome has been the unwelcome reaction from abroad.
Disapproval of the Europeans including the British can be ignored. Earlier
510

too they have been making irrational statements. They need not be
interfering in the internal affairs of Pakistan. It is however the all-powerful
Americans who really matter. For a number of days only the state
department officials expressed themselves about the recent developments in
Pakistan offering unsolicited advice to hold elections, end emergency and
half repression.
Seven of the fired judges had the cheek to declare that the well
thought out emergency declaration was unconstitutional. Good that their
prudent successors have already overruled the uncalled for verdict. It is also
not realized that the media especially the television channels that had
enjoyed so much freedom under the regime had to be directed not to
organize anti-government talk shows and inappropriate programmes.
They need to suspend their activities with a view to ponder over
their unpatriotic behaviour. This is only a temporary step and soon enough
they will be restored their freedom which they can exercise in the light of
well devised new laws issued in the form of two ordinances. No sir, the
country comes first and on no account can its guardians be unnecessarily
criticized and demonized. Let the press and newsmens associations in
Pakistan and abroad rant and rave. Pretty soon they will realize the futility of
defying the De facto legitimate government of the day.
Most unexpectedly and most unfortunate that buddy Bush who was
keeping a prudent silence all these days has suddenly spoken and has firmly
said that the United States wants you to hold the elections as scheduled and
take your uniform off. This indeed was most unnerving. What an unkind
cut! Just see what he added to this directive, you cant be the president and
the head of the military at the same time. No ambiguity, no leeway, no
loopholes. As a good friend he had all along known very well that the
uniform was an integral part of the ongoing dispensation. What a turn
around? Sad, very sad indeed! Promptly, therefore it had to be announced
that elections would be held before February 15, 2008 and the uniform
would be taken off before the president was sworn in. It is for judges now to
clear the path for the oath to be taken.
Most amazing and I might have said amusing actors or shall we call
them jokersnay enthusiastic supporters of the regime. For the sake of
power and pelf, they or at least most of them have sold their souls.
Unmindful of utterly oblivious as they are, of the lavish role they are

511

playing, they are making a mockery of the norms and the spirit of
democracy and the rule of law.
Three news items published in the press yesterday eloquently
sum up the situation created by the proclamation of the emergency and the
PCO. One that the American lobbying firm Cassidy and Associates who
had won $1.2 million contract from Pakistan government have thrown in
the towel and have refused to effectively fulfill the mission because of the
emergency.
Two, that Chinese engineers stopped construction work on three
hydel projects on Thursday after police abandoned their station and 50
soldiers their survey camp, when militants from Swat began making their
presence felt in Shangla District. Three, Pakistan more dangerous than
Iran, warns Russia.
Raoof Hasan wrote: The inevitable was revoked on the basis of a
concocted charge sheet against the superior judiciary of the country. The
proclamation of emergency, issued by the Chief of the Army Staff General
Pervez Musharraf, condemned the judiciary for interfering in government
policy and executive functions, thus adversely impacting the economic
growth and the cause of the fight against terrorism. It also accused some
judges of transgressing the limits of judicial authority and taking over the
executive and the legislative functions of the state leading to the erosion of
the three-pillar edifice of the prevalent system in the country.
What prompted General Musharraf to resort to this extreme step
just a few days before the apex court was to announce its decision regarding
the eligibility for participating in the presidential elections? Obviously, it is
not contained in the reasons listed out for the proclamation. One has to see
beyond that to get a clue.
One also has to look at some of the allied acts that were being
enacted alongside the ongoing principal case before the apex court. These
included the petitioning of the decree called the National Reconciliation
Ordinance 2007 absolving all those who may have committed financial
irregularities between 1985 and 1999 as well as the deportation of Nawaz
Sharif in clear violation of the injunction of the Supreme Court.
It was feared by the establishment that the apex court was going to
hand down an adverse judgment in all of these cases, thus causing

512

embarrassment for the government. It was neither willing, nor prepared to

face the far-reaching consequences of at least one of the decisions that
related to the eligibility of the Chief of the Army Staff to be president also.
Thats why pre-emptive steps were envisaged to ensure the survival of the
person holding the dual office.
The issue was not judiciarys pro-activism that may have impaired
the governments ego. The issue also did not relate to the judiciary having
supposedly taken over the executive and the legislative functions of the
state. The issue also had little to do with the so-called fight against terrorism
or the humiliation of the government officials. The government would have
willingly and happily stomached all that if it had the assurance that the apex
court would not rule adversely regarding the eligibility of the Chief of the
Army Staff to be president also
This catapults us face-to-face with the critical question that is pivotal
to the entire mess that has been created over the last eight years of the
unconstitutional, illegal and unethical military rule. The question is not what
the judiciary was going to order and how it would have impacted the future
of the military government. The question is why the military rule there is
in the first instance?
Why is it that all powers of the state should be vested in person of the
Chief of the Army Staff while all others are denuded of even their basic
rights as enshrined in the Constitution? Why is it that the interest of a coterie
of self-seeking individuals should hold sway over that of all others? Why is
it that, for the survival of the current dispensation, the collective safety and
security of people of the country should be gravely jeopardized?
The dimensions are numerous, but there is only one core issue at
the heart of it all. It is the continuity of the Chief of the Army Staff as
president that all institutions of the state are expected to guarantee. Else, you
have the emergency! It is erroneously presumed that the preservation of the
state is linked with a continuity of this dual position, and if it were impaired
in any manner, the future of the state may be endangered.
The truth lies elsewhere. Through continual misrule, things have
come to pass where the interests of the present regime and the state of
Pakistan are at cross-purposes. Any other effort to subjugate the institutions
of the state itself. The proclamation of emergency is a grave new danger that
envelops the fate of the country. Shorn of any constitutional, legal and
513

ethical basis, it stands out as a brazen attack on the interests of the state and
its people.
What is required is that the Constitution be restored forthwith
and the institutions are allowed to function in accordance with its provisions.
All steps taken under the garb of the emergency are withdrawn immediately
and the judges of the apex court reinstated in their positions with authority to
proceed with matters pending before them in accordance with the rule of
law. All restriction on the media If that proclivity is not arrested, we may
soon have to suffer the ignominy of being the sole 21st century pariah!
Muhammad Aamir from Rawalpindi wrote: President Pervez
Musharraf says that media should demonstrate more responsibility. One
would say he himself acted very responsibly on October 1999 when he
imposed his first emergency after deposing the then Prime Minister Nawaz
Sharif. Now he has again acted responsibly and imposed emergency in
the country arresting the entire judiciary.
This is strange that USA, UK and EU, who are considered champions
of democracy in the world, have not taken any tangible step to stop General
Musharraf from taking these authoritarian steps against his own countrymen.
May be they think he is acting responsibly.
It appears Musharraf considers anyone and everyone criticizing
the decisions and policies to be irresponsible. He first took opposition
political parties to task, then lawyers and now judiciary and media. Many
opposition political leaders have either been arrested or placed under house
arrest whereas raids for more arrests continue.
Musharraf was not satisfied with disposing off the undesirable
judges; he held them under house arrest and subjected them to pressure
tactics. The Nation commented: Amid an outpouring of concern at the
current situation in the country from all corners of the world, there are
disturbing reports of all sorts of pressure being exercised on the sacked
judges, now kept under house arrest, to break their resolve to hold out
against the extra-constitutional measure. At least two dismissed Supreme
Court judges, namely Justice Rana Bhagwandas and Justice Khalilur
Rahman Ramday have complained of having been denied the right to
perform their obligatory religious duties. The former wished to go out to
celebrate Divali, Hindu religions holiest festival, with his relatives and
friends, but was told at the last minute that he could not leave his house, and
514

the latter met a similar fate when disallowed to go to a mosque to offer

Friday prayers, putting a question mark on a statement attributed to Attorney
General Malik Abdul Qayyum that there were no restrictions on the
movement of the deposed judges.
Crackdown on lawyers, including those of high standing who were in
the forefront of the case arguing for squashing the presidential reference
against the CJ and for his reinstatement, have led to hundreds being arrested,
and some of them beaten up in the streets while demonstrating. Media
reports also point to incidents of torture; the name of Ali Ahmed Kurd, who
was on the team defending the CJ against the reference, is being mentioned
in this context. Prominent politicians apart, the fate of large number of
ordinary political activists taken into custody, is not known It is high time
the authorities heeded the advice pouring in from all quarters and lifted the
emergency.
Apart from toppling of the judiciary, it was essential for the regime to
silence all the dissenting voices, particularly the media. The regime
imposed complete blackout of news. Mahwish Fatima from Karachi wrote:
While General Pervez Musharraf may have valid reasons for imposing
emergency, the governments move to enforce a complete news media
blackout in the country will prove counter-productive.
The people of Pakistan are worried with the uncertainty surrounding
the security and political situation in the country. The information void is
not going to help unite the people in such dire times. The regime would
exactly like that the people do not unite.
M Wasim Elahi from Gujranwala observed: Pakistan is suffering the
worst political turmoil of its history. The state aggression has curbed the
voices of the people. Innumerable lawyers and political workers have been
arrested, detained or kidnapped by the law enforcing agencies. Our
military, paramilitary, rangers, police, FIA, CIA, IB, MI, are all busy in
securing the unconstitutional rule. Judicial work has been paralyzed
throughout the country.
Access to media channels, news sources and prominent websites are
blocked by PEMRA and PTA. General Musharraf said in his speech on Nov
3 that the economic activities & law and order situation were deteriorating
due to the actions of the superior judiciary. But what about the economic
and administrative fall out of his action now?
515

The nation is deeply mired in uncertainty about the future of

Pakistan. I am a lawyer myself and am deeply concerned about the
unconstitutional state of affairs in my country. The Pakistani nation is
helpless at being treated so disdainfully by the security forces/agencies.
Other dissenting voices were silenced through a massive crackdown
leading to arrest of thousands of people under charges like treason. The
Nation wrote: The authorities have arrested thousands, indiscriminately in
the sense that even those suspected to be planning to make trouble have been
taken in custody. Charging campaigners against the emergency with
treason and sedition 12 persons have been booked on these charges
sounds too severe.
The extraordinary severe action by the administrative machinery that
tends to put the drive towards full-fledged democracy on the backburner,
has, quite expectedly, drawn strong worldwide condemnation and led to
domestic outcry. Even close allies of the government have taken
exception to the promulgation of emergency.
An immediate reversal of the November 3 order; honouring the
commitment to hang up the uniform that has become an intensely
acrimonious issue; putting to place measures that can ensure free and fair
elections on schedule; and a peaceful transfer of power to the elected
representatives would not only serve the national interests but also put an
end to the turmoil presently engulfing the country.
In a subsequent editorial the newspaper added: How fishy, then, is
that the only individuals arrested and detained so far are either liberal,
secular civil society members or political leaders and activists of parties
that are, far from being terrorist organizations, participating in the positive
democratic political framework of the state? One of the most glaring
examples in this regard is the detention of M Hamza, a former PML-N
MNA. The gentleman in question is an octogenarian. He had all but retired
from practical politics.
The authorities, whose dated records probably listed him as a
member of the N League, would have gone to his house in Toba Tek Singh
to swoop him up. After doing so, they have done to him what has been done
to other political detainees: they have sent him to a jail far away from his
hometown This newer trend of greater spatial displacement is an
attempt at mental torture of the detainees.
516

Leaving the ethics of meting out such a treatment to a senior,

respected former politician aside, on wonders about the utility that the
government thought it would derive from placing the octogenarian under
solitary confinement. By what stretch of the imagination could he have
posed a risk to the stability of the country? But, for that matter, what
threat did the members of the civil society and the lawyers pose? This is a
dangerous paranoia that should be jettisoned as soon as possible.
The regime has been moving as per plan, but the opposition
remained unimpressive, observed Ikramullah. The response of the
opposition parties need not be repeated. Plainly speaking, it is so far
restricted to rhetoric, no matter how loud the verbal big bang.
No political party or alliance has so far succeeded in bringing
enough people on the streets and sustain this anti-government movement at
least for a couple of weeks to create the desired effect at the national and
international level.
It appears unlikely to stir the masses, as things stand at present in
all the four provinces. The lawyers, the ousted judges and various opposition
parties like PML-N, MMA and other groups have not succeeded so far in
spite of urging the masses to rise against the present regime. At this juncture
Benazir Bhutto, who dashed back to Pakistan after the proclamation of
emergency, threatened on Wednesday that PPP would start Long March
from Lahore to Islamabad
President Musharraf is however not sitting idle. He has received
endorsement of the emergency from the NA as well as the federal cabinet.
In the latest National Security Council he worked out the future roadmap
towards initiating the third and final phase of introducing complete
democracy under a civilian president beginning early 2008.
It is to be hoped that all the political parties shall endeavour to
remove the various irritants in the way of evolving a national consensus to
ensure the implementation of the commitments made by the president of
Pakistan. The nation and the international community should welcome the
good news about the finalizing of the date of the elections in order to usher
in peace and progress not only in Pakistan but also at the global level.
Mirza Parvez Baig from wrote: General Musharraf has put the
Constitution of Pakistan in abeyance for the second time, which is

517

unprecedented even in our history. However, the opposition leaders appear

to be paralyzed and are looking towards the lawyers, the Bush
Administration, General Kiani, anybody but themselves, for a miracle.
What is their contribution? Has God given us this opposition solely
to appear in the talk shows? The only good thing that has come out of the
imposition of this emergency is that the nation has been saved from the
moronic TV talk shows where these leaders would make wild remarks.
It makes no sense for anyone to be making sacrifices in the name
of democracy and restoration of an independent judiciary when the end
result will be these corrupt and insincere leaders assuming power in the
country. Besides them, corrupt judges who are always willing to take oath
under one PCO or another will become our new judicial masters.
Only Benazir seemed to be playing on the front foot, noted The
Nation. While the PPP failed to hold a public meeting at Liaqat Bagh on
account of the government crackdown, it has succeeded in achieving the
results it had desired. Government orders to keep Ms Bhutto under house
arrest met with widespread disapproval and had to be withdrawn later in the
evening. The ill-advised decision to block her movement provided Ms
Bhutto an opportunity to show that she was defying an all-powerful military
ruler from behind the barbed wires. In the meanwhile she kept the entire
Islamabad and Rawalpindi administration busy the whole day. Ms Bhutto is
now no more on the defensive on charges of a deal with the government but
is once again playing on the front foot.
With Ms Bhutto maintaining that all talks with the government are
off after the imposition of democracy, and calling on the opposition to close
ranks there is again a possibility of the ARD and APDM getting together.
Mian Nawaz Sharif has said he is willing to work with the PPP for the
restoration of democracy. Mr Imran Khan has called for an APC to jointly
work out a strategy to ensure fair and free elections. Unless the government
revokes emergency, gives firm and early dates for holding the elections and
doffing the uniform, the country is likely to plunge into a most
unfortunate crisis.
Nadeem Sayed observed: Benazir Bhutto is moving like a
whirlwind these days to the disappointment of her opponents. She had a
splendid week ever since she arrived in Islamabad from Karachi. She had a
large number of scheduled and unscheduled political engagements.
518

She is also making right kind of noises, though hurting the

government. They are good for her especially with election around the
corner, which she forced President Musharraf to announce in the prevailing
uncertain circumstances, thanks to mainly US pressure. Most important of
all is her call for the restoration of deposed judges under the new PCO. She
is repeatedly calling for their reinstatement.
Interestingly, as she has stolen all the limelight, her political rivals
have gone in the background for the time being with nobody around to
pose a serious challenge to Benazir Bhutto. Even the more blunt and brash
Chaudhrys are lying low for the moment. Given almost a free hand to move
about while other are facing crackdown, she is almost unstoppable. It shows
that the government has kept her part of the deal, willy-nilly.
While she is making all the buzz, there is a pin drop silence
everywhere else. The silence is more noticeable in the ruling party. After
the imposition of emergency the PML leadership is seen nowhere. All the
anti-Bhutto noise has been subdued with BB calling the shots
With the opposition in disarray and its leading parties including
PML-N and JI not sure whether to contest elections under President
Musharraf, it seems a two-way fight brewing for the election. But for the
PML to mount a serious challenge to PPP, it needs to overcome its
organizational handicaps first, the sooner the better.
The Nation wrote: Ms Bhutto was previously being blamed for
leaning on the military crutches to get back into power, must have
disappointed her detractors by braving all administrative obstacles to
mobilize her party workers against the authoritarian move by the current
dispensation. And she has the unrivalled capacity to draw the crowds to
street.
The opposition, which became divided following her back-channel
negotiations with the powers that be, now, seems to be closing ranks. The
first indication came when Mian Nawaz Sharif expressed his willingness to
participate in an all-parties conference proposed by Ms Bhutto and offered to
join a united struggle but only after obtaining some clarifications from the
PPP about its contracts with the establishment. This was also endorsed by
Maulana Fazlur Rehman

519

Mian Nawazs demand for the restoration of the Constitution,

immediate withdrawal of the PCO, lifting of emergency and reinstatement of
the sacked judges contains a minimum agenda for the opposition to reunite.
Ms Bhutto should have no reservations at abandoning contacts with the
Establishment now that General Musharraf has made it clear that the
Proclamation of Emergency would not be withdrawn till the next elections.
Against the backdrop of the November 3 assault on the judiciary and the
media followed by draconian amendments in the Army Act, empowering the
military to even court-martial civilians, the opposition has a greater role to
play to save the country from being destabilized.
After Musharrafs statement about elections, The Nation commented:
While there were differences of tone in what the opposition leaders said
about General Musharrafs media conference, the substance was by and
large the same. All questioned the legitimacy of the forthcoming elections
under a state of emergency, which borders on martial law. It was maintained
that free elections could not be held in a situation where the Constitution
remained suspended, so were fundamental rights
More and more people in Pakistan now hold Washington
responsible for the hardening of the posture of Gen Musharraf. On
Saturday President Bush, Secretary Condoleezza Rice and National Security
Adviser Stephen Hadley profusely praised him for support provided in the
War on Terror. Coming as these do in the current context, such statements
would undermine the US and force PPP to distance itself from Washington if
it is to vie for public support.
While the APDM ponders whether to take part in elections or
launch a movement, the PPP has apparently chosen to do both. Ms
Bhuttos Long March begins from today with a change in the route that will
now first take her to some strongholds of rural Punjab. She is raising the
issue considered vital by the APDM also and has announced a break-up of
talks with the government.
Dr A H Khayal criticized the politicians indirectly. We flirt with
democracy. The election days are the days of intense flirtation. Each
election contestant flirts with the masses to the last drop of his flirtation
skill. Our democracy falls in love with the most crafty flirters.
Our politicians get power through general elections. They are grateful
to democracy for its immense favourtism. They love to repay for the favour.
520

They repay by flinging democracy into a dustbin. Although elected

democratically, the rulers love to rule autocratically. And they rule
autocratically. They rule in a way which is all benevolence for themselves
and all malevolence for the masses.
For our democracy, the period between two elections is a period of
pure misery. But the election period is pure bonanza. During the
elections our democracy is extremely jubilant. But immediately after the
elections, its breathing system goes astray. It is absolutely meaningless how
the rulers get power.
What is of vital importance is what they do with it. Power acquired
through the ballot box but used for exploiting the masses is not
democracy. It is a Devilocracy. On the contrary, power acquired through
the gun but used for the welfare of the masses is pure Angelocracy.
We have imported democracy from the West. But when it arrived
here, we got it admitted in a hospital. The doctors were asked to drain its
Western blood out and inject the Pakistani blood into its veins. The surgery
was a marvelous success.
Our democracy looks like the Western democracy. But its essential
character has radically different from the essential character of the Western
democracy. In the West, the politicians in power are at the mercy of their
democracy. But here, our democracy is at the mercy of the powerwielding politicians.
Democracy can flourish only in a country where the basic needs
of life are guaranteed by the state to the common man or the common man
himself is capable of providing himself with the basic necessities of life.
Such a man has a free and independent mind and a specific philosophy of
life. Such a man is pure oxygen for democracy.
In Pakistan 75% of the citizens live below the poverty line. For these
starving masses the most prosperous days are the election days. During these
days, the election contestants entertain the poor voters with lavish dinners
throughout the election period. He who entertains most lavishly gets most
of the votes. During the election days starvation of the masses flees the
country. But the day the elections are over, it flies back.

521

Normally, general elections are held a after every four or five years to
get rid of their starvation. If general elections could be held on monthly
basis, the starvation problem of the Pakistani masses would be solved
forever.
Economic misery relentlessly pursues the common man. Inflation
mercilessly sucks the very marrow of his bones. He hungrily gazes at the
politician appeals to his patriotism Free people are bound to make sacrifices
for their freedom. The common man asks the politician why all the
sacrifices are quarried out of the common people? Why dont you contribute
your share? The politician giggles and goes his way.

World reaction to clamping of emergency rule has been described

at the beginning and it was commented upon within Pakistan. The Nation
wrote: The Commonwealth on Monday gave Pakistan 10 days to restore the
Constitution or face suspension. The ultimatum came after emergency talks
among the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group in London to review
the situation caused by the November 3 proclamation of emergency.
Meanwhile, US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte will soon be
reaching Islamabad to meet General Musharraf with the message from
President Bush, outlining various proposals for ending the prevalent crisis.
The worlds anger over the ongoing crisis may further deepen
when it sees the regime detain opposition leaders and launch a crackdown on
their workers while giving a free hand to the ruling coalition to run its
election campaign. This clearly indicates that there is no level-playing field.
But then the government should not ignore the fact that this approach will
bring into question its intention of making the electoral process free and
fair.
The Nation also wrote about the Wests concern over Emergency and
Pakistans nuclear assets. The governments response to the current political
crisis in the form of emergency, removal of large number of judges of the
Supreme Court and High Courts and laying curbs on the media, including
the blocking of transmission of private TV channels, has given the
permission, especially the outside world, that the country is facing a serious
threat to its stability. As a result, the critics in the US are having a field
day, rousing scary prospects. The latest is a Washington Post report that the
US has prepared a contingency plan to safeguard Pakistans nuclear weapons
in case they risk falling into wrong hands. That includes the possibility of

522

removing them from the country. But the concern, according to an unnamed
former administration official, is that the US cannot say with absolute
certainty where the weapons are located and, therefore, any attempt to seize
them could turn out to be very messy. The papers source imagines that in
the best course scenario, even the Pakistan military might lead a helping
hand in executing the plan.
The US thinking reflects poor understanding of the ground
realities of Pakistan. Notwithstanding the rise in extremist forces, there is
absolutely no likelihood of Islamist forces the US believes to be dangerous
coming into power. It had better stop worrying.
Dr Ghayur Ayub from London expressed his views on US interference
in Pakistan. BB and her close confidants know that open support by the
US does not go well with Pakistani public. The Americans are not nave to
ignore this fact but they will keep pounding on the rhetoric irritating the
public psyche. I believe the PPP leadership has also politely conveyed their
subtle reservations on such open support. So what could possibly be the
motives behind it?
I can think of two; one minor another major. Putting pressure on the
honourable judges of Supreme Court vis--vis the two ongoing cases which,
directly and indirectly, are linked with BB can be taken as minor. But if, God
forbid, something happenings to BB in another attack identical to Karachi
blasts, the country will go into acute turmoil. The Americans will then
exploit the situation and takeout the nuclear facilities as part of an
established plan that Condi Rice spoke about in her recent interviews. A
non-nuclear Pakistan, no matter how destabilized, will not send the sort of
shudders in the US policymakers that we are seeing now.
Shamshad Ahmad, however, opined that it was no longer an internal
matter. Pakistan is in the throes of a joke of the highest order. This
what General Musharraf told a group of foreign diplomats while meeting
them in person the other day to belie the rumours of his own house arrest
by his subordinates unhappy over the decision to impose emergency rule in
the country. It must certainly be a joke of the highest order for anyone even
to surmise that there could be anyone in the ruling establishment who would
be unhappy over the tragically comical turn of events in our country.
After the briefing, the presidential spokesman was quoted in the
press claiming that all the foreign envoys went back fully satisfied with
523

the presidents briefing, and now fully understood the situation. According
to him, they all fully supported the president and the present government,
and also appreciated his efforts for removing the growing uncertainty in
Pakistan. Indeed, their support and understanding of the situation in
Pakistan is mirrored in the worldwide reaction in the form of grave concern
and condemnations over the imposition of the extra-constitutional
emergency rule in Pakistan. Our friends are disappointed and allies
embarrassed. Worlds major capitals are reassessing their relationship with
Pakistan.
A loud and clear message came from the UN Secretary General
Ban Ki-moon who expressed his strong dismay at the detention of hundreds
of human rights and opposition activists, and urged the authorities in
Pakistan to immediately release those detained, to lift restrictions on the
media and to take early steps to democratic rule.
It certainly is no longer an internal matter as claimed by the
regimes ambassador to the UN. It is a case ripe for a suo moto notice in the
Human Rights Commission for denial of fundamental freedoms to the
people of Pakistan, and also for the UN Security Council to review
eligibility of Pakistans continued role in UN peacekeeping operations.
The people of Pakistan and the world at large would also now expect
the UN Secretary General to designate, as he did in the case of Myanmar,
a special representative to visit Pakistan for early restoration of a civilian
democratic rule in the country, and help the people regain their
constitutionally-guaranteed fundamental freedoms and rights.
The analysts widely condemned the unlawful act of Musharraf
regime. M A Niazi wrote: When the government first took over in 1999,
General Pervez Musharraf was condemned mainly by those who had lost
office, and was praised by those who expected to come to office either at
once, or sometime soon, or in due course.
This latest proclamation of emergency is being viewed with the same
kind of perspective: those who see it as bringing forward the Blessed Day
(mostly those related to any new judges) or delaying the end of power in the
present government and the consequent transfer to caretakers, are the ones
who see a true beneficial side to this emergency. They are virtually the only
ones, apart from military, which has developed the kin of enthusiasm that it
had when Musharraf first took over
524

Majors are once again dreaming of a time when a tehsil will be

handed over for full-fledged and true reform. Those belonging to an NGO
are seeing a brave new era. Others are seeing the downfall of the regime.
These are almost entirely composed of those who have not yet enjoyed
the sweets of power.
These days, it seems everyone is being persecuted. What the preimposition of emergency has proved fully is that the present government has
a complete control over the state machinery. If anyone should doubt that,
like the lawyers, let them see how obedient was the police, from the wave of
arrests to their behaviour during the actual protests.
And here we have a version which seems milder than most. Never
does talk of elections come as early as in Pakistan: on Day 1 of the
coup. From what we have heard so far, the elections are supposed to be held
on time. Well, that is minimum if the Constitution is to be followed another
aim that the government has set itself. This is not because the military loves
the Constitution, but because the people do.
If the NRO is not revived, this will indicate that the PPP is
excluded from the magic circle, and Benazir Bhutto is not considered
worthy of the exalted company of Ch Shujaat Hussain, not that Musharraf
had any last-minute qualms about letting through someone who had done so
much damage to the exchequer.
The regime continues to be supported by civil society despite the
knee-jerk protests because of first, habit, and second, because, no one else
has presented himself, like Imran Khan, as able to reform Pakistani society.
The military has always been looked towards by the civil society as
somehow designed to cleanse Pakistani society from internal dangers rather
than defend it against external. To an extent this has been fostered by the
military itself, to an extent it reflects the weakness of various institutions.
The society remains a moderate one, which is disinclined towards
rule by the religious right. But the religious right is inclined to rule, an
inclination produced by prolonged exposure to the military through the
intelligence agencies, which are still in charge of these organizations, and
not only are they inclined to rule, but to reform. The military thus wants to
get rid of the private jihadi organizations, because they are not necessarily
agency stooges. Therefore there is indeed a commonality between the
armed forces and the foreigners, just as there was during the Afghan Jihad.
525

Therefore, when the head of the armed forces says that a particular action
was carried out to further the war on terror, he should be believed, as it
appears that the Western capitals are believing Pakistans military ruler.
Fakir S Ayazuddin was of the view that it was the consequence of
regimes own incompetence. The General is fighting his most difficult
battle, for Bush and Condoleezza are both venturing their own inputs
relayed in public as well, which will be welcome ammunition for his
enemies. The reality is the absence of a credible leader to replace Musharraf,
showing the limit of our options, it is also evident from the US and world
reactions, that they expect the president to pull the chestnuts from where his
inept advisers have put them, for there is apparently no one else.
It is for this reason; he should put together some hard nosed
advisers who must be chosen for their ability to tell him the truth. He
should also create a media cell that uses the huge media machine installed
by him to give the public the true picture, without censorship which is
always counterproductive. In suspending the channels across the board
PEMRA has done the government a disservice
If Musharraf wants to lead Pakistan, then, as he has been elected
president by the assemblies, (including the support of Benazir) which
support she is already withdrawing proving her ability to change tack midstride, he must go back to his allowing the judiciary and the media freedom
as before.
Humayun Gauhar aptly remarked that Emergency Plus is equal to
Martial Law Minus. For once the people are not taking sides yet. They
are cynical about the opposition. Why should they come out in support of
those who deceitfully promised them bread, shelter and clothing but all they
gave them were batons, bullets and bombs and often the grave for shelter?
For the first time there is not even an illusion of alternative leadership.
Forget illusions, people are without delusion. They can see no mirage of a
saviour, a messiah, a deliverer, not one credible politician.
Why should people face beatings, imprisonment and death for
those they have regularly elected as their representatives in the forlorn hope
that oppressor will somehow turn redeemer? These tyrants are peoples
tormentors in the garb of a liberator. They have always betrayed them,
robbed them, and impoverished them. Only the drawing rooms are abuzz. It
is the sound that an elite in opposition mistakenly takes for the resonance of
526

evolution, the cry in the street, the shout of the bazaar. Alienated are they
from our real sounds: the dance of our street, the music of our bazaars, the
rhythm of our villages, and the drumbeat of history. The proud resilient
people of Pakistan never lose their optimism, which is why there is always
hope.
What is this thing called emergency plus that has been imposed
in the name of the national interest? The plus is added to emergency
because our Constitution does not give the government enough powers to do
what it wants under simple emergency. Under the Constitution the president
proclaims emergency; anything more he cannot. Which is why emergency
plus had to be proclaimed by the chief of army staff, because the president
cannot. There is no room for a Provisional Constitutional Order in the
Constitution. It can only be done in emergency plus. Thus a simple
emergency would not have enabled the government to change unbending
Supreme Court judges.
President Musharraf said that emergency was proclaimed because of
a runaway judiciary, to fight terrorism better and to arrest the economic
downslide that both were causing. He didnt mention that worse is the naked
American interference in Pakistan, dictating to us that Musharraf and
Benazir Bhutto should team up to fight terrorism.
What is the national interest, a question asked often? Needless to
say, when todays opposition is in government, they will also fall back on
using the national interest as cover. The national interest is the iniquitous
status quo that is intrinsically anti-people and pro-ruling class In short,
those who comprise the establishment, when there is any threat to this
status quo, from within or without the ruling class, the national interest is
invoked. That is all.
Sameer Khosa was of the view that Musharraf has lost an opportunity
to serve the cause of democracy. It was surreal listening to President
General Pervez Musharraf justify his decision to declare a state of
emergency in Pakistan It was surreal because in spending considerable
time convincing his fellow countrymen of the precarious state that Pakistan
was in, he was making the strongest possible case against his presidency and
leadership. It is an inescapable fact, that all of this has happened in the eight
years that Pakistan has been on his watch.

527

Today, when the crunch time came, when it finally boiled down to:
the democratic constitutional process versus Musharrafs presidency, his
non-existent resolve finally told. President Musharraf set out that the
political opposition has no right to hold a country hostage because some of
the security forces committed mistakes (of beating up people to restrain
protesters). Yet, why does the government not hold those who make
mistakes accountable?
Moreover, he claimed that because the Supreme Court was
suspending police chiefs, the police was demoralized and did not want to
fight crime. So, the police should not be accountable. The police chiefs
should not be suspended when they overstep their authority.
The Supreme Court is hampering the fight against terror by ordering
the release of people who the intelligence agencies have confirmed are
terrorists. Surely, it says a lot about the competence of law enforcement
agencies that they cannot make a legal case against people who are
confirmed terrorists.
In effect, there was little or no accountability in the government of
the day, and sadly, a supreme court that provided that accountability was
interfering. Pakistan can only have an effective government if the three
pillars of state work together, claimed the President. Yet, arent three pillars
meant to provide checks and balances on the other pillars? Isnt the very role
of the judiciary to carry out legislative scrutiny and outlaw executive
excesses? They are not supposed to agree, in fact, the very reason they are
called the three pillars of the state is that they come onto their own to stop
the other pillars when they disagree. It was too much to ask for
accountability from the electorate, and it was too much to ask accountability
under the law.
If the Supreme Court had ruled the presidents candidature illegal,
and Mr Musharraf had accepted the verdict and stepped aside as president, it
would have been an unprecedented victory for democracy and
constitutionalism. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of current judicial
activism, in the long run, it would have fostered an independent judicial
institution, which could only have been good for Pakistan. Regardless of the
merits of the current criticisms of Pakistani public and media, it would have
fostered a belief in the people that government is accountable to them, and
that could only have been good for the country. Pakistan was not months
away from democracyit was moments away from it. All it needed was for
528

the President to step down following the Supreme Court verdict. It is a

historic opportunity lost.
Javid Husain opined: The so-called proclamation of emergency and
the PCO make an interesting reading in that they are based on the premise
that the chief of the army staff has some inherent supra-constitutional
powers allowing him to suspend the Constitution when he so desires and
virtually grant unlimited powers to himself or to his boss, the president, who
in this case happens to be the COAS himself, the illegality of this premise
is too manifest to need any further elaboration. The net result of this legal
gymnastic is that the country is being ruled by the COAS and the emergency
is in fact a euphemism for martial law imposed on the nation.
General Musharraf has declared martial law against his own
government primarily to get a verdict of his liking from the Supreme
Court by changing its composition. The seven-member bench of the
Supreme Court saw through the game, it struck down the PCO and
restrained the executive from taking any action which was contrary to the
independence of judiciary. On the other hand, the eight-member bench of the
reconstituted Supreme Court by setting aside the earlier order of the sevenmember bench has resurrected the doctrine of necessity which has been one
of the main factors preventing the democratic evolution of the country.
The proclamation of emergency and the PCO have placed the
destiny of the nation in the hands of one man who is above any law of
the land and whose powers are not subject to any check by any other
authority whatsoever in the country. We are actually faced with the absence
of law since the will of one individual rather than law reigns supreme in the
country. Considering that the progress of human civilization and rule of law
go hand in hand, General Musharraf has taken a highly retrogressive step
taking Pakistan back to the medieval ages when the will of the ruler was
considered supreme over and above the constraints of law.
The government has taken draconian measures to stifle the
dissenting voices in the country. Lawyers, workers of the political parties
and other members of the civil society, who have tried to protest against the
constitutional steps taken by the government, have been beaten mercilessly
and arrested.
The proclamation of emergency begins by taking note of the rise in
the activities of the extremists and the terrorists in the country. However,
529

instead of acknowledging the Musharraf governments failure in overcoming

this menace, the proclamation mistakenly tries to link it to judicial
activism. Apparently the government wants that the police and the
Intelligence Agencies should be allowed to function unrestrained by law and
the Constitution and irrespective the fundamental rights of the people.
General Musharraf should take off his uniform immediately without
any ifs and buts. Arrangements may be made for fair, free and transparent
elections under a neutral caretaker government and an independent Election
Commission with the participation of all the political parties and leaders
The danger is that if General Musharraf does not listen to a wiser counsel
and takes steps on the lines indicated above, he will not only face an
ignominious exit from power but will also cause irreparable damage to
the security and integrity of the country.
Fauzia Wahab was of the view that measures taken by the regime
would have destabilizing effect. The more the Chief Justice and his brother
judges showed independence, the more closer to the possibilities of an
emergency emerged from Lal Masjid decision to the return of Mian Nawaz
Sharif and the acceptance of the petition on the eligibility of the Generals
elections, were landmark cases that were creating ripples in the
corridors of power, but hailed by all segments of the society.
The hearing on the eligibility of General Pervez Musharraf for
presidency, in particular, had on one hand enamoured the whole nation,
while on the other hand it had unnerved the regime to the extent that the
extra-constitutional steps came under serious consideration. A day
before, the Supreme Court had decided to change the schedule of hearing in
order to give a verdict before November 15 the day the tenure of the
president ends. But before long, the General struck and nipped the bud of the
new-found independence of the judiciary.
Consisting of thirteen paragraphs, the proclamation of emergency
cites terrorism, religious extremism and negative role of the judiciary as the
reason detre for the drastic action. But a close scrutiny of the document
shows that terrorism and extremism are mere smoke screens, the real threat
perceived by them was the growing independence of the judiciary. Out
of the thirteen paragraphs, eight directly pertained to the judiciary.
Another interesting aspect of the document is that it was signed not
by the President of Pakistan but by the chief of the army staff, whereas the
530

Constitution provides powers to the president alone, in case a grave

situation exist to the security by was or external aggression or by internal
disturbance beyond the power of a provincial government. The
confrontational path that started on March 9 with the filing of a reference
against the sitting chief justice by the General finally culminated into the
proclamation of emergency.
Under the new PCO, the courts are disallowed to hold or issue any
decree against the president, the prime minister or anyone exercising
powers under their authority and all the judges of the Supreme Court and
higher courts are required to take fresh oath.
Out of 17 sitting judges of the Supreme Court, four of them took oath
under the new PCO, the rest refused to work under the new instrument of
law. The Attorney General of Pakistan has announced that the number of
judges in the Supreme Court will now be reduced to twelve, and Abdul
Hameed Dogar has been installed as the new chief justice.
The Bar Associations of the country, however, have refused to lie
low They have announced the boycott of the high courts and the Supreme
Court. They have vowed to continue their struggle till the Constitution is not
restored, until then no case will be pleaded before the higher courts.
Consequently, the entire bar leadership has been arrested.
The common man engrossed in his own miseries, has also been
dragged into the crisis. He might have never known or felt about the state of
emergency, had he been spared from seeing the blank screens of his
television. The biggest casualty of the judiciary-military tussle has been
the electronic media.
These can be described as last-ditch measures. Unfortunately, they
have more of triggering than a containing effect on events. It is an admission
of failure of governance and has never succeeded in arresting the process of
decline. In fact it creates the much feared destabilizing factor in our polity.
No amount of cosmetic surgery can hide the damage. Strangely, nobody
takes lesson.
Finding solutions in extra-constitutional measures has never
helped. The Constitution alone has the answers to our problems. It is time
that the political forces and the civil society rise to the occasion and let the

531

people in the corridors of power know that their rights will not be allowed to
be trampled down again.
Khurram Khan from Lahore wrote: I shudder to find similarities in
the main cast of 1971 and 2007 events. I only pray the consequences are
dissimilar.
Abdul Qayyum Mangi from Sukkur compared Pakistani leaders with
Putin. Of course I am going to Iran. If I had always listened to the
recommendations of the special services about the various threats to my
life, I would have never left home, Russian President Vladimir Putin told
reporters prior to his visit to Tehran to attend the Caspian Sea Summit.
Contrast that with the self-imposed emergency of our rulers under the
pretext of their own nurtured terrorist threat, a mere ruse to perpetuate their
misrule and plunder. Why is there such a huge difference between the
Muslim and non-Muslim rulers? Why are the Muslim rulers so
cowardly?
Farrukh Shahzad from Islamabad observed: Musharraf says he has no
lust for power or money and he took the decision of staying in power in the
larger national interest. This larger national interest is the favourite
hobby-horse of every military ruler and the blanket excuse for justifying all
his actions. If Mr Musharraf has no lust of power then why this tasteless
show of presidential election is being put on display which is opposed by
one and all including the opposition, lawyers, intellectuals and members of
the civil society.
The Nation mentioned on one of the negative effects of the
Emergency. The post-emergency volatility experienced at our major
bourses and the reported flight of about $235 million of portfolio foreign
investment reflect badly on hour investment credibility. Coupled with the
downgrading of the country by the lead credit rating agencies, the going for
Pakistan in the international investment and financial market does not
look promising with each passing day.
Keeping in view the fact that the current set-up has always prided
itself on making Pakistan a desirable place to invest in, taking credit for
correcting the economic indicators like forex reserves, resource mobilization
in the form of tax collection and above all attracting foreign investment in

532

real estate, telecom and also in the capital market; the last few days seem to
be an undoing of all these advantages.
The so-called stability of the current dispensation has been seriously
brought into question since the proclamation of Emergency. This
government step, which was justified on the premise of keep going the
ongoing economic growth, would in the final analysis prove counterproductive The sort of fragile political stability experienced
nowadays can wash away all the economic growth bonanza.
The newspaper also commented on Musharrafs statement about
holding general elections. Responding to increasing pressure from inside
and outside the country General Musharraf has finally promised to hold the
elections by February 15 and doff the uniform when taking oath as President
after the Supreme Court has delivered a verdict regarding his election. While
Musharraf has hailed what it considers a clarification of the election date,
many think the statement fails to provide an election schedule and keeps
the timing of doffing his uniform open-ended.
Political parties are demanding holding of elections around
January 15 as promised earlier by General Musharraf and suspect he might
again go back on his world. The opposition has unanimously demanded the
restoration of the Supreme Court judges whom the General removed days
before they were to deliver a verdict on his eligibility to contest the
presidential election Questions are already being raised about the
independence of a court thus being assembled not only by politicians but
also by the legal community and civil society organizations.
Ms Bhutto has been debarred from holding a public meeting in
Rawalpindi on the basis of two excuses that would convince few If
Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi can hold public meetings virtually every other
day in the Punjab despite Section 144 being in force, as part of his election
campaign, it is highly unfair to stop Ms Bhutto from undertaking a similar
activity.
Elections held under a set-up of General Musharrafs choice, a
Supreme Court purged of independent judges and hundreds of opposition
activists put behind the bars will have no credibility. General Musharrafs
statement comes in a situation where politicians, trade unionists and lawyers
opposing emergency are being charged under sedition laws and there are
reports of military courts being empowered to try civilians. It is natural
533

under the circumstances for the announcement to raise doubts and

suspicions.
Sarmad Bashir opined that Musharraf could not keep benefiting from
such tactics. General Musharrafs dilemma is that now that he has given a
timeframe for the next general elections and promised to hang up his
uniform after taking the oath of presidential office nobody is going to trust
him. It is difficult to be carried away by vague announcements when
politicians and people from other sections of society are being charged with
treason merely for raising voice against the recent assault on the judiciary
and suspension of the fundamental rights of citizens.
By seizing emergency powers General Musharraf has put the
country in jeopardy. The newspaper pictures of dreaded cops torturing
lawyers and others staging demonstrations raise doubts about his claim that
the country would be governed, as nearly as may be, in accordance with the
Constitution. One may ask which Constitution he is referring to. The one he
has consigned to the dustbin.
The country today is in the grip of extremism. It is the military rule to
blame, not the judiciary. The armys capacity to fight extremism, now
rearing its ugly head in even the settled areas of the country, is being
questioned by the United States and the rest of the international community.
Judiciary, however, cannot be accused of fanning the scourge of putting
the top cops and intelligence sleuths in the dock for not producing hundreds
of innocent citizens kidnapped on the mere suspicion of their involvement in
terrorist activities
The fact remains that the assault on judiciary was aimed at preempting the apex court from delivering an adverse verdict on the
petitions challenging General Musharrafs candidature for the presidency.
Those putting the spin of extremism on the issue might have thought that
by doing so the government would be able to draw support from the US; for
it is the one factor that keeps haunting the Bush Administration. But
Musharraf would certainly not be sure how long he could keep benefiting
from such tactics.
Kuldip Nayar from across the border was forthright in telling
Musharraf that party was over. A message received from Pakistan says:
Cases of Muneer A Malik, the former president of Supreme Court Bar
Association and leader of the lawyers movement has been shifted to the
534

notorious Attock Fort. He is under the custody of the military intelligence.

Tariq Mahmood, former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association,
was imprisoned in Adiala Jail. No one was allowed to see him and it is
reported that he has been shifted to an unknown place. Ali Ahmed Kurd,
former vice chairman of the Pakistan Bar Council is being kept at an
undisclosed place. Aitzaz Ahsan, president of the Supreme Court Bar, is
being kept in Adiala Jail in solitary confinement, after torture.
The civil society of Pakistan has urged bar associations all over the
world to mobilize public opinion in favour of the judges and lawyers. I
believe that Delhi High Court has already passed a resolution to
condemn the emergency. Other High Courts in the country and the
Supreme Court are expected to follow suit.
The president had to accept Washingtons word. He really had no
option except to declare that elections would be held before February 15 and
that he would shed the uniform after President Bush telephoned him that he
could not be the president and the army chief at the same time.
Still the real credit goes to the people of Pakistan whose protest
remains undiminished. True, it may take time to build up a countrywide
movement because Pakistan has never gone through a national movement as
India has. Aitzaz Ahsan who has led the protest from the front has often told
me how they are now going through that process. And all credit to them.
The best jihad is to speak the truth before an unjust ruler
Thousands of people of Pakistan have done exactly what has been
ordained. The governments repression has been savage and brutal. It has
specially picked up for punishment those lawyers who had won the battle for
the reinstatement of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.
In India there is a widespread sympathy for the people of
Pakistan. I wonder if New Delhis policy on Pakistan is being formulated
by the central government or the ministry of external affairs. To refuse a visa
to Pakistans Railway Minister Shaikh Rashid to watch the one-day cricket
match at Mohali was to create a point of a digression at a time when all
attention should be focused on the battle between the military rulers and the
democratic elements.
Elections are bound to be held early because of Americas pressure.
But the people in Pakistan are not sure how free and fair they would be.

535

However, Musharraf should realize that the party is over. The

emergency-cum-martial law rule has proved to be the last straw on the
camels back. His exit is only a question of time.
Husain Haqqani criticized the army chiefs for their misplaced belief
that they have the right to interfere in politics. Only a belief in the divine
right of army chiefs can explain some of the assertions made by General
Pervez Musharraf in his press conference over the weekend. He claimed that
I did not violate the Constitution and law of this land, even after
suspending the Constitution. Quite clearly, he sees his decisions as the law
of the land. Similarly his statement that the Supreme Court judges who
refused to accept his Provisional Constitutional Order were not above the
law indicates the belief that the army chiefs, and not judges, have the
ultimate authority to interpret the law. In normal jurisprudence and political
science the law is what the judges say it is.
General Musharraf has repeatedly demonstrated that his status
as army chief somehow places him above the rest of the citizenry in
understanding and solving Pakistans problems. The president has, however,
never shown much awareness of matters political and constitutional. His
ignorance of history was revealed when, while visiting the Gandhi memorial
during the course of the Agra Summit in 2001, he asked his Indian hosts, so
how did Gandhi die? Even now he has expelled three reporters from
Britains Daily Telegraph because of an editorial in the paper that used foul
and abusive language to allude to General Musharraf. The Telegraph
editorial referred to language reportedly used by former US president
Franklin D Roosevelt in expressing Washingtons grudging support for
Nicaraguas then dictator Anastasio Somoza. Anyone well versed in political
history and debates over US support for strongmen would have known the
reference and taken it in its political context.
In 1999, General Musharraf explained his military takeover by
blaming Pakistans politicians and insisted that he needed to correct the
countrys course by changing its politics. Now he maintains that he alone
knows how to correct the course of Pakistans judiciary. He does not realize
that Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry has become a symbol of the
Pakistani peoples resistance to arbitrary rule
According to Brigadier A R Siddiqui, who served as head of InterServices Public Relations, Pakistans military has built an unrealistic
image of itself as being above everyone else in Pakistan. This image has
536

produced self love, self-righteousness and self complacency among

Pakistani generals, which is suicidal for the military profession. This may
be the reason that Pakistan has done less on the battlefield according to
independent analysts than the nation has ever been allowed to believe and
continues to fare terribly in the arena of politics and constitutional
governance.
Musharraf must recognize sooner rather than later that he and the
rulers of Myanmar are the only ones left in the world who believe that a
coup-making general can successfully lead a country forever. The rest of the
world left behind the ideas about the divine right of rulers, whether
kings or generals, a long time ago.
Dr Haider Mehdi wrote an open letter to Musharraf. Dear Mr
President, at the time of the promulgation of emergency in this country on
the evening of November 3, you revealed a great deal about yourself to
the nation and to the global community when you said: I have not learned to
surrender. Incidentally, he had not taken a second to surrender when Powell
talked to him.
At this moment in a frank and introspective revelation of your innerself, you made the nation aware of your true character; your selfperception, your self-image, your script, your inner-being and inner-strength,
your psychological set-up and cognitive personal development, your soul
and stature, your self-reliance and independence, your individuality and your
virtue, your sentimental strength and your beliefs, and your indomitable
nature.
Indeed, you have proved your convictions indeed you have made
the point that you are worthy of being a distinguished soldier. But let me
remind you that in the chronicles of military history as well as in the tactical
training of the army commanders, a withdrawal on a battlefield, and even a
complete surrender, in the face of a certain defeat to save the lives of
troops and to minimize further destruction and ensuing chaos is a viable
and useful strategic option.
Perhaps the moment has arrived for you to exercise this viable
strategic option of withdrawal and completely surrender. Be mindful that
such an act would elevate your stature to an eminent commander who has
the moral strength and inner convictions to forestall the complete destruction
of his nation
537

As mortal human beings, dispensable and destructible as we all are,

every one of us has to make hard and difficult decisions at specific points in
time. That moment of a difficult choice has arrived for you. The fact of
the matter is that your will not serve you nor will it serve the interests of the
people of Pakistan. Let the nation and the world witness that you are the
Hero of this crucial moment in the history of nation Let this nation and
our future generations recall you as a valiant commander who, in order to
save his troops, surrendered himself with dignity, honour and with a depth of
vision unprecedented in this nations political history.
Perhaps your political allies are keeping you in the dark. The
present battle in Pakistan is of winning peoples hearts and minds. I hate to
be the bearer of the bad news however, the fact is that your political
establishment has already lost this battle.
Let me bring another fact to your attention: There is a complete
consensus in the Pakistani nation and in the majority of the global
community at large that the January 2008 elections as they stand now will
merely be a show of going through the motions without resolving
Pakistans contemporary dilemma of political impasse.
You should be cognizant of the fact that Pakistanis are sentimental,
generous, impressionable and sensitive people they will honour you and
your courage, your graciousness and indomitable nature only if you will
demonstrate humbleness, understanding and respect for their democratic
aspirations and quit the battlefield now without any more casualties in
the publics life and national institutions. This is the only way you can win
the peoples hearts and minds now.
Verily, a man hath performed prayers, fasts, charity, pilgrimage, and
all other good works; but he will not be rewarded except by the proportion
of his understanding, said Prophet Mohammad (PBUH). General Musharraf,
the nation awaits your understanding.
Imran Khan urged fighting the battle for Pakistan. The imposition of
martial law under the garb of emergency should make it abundantly clear to
everyone that military rulers cannot afford even a semblance of either an
independent judicial system or a free media. And neither can the
assortment of those camouflaged as politicians who collaborate with military
leaders.

538

No one is fooled by General Musharrafs latest move to hang on

to power. The war on terror has served him well so far and so why change a
successful strategy; spread fear in the western capitals by invoking images
of bearded men with guns and in the meanwhile brutally crush all dissent
within the country, as was recently done by the Burmese military.
Having inducted pliant judges through the PCO, the next step would
be to massively rig the elections while keeping the media muzzled. What
he hopes is that he will again have a rubber-stamp assembly, a controlled
majority and a friendly opposition, while real power will rest with him for
another 5 years.
So, what we are witnessing is the first phase of the plan; massive
crackdown on the genuine opposition, lawyers, human right activists and the
civil society. He is hoping that the police brutality will induce enough fear in
the people for him to crush all dissent within a couple of weeks, before he
takes the next step of getting himself endorsed by the new judges.
Everyone can see through his latest power grab attempt. No one
believes that the judges were an impediment in his fight against
terrorism. The President has had absolute power for the last 8 years and yet
terrorism and militancy is rising rapidly. What is he going to do that is
different?
The present dispensation has had Pakistanis abducted and handed
over to the US authorities without allowing them their right to prove their
innocence in a court of law. Others have simply disappeared. Many tortured.
Our own people have been bombed by helicopters and jets and when women
and children have been killed, it has been shamefully called collateral
damage. No one to this day knows how many Pakistani (soldiers and
civilians) have been killed since 9/11.
Most significantly this regimes liberal credentials stand exposed.
Gimmicks like enlightened moderation, soft image and sufi Islam stood
exposed as the nation saw police boots and sticks shower on peaceful human
rights protestor, lawyers and the media. All laws whether it was through
PEMRA, PCOs, the 17th Amendment or the disgraceful NRO were only to
consolidate his power.
The time has come for the people of Pakistan to decide their
destiny. If Musharraf succeeds in undermining the independent judiciary

539

through his PCO, then I am afraid it is all down hill. His pocket judges will
assist him in suppressing the media and in rigging the elections.
Another five years of Musharraf will mean that certain
discontented sections of the society will lose faith in the democratic process
and will also join the militants; thereby raising the prospects of Pakistan
turning into another Algeria the army against its own people.
Equally disastrous is the collapse of governance in Pakistan.
According to Transparency International this is the most corrupt government
in our history; hardly surprising since crooks and criminals are sitting at
the helm of affairs Hence it is imperative that all sections of Pakistani
society stand behind Chief Justice Iftikhar and demand his restoration along
with the other honourable judges.
Only if Justice Iftikhar is restored will we have an independent
judiciary, which is the bedrock of a genuine democratic system. The
independent judiciary will protect the medias freedom and ensure free and
fair elections that are vital for the countrys survival only. Free and fair
elections can throw up a government that can start a political dialogue with
the militants
Above all only an independent judiciary will stop criminals from
entering politics. At the moment they know that once they are part of the
power structure they are safe from the courts. The NRO is a classic case in
point which under the pocket judiciary will absolve politicians of their
crimes that includes plunder of the countrys resources as well as
assassinations and target killings.
What needs to be done is for all sections of the society especially
the students whose future is at stake, to demand the restoration of Chief
Justice Iftikhar and a total boycott of the PCO judges. Until our demands
are accepted we should agitate throughout the country.
And finally it brings me to Benazir and Maulana Fazlullah
Rehman. They are the only two opposition leaders who are allowed to
freely roam around. The former is even given protocol. Both of them have
played a major role in strengthening Musharraf by undermining the
opposition at every stage. Both have used the opposition to strengthen
their bargaining position with the government for their personal ends.
Most regrettably neither has demanded the restoration of Chief Justice

540

Iftikhar. The APDM should tell them that we have had enough of their noora
kushti.
Viqar A Khan urged that the struggle of every Pakistani should be for
one point agenda. Reinstatement of superior judiciary; everything else
falls in place. Recession of the Martial Law and restoration of the
Constitution precedes Anything short of reinstatement of the superior
judiciary falls a millennium too short.
How does one gauge the stature of Justice Javed Iqbal who declined
to accept the position of the Chief Justice of Pakistan or Justice Khawaja
Muhammad Sharif, who was going to be the Chief Justice of Punjab in two
months time and the fifty plus other honourable judges of the Supreme Court
and High Courts of Pakistan who refused to take oath on the Provisional
Constitutional Order? How do we compare them to those who did take oath?
Can we expect justice from the ones who took oath?
Anyone, be it a country, an organization, a political party or an
individual, pleading the case of free and fair elections without the
reinstatement of the superior judiciary has a flawed approach. The
power lords of Pakistan have mastered the art of duplicity. The mainstream
political parties have disappointed the country one time too many.
Gauging by the brute force being shown by the government in
dealing with the protests, and the full force of self serving laws being
applied, one has to be prepared to go the extra mile for ones cause.
Incarceration is no picnic which one should understand before coming onto
streets. Brute force is being applied with the clear objective to intimidate and
harass. One falls right into the trap laid out by the perpetrators when there is
a bee line of relatives and friends honing into the jails with goodies for their
loved ones and the scramble for applying for bail
A tame judiciary that toes the line of the executive and a subservient
legislature that rubber stamps the dictation of the army high ups is not why
Pakistan was created if this is the freedom then this is not the freedom we
want.
We have come to a crossroads. We have to choose a path. One is
supposedly an easy path of compliance and subservience and maintenance
of status quo. This path leads to accepting the army top brass flout its oath of
not indulging in politics time after time, of political leadership vying to

541

come to power through shady deals, of the top bureaucracy bending

backwards as a facilitator and the judiciary sanctifying and giving legitimacy
to the unholy matrimony.
The other path is difficult path. It is path of walking with your
head high. It calls for a change. It calls for rule of law. This path gives a
hope and a country where one would be proud to raise ones children. The
choice is yours. It does not matter which gender you have, whether you are
young or elderly or what religion you belong to, whether you are rich or
poor. If you have the conviction, you can contribute.
The judiciary has played its part admirably when more than 50
judges of Supreme Court and High Courts refused to take oath under the
Provisional Constitutional Order. The lawyers are continuing to play their
part we have to play ours. We have to rise and rise we must. Those coming
onto the streets should be willing to court arrests with the mindset that
applying for bail is not an option that would be exercised till the
reinstatement of the Judges of High Courts and Supreme Court.
Prem Shankar Jha was a rare exception who supported Musharraf by
arguing that his regime was trying to save democracy, not kill it. The Dutch
government had already suspended its aid. Other EU do-gooders are almost
certain to follow suit. Behind these reactions lies not a love of democracy,
but a mixture of willful blindness, racial and moral condescension that may
be the greatest peril that the world faces today.
It has barely taken these governments a blink of an eyelid to conclude
that Musharraf has declared an emergency because his skin is in danger.
They feel no need to study the choices that Musharraf faced; no need to
compare the circumstances of the current declaration of emergency with past
such declarations in Pakistan. It is sufficient to remember that power
corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
This Emergency is as different from previous military takeovers
as chalk from cheese. It has been declared not to cement the alliance with the
mullahs but to enable the state to fight them. Since July 15, Pakistan has
been in the grip of a civil wara low intensity conflict that the Indian armed
forces have never had to face.
But what is far worse, this civil war is spreading at disconcerting
speed from Waziristan and the tribal border belt to settled areas such as

542

Swat, Malakand, Upper Dir and parts of the North West Frontier Province.
Militarized militants are raising their heads in more and more places
The origins of this civil war lie in Pakistans involvement in the
US unending, goal-less war in Afghanistan, the rising death toll among
civilians and increasingly the US armys remote-controlled method of
fighting the war a method that does not distinguish between combatants
and civilians. The anger this has been generating among young Pakistanis
has turned anyone who is prepared to speak out against the killings into a
hero.
Musharraf may not be doing a very good job of it, but the fight he is
fighting, therefore, is not to kill democracy but to save it. For democracy can
only flourish when there is a strong civil society upon which its institutions
can rely on for support and replenishment.
That society has been struggling to be born in Pakistan ever since
independence. It has always been distrusted by military and frequently
suppressed. But today the military is on its side. For, the rise of militants
will snuff out civil society altogether, and wipe out the preconditions for a
return to democracy.

REVIEW
Musharraf has often boasted that under his umbrella the assemblies
completed their tenures; something rare in Pakistans political history. Even
after clamping Martial Law he felt no shame in reasserting this claim. It did
not occur to him that controlled democracy under a serving army chief was
nothing but dictatorship, and yet, this feat of tenure completion ended up in
imposition of Martial Law.
Irrespective of the pretexts quoted by the regime, the reason behind
the imposition of Martial Law was the vindictive psyche of Musharraf. Only
in the recent past the Pakistanis had seen this on display in the form of
killings of Akbar Bugti and Abdul Rashid Ghazi and deportation of Nawaz
Sharif. How could the judiciary led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad
Chaudhry escape the wrath of a vindictive dictator?
Vindictiveness is common to all dictators. In Musharrafs case this
character trait is profoundly pronounced, because its practice has been made
543

easy by decades-long commando training and enjoying absolute power.

Once he saw his position of authority being threatened, he carried out a
commando raid on the stronghold of the superior judiciary. Some judges
surrendered and others were made prisoner; according the military manuals
he has read, the operation was a remarkable success.
The imposition of second Martial Law by Musharraf was unique in
many ways. Firstly, it was an act of an accused who was about to be
convicted. He launched a pre-emptive which had nothing to do with
military strategy but was an outcome of his criminal tendency.
All well-established gangs of criminals and mafias resort to
intimidation of the judges to escape the law, failing which they do not
hesitate in eliminating the judges who show fondness for the rule of law.
What happened on November 3 was exactly that but at quite a massive scale.
Secondly, it was unique because General Musharraf imposed Martial
Law against President Musharraf who had performed well on all fronts
according to his own assessment. Lastly, his attempt to pre-empt Supreme
Courts decision was an admission of the fact that his participation in
presidential elections was not a legal act even under the badly tinkered and
tempered Constitution.
While criticizing Musharraf for the imposition of martial law under
the garb of Emergency Plus, one must not lose sight of the real criminal
minds that worked behind the scenes in this act of extra-constitutional
piracy. Out of the legal advisers of the dictator, two stand out
conspicuously; Sharifuddin and Qayyum. Both of them saw the defeat
staring at them in legal arena and shamelessly advised the dictator that only
way to win was in delivering the knockout punch which he had been
talking about since months.
One must also not forget the US factor in the entire episode. There
should be no doubt that Musharraf serving as mercenary in the war on terror
had sought prior approval of those who had hired him. He must have told the
Crusaders that elimination of the Chief Justice was essential for him to stay
at their service and they must have consented.
It must be noted that the United States repeatedly urged lifting of
emergency rule and holding of polls, but not once talked about reinstatement
of Chief Justice and other judges. There was no logic in demanding what

544

had been already conceded; as regards other demands, those would

obviously be met in due course once the real aim of ousting the independent
judiciary has been achieved.
The political crisis since last March has exposed the regimes legal
and moral standings, but it has also stripped the Opposition parties stark
naked. Its ugliness was witnessed in Punjab University campus. The incident
of taking Imran Khan as hostage and then handing over to police proved that
some elements of religious parties have degenerated to the level of MQM,
just as JUI-F fell low the level of PPP during presidential election.
The disunity and incompetence of the Opposition encouraged
Musharraf to bulldoze his way through not only to be president for the next
five years but also to have a rubberstamp parliament in next general
elections. In consultation with his internal and external advisers, he has
reduced the electioneering period to the minimum to achieve this aim.
Musharraf would go through the ritual of polling with a plan to
produce the desired results. He wont bother about the allegations of
rigging. The losers, as usual, would be blamed for making lame excuses for
their failure. He would also not bother about boycott of elections. In fact, it
would help him in securing two-third majority which would grant indemnity
to all his illegal acts.
The PCO Supreme Court has ruled the imposition of emergency rule
as legal. The rationale given by the bench would provide a handy precedence
for any COAS to legally impose Martial Law in the garb of emergency rule
in future; what a service the guardians of the Constitution have rendered?
15th November 2007

545

KNOCK-OUT PUNCH - III

National Assembly was dissolved on 15th November. Muhammadmian
Soomro was sworn in as leader of the caretakers. Opposition parties rejected
the interim government and Benazir termed it as an extension of PML-Q. On
20th November, CEC announced election schedule vowing free and fair
polls under peaceful environments.
Negroponte dashed to Islamabad and talked to Benazir on telephone
soon after his arrival. He delivered Bushs strong message to Musharraf,
who told the visitor that emergency would stay for now. On 18th November,
Negroponte held a post-visit press conference and asked Musharraf to end
emergency rule. He also urged Benazir and Musharraf to restart talks.
The counsel of Justice Wajihuddin decided not to appear before the
court during hearing of the petition on eligibility of Musharraf for
presidency. The judges enrolled under PCO acted like a Summary Court
Martial in dismissing all the petitions in just one sitting.
The lawyers led by Justice Wajihuddin went to judges colony to
expose the lies told by the spokesman of Musharraf regimes Interior
Ministry; they were stopped. Wajihuddin said the emergency rule was
imposed to cover illegal acts of Musharraf.
Students in Lahore carried out rallies to protest kidnapping of Imran
Khan. They vowed challenging the hold of IJT in universities. The lawyers
protest and governments crackdown continued. The regime once again
requested Arabs for help; this time they stopped the broadcast of Geo and
ARY TV channels based in Dubai.

EVENTS
On 15th November, for the first time in the history of Pakistan,
National Assembly died its natural death after the doctor ordered removal
of the life support machines. Another banker, Muhammadmian Soomro, was
named to lead hand picked team of caretakers.
Crackdown against PPP leaders and activists was intensified in Sindh
where thousands of them were arrested. Three persons were killed in
546

Karachi protests. Hundreds were arrested in Punjab. PPP Chairperson called

APC on 21st November. Students in Lahore carried out protest rallies against
the kidnapping of Imran Khan and handing him over to the police. Dozens
of protesters and PTI workers were arrested in Lahore and elsewhere. PTI
demanded probe into PU incident. The lawyers continued their protest
despite the arrest of their leadership. General Hamid Gul and his son were
freed. Benazir and Asma Jehangir were freed on the eve of Negropontes
arrival in Islamabad.
COAS General Pervez Musharraf empowered President Pervez
Musharraf to lift emergency rule. The US warned that Musharrafs role as an
ally was at stake. The Supreme Court bench suspended convictions of
officials of Islamabad administration and senior police officers who were
punished by a bench headed by Justice Rana Bhagwandas.
On 16th November, Musharraf swore in the interim prime minister and
his dream team of 24 ministers. The caretaker prime minister placed free
and fair polls at the top of his agenda. In the evening arranged a farewell
feast for the outgoing team with a promise to meet again. Reportedly, Gujrati
cousins were annoyed over composition of the interim government.
Benazir urged the US to threaten aid cut. Negroponte talked to her on
telephone soon after his arrival in Islamabad. The United States announced
that it wanted an end to emergency rule. In Washington a resolution on aid to
Pakistan was introduced in the House of Representatives.
The opposition parties rejected the interim government. PML-N said it
was a collection of Musharrafs friends. Nawaz said there would be no deal
with Musharraf. Political parties and lawyers continued their protest. The
regime successfully crushed PPPs long march at Gujranwala. Crackdown
against activists resulted in many arrests and injuries.
Ch Aamer Waqas reported that the script for humiliating and arresting
Imran Khan was written by IJT and security personnel, which was brought
to the knowledge of the Jamaat-i-Islami. Student leader, Hafiz Ayub, was the
mastermind who stayed away during the episode. Thousands of students
demonstrated in Punjab University to protest high-handedness of IJT and
vowed challenging its hold in universities.
Three judges of the bench, which started hearing petitions against
imposition of emergency, refused to sit on the bench. Justice Muhammad

547

Nawaz Abbasi, Justice Fakir Muhammad Khokhar and Justice M Javed

Buttar took this decision over the remarks of President General Pervez
Musharraf about judiciary.
On 17th November, the counsel of Justice Wajihuddin decided not to
appear before the court during hearing of the petition on eligibility of
Musharraf for presidency. The reasons given were that judges sworn in
under PCO were not competent to hear and a constitutional petition cannot
be heard when the Constitution has been held in abeyance.
Negroponte delivered a strong message from Bush; for whom?
Musharraf told the visitor that emergency would stay for now. The brave
commando told the US that Pakistans nuclear weapons would be safe as
long as Im in power. Benazir ruled out talks with government. Nawaz
Sharif declined an offer to meet Musharraf in Saudi Arabia. PML-Q offered
party president-ship to Musharraf.
The regime once again requested Bedouins for help; this time they
closed the broadcast of Geo and ARY from Dubai. Journalists protested all
over the country against yet another draconian step. Mushahid Hussain
demanded lifting of emergency and curbs on media. Agencies kidnapped the
editor of Daily newspaper from his office in Lahore.
Interim prime minister vowed to ensure writ of law. Crackdown
against terrorists of all kinds continued with special focus on PPP leaders
and activists. Thirteen Punjab University teachers were booked on treason
charges after staging a rally against PCO.
On 18th November, Negroponte held a post-visit press conference in
Islamabad. He asked Musharraf to end emergency terming it main hurdle in
free elections; free all detainees and lift curbs on media. He made no
mention of the mauling of the judiciary at the hands of Americas hired
mercenary. He also urged Benazir and Musharraf to restart talks. Afzal Khan
noticed that Negroponte was tougher on Benazir than Musharraf. Benazir
reacted by saying that it was useless to talk to Musharraf. Negropontes visit
will destabilize Pakistan, said JI.
Musharraf said Pakistan comes before the Constitution (and he comes
even before Pakistan). He planned to go to Saudi Arabia on 19th November
to take Saudi into confidence on various matters. Jamima led a protest rally
in London; protesters demanded release of Imran Khan. JI Shoora removed

548

PU IJT Nazim and General Secretary over Imran Khan incident. PML-N and
PPP decided to boycott code of conduct moot announced by ECP. PML-N
ruled out reconciliation with PML-Q. Fazl urged opposition parties to join
MMAs APC.
On 19th November, interim governments in three provinces were
sworn in a day earlier than scheduled. The composition of all the three
governments was no different from the federal government; they were all
hand-picked by the dictator mostly affiliated to the parties that ruled for five
years. Gujrati Brothers met Musharraf and the elder brother urged Musharraf
not to dissolve local governments during the elections.
US Ambassador met Benazir. Benazir asked US to take steps to ensure
fair polls as the government has planned to rig elections. She also threatened
that boycott of polls remained an option. She ruled out talks with Musharraf
but acknowledged that Bush wanted Musharraf to stay. EU passed a
resolution demanding lifting of emergency rule; the regime reacted by
asking EU to make reasonable demands.
Nawaz set terms for talks with Musharraf: Musharraf must roll back
the November 3 actions and spell out definite agenda of the meeting solely
at restoration of rights of 160 million people he has usurped before any such
meeting. He laid out seven demands in this context. Opposition parties
boycotted ECP meeting for framing code of conduct. ECP announced that
polls would be held on 8th January 2008. JUI-F quitted APDM. Protest rallies
by lawyers, journalists, political workers and civil society continued.
Imran Khan went on hunger strike in Muzaffargarh Jail. Anti-IJT
demonstration in Punjab University turned violent. The teachers and staff
were beaten up by protesters. Students staged sit-in protest in front of VC
office, who promised to close down IJT offices and assured withdrawal of
treason cases against 14 teachers.
The judges enrolled under PCO acted like a Summary Court Martial
in dismissing main petitions challenging Musharrafs candidacy in just one
sitting. The candidate of PPP withdrew its petition. The counsel of Justice
Wajihuddin refused to plead for the constitutional petition before PCO
judges when the constitution was held in abeyance.
Hearing of the petitions challenging imposition of emergency rule and
promulgation of PCO commenced. Hearing the arguments of Advocate Irfan

549

Qadir, the counsel for the petitioner Tikka Iqbal, the bench remarked that
doctrine of necessity could be applied in an extraordinary situation.
On 20th November, CEC announced election schedule vowing that
free and fair polls would be held in peaceful environments. Nomination
papers will be filed between Nov 21 and 26; scrutiny of papers will be
carried out from Nov 27 to Dec 3; complaints will be received on Dec 7;
Decision on appeals will be announced on Dec 14; papers can be withdrawn
by Dec 15; and polls will be held on Jan 8, 2008.
Opposition termed the announcement a big joke. Benazir said
decision on participation in polls would be taken in couple of days.
Musharraf met Saudi rulers in Riyadh and urged them to rein in Nawaz.
Reportedly, Nawaz planned to return to Pakistan on 26 th November. US
Ambassador called on Fazlur Rehman. The regime allowed duty-free import
of bulletproof cars to help solve the problems of the masses.
Imran Khan vowed to continue hunger strike till death. Protesting
journalists were thrashed by police in Karachi and 150 of them were
arrested. Punjab University administration closed down two offices of IJT.
Students continued their protest.
Spokesman of Interior Ministry said 3,416 detained lawyers and
activists have been released since the start of crackdown. When asked about
the latest arrests he replied that arrests and releases were part of the ongoing
process. He said the removed judges were absolutely free to move around.
On 21st November, Musharraf met the evil genius, the Attorney
General, before promulgating an ordinance providing cover to the acts he
has taken since November 3, including imposition of emergency. Legal
experts considered the Ordinance more as an obvious indication of insecure
feelings at apex level than another authoritarian action of a military ruler.
Bush observed that Musharraf has not crossed the line; (he only
obliterated the line dividing lawful and unlawful, right and wrong, good and
evil). Meanwhile, Pakistan urged the Commonwealth to delay decision on
Pakistan. Britain said polls wont be fair at current stage.
Amin Fahim, Nawaz Sharif and Qazi discussed boycott option on
telephone, but differences on boycott persisted. Benazir demanded
suspension of Nazims before polls. Nawaz and his wife could return in four

550

days, claimed a special report of The Daily Nation. Indian and British
diplomats met Fazlur Rehman.
Journalists protested across the country and in the process got beaten
up and arrested. Lawyers boycott of courts continued. Students of Punjab
University demanded registration of cases against IJT members. More
prisoners, including Imran Khan and Khwaja Asif, were released by Punjab
interim government. The former, however, continued with his hunger strike.
Outgoing prime minister and his cabinet members continued enjoying the
protocol and privileges.
To expose the spokesman-ship of the brigadier serving the Interior
Ministry, the lawyers led by Justice Wajihuddin went to judges colony in
Islamabad. Police did not allow them to go to the residence of the Chief
Justice Iftikhar and the captive judge was also stopped from coming out of
his house. The senior lawyer leading the attempt was arrested and sent to
Adiala Jail. Wajihuddin said the emergency rule has been imposed to cover
illegal acts of the Musharraf regime.

VIEWS
Musharraf had claimed that the crackdown against the judiciary and
media was part of the war on terror. It is therefore appropriate to first view
the Wests viewpoint. Bret Stephens borrowed Musharrafs own words to
criticize his actions.
No doubt you are sensitive. In your autobiography, In the Line of
Fire, you wrote about former Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
as follows: He threw many of his opponents, including editors, journalists,
and even cartoonists, into prison. He was really a fascist using the most
progressive rhetoric to promote regressive ends, the first of which was to
stay in power forever.
Of the former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, you recalled how he
got his party goons to storm the Supreme Court building while the court
was in session This was, to put it mildly a very low point in Pakistani
political history. Concerning the efficacy of martial law, you said that our
past experience had amply demonstrated that martial law damages not only
military but also civilian institutions.

551

Your motives for declaring an emergency have been so

transparently self-serving that its easy to forget there really is a terrorist
threat to the country. It may soon dawn on you that your assault on civil
liberties has only ripened the conditions in which terrorists thrive Your
support, both at home and abroad, may never again be what it was, but the
absence of support does not necessarily mean active opposition. In your case
it will probably mean reluctant acquiescence to the facts you lay on the
ground.
H D S Greenway opined: When Pakistans Pervez Musharraf
declared his state of emergency, he seemed to be appealing directly to the
United States, asking for patience from those who had had a couple of
centuries to build their democratic institutions. He said his state of
emergency was a temporary and necessary step in the struggle against
extremists.
After narrating Musharrafs unconvincing arguments to justify his
action, the analyst added: But for all that, Musharraf did not suspend
Pakistans Constitution because of Islamic extremism, but because of
Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. Musharraf most certainly
feared that the court would not confirm his election as president while he
remained in the army uniform, but his grievance with the justice was broader
than that.
The court under Chaudhry showed an independence of mind that
Musharraf couldnt abide. As of this writing, Musharraf seems willing to
compromise on the date of upcoming elections, but not on the Supreme
Court. The justices are gone, he says, and with that he may be planting the
seeds of his own fall. History is full of leaders who once did much good,
but whose ambitions took them too far on the road to perfidy.
Helene Cooper, Mark Mazzetti and David Rohde observed: Almost
two weeks into Pakistans political crisis, Bush Administration officials
are losing faith that the Pakistani President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, have
begun discussing what might come next, according to senior administration
officials.
Administration officials say they still hope that Mr Negroponte can
salvage the fractured arranged marriage between General Musharraf and
former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. But in Pakistan, foreign diplomats

552

and aides to both leaders said the chances of a deal were evaporating 11 days
after General Musharraf declared de facto martial law.
Several senior administration officials said that with each day that
passed, more administration officials were coming around to the belief
that General Musharrafs days in power were numbered and that the
United States should begin considering contingency plans.
More than a dozen officials in Washington and Islamabad from a
number of countries spoke on condition of anonymity because of the
fragility of Pakistans current political situation Officials involved in the
discussions in Washington said the Bush Administration remained wary
of the perception that the United States was cutting back room deals to
install the next leader of Pakistan.
Many Western diplomats in Islamabad said they believed that even a
flawed arrangement like that one was ultimately better than an oppressive
and unpopular rule under General Musharraf. Such a scenario would be a
return to the diffuse and sometimes unwieldy democracy that Pakistan had in
the 1990s before General Musharraf seized power in a bloodless coup But
the diplomats also warned that removing the General might not be that
easy. Since he invoked emergency powers on Nov 3, General Musharraf has
successfully used a huge security crackdown to block large-scale protests
Senior administration officials in Washington said they were
concerned that the longer the constitutional crisis in Pakistan continued,
the more diverted Pakistans security apparatus would be from the
mission the United States wants it focused of fighting terrorism in the
countrys border areas.
While no large-scale protests have emerged since the emergency was
declared, the apparent collapse over the last week of America-backed talks
to create a power-sharing deal between Ms Bhutto and General Musharraf
could lead to more street confrontations, diplomats said. As General
Musharraf has refused to lift his emergency declaration, lawmakers in
Washington have stepped up threats to freeze aid payments to
Islamabad.
But other top Democrats say they are wary about endorsing cuts
in aid, citing concern that it could undermine efforts to fight al-Qaeda in
Pakistan. And the Western military official in Pakistan warned that an aid

553

cut-off could anger Pakistan. Other experts argue that pressure could build
on General Musharraf if Pakistan believed that the presidents actions
threatened the $1 billion in annual aid Washington provides to it.
Negroponte before Foreign affairs Committee said: Events in
Pakistan deserve our countrys full attention. What happens in Pakistan
directly affects our vital interests. Pakistan sits on the crossroads between
South and Central Asia. It shares a 1,600-mile long border with Afghanistan,
where we and our NATO allies have so much at stake. Pakistans continued
cooperation is vital to our cause in Afghanistan.
On November 3 the Government of Pakistan implemented a state
of emergency that impedes Pakistans democratic development and
transition to the civilian rule and compromises its tradition of an
independent judiciary. We strongly counseled against emergency rule, but
Pakistans leadership did not follow our advice.
Id like to talk now about US-Pakistan relationship since 2001. Since
that time, the Government of Pakistan has been an indispensable leader
in the fight against terrorism and violent extremism. Pakistans
Government and security forces have captured and killed hundreds of alQaeda operatives and Taliban militants, including some of the most senior
terrorists from these groups, since 2001 These successes were in no small
measure due to the growth of civil society and media groups under President
Musharraf.
We are urging the government to return to laying the foundation
for a sustainable transition from military to civilian rule, and fulfilling the
commitments to do all it could to ensure that upcoming parliamentary
elections occur on time and reflect a free, fair and transparent political
process. The current state of emergency calls into question these
commitments
Secretary Rice talked about our relationship with Pakistan on
November 4, shortly after President Musharraf declared the state of
emergency. She said that we would be reviewing our assistance programs to
Pakistan in the context of statutes governing provision of aid to that country;
and, she said that while we did so we needed to keep in mind that we have
an obligation to protect the American people. She noted that much of our
assistance in Pakistan contributes directly to our national interests and
to the counter-terrorism mission, whether addressing terrorism and security
554

concerns directly, or whether addressing the underlying social, economic and

political conditions that terrorists and violent extremists exploit.
Thanks to bipartisan Congressional support, our assistance to
Pakistan is accomplishing a great deal for the American and Pakistani
people. Our programs are empowering Pakistans moderate center to
assist and eventually defeat a violent minority.
Long-term partnership with the Pakistani people aimed at building a
stable, democratic society is the only option. We cannot afford to have onagain, off-again interactions that characterized our relationship in the past.
Pakistans future is too vital to our interests and our national security to
ignore or to down-grade There is not a mission in world more
deserving of our persistence and considered patience.
Rosa Brooks wrote: Today, Pakistan is in crisis once more.
Musharraf has managed to alienate secular democrats and radical
Islamists alike. Thousands of opposition activists are now in prison, twothirds of Pakistans senior judges are under house arrest, and Musharraf has
suspended the constitution.
As Musharraf clings to power, we continue to lose traction in the
battle against extremism in Pakistan. A recent opinion poll found that most
Pakistanis are so alienated that they give Osama bin Laden higher approval
ratings than they give to Musharraf or to you, George. Osama thanks you.
And what are you doing about all this!
Nothing! Youre not calling on Musharraf to step down and hold
elections, youre not threatening to pull the plug on any US military aid, and
youre not opening up links to the grass-roots democratic opposition; which
means theres little chance that well get what we say we want and what
most Pakistanis want: a moderate, democratic Pakistani government.
Instead, our policies will continue to inspire and strengthen Islamic
extremism.
Boston Globe observed: Supporters of religious parties who join with
secular parties to demonstrate against Musharraf have been shouting antiAmerican slogans. They are seizing on the Generals vanishing popularity to
argue that Pakistanis ought to direct their wrath not only at him, but also
at the Uncle Sam who manipulates behind the scenes.

555

Bhutto seems to recognize that her political interest demands she

keep her distance from Washington, even though she owes her
homecoming after eight years in exile to a US-brokered deal between her
and Musharraf on political cohabitation.
As popular sentiment now turns against Musharraf and his state of
emergency, Bhutto is swimming with the current. By breaking her part of
the tacit bargain with Musharraf and calling for his immediate resignation as
president, she is not only freeing herself of any association with him; she is
also repackaging herself as a democratic leader who is not in thrall to
Musharrafs American sponsors.
At this treacherous point in Pakistans power struggle, President Bush
and his advisers should first do no harm. The last thing they should be doing
is to declare their preferences in that power struggle. America should favor
free and fair elections in Pakistan, the restoration of constitutional
democracy, and the preservation of an independent press and judiciary. But
trying to pick particular winners among candidates and or parties
would be a major mistake.
M K Bhadarakumar wrote for the Asia Times. Senator Joe Biden, the
chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee (and presidential
aspirant) correctly identified the problem when he said this week that the
relationship between the US and Pakistan is largely transitional and
this transition isnt working for either party.
Biden argued, we (the US) must (move) beyond the transitional
relationship the exchange of aid for services to the normal functional
relationship we enjoy with all our other military allies and friendly nations.
Pakistan doesnt think it is getting from Washington what is its due as
the USs unique non-NATO ally in the region, and as a nuclear power with
a big standing.
Biden put his finger neatly on another aspect of the problem when he
sized up that Pakistan harbors a great grievance about our blossoming
relationship with rival India. The grievance takes an acute form when
Washington brusquely tells Islamabad that it does not qualify for the sort of
nuclear cooperation that it proposes to have with New Delhi.
Washington doesnt seem to notice the Pakistani militarys
sensitivities about the USs perceived step-motherly attitude. From the

556

militarys perspective, the US is forging a strategic partnership with India,

which is bound to elevate the latter into a super league of world powers. In
comparison, the Pakistani military is entrapped in the Pakistan-Afghanistan
tribal tracts as a border militia.
Biden is right in saying it is time Washington addresses the core
issues of the US-Pakistan relationship. The issue is not about Musharraf
alone. There is doubtless a massive undercurrent of anti-Americanism in
Pakistani society.
In sum, Musharraf and the Pakistani military would see no
reason to succumb to US pressure tactics. The increasingly defiant tone,
almost unwillingly, in Musharrafs stance with regard to Washington must
be carefully noted. Anyone who thought Musharraf and Bush were
dissimulating disagreement would have realized by now that is not the case.
Also, Islamabad cannot be unaware that apart from the Afghan war,
regional tensions involving the US with Iran, Russia and Central Asia are
likely to accentuate in the near term, which in turn will only increase US
dependence on Pakistan.
Negroponte may complain, but the regime remains adamant that the
state of emergency is needed to ensure the smooth conduct of elections. The
regime calculates that ultimately, political parties will participate in the
elections regardless of the emergency. The regime will cut back on the war
on terror if Negroponte tries any of his famous tricks learnt in previous
diplomatic assignments
It must be understood that at every stage in recent months
Musharraf has acted on the basis of decisions reached by the collegiums
of corps commanders. While propagandists may suggest that an army
revolt against Musharraf is conceivable, the General indeed exudes the
confidence of a military man who commands absolute loyalty.
In fact, it would be the height of folly for Washington to try to
create dissentions within the Pakistan Army As long as the army stays
united, the Pakistani state has inherent stability and a fair chance of outliving
the weaknesses of its civilian institutions, democratic elections or any of the
fragilities associated with civil society.

557

Given the political gridlock ensuing from the breakdown of the

Musharraf-Bhutto deal and the absence of any plan B, Negroponte will
have to take a good second look at what is on offer from Musharraf a
continuation of the present ruling alliance with adjustments. He could
always offer improvements.
Finally, Negroponte will know that after all, Washington has ways to
influence Musharraf. Musharraf has already offered that the choice is
entirely Bhuttos to be conciliatory or confrontational One thing is clear.
The military doesnt seem to trust Ms Bhutto. Musharraf happens to be
the only acceptable game in Islamabad.
Ivan Eland opined: Although US President George W Bush has asked
Musharraf to set an end date for the state of emergency, to hold elections,
and to give up his powerful position as head of the armed forces, Bush has
continued US aid and recently described Musharraf as an ally America
needs in order to fight al-Qaeda.
These signs of continued US support have emboldened President
Musharraf. Although Musharraf has set parliamentary elections for January
2008; they will be hardly be fair, unless emergency is lifted prior to the
plebiscite. Meanwhile the Pakistani population smolders with anger against
him, and in Pakistans northwest, militants are ascendant.
The United States is so unpopular in the region that supporting a
governing alliance between Musharraf and former Prime Minister Benazir
Bhutto would probably delegitimize even the middle ground in Pakistan. For
moderate forces to have the best chance in that nation, the United States,
paradoxically, should refrain from supporting them and stay out of
Pakistani politics.
Claude Salhani wrote in The Washington Times. Gen Musharraf
justified his move by saying the security of Pakistan was at stake from
extremist elements, but the heads and bones cracked by baton-wielding riot
policemen and the military were those of lawyers and judges, not religious
fundamentalists trying to bring down the government.
Raza Qasuri blames judicial activism. The lawyers and judges were
bailing out hundreds of Islamists, he said, and they had to be stopped. In
analyzing events in the country, one cannot help but see similarities with the

558

events that unfolded in the streets of Tehran, Abadan and other Iranian cities
prior to the Islamic revolution.
The real danger is that the ingredients for an Islamic revolution,
similar to the one in Iran, are all there. Consider the following:
Overwhelming desire among all classes of society for political
change; the urge to do away with the current rulers and their often
corrupt entourage.
The elite and the middle-class bourgeoisie tend to lean towards the
West and want to see changes more in the shape of democratic
reforms and free elections.
The presence of large, often illiterate lower-working-class populace,
easily influenced by the mullahs.
The largely negative role ascribed to the United States unwavering
support of a leadership that no longer fully represents the people.
As with the Shah in Iran then and the Pakistani President now,
Washington is perceived as closing its eyes to human rights abuses, ignoring
what it preaches on basic democratic principles. Once again, Washington is
seen as adopting double standards saying one thing but doing another.
Graham Usher observed: Analysts say two things may have spurred
Benazir to up the ante so dramatically. One was Musharrafs
announcement that the elections might be held under emergency a recipe
for wholesome rigging. The other was perhaps the realization that her
attempt to oppose the dictatorship while defending the deal was costing
her support among Pakistanis.
Lahore again demonstrated that only PPP cadres were rallying to her
call. Other opposition parties, civil society groups and the general public
stayed away. This thing wont take off if we go solo, admitted PPP
lawmaker Yousuf Raza Gilani. So now Benazir says she wants to fly in
formation.
There is a widespread political consensus that General Musharraf
must go and the situation in the country will only be aggravated if he stays.
Pakistan is a nuclear-armed country and its military is over-extended. The

559

PML-N and other opposition parties have welcomed Benazirs overtures

as a step forward in the struggle for democracy.
But given her history of hunting with hounds while running with the
hares few think the rupture is irrevocable, including Benazirs allies
There is a lot of fog around Benazirs call for Musharrafs overthrow.
But one thing is clear. Benazir has joined the overarching sentiment of her
people.
James Klurfeld wrote: I dont mean to suggest there are exact
parallels between Iran and Pakistan. Every situation is different. In some
ways, whats happening today is more dangerous because Pakistan
possesses nuclear weapons, and the largely ungoverned border areas of
Pakistan have become the base of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
But Pakistan also comes out of a much different historical and
cultural tradition, split from India in 1947 as a Muslim majority state. Some
Pakistani scholars believe it is extremely important that Pervez
Musharraf, or his successor, back off from the emergency decree and
allow elections to proceed in January.
Some degree of humility about our power to determine events is in
order. Im not arguing for a policy of isolationism. Thats unrealistic, too.
But the Bush Administrations policy of trying to impose American values
and an American perspective on other countries hasnt worked well either.
Flag-waving seems to go over better. Yes, Washington, with its huge
military-aid package, has some influence over what happens in Pakistan
with its military. But what we say and what values we demonstrate we stand
for might be just as important with the Pakistani people. More important
even, but in the end, the fate of Pakistan is going to be determined in
Pakistan.
Michael Abramowitz opined: In the two weeks since emergency rule
was imposed, Bush has made clear he is standing by Musharraf, offering
only muted criticism of his actions and refusing to consider any significant
cut in US assistance, which has totaled more than $10 billion since 2001.
Bushs response to the crisis has been shaped to a great degree by
a continuing White House calculation that Musharraf represents its best

560

chance to put Pakistan on a path to democracy and to wage an effective

fight against Islamic extremists on its border with Afghanistan.
The assessment does not appear to have changed much in the
past two weeks, despite deep doubts from outside the administration about
whether Musharraf remains capable of achieving either objective, and
questions about whether he is truly committed to democracy.
Wendy I Chamberlin, who served as ambassador to Pakistan during
the critical months after Sept 11, 2001, said the administration may have
been justified in standing by Musharraf but not after his recent seizure
of emergency powers. We have to make clear that our relationship is with
the people of Pakistan and not with one man, and that he is not
indispensable, said Chamberlin, president of the Middle East Institute, a
Washington-based policy group.
A key source of tension in recent years has not been Pakistans
democracy but concern within US government that Musharraf has been
increasingly unwilling or unable to control the renaissance of Islamic
extremists in the lightly governed regions along the border of Pakistan and
Afghanistan. The issue came to a head in the fall last year after Musharraf
stunned US officials by signing a peace deal with Islamic militants
A number of people involved in Pakistan policy over the years say
they remain uncertain how strong Bush has been in delivering a truly tough
message to Musharraf about the need to rein in extremists or to restore
democracy. Administration officials say Musharraf has little question where
Bush stands on key issues, though they do acknowledge that the tough
talk is often delivered by the presidents subordinates.
Keith Jones wrote: Last week the US media and the Western press as
a whole made much of Negropontes impending visit to Islamabad,
claiming that he was going to read the riot act to Musharraf who, since
declaring a state of emergency November 3, has jailed thousands, purged the
judiciary, suspended the rights to free speech, free assembly and free
movement, and empowered military courts to try government opponents.
In reality, as was exemplified by Negropontes press conference, his
visit was aimed at salvaging the Musharraf regime and, above all, the
decades-long partnership between US and Pakistan. The naming of
Negroponte as the US governments emissary to Islamabad had itself a

561

significance that would not have been lost on Musharraf and the Pakistani
military.
In his press statement Sunday, Negroponte devoted a scant two
paragraphs to what could be construed as criticism of Musharraf and, in
so doing, drew an entirely spurious contrast between the recent imposition of
martial law and the rest of Musharrafs rule.
State Department officials had said that Negroponte would demand
Musharraf lift the state of emergency prior to the national and provincial
legislative elections slated for early January. But the General refused to
give or accept any time limit on the emergency
The repression continued unabated over the weekend, with police
breaking up anti-government protests with baton-charges and mass arrests.
Musharraf had promised as much. Anyone who breaks the law of the land
will be back in jail or restricted, he announced Friday.
Acting under pressure from Islamabad, the Dubai government forced
off the air Geo TV and ARY, two private television channels that prior to the
emergency broadcast into Pakistan via cable and continued to have
audiences in Pakistani expatriate community in the Gulf States.
Negroponte telephoned Bhutto Friday, but apparently refused to
meet her after she rejected his appeal for her to ally with Musharraf. Nor
did Negroponte meet with any opposition leaders, in yet another
demonstrative show of Washingtons support for the government.
Ever since Musharraf imposed martial law, Bush Administration
officials have been claiming that there are serious limits to their leverage
over Islamabad and that all they can do is plead with the Pakistani military
to move toward democracy. Such claims are ludicrous. If the US wanted to
exert pressure on Islamabad, it and the other Western powers would have a
vast array of tools with which to exert economic and political pressure on the
Pakistani government.
The reality is the Bush Administration and the US establishment as a
whole are terrified at the prospect that a popular struggle against the
regime could precipitate a social upheaval. At the very least, such
development would seriously disrupt the US war in Afghanistan almost

562

half of the oil and the majority of other supplies used by US forces in
Afghanistan come through Pakistan and US plans for war against Iran.
Jo Johnson expressed his views on Benazirs change of track. Her
return has not gone to script. After months of negotiations with General
Pervez Musharraf over a transition to democracy, her euphemism for a
pact that would have seen her provide a civilian front to his military rule. Ms
Bhutto arrived to find herself tainted by association.
Even when Ms Bhutto was placed under house arrest on Monday,
many suspected she was only going through the motions in condemning
Gen Musharrafs decision, two weeks ago, to impose a de facto martial
law. She had, after all, much to gain from his assault on the judiciary: a
compliant Supreme Court would be unlikely to throw out the decree
providing an amnesty to politicians facing corruption charges filed by 1099.
As the government clamped down on the media and arrest of
thousands of lawyers, human rights activists and other moderate Pakistanis
threatened to take further toll on her popularity, Ms Bhutto was forced into a
radical change of tactics. On Tuesday, under pressure from her Pakistan
Peoples Party, she burnt her bridges with the General, promising she
would never serve as prime minister as long as he was president.
By withdrawing a last democratic lifeline from Gen Musharraf, Ms
Bhutto deprives him of his best chance of securing broader legitimacy
for his rule. Although he has announced that elections will be held by
January 9, he has refused to lift emergency. There is little prospect the main
political parties, their candidates jailed, deported or in hiding, will
participate.
While her return from the political graveyard reflects the poverty
of choice in Pakistans political system, it has also been extraordinary feat
of will-power. Her challenge now will be to overtake politicians such as
Imran Khanand Mr Sharif.
On Thursday, Ms Bhutto swallowed her pride and telephoned Mr
Sharif, suggesting they reform a common front to oust Mr Musharraf. Her
attempts to present herself as the unifier of Pakistans democratic opposition
may be laughable to those who have borne the brunt of the military
crackdown, but it is a matter of urgency for the PPP.

563

Shahan Mufti wrote for The Christian Science Monitor. Even as Ms

Bhutto appears to throw herself into convening a unified opposition
movement against President Musharraf, her prolonged negotiations to reach
a power-sharing agreement with him have earned her the distrust and
skepticism of many other leaders in the opposition ranks.
After a visit last weekend by US Deputy secretary of State John
Negroponte in which he articulated Washingtons reluctant but continued
support for Musharraf, Bhutto is faced with a stark choice between a path
to potential power that either runs through power politics or popular
politics.
Negroponte suggested reconciliation between political moderates
would be the most constructive way forward to maintain Musharraf as an
ally in the war on terror. But in separate conversations, both Musharraf
and Bhutto conveyed to Negroponte that there was little space for
negotiations left.
Bhutto has spent the past week networking with all elements of
Musharrafs opposition political parties of all ideological stripes, civil
society groups, lawyers, and students in the hopes of leading a strong
alternative bloc. Such a unified political force could be presented to her
sympathizers in the West, who are now being forced to consider a postMusharraf Pakistan as an alternative to the military rule.
Bhutto also used her time under house arrest to reach out to
estranged opposition leaders, including her sometime rival former Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif, who lives in exile in Saudi Arabia. She has also
begun working with Qazi Hussain Ahmad In an apparent attempt to win
back her estranged secular liberal vote bank, Bhutto also met Asma
Jehangir.
Bhuttos decision to start a campaign against Musharraf, analysts
say, could be the result of some hard calculations, including weighing
how much power Musharraf will truly wield if he does quit the Army as
promised and begin his second term as a civilian president.
Bhutto may also be banking on support from Washington if the US
is presented with a choice between the military leader and her For his part,
Musharraf has appeared, for now, to have thrown all his chips back
with his own loyalist party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Q

564

Stephen P Cohen opined: Musharraf may have sidelined the

journalists, lawyers and judges, but he has yet to demonstrate that
Pakistan has the will, or the capacity, to develop a comprehensive
counter-terrorist and counter-insurgency strategy. The recent operations in
Swat, once a tranquil backwater but now under the control of Islamic
fanatics, was done, according to press reports, without any regard for the
refugees and innocent civilians; if past experience is any guide, the
operations will merely serve to increase recruitment to the ranks on
militants.
Second, bringing Benazir into the system will be bitterly
opposed by Musharrafs civilian supporters. They detest her populist
approach, they have no rejoinder to the developmental and educational
agenda that she has set out, and only talk of how many roads and bridges
Pakistan has built under this and previous military regimes. It is hard to
imagine that they will work with a Bhutto government, and she may find it
hard to work with them.
The best scenario a brief emergency, a short election campaign,
carefully controlled elections, and power-sharing with a willing Benazir
Bhutto, is what Musharraf is probably going after. However, other, more
desperate scenarios have to be examined Pakistan could begin to crack
apart on ethnic lines.
The US should have pressed for a broadening of Pakistani politics
much earlier, and failing to do so means that Washington has no alternative
but to ride the Musharraf tiger to the end whatever that may be.
Meanwhile, the US may yet decide that a cross-border attack upon a known
al-Qaeda or Taliban target is well worth the risk of angering Musharraf; after
all, there is not much he can do about it
What can be done? Comparisons with the Shah are premature,
but Washington needs to talk to the experts, it needs to consult with other
concerned countries (India, Iran, China, not just the Britain), it still needs to
work with Musharraf and help him achieve a broader political base, and
above all it needs to ask how its short term goals (the destruction of alQaeda elements residing in the FATA) can be reconciled with the long term
goal now perhaps out of reach of a stable, if not wholly democratic
Pakistan.

565

The US will disregard the illegality of Musharrafs bid for

another term as president if he takes office as a civilian and lifts the State
of Emergency prior to parliamentary elections. It looks like thats whats
going on. And that probably means the judiciary gets hung out to dry,
observed The Counterpunch.
In John Negropontes statement before leaving Pakistan there wasnt
a word about restoring the Supreme Court, releasing the lawyers and
judges from jail, or maintaining independent judiciary. But there was a
reference to Musharrafs second term: We welcome President Musharrafs
announcement that elections will take place in January, a commitment he
repeated to me in categorical terms.
The fact that lawyers arent getting lip service either from the United
States or the PPP indicates that the last thing we want is for a straightforward
legal challenge to the constitutionality of Musharrafs second term to upset
the applecart. I guess our vision of democracy does not accommodate the
idea of an activist judiciary seeking to enforce constitutional limits on an
executive that see itself as above the law.
The nucleus of prosperous, bourgeois Pakistans drive for civilian
rule, political and theological moderation, and democracy is not the corrupt
political parties headed by Bhutto and Sharif. Its the lawyers and judges
who have been fighting for law-abiding, civilian, secular and democratic
rule
And they are probably so estranged from Musharraf that theres
no concession that can reconcile them to him, and allow him to claim a
second presidential term with the genuine backing of the judiciary. Maybe a
dose of internal exile is what the doctor ordered!
I suppose Musharrafs plans to pack the courts, grit his teeth at
the rejection of the new legal systems legitimacy by a significant number of
Pakistans lawyers and judges, and expect that their discordant, principled
voices will be drowned out by the babble of greedy, corrupt and powerhungry politicos on the hosting come January.
But having a vocal, educated, prosperous, organized, and terminally
alienated group with a legitimate sense of grievance at the heart of
Pakistans bourgeoisie does not bode well for democracy American Style
in Pakistan, for Musharraf, whatever military leader follows himor for any

566

opposition party that cuts a cynical deal with Musharraf for a share of
power.
It will be interesting to see if Bhutto, after weighing the lawyers in
the balance against the army, the United States, and her own ambition,
decides to ignore them, exploit them, or betray them.
The Washington Post wrote: Like many autocrats before him,
Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has confused his own fortunes with
those of his country. Over the weekend he told a visiting US envoy that
only he could save Pakistan from terrorism and lead it toward democracy. In
fact the opposite is true Musharraf needs to accept that Pakistans rescue
can begin only with his departure.
Every major step Gen Musharraf has taken in the past two weeks has
been aimed at preserving his hold on power, at the expense of his
country. The state of emergency he declared did not facilitate the armys
fight against extremists, as he claimed, but it allowed him to fire a dozen
Supreme Court judges who were considering legal challenges. The new
judges appointed by Gen Musharraf dismissed most of the challenges; they
are paving the way for him to remain president.
General Musharraf has sought to appease the Bush
Administration by announcing parliamentary elections for early January.
But he has refused to lift the state of emergency and has suggested several
times that he will hold the vote under de facto martial law. That would save
Gen Musharraf from the political and legal challenges that could flow from a
restoration of rule of law, since his actions after he suspended the
Constitution have been hugely unpopular.
The Bush Administration, which for years have made the mistake
of wedding itself to Gen Musharraf rather than working to strengthen the
countrys secular institutions, at last is backing away slightly But the Bush
Administration is still clinging to the idea that Gen Musharraf can be
induced to make a deal with opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, though she
has said publicly that she will no longer work with him.
In reality, it is difficult to imagine a positive outcome to Pakistans
crisis that does not involve Gen Musharrafs retirement. The countrys
best interest, and that of the United States, lies in restoring the Constitution,
reinstating and strengthening an independent judiciary, reopening

567

independent media without restrictions, and holding free and fair elections in
which all Pakistani parties are able to participate.
H D S Greenway was of the view that the US has been
spectacularly unsuccessful in the role of marriage broker. The Bush
Administration desperately plotted an arranged union between Pakistans
President Pervez Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto, a former failed prime
minister and heiress to a political dynasty. Musharraf agreed to drop a
bundle of corruption charges against her so that the bartered bride could
return from exile. But then the reluctant groom declared an emergency, and
put Bhutto under house arrest for a while, giving her a chance to be
compared to Burmas Sung San Suu Kyi as a prisoner.
Last weekend, Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte flew to
Islamabad to persuade Musharraf to drop his emergency, and get the
marriage back on track. But Bhutto said she no longer considers
Musharraf suitable for power sharing. And he, in turn, made it clear that
he was not going to be dragged to the altar even if the Bush Administration
wants.
Having viewed what the West had said during the period, it is time to
see all that has been said at home. First about some of the specific events;
out which arrest of Imran Khan was most significant. The Nation
commented; a student organizations spokesman has said Mr Imran Khan
was to blame as no politician could enter the university without the
authorities permission.
It added: The explanation is unacceptable, as numerous politicians
have visited the campus in the past at the invitation of students. What is
more, a number of JI leaders present at the time at the campus were spared
the treatment, indicating that PTI chief was the only target. They
presumably had coordinated the action with the police waiting outside
to arrest the opposition leader who had dodged arrest since the
announcement of emergency last Saturday. If the idea was to stop him from
addressing the students, this could have been achieved without recourse to
force.
Like a number of PPP activists arrested earlier, Mr Khan has been
booked under anti-terrorism act. The way the draconian law is being used
against political opponents known for their democratic credentials raises
serious questions about the governments claims that the emergency and the
568

amendment in the Army Act, allowing citizens to be tried by military courts,

are only aimed at bringing extremists and terrorists to book.
With the elections to be held before January 9, major opposition
leaders have been confined to jails and the second rank leadership has either
been arrested or is being hunted down. Independent TV networks have been
barred from airing programmes making people dependent on governmentcontrolled media airing one-sided propaganda A number of statements
from opposition leaders indicate that in the absence of a level playing field,
they might decide to boycott the elections, thus adding a new dimension
to the ongoing crisis.
A few days later, the newspaper added: Ever since the manhandling
of Imran Khan by the activists of the Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba in the Punjab
University, the political climate of the largest university of the province has
changed considerably. The anti-Jamiat demonstrations on the campus, the
largest in over 25 years, taking place in an institution that until a week ago
had no demonstration organized by a body other than the Jamiat, were a
sight for sore eyes. The body had virtually become the varsitys parallel
government that could not even be kept in check by the otherwise repressive
administration. The VCs announcement to close all offices of the IJT is a
commendable step.
What is truly sad, however, is the beating up of some of the faculty
members by the protesting students. After decades of oppressive rule, these
students do not realize that, looked at in terms of superstructures, they are
showing signs of becoming yet another student organization that resorts to
violence and rowdy-ism. It is hoped that sense will prevail.
Gulsher Panhwer from Dadu wrote: Entry into politics has brought
no dividends for him, though, because there is no place in Pakistani politics
for honest and well-meaning persons. While acknowledging this sad fact, the
treatment meted to him has to be condemned in strongest possible
terms. If this trend of violence in politics, that was augmented by an ethnic
political party in Karachi on recent visits of CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry and Imran
Khan to Karachi, persists it would be bad for all politics in this country.
Zeeshan Tahir from Lahore said: I am extremely upset by what
happened to him at PU and very disgusted at the IJT students who have done
it. The religious parties have shown time and again that they are pawns

569

of the establishment. They proved that once again on yesterday by handing

over major adversary of the government to the authorities.
These religious fanatics are an intolerant lot that loathe anybody who
opposes their point of view. Imran Khan was taught a lesson by these
religious bigots for speaking out against the MMA godfather, Maulana
Fazlur Rehman. This incident sums up the dirty politics of our religious
parties. Anybody who thinks they will ever take an anti-establishment
stance is sadly mistaken.
Z Israr from Karachi observed: According to news reports, Imran
Khan was thoroughly humiliated by IJT in Punjab University. It appears the
students have finally realized that political leaders like him are trying to
exploit them to achieve their political objectives. Imran Khan should now
abandon his political career and return to cricket as he has failed as a
politician.
The students should protect their educational interests and should not
let anyone manipulate closure of their colleges and universities through
political agitation. Studies should be their first priority, no matter which
political party they have sympathies for. I think placard should be affixed
at the gates of the educational institutions that no political leader is allowed
inside.
Dr Azhar Mukhtar Sindhu from Bahawalpur wrote: A wise man had
once said: The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of
crisis, choose to maintain neutrality. The nation is burning. There is no rule
of law, no human rights, neither liberty nor freedom. The only hope is Imran
Khan who, even in these dire circumstances, gives the impression that the
nation is not dead yet. It was, therefore, especially galling that Imran Khan
was maltreated in such a brutal fashion. The nations, who fail to honour
their heroes, perish.
Amjad Malik observed: It was really shocking to see on the print
media pictures of Imran Khans manhandling at the Punjab University
campus. Ever since reading about the unruly behaviour of the IJT students
with this great man, I feel immensely ashamed of being a part of the
organization during my college/university days. I, on behalf of my other
fellow members of the organization, express my heartfelt apologies to him.

570

A W from Lahore wrote: I have always been an ardent admirer of

Imran Khan. This admiration grew even further when he stepped in the field
of social work. I wish he had continued as a philanthropist but he decided
instead to join politics, which is not suitable for truthful people like him.
The shameful manhandling meted out to him by the students of Punjab
University deserves a national apology on the part of youth of the country
for whom he is something as a Messiah.
Sadaf Ejaz from Lahore opined: Although there have been several
incidents in Pakistan these days which do not make any sense, one in
particular was painful for me. Imran Khan has been arrested and is
detained under the Anti-Terror Act. Imran is not only a national hero but also
a great contributor to our society as he has established the first state-of-theart cancer hospital in the country.
Pakistan has many resourceful people who could have made a
specialized cancer hospital long ago, but nobody dared to do so as the
treatment costs are extremely high. Imran used his celebrity appeal to take
this bold step, and it is only now that other celebrities have started following
his example. As a nation it is a reflection of our thanklessness that we have
put this great benefactor behind bars. I urge the government to free Imran
Khan and appeal to the people of my country to wake-up and start
respecting our heroes.
Wasif Bhatti from Lahore wrote: In the movie Reign of Fire, there is
a quote that Pity the land that has no heroes. First it was Dr Abdul Qadeer
Khan, now it is Imran Khan who has been targeted for state orchestrated
humiliation. A living cricketing legend, a national hero to millions of
Pakistanis, and the founder of the only free, state-of-the-art cancer hospital
(SKMT) is the latest victim of this anti-hero campaign being conducted by
the establishment. Is this how we treat our national heroes?
Humayun Gohar wrote: What an affront to God. Whilst our most
corrupt villain of a politician has been left off the hook, our most honest hero
of a politician has been arrested under the anti-terrorism act. It could only
happen in Pakistan, many would say spontaneously. I reject the assertion
with contempt, for it implies that we are intrinsically a dishonest people who
cannot tell the difference between right and wrong.
We most certainly can. It is only that our voices get drowned out by
wrongdoers. Right and wrong are not to be confused with cleverness and
571

foolhardiness. I have always placed President Musharraf in the category of

people who can differentiate between right and wrong. What has made him
go awry of late is the mind-boggling pressure of our convoluted politics
and inability to stand up to a hyper-power that is the biggest state terrorist of
them all and which has spawned every other type of terrorism that exists
today.
All Musharraf wanted to do was exactly what his detractors are
hypocritically demanding: hold elections and retire from the army. That is
precisely his intention. What is the problem? It is that power-hungry
politicians who know they will do badly in the elections and Pakistans
American opponents whose real agenda is not democracy but chaos and
castration have deliberately made such a production out of it that his
intent has got lost in the fog of their diabolical politics.
It has turned the intrinsically democratic Musharraf who always tried
to take the path of least resistance into an angry fire-spewing dragon.
Confusion caused by the inordinate pressure of a hyper-power has
regularly made our rulers take the wrong path
Imran Khans arrest on terrorism charges reminds me of the
arrest of the late great Punjabi poet Ustad Daman by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
on terrorism charges. One of the poems had offended the late prime minister.
Ustad was charged with keeping grenades in his house
Musharraf should act now to correct this folly and concentrate on our
real problems. John Negroponte is intent on achieving Americas real
objectives, which are to disable our nuclear assets, attack our tribal areas and
force Dr A Q Khan to give evidence that nuclear proliferation was state
policy, forgetting that most of it was done during Benazirs second
government. Installing Benazir in power would enable them to achieve all
three. If that doesnt work, break Pakistan. There is a bumper sticker doing
the rounds these days: Be nice to America or they will bring you
democracy.
Zamir Sheikh observed: The saner segment of Pakistani society
were not surprised of the incident in Lahore because they knew the role
played by the pious leadership of religious parties and its subordinate wings,
in the chequered political history of the country.

572

However, the incident is a lesson for the entire opposition. It is an

eye opener for Both Benazir and Nawaz Sharif, who wanted to join hands
with the pious leadership of the religious parties their struggle against
emergency and authoritarian rule It has remained the hallmark of these
religious parties, who always stabbed in the back of political-democratic
forces right from General Yahya Khan onwards An analyst has likened the
religious leaders who run with the hare and hunt with the hound. Another
described them as Trojan Horse which catches the defenders of democracy
by surprise in the dead of a dark night.
Fraz Shafique was of the view that with one eye fixated on probable
elections, the opposition is being forced to reconcile with some if not many
of the dictatorial and unconstitutional steps of the military regime. It is in
this confused context that Imran Khans long-argued stance for the
independence and the supremacy of the judiciary becomes crucial. It
provides a centralized focus for the diverse elements that have a stake in the
future of Pakistan.
Without an independent judiciary everything becomes possible
for the regime. There is no recourse for justice for neither the media nor the
civil society. With full powers to manipulate the system and call the shots,
the military state is able to obfuscate important issues and set its own
agenda, which would promise returns of the same kind it enjoyed the
previous eight years. Already Pakistans opposition parties are scurrying for
strategies. One day they seek to topple the government, the next to negotiate
a way out.
Imran Khans decision to go on hunger strike until the judiciary is
restored to the pre-November 3, 2007 state, is a rejection of this touted aim
of continuity. This continuity has been the source of Pakistans undoing.
This continuity has resulted in a progressive decline of faith in the system
resulting in the disowning of say about national and international policies.
With the people having disowned their responsibility and a stake in their
future, the government can then get away with the murderous policy in
Waziristan and the rest of the tribal areas without any opposition from the
other provinces
Imran Khan was shifted to the distant Dera Ghazi Khan jail so that
his activists and supporters end up demoralized and dejected D G Khan
Jail may be far away from the epicenter of Pakistans political landscape.
But the issue which Imran Khan has taken a stand on is the be-all at this
573

juncture in Pakistans history. Imran Khans last stand may also be that of
Pakistan.
Forthcoming general elections were obviously a point of focus for
everyone in Pakistan. Raoof Hasan was of the view that the imposition of
martial law has brought about a paradigm shift in the prevailing ground
realities. With the sacking of the judiciary, the extra-constitutional step has
stripped the country of the one fundamental forum that could have kept the
executive under some form of check to ensure the holding of fair, free and
transparent elections. With one rampaging stroke all hidden and not-sohidden threats to the absolutism of authority in the person of the Chief of the
Army Staff, have been struck off.
The hidden as well as not-so-hidden fangs are out and the forces that
had, for long, been operating from inside safe sanctuaries have come in the
open with an agenda. The intention is not to drive the country towards
democracy. It is to push it deeper into the quagmire so that it continues to
rile under the dictate of the military command. The intention is not to
expedite the advent of the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law.
It is to further perpetuate the deprivations of the people by refusing them
access to their rights as enshrined in the book of law. The intention is not to
provide a level playing field for all the stakeholders to take their
programmes to the people of Pakistan. It is to elevate the chosen few so that
they could use the electoral process to plant themselves into the assemblies
and continue disenfranchising the people of their legitimate rights and
aspirations. The intention is not the deliverance of people from their
problems. It is to multiply them further so that they would have no time to
indulge in the luxury of even pondering about them. The intention is not
democratic in intent or in purpose. It is demonstratively and undeniably
dictatorial and autocratic.
It is, therefore, no wonder that the politics of deal making is giving
way to politics of confrontation. The critical salvo has been fired by none
other than Benazir Bhutto who has accused General Musharraf of reneging
on numerous commitments that had been made to her. Having lost
considerable political goodwill on account of engaging in self-serving
negotiations with the ruling General, and having tried to ride into Pakistan
on the US support bandwagon, she is now trying to reclaim some of it by
calling foul. But, she must realize that her credentials stand mortally

574

tarnished and it is going to be a long haul back to the pinnacle that she may
have enjoyed once.
The uncompromising demands of the struggle that is gaining ground
by the day There is no provision in all this for any parleys, covert or overt,
with the head of the military government, or any of his deputies or
proponents. The divide is clear between the forces advocating democracy
and those advocating autocracy. A wide gulf divides the advocates of
deliverance to people from those who are bent on keeping them perpetually
enslaved. The lines are clearly drawn.
Today, there is a need for all genuine political forces to combine with
only one goal in mind: democracy, more democracy. Elections under
General Musharraf hold no relevance. There is no middle course. Clarity
and commitment, but no compromise, should propel the strategy to unmask
the dawn of that glorious day for which invaluable sacrifices have been
rendered by the brave sons of this soil
From across the border, Kuldip Nayar opined: Pakistan would have
elections before January 9 as Musharraf has assured. But there is no
prospect of the polls being free and fair. The last time he held elections in
such a way that he brought in religious parties to lessen the space for the
liberals. This time he would see to it that his loyal party, the Muslim League
(Quaid), gets near majority in the National Assembly.
General Ziaul Haqs draconian laws have also been activated and
offences under them will be tried under the Army Act. In 1984, Zia made
amendments to the Penal Code making expressions of disaffection against
the government and those prejudicial to Pakistan punishable. Those
accused of expressions or acts that are prejudicial or offensive towards the
government will now be tried by the military courts.
The Attorney General of Pakistan has justified these amendments
on the grounds that these were essential for combating terrorism and
that similar laws exist in UK and the US. First, two wrongs will never make
right. Secondly, the UK and the US have an independent judiciary that has
also struck down provisions of the Patriot Act. The military courts in the UK
or the US do not try their own citizens. Nor have the journalists, lawyers and
activists in those countries been charged for terrorism or treason. But in
Pakistan police have filed reports accusing several lawyers and human rights

575

activists of terrorism. Similarly, no judge of the superior courts is under

house arrest in those countries.
It is a long haul for democracy to cover in Pakistan. Since its creation
60 years ago, it has been under one military ruler or the other for more than
four decades. But then the people in India too felt during the emergency that
it was an endless tunnel. The alienation of the people went on building and
they ousted the Congress rule, lock, stock and barrel when the elections were
held. Once Musharraf takes off his uniform, which he would because of
the undertaking he has given to the Supreme Court, nobody can predict
what would happen. The process may begin when the notification of
Musharrafs election is cleared by the Supreme Court.
The Nation commented on the caretaker set-up. The interim cabinet
sworn in on Friday to oversee the elections can hardly be called neutral
or independent. A number of its members are either former aides or
ministers who served under General Musharraf prior to the September 2002
elections or were associated with Mr Shaukat Azizs administration in the
same shape or other.
With the opposition now pressing for a government of national unity,
the interim set-up seems to have been overtaken by circumstances. Ms
Bhutto said that she was in talks with key political leaders, including Mian
Nawaz Sharif, to try to form a united opposition front to bring an end to the
dictatorship. Against this backdrop the government needs to give serious
and urgent consideration to the oppositions major demand for defusing
the crisis.
Ikramullah wrote: The outgoing and incoming PMs along with the
outgoing and incoming cabinet members were not only present but
contributed a healthy tradition towards national harmony through their
mutual warmth in the joint cause of holding free and fair elections. Mr
Soomro spoke to the media after his oath taking and was quite clear about
his task and responsibility.
I need not repeat the challenges facing the nation on the global
level. They are indeed very grave and grim. It goes without saying that the
nation stands at critical crossroads. It will not be wrong to state that this is a
defining moment in our history. Any nasty and self-oriented decision in the
long-term shall have far reaching consequences for the country

576

In case certain foreign powers adopt the role of encouraging chaos

and anarchy resulting in collapse of law and order, the danger of derailment
of the electoral process cannot be ruled out. As I said: Let the people of
Pakistan decide their fate through the ballot box and if Baby
Democracy has been bathing in dirty politics for the last half a century, for
Heavens sakes let us not throw away the baby with the bath tub.
The Nation also commented about boycotting the elections. While
there are number of agreements within the opposition, it remains disunited
over boycotting the elections if held under General Musharraf and the
set-up announced on Friday. It is a test of the intelligence of its leaders to
arrive at an understanding
The announcement of a partisan caretaker set-up, compromising
numerous loyalists of the General, has proved to be the proverbial last straw
that breaks the camels back. A consensus has gradually emerged among
the opposition that unless the Emergency is lifted, the Constitution
restored, judges not taking oath under PCO reinstated, bans and restrictions
imposed on media withdrawn and General Musharraf sidelined the elections
would be farce. There is also an agreement that what is needed to hold the
elections is a government of national consensus
Mr Negroponte has reportedly come to persuade General Musharraf
to lift the emergency and doff the uniform. To ward off any perception of a
possible patch-up with the General under Washingtons pressure. Ms Bhutto
has categorically stated that she would feel uncomfortable about the
fairness of elections under him
No mainstream party can afford to boycott the elections if it is
confident these would be held in a free environment allowing a level-playing
field to every participant. The open patronization of PML, the announcement
of a partisan caretaker set-up being the latest example, by the President
who needs to be seen to be above party politics has forced the opposition
to consider the ultimate option. Measures need to be taken, including those
requiring personal sacrifice, to restore the oppositions faith in the neutrality
of the set-up, which is required to oversee the elections.
Syed Ali Zafar was of the view that Musharrafs years indeed saw
economic progress but eventually have resulted in another emergency this
time called Emergency Plus and a new PCO. The country is without
credible judicial institution. However, whereas in each of the previous
577

martial laws prior to this PCO, Pakistan did not plunge into a state of
lawlessness as the Supreme Court, rightly or wrongly, gave the regime legal
recognition. The 2007 emergency and PCO gave rise to a totally different
situation altogether.
Firstly, it is not a coup ousting a civilian government but a PCO by
the General against a government and regime which he himself had
been heading for the last 8 years. PCO by alleging that terrorism has
increased is a judgment against his own rule.
Secondly, the reason for the coup is not corruption amongst
politicians but astonishingly an allegation against the judiciary for having
supported terrorism. Unlike previous takeovers this is a coup against the
judiciary.
Thirdly, whereas the armed forces have always taken over the reigns
of power without any resistance, and even with some support from the
public, this PCO has seen a spontaneous reaction, with the legal
community, human rights activists and students taking to the streets. It
appears therefore that the people, even in Punjab, are not readily willing to
accept the COAS as a legitimate sovereign entitled to make laws for them.
Fourthly, whereas previously some people believed that the take-over
by the armed forces was genuinely to safeguard the integrity of the nation, in
this case majoritys perception is that PCO is an action taken in pursuit of
the naked desire to perpetuate self-rule.
Fifthly, and most important, this time, unlike the past, the judges of
the Supreme Court have not mostly taken fresh oath which may have
given legitimacy to the new takeover. To the contrary 7 judges of the
Supreme Court have immediately after the PCO decided that it is indeed
illegal and unconstitutional and accordingly restrained all state functions to
act in accordance therewith.
The significance of the last point is indeed immense. This means that
in so far as the legal framework of Pakistan is concerned, we are in a
vacuum. The power to issue PCO cannot be derived from the Constitution
nor from the will of the people. They did not give any authority to chief of
the armed forces to make laws for them

578

PCO and rules made there under are not entitled to rank or
qualify as Laws but are more equivalent to rules imposed by someone
who can use force to carryout their obedience and have no legal validity
except that they have4 to be obeyed because the power-that-be can ensure
their enforcement. Obtaining validity from judges appointed under the PCO
will not give PCO requisite legitimacy.
While no one wants to give up the struggle for the restoration of law,
to me the key solution rests in adopting a wait and see policy from both
sides till after January 9, 2008. President Musharraf has announced this
date for the next general elections and promised that they would be held in a
fair and free manner including doffing of his uniform. While the people do
not believe this, there is good reason to give benefit of doubt at this stage.
While President Musharraf may not be willing to reverse the PCO,
holding of elections seems to be the only option and way out available to
us to alleviate the aggravated situation created due to imposition of PCO.
Escalation of protest or boycotting of elections will merely give the
government an excuse to postpone elections or worst to conduct unfair
elections. Equally important, if the President Musharraf is sincere to the
country then he must know that holding of transparent elections is the last
option to save his image in history and Pakistan, because forged elections
will be catastrophic.
Prudence therefore demands that the best thing is to support the
promise to hold transparent elections and see that it is actually fulfilled. It
will then be up to political parties to contest elections on the basis of
manifesto to restore the rule of law even retrospectively. Newly elected
parliament would then be entitled to treat this current period of lawlessness
as a cancerous past to be surgically removed by inter alia restoring freedoms
and through constitutional amendments correct the wrongs which occurred
during this brief period of emergency plus. Perhaps the elections could
achieve what protests may not. Let the people choose.
Gagging of the media was another issue widely commented upon.
Ghulam Asghar Khan wrote: AFP reported that the chief of a popular TV
channel explained the situation this way, news is a contraband item in
Pakistan now, and it is being sold on the black-market. This black market
consists mainly of internet sites, but satellite broadcasts are growing fast as a
source of independent news as well.

579

European sites were reverberating with the latest news from Pakistan.
Since the dishes can help Pakistans citizenry to circumvent the media
blackout by picking up signals from sources beyond the government control,
the latest development should hardly be surprising. In university computer
labs and at internet cafes, students and others are blogging about
emergency rule, posting online videos of protests and publishing daily
newsletters.
Trying to cut off information in the digital age is like trying to
stop rain and wind in a monsoon is not possible. By this miscalculated
crackdown, the government has lost a very valuable source through which it
could feel the pulse of the people correctly that has never been done by its
huge intelligence network.
There is reason to worry about so-called fake media pretending to
be objective while fronting for special interests. At the same time there is
more reason to worry about efforts to close off access to the independent
media. The legitimate journalists resent the unsavory efforts by the
government to reinvigorate the PTCL and new media outlets that actually
are nothing but shills in the eyes of the people.
As a consequence, the rumour mongering is pushing Pakistan to
the brink of an utter chaos that will only help the militants. It would create a
situation from which it would be difficult to pull out. Gossiping and rumours
could only bring more instability in the country that is already facing
gigantic problems.
What it does illustrate is that when there is huge public interest in an
event with strong emotional appeal and lack of verified facts, the most
fanciful stories can flourish and would be given credence. Independent
media is the only bulwark that can check rumours. Unfortunately, for any
government failure, it is the media that is the first target and gagged.
The Nation opined: There is desperation and then there is
desperation. The governments pressure on the authorities in Dubai to close
down Geo TV and ARY One TV is yet the latest episode in the military
regimes frantic attempts to control public opinion. Visibly nervous over
having held the Constitution in abeyance, the government had promptly shut
down all private news channels on the very same day, both local and
international, from the countrys cable television networks in a

580

counterproductive attempt to both shield the polity from instability and to do

some damage control for its image.
Accustomed as of late to the availability of independent television
news the general public has felt pronounced withdrawal symptoms in the
wake of clampdown. The print media has yet again become the publics
only source of independent news while breaking news has become a highly
valued contraband item
This cul-de-sac in its quest for total domination made the
governments media mandarins desperate. Desperate times calling for
desperate measures, so they went above and beyond and put pressure on the
authorities in Dubai itself, where the channels are based, to shut down these
channels. The extreme measures taken by our beleaguered government to
shut down private television channels, give the lie to its claim that it has
given unprecedented freedom of expression.
There was one aspect or the aspect of present crisis which no observer
or analyst could ignore; the US-BB-Musharraf Nexus. Every
commentary made a mention of it with varying degree of emphasis. The
Nation wrote: The opposition parties have welcomed Ms Bhuttos call for
General Musharraf to step down as army chief and president to save the
country from any further loss. Her earlier overtures to the opposition had
met with a cold response as suspicions lurked among them about Ms
Bhuttos motives.
Ms Bhuttos party is currently in the forefront of the fight for the
restoration of democracy. After a daylong detention in Islamabad on
Saturday and refused to allow her to hold a public meeting in Rawalpindi,
she was detained in Lahore for seven days. She was forced to hand over the
lead role in the long march to PPP Punjab President Shah Mehmud Qureshi
who has also been arrested now This indicates the government is not
prepared to hold free, fair and transparent elections.
A White House spokesman has said President Bush wants Emergency
lifted ahead of polls. Ambassador Anne W Peterson has also described
Emergency as a setback for the onward movement to democracy. While
these statements would be widely appreciated, many would question the
statement by Secretary Condoleezza Rice that there is still room for General
Musharraf and Ms Bhutto to work together. Washingtons image would

581

improve if it stopped from prescribing what sort of alignments political

forces in Pakistan should enter into.
Dr Ijaz Ahsan observed: General Musharrafs game plan would
appear to be unraveling. He had chosen Benazir to deal with for two
reasons. Firstly, the Americans were very impressed with her, as she
appeared to them to be modern and secular. Secondly, she was on weaker
wicket than other political parties because of the cases against her
However, General has overlooked one important factor: the
mortal fear of the Chaudhrys and PML-Q that if she was allowed free rein to
campaign, she would have large rallies and would sweep the polls. This fear
has thrown spanner in the works. Because of Americas backing, BB was
given VVIP treatment on the roads of Islamabad and Lahore. However,
when she wanted to address a rally in Rawalpindi, the Chaudhrys placed her
under house arrest.
Next she announced a procession from Lahore to Islamabad But she
was arrested even before this rally and prevented her from leading it. This
was just too much. She then announced that General Musharraf should go,
uniform and all. In making her break with Musharraf, BB was also
aware what was also happening all around her. All opposition parties
were coming together.
She likely felt that if she did not join the opposition even at this
stage, her credibility and that of her party would be irretrievably lost.
Someone has summed up the whole thing by saying: Musharraf and BB
preparing halva, but the Chaudhrys have overturned the pot.
When political parties failed to get together and give a call, many
people were quite despondent. They were overlooking the fact that unlike
previous martial laws, there was a difference this time around On
previous occasions when martial law was declared, there used to be the
silence of the grave. The question is: what has caused the difference? It is
simple, really. Over a period of seven months since March 9, the lawyers
movement had galvanized the people.
Inayatullah was of the view that both General and Benazir suffered
from delusion. The General who earlier was quite vague in promising to
hold elections sometime in the future, came out with a firm statement, both

582

about the holding of elections in early January 2008 and about taking off the
uniform as soon as the court gives its decision on the relevant case.
Speaking on the Fox Business Network, Bush reiterated his demands
and said: He (Musharraf) has agreed to hold elections in January and hes
agreed to take his uniform off. He added that the sooner he can suspend his
emergency decree, the faster Pakistan gets back on the road to democracy
The same day General Musharraf in an interview with the Sky News, as
published in the Times (London) made the remarks that he was the only
person who could lead Pakistan to democracy. Further that when there is no
turmoil in Pakistan, I will step down. I am not a dictator, I want
democracy He promised to step down as army chief by the end of
November
It is interesting and disturbing at the same time that both the General
and Benazir Bhutto suffer from the delusion that only he and she can
put things right and run the national affairs efficiently. The former even
after suspending the Constitution and fracturing the judiciary, placing severe
restrictions on the media and imprisoning thousands of protesting Pakistani
lawyers, students, civil society activists and politicians, has the courage to
claim that he had given true democracy to Pakistan.
It is time the General realizes that the people of Pakistan are not
willing to tolerate the suspension of the Constitution and of the fundamental
rights. Also the placing of the restrictions on the media cannot be accepted,
in this day and age. Nobody, in Pakistan and abroad accepts his plea that
he is doing all this for the sake of the country and not to save himself.
Already there is speculation about possible exit routes for him to choose
from.
Inam Khawaja termed Benazirs house arrest as fake wrestling. What
happened on November 9 in Islamabad makes one wonder what is the
truth? Benazir was put under house arrest but it was a strange house arrest
because she was permitted to give an interview to CNN flanked by over a
dozen party leaders. How come all these senior PPP leaders were allowed to
remain with her and were not arrested?
There was no sign of any police trying to stop her or the Western TV
crew who recorded the interview live on video. This interview was broadcast
a few hours later by CNN, BBC and other channels. It is strange that the
Western media was tipped off and no attempt was made to stop them
583

In view of Benazirs pro-American stance and the lack of opposition

to the presidency of Musharraf there were doubts about her support in the
politically important Punjab therefore it was necessary to do something to
improve her image there. There is a school of thought that this drama of
house arrest was staged to project her defiance of Musharraf
It is also interesting that some of the journalists reporting in the
International Herald Tribune and on the internet in BBC News are also of
the view that the events on the November 9 were stage managed with the
cooperation of the government.
Fakir S Ayazuddin wrote: Mr Musharraf, the people of Pakistan are
surprised that in your TV appearances you gave the impression that you
would not accommodate Benazir at the cost of the other political parties. Yet
she has managed to squeeze all her concessions from the Government
without any favours in return, on the other hand she has raised the
temperature many degrees; making dialogue impossible.
It seems, Mr President, having achieved her objective, which was
primarily the dropping of the cases against her, that the hype she is creating
is aimed at boycotting of the elections, where she has decided that because
she cannot win, she must create an impression that it is Musharraf who is not
giving her an equal opportunity. For today with the new alignments in Sindh
between MQM and Pagara, her PPP stands outmanned and outgunned.
Even poor Chaudhry Aitzaz is close to realizing where he really stands
with her.
The time has come for Musharraf to evaluate the chaos around him
and this time make right decision. Being rid of the odious assemblies, a
National Government comprising of the Parties PPP, N, Q, F, MQM and
MMA should be formed, and the Emergency withdrawn. Under the
National Government the elections should be held. There is no other
way; tempers are already high, and rising. The people are in the streets.
The Nation opined that the US had some sort of realization. From a
state of benign indifference to his domestic policies as far as they did not
impinge upon the so-called war on terror, which has marked Washingtons
attitude towards President Musharraf in the post-9/11 period, it has been
compelled, by the force of public opinion in Pakistan and international
disapproval, to oppose the imposition of Emergency and the
extraordinary measures taken under it. Besides, had it let this regression
584

from the avowed democratic transition pass unnoticed the US would have
found it hard to keep up even the faade of its commitment to the spread of
democracy in the region.
Despite doubts in some minds about the sincerity of the American
public professions on the score of the view that untrammeled hold on power
that the state of emergency gives to General Musharraf would enable him to
deal with the scourge of terrorism more freely and more effectively, there
appears to be enough evidence to suggest that the circumstances have
driven the US to change its stance.
Mr Negroponte views the political process in Pakistan as derailed
and says his visit is aimed at conveying his governments readiness to work
with Islamabad to put it back on track. One hopes that General Musharraf
reads the signs of the time and adjusts his policies accordingly.
Persistence in the current attitude would only result in further termoil in the
country with unpredictable consequences and work against the national
interest.
The newspaper also commented on Negropontes agenda and
achievements. Although American Deputy Secretary of State John
Negroponte would not call his mission to Islamabad a failure when he spoke
to the press at the US Embassy on Sunday, the fact remains that he could
not persuade President Musharraf to lift the Emergency, which he
believed was not compatible with free, fair and credible elections. The
response he received, according to an unnamed Pakistani official, was that in
fact this extraordinary measure was necessary to ensure successful and fair
polls and that the world would have to wait till the security situation in the
country improved.
Interlinked with the withdrawal of Emergency was another item
putting the Musharraf-Bhutto reconciliation process back on the rails
on the Deputy Secretarys agenda when he held a meeting with the President
on Saturday. He urged both to restart talks and ease political confrontation.
In his telephonic conversation with Ms Bhutto, he is supposed to have
expressed Washingtons opposition to the Emergency and the desire to see
all political detenus freed peacefully take part in the elections.
While the nationalist sentiments have always been opposed to an
outside pressure guiding the countrys policies Mr Negropontes trip was one
instance when the majority of people wished that it bore fruit. Apparently, it
585

did not. But one really wonders how the Emergency rule, constricting the
freedoms of expression and political activity, could sit with the logic of
ensuring free and fair polls. For that objective to be achieved, the oppressive
atmosphere has to change. And with arrests of political leaders, human rights
activists, teachers or students the judiciary purged and the media muzzled,
it is hard to conceive that anyone would be able to exercise free choice
The Hindu wrote: Since November 3 emergency, the Pakistani ruler
has shown he can go any distance to silence the opposition It requires a
suspension of disbelief to accept General Musharrafs contention that with
all this, the January parliamentary elections will be free and fair. If
Pakistanis believed that the worlds oldest democracy would come to their
rescue, they did not read history right.
Negroponte said he gave a strong message to General
Musharraf that he must lift the emergency, step down as army chief, release
all political prisoners, remove restrictions on the media, and hold free and
fair elections. But did he ask him to reinstate Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry
and the other judges of the Supreme Court against whom the emergency was
primarily directed?
Negroponte also urged Pakistans moderates read General
Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto to come together gives further indication
of what the Bush Administration wants. If the General looked distinctly
vulnerable in the last few days, it was because the Pakistan Peoples Party
leader has all but crossed over to the opposition side, declaring an end to
negotiations with him and demanding that he step down as President and
Army Chief.
This has enabled opposition parties to think, for the first time,
including a possible boycott of the January parliamentary elections. But
there is still a question mark over Ms Bhuttos real intentions. Should
she now somersault back to the Generals camp, she will be betraying the
people of Pakistan. It is time the US and Ms Bhutto understood how deeply
unpopular the government is in Pakistan.
Tayyab Siddiqui was of the view that while Bush regards Musharraf
as indispensable ally in the war on terror, the events in Pakistan are moving
so fast that Bush has no choice but to reassess US policy towards
Pakistan. Negroponte, deputy secretary of state, was assigned to convince

586

Musharraf to rescind the emergency, but since the inception of the

emergency President Musharraf has stiffened his stance.
The General believes that he is the only option for the US in the
region in the war against terror, but he may have over-estimated his
worth. The mood in Washington has changed. There is almost unanimity
among officials, media leaders and think-tanks in the US and Europe that
continued support to Musharraf carries serious risks and they cannot pursue
such a perilous course without damaging their interests in Pakistan.
While apparently the crisis in Pakistan and the main issues
confronting the west are the return of democracy and rule of law to ensure
stability in the region, the fact is that Pakistans nuclear status goes beyond
their oft-repeated concerns about democracy and human rights. When the
media asks, What is to become of Pakistan? its real concern is the safety of
the nuclear weapons.
Husain Haqqani was of the view that the US found it easier to handle
military rulers. This regime is following in the footsteps of the Shah of Iran,
Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines and Manuel Noriega of Panama. In
their final days each one of these US-backed authoritarian rulers blamed the
United States for failing to understand their compulsions and for creating the
circumstances eventually leading to their downfall. In the days to come, the
government can be expected to whip up anti-Americanism in an effort
to deflect blame for their predicament.
Things were going very well until the US demonstrated its legendary
fickleness and showed a soft spot for Benazir Bhutto, Musharrafs apologists
will argue vehemently. Musharraf recently spoke of Bhutto as the darling of
the west, completely forgetting that he, and not Bhutto, was the recipient of
billions of dollars in aid and personal praise from a long list of luminaries
ranging from President Bush to Donald Rumsfeld. The anti-Americanism
seems to be the last refuge of US-backed dictators.
Even now, the uproar against the Musharraf government has been
caused by its disregard for Pakistans Constitution and its disrespect for the
rule of law. After all, of the UNs 191 member states why is it that Pakistan
is the only country where the Chief of the Army Staff has got rid of the
countrys Supreme Court to thwart a judicial verdict against his person.

587

Pakistans military leaders have followed a familiar pattern since

the countrys first military coup in 1958. They begin by trading on
Pakistans strategic location and securing US support for military
modernization as well as an economic bonanza for the countrys elites.
During the honeymoon period with the United States, cooperation
with the US is cited as crucial for Pakistans security and economic wellbeing. Military officers queue up for training programmes in America and
look forward to the induction of new and fancier weapons systems in the
countrys arsenal. The smart ones go on to become representatives of the US
military-industrial complex immediately after retirement. The ordinary take
jobs in the vast military-financial complex within the country.
An American friend recently described to me as a Kabuki
situation, a reference to the Japanese popular drama involving highly
stylized singing and dancing and slow and cautious movements. While
consolidating their rule as US allies, Pakistani military rulers do not
completely conform to the US strategic vision and engage in policies that are
considered unsavory by the Americans but in the Pakistani states interest by
Pakistani officials.
General Musharrafs military regime might now be gradually
entering its own Friends, Not Masters phase of relations with the United
State. It has delivered only partially on the promise of rooting out Islamic
terrorists from Pakistan. For almost seven years, Musharraf has had a free
ride with international public opinion by pretending to be a reformer without
delivering much by way of internal reform. But now that he has exposed
himself by imposing Martial Law/Emergency, he should be prepared to lose
the international support he assiduously cultivated.
The US is being nice to the current dispensation by giving it time
to rectify its mistake instead of putting its full weight behind Pakistans
political opposition and civil society. Instead of blaming Washington for
betraying him, Musharraf should be grateful that the last act of his theatre
play is unfolding somewhat slowly. If someone should be complaining right
now, it should be the thousands of civilians jailed without cause not
Musharraf. The US has already done more than a fair share for Pakistans
ruler and all that largesse has still not prevented Musharraf from turning
against America. It is time for America to do something for the democratic
aspirations of the people of Pakistan.

588

Salman Ahmad was of the view that Pakistans future lied within
neither of these two leaders. As Pakistan descends into political chaos,
much attention has been given to two leaders competing for power, Gen
Pervez Musharraf, and the media-savvy former prime minister, Benazir
Bhutto. The White House appears to be backing Musharraf as its best bet in
the war on terror, while much of the worlds media and Western liberal
elite see Bhutto as a democratic savior for a country mired in Islamic
fundamentalism.
Both fail to recognize the core problem plaguing Pakistani
society: Without a strong and independent judiciary, Pakistan, a nucleararmed state, will forever be at the mercy of strongmen and power-hungry
politicians. Lack of oversight and institutional accountability leads to coups,
counter-coups and perpetual instability.
As an artist and social activist, I have worked with the governments
of both Musharraf and Bhutto on peace initiatives and socially uplifting
themes. I have been disillusioned by their lack of commitment to getting real
work done; they appear to spend most of their time consolidating their
power bases.
Pakistans future lies within neither of these leaders. The key to
moving forward lies in the genesis of Pakistans freedom movement: Our
nations founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, struggled and sacrificed to win our
independence from Britain, setting clear examples of legal and political
activism
The United States and its allies need to unequivocally support the
Pakistani judges, lawyers, journalists and rights activists fighting for the rule
of law. A strong Pakistani civil society would provide stability and a
powerful institutional deterrence against violence and extremism. It is
the best hope for discouraging future political and military actors from
grabbing power unilaterally. The reward for such support now could one day
be a democratic Muslim country at peace with itself and the world.
Most of the analysts preferred to take the regime front on. A
Visionry suggested formation of a clean-up government instead of interim
setup. The imposition of emergency has removed all the confusion from the
minds of the Pakistanis in particular and the world at large, that true to our
tradition of taking one-step forward and two-steps back, this time we have
outdone ourselves by taking ten steps back.
589

The president has done more good than most generals, presidents and
prime ministers who have had the honour of pushing the country towards the
brink. But the coup de grace was the imposition of emergency. If the
ground realities were such that the imposition of emergency was deemed to
be the only solution, then this nation would have whole heartedly backed it
as per its previous traditions.
The coming week I feel is of utmost importance for the future of
Pakistan, the options before us are:
The lawyers and civil society along with the opposition can muster
enough clout to overrun the police and ranger barricades and the
general is forced to ask for army to come in aid of civil authorities.
My gut feeling says that when the army will put its foot downshort
of that if the general and the Chaudhrys can contain the national
sentimentthe army will not interfere.
If the general decides not to take off his uniform after the November
15...then the army may request him to go play golf.
If the newly sworn in judges give a verdict in his favour and he is
redeemed by them as the newly re-elected president, then it will be
business as usualwith assemblies being dissolved, emergency being
removed, caretaker set-up being announced with a firm date for the
elections or selections.
The third option would be the best provided it is transparent
but with the deal being brandished openly, what are the chances of that?
Keeping ground reality and lack of will in those who matter in mind, the
following steps are an immediate must. Short of which we are just going to
be doing Talle Talle mark time till the inevitable overtakes us.
Suggested solution: Through a special order under the existing
emergency, the interim government to be installed for a minimum of one
year. No known, have-beens or wannabe faces to be included in any of the
interim set-upsin short the palace leeches darbaree to be kept miles
away from any role in the caretaker government. Instead of caretaker it
should be called by the namefor which it is being set up: Cleanup
Government.

590

This interim set-up cleans up the rot within. First and foremost, if
our highly trained and so far disciplined forces can normally have a change
of command after every few years, why should the political parties become
the fiefdoms of a few familieswe need to break this mythbefore we
wean the mosques away from half-baked mullahs.
Mrs Benazir Bhutto Zardari, Mr Nawaz Sharif, Maulana Fazlur
Rehman, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Mr Altaf Hussain, Chaudhry Shujaat
Hussain, Pir Pagara, and in the larger interest of the nation, since he has got
his hands soiled by the deal Mr Pervez Musharrafof course it goes without
saying Mr Shaukat Aziz goes back to advising Uncle Samon how to
redeem the Citi Bank.
In the process those of politics, business community, bureaucracy and
some elements in the Army who have been openly exposed for their
Shenanigansto be made accountable and payable to the Ex-chequer I
know lot of people will sayoh this is idealismthe ground realities will
not allow for such an actionwhat action I am asking for massacre of the
masses or suggesting a way out of that? If Pakistan First is everyones
favourite sloganthen how do these suggestions undermine the well being
of Pakistan? The only aspect that my suggestions undermine are the vested
interests of above named people and the immediate to mid term policy of the
Neo-consa policy which is being challenged by the American people
themselves, which is going to be unraveled by the coming of the
democrats
A strong, stable and progressive Pakistan is in the interest of not only
Pakistanis but the Chinese, the Indians, the Russians. The Americans and the
world at large There are only a few people today who can turn the
events without a major bloodshed towards a positive directionI pray
they wake up to this reality and re-set the course of Pakistans journey into
the futurePakistan First.
Mowahid Hussain Shah opined that staying the course is no longer a
viable option. The temptation to use force to cut through a web of
complicated issues is sometimes over-simplified and over-rated as a means
to an end. The theory the overwhelming use of force can quash the will
and spirit of those at the receiving end is, at best, spurious.
The current drama at home is too crude and the force too brute
to be sustainable. It is equivalent to someone slaying his parents and then
591

pleading for clemency on becoming an orphan. Matters never should have

been allowed to reach the boiling point. It is a tacit acknowledgement of
inept stewardship and an admission of continuous misjudgments and poor
selection of key personnel.
Pakistan is too precious to be someones personal playground.
Compromise works by over-compromise never. What is morally weak
cannot be politically strong. The rules apply to all. Bad decisions produce
bad results. What is unfolding today is bad karma. Has any ruler made a
graceful exit?
But then there is always a silver-lining of hope. When things become
bad, they dont stay bad. Agitation has its own dynamics. Sometimes an
agitator has a cleansing impact on politics and society. Slowly, it creates a
constituency for self-correction. It is hope which can overcome the paralysis
of fear.
The time is now to ponder whether the path undertaken is tenable.
Staying the present course is no longer a viable option. Changing the
course is. A two-fold realization is vital to move forward: First, a brutally
honest diagnosis of what ails the nation. Second, a recognition that might
does not make right. It is right which makes might.
Wajahat Latif took exception to Musharrafs utterances. Justifying
the action, the government quotes the interference of the judiciary in the day
to day functioning of the government. He mentions the case of disappeared
persons and the countrys privatization process. He also recounts the charges
he leveled against CJ Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry when he moved the
reference against him earlier this year.
He says the charges had not known to people. The fact is that the
Supreme Court heard the case at length and a full bench rejected it on
July 20 unanimously, moreover, the text of the reference was all over the
internet and in the press.
General Musharraf repeated the charges in his press conference last
Sunday before a bevy of foreign correspondents. He thought he had fixed the
meddlesome priest with his PCO: the CJ under house arrest, unable to
respond to the one-sided allegations. But he seemed uncomfortable with the
questions he was asked. He knows in his heart that people do not believe
him He reiterated that he took no dictation or allowed foreign

592

interference in the formulation of national policy. Statements from abroad

after Saturday that forced him to announce the date (January 9) for general
elections belie his claim.
In a fast deteriorating situation, the regimes game plan as I write on
Wednesday seems to be following. One, coerce the court to decide the
eligibility case in favour of General Musharraf so that he can take oath as
president immediately. Two, appoint handpicked interim governments in the
centre and the provinces. Three, rig the general elections with or without the
PPP. Four, keep the judiciary muted and the leaders of legal community
behind bars.
But this game plan is not going to work because one, the deal with
Ms Bhutto has broken down, the Anglo-American bloc pressing General
Musharraf to end the martial law; and two, that the world community has
seen that he cannot pull it off. But three, and most important, the people of
Pakistan know it is a recipe of disaster
The lawyers movement that upset Musharrafs applecart this
year is still strident in spite of thousands of arrests lawyers and detention of
Supreme Court judges. In todays Pakistan he cannot hope to keep people in
jail, especially eminent lawyers
Once they are out of prison, the lawyers movement supported by
civil society is going to become unstoppable. Political parties too seem
finally to be coming together. Everyone is agreed on end to martial law,
restoration of the Supreme Court judges and the Constitution: everything
pointing to a restoration of democracy. The Generals exit, thus, is writing on
the wall.
The Nation talked of Musharraf and Messiah syndrome. A certain
characteristic become apparent in a ruler when a large section of the
public reacts strongly to repressive moves initiated by him. This appears
to be the case with General Musharraf these days. As pressure mounts on
him both at home and from the international community for the withdrawal
of the Proclamation of Emergency and restoration of the Constitution, he
asks the West to choose between Pakistan and democracy. A day after posing
this question in an interview with an American television channel, in another
interview, he claimed he had considered quitting over the current crisis but
decided against it because he was the only person who could lead the
country towards democracy.
593

It may be his personal view not shared by the majority of people,

which is evident from the countrywide protests by the legal fraternity,
students and members of civil society. They were not prepared to lend any
credence to the official explanation that the only way to effectively combat
growing terrorism in the country was to impose Emergency
General Musharraf has conceded that the domestic political situation
is not going well and asked the people to leave the past behind and work
together for the best of Pakistan. But for that to happen he should withdraw
the Proclamation of Emergency, restore the Constitution, and then quit
both as President and as Army Chief. This is important to expedite the
process of transition to democracy as demanded domestically as well as
internationally.
Sarmad Bashir wrote: General Musharrafs American backers have
started realizing that the people of Pakistan greatly fear that his continuation
in power might put the country in serious jeopardy. The Bush
Administration is reportedly losing patience with the General and there
has been talk of the US preparing to deal with his successors.
Perhaps Musharrafs grandiose vision that has eventually thrown
Pakistan into turmoil has raised new concerns in Washington about current
dispensations ability to combat militancy. The usual pats on the back have
been replaced by not-so-polite snubs.
Much would have been conveyed to him by US Deputy Secretary of
State John Negroponte who made a dash to Islamabad with a message,
outlining measures to end the current crisis. The entire nation is up in arms
against the draconian move he made on November 3
Never before has it been so lonely for our beleaguered president
at the top. PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto with whom he was holding talks
for a power sharing deal before the imposition of emergency has expressed
her workers feeling by pledging to step up effort to rid the country of
lingering khaki shadows Ms Bhuttos detractors still doubt her intention,
terming her defiance of the establishment a fake bout. The most vocal
among her critics has turned out to be her own neice Fatima Bhutto.
The responsibility of putting the country back on democratic path
rests with political leadership. The people have contributed their share by
boldly facing the repression they have been subjected to The last seven

594

years of military rule has virtually turned Pakistan into a banana

republic, making it far unstable it has ever been in the past. Yet General
Musharraf takes pride in introducing the essence of democracy. Its sheer
messianic boast isnt it?
Dr Faisal Bari commented on Musharrafs Emergency-Plus. The way
protesters have been beaten up over the last two weeks has given a new
name to state brutality. The police, across the country, have shown how far
they are willing to go to obey orders. They have fired rubber bullets at
people, they have used their lathis, their hands and legs, they have thrown
stones at people, and they have dragged and humiliated people. Is this within
the law? And can the government still claim that they are dealing with
people according to the law of the land and according to the basic cannons
of human rights and justice?
The state has shut down the television channels so that people cannot
see what is happening in the country. The state also knows that since it is a
state of martial law, with no rules and law, with no recourse to any court
system and with no one to take up suo moto action on brutality, the state can
get away with murder, quite literally. And it has chosen to do so. It sends
500-600 police officers to arrest 50 odd children from F-9 Park, it sends
hundreds of policemen to arrest 70 odd people from the HRCP building in
Lahore and it sends hundreds of policemen to beat up and arrest the people
protesting the arrest of Imran Khan. All of these people were unarmed.
If the state was sure about the legality or appropriateness of what it
had done, why would it feel so threatened by peaceful protests? Why would
they not allow people to express themselves and be content with the fact that
eventually people will see things the way the people in power are seeing
things?
So, there seems to be more to the story than that. It seems that the
state has realized that it has almost taken the ultimate step that it could
in announcing the martial law. It is clearly stepped beyond the law while
doing that. And the only way it can get away with it is by suppressing
dissent.
There is no argument that can make the state actions defendable.
And this is true despite this regimes attempts to do so. The only way to get
away with it is by suppression and intimidation. So the police have been

595

given the power to quell unrest as quickly as possible and as brutally as

might be required. In fact the intimidation is supposed to work beyond that.
Brutality is being used as an instrumental variable here. It is not
only being used as a way of dealing with those who speak or pose a threat to
peace or to other people, it is being used to intimidate others from coming
on the streets and from expressing their opinion on what the government has
done.
For those who still back the government or feel that the argument
given above is not correct, the question to address is: how else can you
explain the brutal treatment meted out to the young people in the F-9 Park,
the peaceful and unarmed demonstrators that showed up to protest the arrest
of Imran Khan, and the horde of peaceful protests that lawyers, journalists
and students have been holding?
The government clearly knows that people have an aversion to being
beaten up. They know that people who are slapped, lathi-charged, dragged
around and man-handled carry the scars around for a long time. They also
know that those who hear about it or watch it also get brutalized. And they
know that the threat of brutality will deter many and they will be able to
say, at various fora that people are not coming out against the
government. But what they do not understand is that this is going to leave
longer-term effects on our individual and collective psyche as well.
Those who are brutalized today will seek to get even tomorrow.
Or they might deal with their opponents the same way. And they will have a
precedence to refer to as well. But this can only lead to a downward cycle
and spiral, and one where we, as a nation and a people, can only come out as
collective losers. It seems that the states time horizon right now is too short
to consider the medium to long-term effects of what they are sowing right
now. But they can rest assured; it will all come back to us eventually.
Police brutality is surely being used as an instrument to suppress
and deter people from expressing their opinion on the odious behaviour
of the state. There can be no other explanation for it as it has been used even
in cases where the protestors were very peaceful, were not causing any
problem for anyone, were not a threat to the peace of the country, were not a
threat to even the traffic of the area and were certainly not a threat to the
security of the police force surrounding them. And the level of brutality
being exercised in also clearly of a type that is used for intimidation.
596

This will surely have a dampening effect on people who were and are
contemplating expressing their opinions. But, what has been interesting so
far has been the insistence of large number of students, lawyers, journalists,
human rights activists, academics and intellectuals, and many people from
other walks of life as well to have their say. And they have, apart from
coming on the streets, found innovative ways of expressing their dissent as
well. From the black arm band to internet journalism a wide variety of
innovations are finding space now. Irrespective of the above, even if the
state succeeds in suppressing people now, it will neither get legitimacy
this way nor will it be able to get away from some of the more medium
and long term consequences of what they are doing today.
The Nation opined: General Musharrafs observation that he is doing
the most important job of saving the country is reiteration of his earlier
claim The President, however, publicly conceded that the measures taken
by his government to combat extremism had some adverse effects.
Finally he seems to have realized that the menace has spread on his watch.
General Musharraf needs to realize that the Constitution is as
important as the country itself. It is the only document that provides
guarantee for the unity of the federation that seems threatened by the serious
crisis the country is facing at present. Now that the President has himself
admitted that Pakistan is on the verge of destabilization, he should consider
his earlier option of quitting both offices and take appropriate measures to
ensure the countrys return to civilian rule through fair and credible polls
scheduled for this January 8.
Dr Haider Mehdi saw the President ignoring the ground realities. The
fact of the matter is that General Pervez Musharraf still truly believes that
he enjoys the popular support of the people. Not only that, the President
feels that his move to enforce emergency is backed by the majority of
Pakistanis. The General has repeatedly said that the enforcement of
emergency was well-received move because many people have told him that
this decision should have been taken much earlier
The trouble is that a majority of political commentators and
analysts are in a total agreement with the presidents perspective. There
is hardly anyone in the Pakistani political spectrum or in the international
community who seems to fully or even partially agree with the Presidents
beliefs.

597

Content analysis, a social science research technique, to ascertain

the emphasis in given statements by counting the use of a specific word or
words, offers a window to the presidents mindset. As the Diplomatic Editor
of the Telegraph (India) pointed out, the General used the word the people
only once in his November 3 speech an obvious and clear indication that
the people of Pakistan were not the focus On the other hand, the
president used the world I frequently and continuously I gave freedom
to the media, I take decisions, I want democracy, if I do not handle the
political environment, I am not a dictator, etc. what does this point to as
his centre of attention and interest?
The point is that the president has completely and fully
internalized and personified Pakistani politics onto himself. He quoted
him as claiming I am Pakistan and Pakistan is me. But this concept of
personalized political form I am the Philosopher King, meaning the source
of all goodness, violates the very basic parameters of a modern democratic
civilization and the essential elements of a democracy
Just the fact that the president has unfounded faith in his own
political and moral judgments will not bring democracy to Pakistan.
One cannot be a Philosopher King without truly understanding what it
takes to be one!
Plato said Humans have a duty to pursue the good, but no one can
hope to do this successfully without philosophical reasoning. Was the
November 3 emergency adequately reasoned? Can it be morally
justified? Search your heart and you will have the answer: Pakistans future
is at stakeunless reason prevails.
Alizeh Haider wrote: The imposition of martial law, disguised as
emergency rule, comes as a slap in the faces of the people of Pakistan
after the years they have spent listening to the military regimes sweet
lullabies heralding the advent of democracy. In his November 3 address to
the nation General Musharraf warnedPakistan is now at the brink of a
very dangerous situation.
Consider the real circumstances. For eight years, Musharraf has
simultaneously held Pakistans two most powerful offices, President and
Chief of Army Staff. The countrys entire military and paramilitary power
was at his command. He had hand picked his Prime Minister, and his major
political opponents were in exile abroad. The West had offered
598

overwhelming and unconditional support for action against these

extremists.
My humble question to General Musharraf is this: With this kind of
power, why was he not been able to contain these terrorists and curb this rise
in militancy? Why are we, the people of Pakistan, being made to pay for
his strategic failures in dealing with the Taliban?
On Musharrafs watch, military has continued, unchallenged, while
he remains pre-occupied with battling his political opponents and members
of civil society, in particular the judiciary and the media. Since he declared
emergency rule, Musharraf has ordered mass arrests of judges and lawyers.
Meanwhile, he is scrambling to put together a puppet judiciary that will
happily dance to his tune.
Interestingly, the main allegation that Musharraf has leveled against
the judiciary was that it ordered the release of terrorists, thereby negating
government efforts to fight the Taliban. But since the imposition of the
emergency rule, the government has wasted no time in ordering the release
of 25 terrorists who had been arrested, and some convict6ed, by the antiterrorism court on charges of kidnapping, killing and beheading Pakistani
soldiers
Eight years of Musharrafs rule has allowed Pakistanis to forget that
under its clever disguise of democratic aspirations lies a thoroughbred
military man, who once stated proudly that asking him to shed his uniform
was akin to asking him to shed his skin. In retrospect, that was probably a
nave hope in the first place. Call his power seizure emergency-plus rule
martial law, or what you will; I choose to call it a tragedy.
Shamshad Ahmad stressed upon the restoration of the Constitution.
We now have a caretaker government already sworn in with most
neutralized neutrals that represent nothing but an extension of General
Musharrafs military regime. It was music to hear them all singing their oath
in unison with guilt-ridden faces. Their challenge will now be how
impartially they can govern this country which is at the brink of an
apocalyptic political disaster.
They are part of a handpicked loyalist dispensation which will be
running the country in accordance with the will of the willful ruler during
one of the most critical phases of its history. It is being claimed that this

599

neutral caretaker government will be neutrally overseeing a transition to

democracy in a besieged country where an emergency blitz has struck
its Constitution, its judiciary, its media and its people all together in one
blow.
General Musharraf is determined to go to any extent to retain his
power. He has not only suspended the Constitution but is also claiming
powers to amend it at will. He now plans to hold free and fair elections
under the extra-constitutional state of emergency that he has now imposed,
not as president but as army chief. Knowing that he will soon have to
relinquish the office of army chief, he has now transferred emergency
powers to the President.
This is a person to person transfer of power. General Musharraf,
who will soon be Mr Musharraf, now owns the Constitution and the law.
Have we heard anything like this ever before? Nowhere in the world is the
state of power concentrated so densely in one person by name. The
nation and the world at large stand aghast. The people are protesting. The
world is expressing concern. Pakistans friends and allies are embarrassed.
They are all asking for sanity to return to this beleaguered country.
This is not what the founders of Pakistan envisioned when they
led the struggle of the Muslims of South Asia for a separate homeland.
Pakistan did not come into being merely as a geographical entity or an
empty idea to be tossed around by its armed forces. It represented the
collective resolve of our people to live in peace and with dignity and honour,
as a free nation, imbued with Islamic ideology and democratic values.
In todays radically transformed world, there is no alternative to a
democratic form of government. With national boundaries redrawn, and new
concepts and ideas having replaced old ones, the dominant themes of world
affairs today are those of globalization and integration through greater
economic interaction between nations and peoples, promotion of
development and democracy as mutually reinforcing imperatives and respect
for fundamental freedoms and human rights.
Viewed from this perspective, we must confess, the evolution of
political system in our country has been a tale of woes and wiles. We
have been experimenting with different systems at different times and
sometime all at the same time. We have done things in the name of
democracy that no other country in the world has ever experimented.
600

This state of affairs is certainly not conducive to successfully tackling

the numerous challenges now confronting our nation, including the
challenge of terrorism which will not be eliminated through military
operations or killing of innocent people. The complexity of these
challenges requires a non-combative approach with the full support and
backing of the people of Pakistan.
Pakistans recovery from its current political and constitutional
crisis is predicated on the restoration of the Constitution and immediate
lifting of the state of emergency. It will not come through free and fair
elections organized under a military-controlled caretaker regime. In a
remote-controlled system, no elections can be free and fair, and will only be
a farce devoid of transparency and credibility.
Elections as announced by General Musharraf will be no solution
to our myriad problems. We dont need puppet caretakers. Instead, the
country needs a national unity government which should be established with
consensus among all political stakeholders of the country. A new election
commission needs to be constituted in consultation with the major political
parties.
We need to change worlds perception of our country, which surely
has many reasons and assets other than terrorism and violence to be
recognized as a responsible member of the international community. In this
situation, our foremost challenge is not what we are required to do for
others; it is what we do to serve our own national interests and to uphold
our sovereignty and Islamic values.
It is time also for the people of Pakistan to have faith in themselves
as the final arbiters of their destiny. Caretakers of any breed or creed will not
solve their problems. Pakistan owes its existence to a courageous and
visionary lawyer and constitutionalist wedded to the rule of law. Let us keep
the Quaids legacy alive, for therein lies Pakistans survival
Imran Khan urged saving Pakistan. Make no mistake; Pakistan faces
a grave threat from the creeping chaos, a by-product of the most shameful
demonstration of power politics. There are many threats confronting our
society. The threat of extremism is just one which is essentially a
consequence of policies that serve foreign interests at the cost of the
fundamental rights of our citizens.

601

No civilized society will ever allow its own army, raised and armed at
a great cost to society, to be used so mercilessly against its own citizens and
expect business as usual. In a society where the majority is without
fundamental rights, without education, without economic opportunities,
without healthcare, the use of sheer force will only expand the extremist
fringe and contract the majority moderate.
In the absence of democracy and rule of law, extremism and religious
fundamentalism will continue to grow at a frightening pace. The more the
present regime bows to Washingtons desire to do more the more
innocent Pakistani blood is shed under the garb of fighting the war on terror
or curbing extremism, the more Pakistan moves towards becoming a failed
state, and the more people would resort to picking up arms against the
security forces.
To save the country from impending disaster the first and the most
crucial step has to be a government that is established through free and fair
electionsa government that brought to power through the vote of the
people of Pakistan and which is perceived to be politically sovereign. The
moment a leader is perceived to be an American stooge, he or she will be
like a red rag to a raging bull and the situation would be further
exacerbated
Free and fair elections under General Musharraf wielding
unlimited powers under the PCO are impossible. So the first step has to
be a political consensus of forcing General Musharraf to resign followed by
lifting of Martial Law albeit under the garb of emergency, reinstatement of
the judiciary prior to November 3, 2007, removing all restriction on the
media, and holding of an empowered APC to decide on the federal and
provincial caretaker setups and an independent election commission.
A government that is formed through free and fair elections will not
only be politically sovereign but it will also have the credibility to initiate
national reconciliation which demands a comprehensive review of policies
since 9/11 and building a national consensus on policies that can save
Pakistan and not on building unholy alliances between individuals for
sharing power
But before we achieve our goal of building a free democratic society,
the first and foremost challenge is to force General Musharraf to resign.
General Musharrafs recent statements are proof that he is in a denial mode.
602

The time is ripe for change, for a fresh beginning. The present regime is
under siege and we must never allow this opportunity to fritter away. I
appeal to all Pakistanis particularly the students, workers, civil society
members, and political workers to join the peaceful protest led by the
lawyers for the restoration of democracy.
The treatment meted out to me in the Punjab University campus by
the agents of the agencies is no different to what has been meted out to other
democracy activists. My loyalties are with the people of Pakistan and I am
determined to continue the fight for Pakistan being waged today in the
streets and bazaars of my country.

REVIEW
On November 3, Musharraf followed Bushs strategy and launched
pre-emptive strike against the superior judiciary in general and Chief
Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry in particular. He used Emergency Plus
as weapon of mass destruction in this context.
He could not have acted on the basis of a mere assumption that the
bench was likely to rule against him in the case pertaining to his eligibility
for presidential office. He must have received credible intelligence reports
to collate and conclude that the threat was quite imminent. The information
must have been gathered through his agent judges in the bench. The plants
in the staff of the apex court could also have confirmatory evidence.
Musharraf in his interview to BBC complained that everything was
fine with him till March 9. Things changed all of a sudden since then; has
anything gone wrong with him, he counter-questioned. Nobody can
convince him that he has been wrong, because of his present mindset of selfrighteousness. He only has to spend some time in pondering honestly to
discover the obvious; almost everything went wrong after second Friday on
March 2007, and mostly because of the actions of his regime.
A lie cannot be remedied with more lies or a wrong cannot be
corrected by committing more wrongs; the solution lies in admission, a
forthright confession. But, that is not in the nature of Musharraf because he
firmly believes in his Western mentors: The king can do no wrong.

603

Therefore, he finds no reason to mend his ways. After imposing

Emergency Rule, he amended the Constitution by issuing a Constitution
(Amendment) Order. Amending a Constitution held in abeyance amounted
to mutilating the dead. The ordinance was in fact a verdict issued before the
PCO judges could come out with theirs on the two petitions pending before
them challenging the emergency rule. The PCO judges have no option but to
legalize his illegal actions.
The regime has once again caught the opposition unprepared by
announcing the election schedule. Musharraf has decided to push through
the polls in shortest possible period to achieve the predetermined results.
The opposition in its present state of disarray seemed unlikely to foil his
nefarious designs.
Early elections would save him from lot of bickering before the
elections. Once the desired results are achieved, he would not bother about
the criticism on the conduct of polls, including the charges of rigging. His
opponents would not be able to stop him from carving out yet another docile
parliament allowing him smooth sailing during his second tenure as
president.
Musharraf has benefited a great deal in terms of perpetuating his rule
by collaborating with the US in the war on terror. But, his cowardly
subservience to the US dictates has led Pakistan to a situation from where
the country would find quite hard to regain semblance of its lost sovereignty.
22nd November 2007

604

KNOCK-OUT PUNCH - IV
The PCO Supreme Court wasted no time in clearing the last hurdle in
Musharrafs way by dismissing the remaining petition against his
candidature. ECP formally notified Musharraf as winner in presidential
polls. On 28th November, Musharraf handed over the charge of Pakistan
Army to General Pervaiz Kayani and became a civilian president.
Nawaz went to Riyadh for talks with the king. Sharif brothers and
Kulsoom were cleared by the Saudis to return to Pakistan. Saudi King
gifted a bulletproof car to Nawaz Sharif. On 25 th November, he arrived in
Lahore with his wife and brother.
Lawyers boycott of courts continued and there was no let in
journalists protest against curbs on media. The President promulgated Legal
Practitioners and Bar Councils Ordinance to suit the requirements of the
Executive. Nawaz Sharif visited deposed judges and demanded their
reinstatement. He termed doffing of uniform meaningless.
PTI announced boycott of polls. Hashmi said decision on boycott
would be taken after consensus. Pervaiz Elahi said no political party would
boycott elections. Generally, the larger political parties remained indecisive
on the issue of boycott.

EVENTS
Nawaz arrived in Riyadh on 22nd November for talks with the king.
Shujaat taunted, Nawaz went under a deal and would come back under a
deal. Benazir decided to participate in polls for not letting the field open for
the rivals. Students of QAU, Islamabad observed Black Day.
Commonwealth suspended Pakistans membership till restoration of
democracy and rule of law. Dubai allowed Pakistani TV channels to resume
broadcasting. The PCO Supreme Court cleared last hurdle in Musharrafs
way by dismissing the remaining petition. Justice Wajihuddin was once
again stopped from meeting the deposed judges.
Next day, APDM held rallies across the country and at least one
hundred protesters were arrested. Lawyers and journalists also continued
605

their protest. The regime warned the students of Islamabad to stay within
limits. S M Zafar asked the regime to review its policies. PPP, PML-Q, JUIF and ANP finalized their candidates for contesting elections. Reportedly,
there was strong opposition to awarding party ticket to Shaukat Aziz.
Sharif brothers and Kulsoom were cleared by the Saudis to return to
Pakistan. Hashmi threatened to quit the party if there was a deal. The US
declined to comment. The regime threatened to review its ties with
Commonwealth. McKinnon defended the decision.
The Supreme Court ordered ECP to notify Musharrafs presidential
victory and asked Musharraf to quit army in seven days. The Court also
declared PCO and emergency rule valid and in doing that it accused the
suspended judges of spreading anarchy in the country. Lawyers community
rejected the verdict.
On 24th November, ECP formally notified Musharraf as winner in
presidential polls. APDM decided to boycott polls and urged other political
parties to follow the suit. Shaukat Aziz decided not to contest election and
Sher Afgan too did not get the ticket.
Couple of days after suspension of Pakistan, Indias Sharma was
appointed as new Secretary General of Commonwealth. Saudi King gifted a
bulletproof car to Nawaz Sharif and airlifted that to Lahore. Rumours of a
deal were abuzz but PML-N denied. The regime warned of suicide
bombings threat while imposing Section 144.
In less than 24 hours after the Attorney General boasted that there
have been no terrorist attacks since imposition of Emergency Rule, two
suicide bombers struck in Rawalpindi. Malik Qayyum must have
contemplated suggesting to the regime to register a case against the deposed
Chief Justice. Munir A Malik was shifted from Attock Fort to PIMS owing
to kidney malfunctioning. The President promulgated Legal Practitioners
and Bar Councils Ordinance.
Next day, Nawaz Sharif arrived in Lahore with his wife and brother.
He vowed to end dictatorship and demanded restoration of judges.
Musharrafs caretakers launched massive crackdown to round up PML-N
activists. Benazir boasted that Nawazs return was an outcome of NRO.
PML-Q top leaders gathered to assess the damage they would suffer because

606

of the return of Nawaz. Presidents spokesman denied that Nawazs return

was out of any deal.
Some self-exiled leaders of MQM, including Saleem Shahzad,
Muhammad Ashfaq, Javaid Kazmi and Dr Nadeem Ahsan made a quiet
comeback to Karachi. Aitzaz Ahsan filed nomination papers under police
custody. Journalists and lawyers decided to gear up their protest.
Commonwealth asked Pakistan to remain engaged. Tariq Azeem was
tasked to brief EU in the capacity unspecified. Punjab caretakers withdrew
detention orders of Munir A Malik after he had been nearly killed by the
regime through torture.
On 26th November, Shujaat showed willingness to form coalition with
PML-N. Benazir also wanted alliance with Nawaz League. Nawaz Sharif
ruled out unification with PML-Q and alliance with PPP. He also said that
polls would be acceptable if emergency rule is lifted and status of judiciary
is restored to post-November 3.
Benazir warned ECP of rigging in polls through a letter; she alleged
that PML-Q candidates would be given 25 thousand blank ballot papers
each. She also asked for reversal of judicial transfers. Imran Khan tore
nomination papers in a press conference and reiterated boycott of polls.
Hashmi and Kurd filed papers against Shaikh Rashid in Rawalpindi. Pervaiz
Elahis son, Moonis filed his papers in Lahore where lawyers clashed with
his supporters.
Musharraf has decided to retire as COAS on 28th November and take
oath as President under the Constitution next day, said the Attorney General.
The US asked Musharraf to do more by lifting emergency rule. Soomros
premiership was challenged in the Supreme Court. Lahore High Court Bar
rejected PCO judges. After Munir A Malik, Justice Tariq Mahmood was
shifted to Services Hospital from a jail in Lahore. The former was reported
improving gradually. Lawyers slammed torture of Munir A Malik.
On 27th November, Nawaz Sharif visited deposed judges and
demanded their reinstatement. He termed doffing of uniform meaningless.
Benazir said no to boycott. Application for Shahbazs arrest was filed in
ATC. The regime said all but 37 detainees have been freed. Government and
media bodies agreed to have good ties.

607

ECP sought reports from the returning officers of Rawalpindi and

Sialkot on complaints against using of protocol and government resources
by Skaikh Rashid and Ch Amir Hussain. Pervaiz Elahi was still getting
CMs protocol including: four escort vehicles; air travel as per blue book;
bullet-proof car and rostrum; and police guard in uniform and plain clothes.
Deposed CJP asked political parties to boycott polls. Lawyers
criticized illegal detention of Aitzaz and Kurd. Seventeen prominent former
judges of Karachi passed a resolution condemning imposition of emergency
rule and PCO.
On 28th November, Musharraf handed over the charge of Pakistan
Army to General Kayani to take charge of the Presidents office next day.
Nawaz Sharif rightly said that his quitting of army was meaningless.
Benazir, however, took the credit of enticing the General to peel-off his
uniform and she then dashed to Islamabad.
JUI-F decided not to attend APDM meeting as Fazlur Rahman refused
to boycott general elections. Q Leagues man raised objections on
nomination papers of Shahbaz Sharif and his son. Journalists protest
continued. Lawyers decided to observe Black Day on 29 th November, the
day Musharraf would take oath as civilian president. Lawyers in Karachi
protested orders to expel the deposed judges from official residences.

VIEWS
The West remained focused on the events in Pakistan. Wests
viewpoint on the moves made by Musharraf, their front-man in their holy
war against Islamic fascism, is therefore; very important to understand
Musharrafs urge to perpetuate his undemocratic rule.
Michael Abramowitz and Robin Wright observed: President Bush
offered his strongest support to embattled Pakistani President Pervez
Musharraf, saying the General hasnt crossed the line and truly is somebody
who believes in democracy The comments, delivered in an interview with
ABC News anchor Charles Gibson, contrasted with previous administration
statements including Bush himself.

608

The shift appeared part of a broader strategy to ease the crisis in

Pakistan. Deputy Secretary of State John D Negroponte carried a terse
message to Musharraf during talks last weekend, urging the General to step
down as chief of the army. Now, after this strong personal show of support
from the president, the Bush Administration expects the General to shed
his military uniform before the end of the month, an administration official
said.
Several outside analysts and a key Democratic lawmaker
expressed incredulity over Bushs comments and called them a sign of
how personally invested the president has become in the US relationship
with Musharraf. What exactly would it take for the president to conclude
Musharraf has crossed the line? Suspend the constitution? Impose
emergency law? Beat and jail his political opponents and human rights
activists? asked Joseph R Biden Jr.
Musharraf has provided extensive assistance to the United States in
its efforts to seize high-profile al-Qaeda suspects, but his devotion to the
fight has been increasingly questioned by some US officials and outside
experts. Musharraf is not only indispensable; he is a serious liability to
US policy, a new report by the International Crisis Group said.
Michael Gerson opined: The current debate on Pakistan is a
contest of historical analogies. Is Musharraf more like Ferdinand Marcos,
the Filipino dictator deposed in favour of a democracy? Or is he the Shah of
Iran, whose fall resulted in a radical, anti-American regime?
It is Musharrafs own view that is most instructive. According to
one report, he mentions a third ruler as his model Egyptian President
Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak has survived by presenting America with a choice:
his own rule or the triumph of the Islamists the pharaoh or the fanatics.
And he has done his best to guarantee that these are the only choices by
destroying moderate, democratic opposition and forcing most dissent into
the radical mosque.
Musharraf seems to be on the same path. While talking about fighting
radicalism, his real energy has been devoted to imprisoning and
harassing his democratic opponents. As in Egypt, this approach has
elevated the Islamists. Polli9ng by the nonprofit group Terror Free
Tomorrow shows broad Pakistani support for democracy coupled with
considerable sympathy for radical groups that oppose the military regime. In
609

the long run, propping up favourable dictators to fight terrorism causes a

backlash.
Fortunately, there are options in Pakistan beyond the pharaoh or the
fanatics responsible senior leaders of the army and well-known democratic
leaders. Additional pressure on Musharraf is not likely to result in an Islamic
revolution. So it would make sense to cut aid to Pakistan if Musharraf
does not back off from emergency rule not humanitarian aid, or even
counter-terrorism aid, but military aide not directly tied to the fight against
terrorists.
The Pakistani crisis is important for its own sake, but it is also a
warning. Eventually, we will see street protests and crackdowns in Egypt
perhaps when Mubarak passes from the scene. And the same question will
arise: Has he done enough to encourage political alternatives to Islamic
groups? On the current course, the answer will be NO.
Shahan Mufti wrote for the Christian Science Monitor. A newly
appointed panel of Supreme Court judges is scheduled to throw out the
last of the legal challenges to President Pervez Musharrafs continued rule
Thursday. The rulings would clear the way for the General to quit the Army
and take on oath as a civilian president of Pakistan.
If he follows the script, President Musharraf will become the first
military ruler in Pakistan to quit the Army to become a civilian leader
in itself a testament to the extraordinary challenges the ruler has faced of
late. But it is a move inherently laden with risk and uncertainty. There is no
historic precedent to suggest how civil, political, and military forces will
react to Musharrafs new placement in the power landscape.
While his quitting the Army may placate much of his political
opposition, observers say, some others, including an agitated street
movement, may remain adamant about seeing the General off
permanently. But once he is a step removed from the Army, Musharraf
might find himself newly vulnerable in the ring of civilian politics.
Now, the courts neutralized and an election planned for Jan 8,
opposition parties are faced with a choice. They could try to secure
whatever gains they have made, participate in the elections, and move
forward into a new set-up of, at least on paper, civilian rule. But they could

610

also boycott elections completely and continue in the streets with their fight
against Musharraf.
Civil society, including journalists, rights groups, and students, are
experiencing a momentum for civilian democracy not seen in decades
despite wavering political support. Pakistan, says Masood, is still in the thick
of the historic moment where its civil military power dynamic may be
altered: Whether it will be revolutionary or evolutionary is still a question.
Vijay Parshad writing for Frontline observed: Both the White House
and the State Department have turned, it is said, not to the civil society
protesting in favour of democracy, but to the barracks, where the most
measured man is Kiyani Negropontes man in Tegucibalpa was General
Gustavo Alvarez Martinez, who famously said that extra-legal means were
needed to pursue the Argentine method of torture to maintain control of the
country.
Washingtons concern is mainly on the Pakistani-Afghan frontier, on
the rise of political Islam within the country and on the concomitant problem
of nuclear weapons in the hands of anti-US Islamic groups. The White
House is mute when it comes to the democracy being demanded by
lawyers, journalists, human right activists and students. Their struggles
provoke consideration about chaos rather than hope for the creation of a new
political dispensation. They evoke fears of Iran, even as this is misplaced.
Robert Kagan opined: Musharraf is not even like the Shah of Iran.
He is not the living embodiment of a regime, as the Shah was. He is not
replaceable. He is not the lone savior of a whole way of governance. He is
but a General.
Much is riding on the Bush Administrations ability to steer its way
through this transition in Pakistan. President Bushs claim that Musharraf
can be trusted to lead Pakistan toward democracy is not credible. In its
better moments, the United States has known when to tell such leaders
that their time was up. If the administration cannot muster the courage or
skill to find alternative in the name of Pakistani democracy, all because it
fears the alternative, then it had better cease the absurd rhetoric about
democracy promotion
Times wrote: With the dismissal by the reconstituted Supreme Court
of the last legal challenge, there is now no obstacle to his being sworn in

611

for further five years. Nor can his re-election be reversed Musharraf has
amended the Constitution to ensure that decisions taken under the
emergency cannot be challenged in court.
The focus now falls on the angry and fractured opposition
leaders. Out manoeuvred, they must now decide whether to contest or
boycott the elections. Those with little hope of winning are trying to strike a
principled pose: Mr Khan has promised to continue his hunger strike, and
Nawaz Sharif, exiled in Saudi Arabia, has denounced the vote as a farce. The
main Islamist party, however, has promised to field candidates.
The decisive factor was the tough talk by Washington, though the
threat of renewed suspension from the Commonwealth may also have played
a part. He still has not lifted emergency rule, and Ms Bhutto will continue
sailing against him to burnish her domestic image. But the makings of a deal
are in place. Washington must nevertheless keep up the pressure on both
Ms Bhutto and General Musharraf. Pakistan has little alternative.
Anita M Weiss wrote: Musharraf swears he will reinstate democracy
just as soon as elections are held, but democracy cannot emerge when one
man is able to stand up and suspend a Constitution, imprison the Chief
Justice of a Supreme Court, and arrest civil activists demanding its
restitution.
The influence of the military in governing Pakistan remains
potent today. Hasan Askari Rizvi, a Pakistani political scientist who has
researched the military extensively, contends that its influence extends far
beyond the barracks in Pakistan as extended direct or indirect rule have
enabled the military to spread out in the civilian administration, semigovernment institutions, the economy and the major sectors of the society.
Its clout no longer depends solely on controlling political power.
Musharraf claims to the BBC that he did not go mad nor become a
Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, though his actions in abrogating the liberal,
parliamentary solutions he has championed since seizing power in October
1999 in the name of enlightened moderation certainly dont sustain his
arguments. He notes nothing concerning what comprises the necessary
components of a participatory democracy.
Pakistan finally has the opportunity to create political and economic
apace for the masses in the country. Indeed, the reverberations from the

612

Musharraf administration aligning itself with the United States against the
Taliban since October 2001 has created both enormous political and
economic opportunities for Pakistan as well as considerable social conflict.
A new layer of animosity exists toward President Musharraf and his
administration for supporting the US invasion of Afghanistan for carrying
out a violent operation in Waziristan, and now for abrogating the
Constitution in the name fighting terrorism while imprisoning judges and
clamping down on the media.
Robert Naiman observed: The USs second highest diplomat went to
Pakistan. Did he complain about General Musharraf shutting down the
Supreme Court and replacing it with his loyalists? Did he press General
Musharraf to release judges and lawyers from prison?
Tom Malinowski of Human Rights Watch said: Its hard to imagine
how the administration will be able to achieve anything in Pakistan if the
president is so disconnected from reality. Malinowski added: Almost
everyone in Pakistan who believes in George Bushs vision of democracy
is in prison today and calling the man who put them in prison a great
democrat will only discredit America among moderate Pakistanis.
There is no widespread political support in Pakistan for violent
movements; efforts to combat these movements by the government are
undermined by the lack of democratic legitimacy; Musharraf cares more
about preserving his own power than combating these movements; US
policy, if anything, is encouraging extremism by helping to block a
democratic, non-violent path to reform. Now consider this: while US policy
has been predicted on the assumption that any real sanction on Musharraf is
impossible, the Commonwealth group of countries has suspended Pakistans
membership.
Why has the US Congress failed to act? The uninterrupted flow of
US military aid including military aid for weapons systems that have no
plausible relationship to fighting insurgents is being interpreted in
Pakistan as US support for Musharrafs crackdown.
Tracy Dove talked of Nawazs return. Nawaz is coming back on
Sunday. His goal is to register before the November 26 deadline so that he
can contest general elections and thereby oppose President Musharraf. This
is a dangerous plan, and Nawaz will have to be exceptionally careful;

613

history shows that rulers dont take kindly to opponents returning from
exile.
Benazir Bhutto, who recently returned from exile, knows very well
that assassination is not only a possibility, but a likelihood in politics. Upon
her return last month, two bombs exploded as her vehicle was leaving the
airport, killing hundreds of supporters and many of the 150 bodyguards that
had formed a human shield around her motorcade. Who the assassins were
no one can be sure. Since then, Benazir has been careful to remain behind
bulletproof glass while rallying her supporters, and she is aware through
personal experience that assassination has been very effective political
tool in her country.
Carlotta Gall wrote: Mr Sharifs unimpeded homecoming at Lahore
Airport stood in stunning contrast to his attempt to return less than three
months ago, when Pakistans President Gen Pervez Musharraf, ordered Mr
Sharif summarily deported General Musharraf who has repeatedly vowed
he would not allow Mr Sharif back to participate in the elections, said
nothing Sunday about the decision to relent. That decision appeared to
reflect not only that the political environment in Pakistan is rapidly
changing, but also that Saudi Arabia, Mr Sharifs home in exile, had
interceded on his behalf, even providing the airplane for the homecoming
trip.
Mr Sharif has also sought to distinguish himself as a leader not
beholden to the United States, which considers General Musharraf the
most important Muslim ally in the struggle against al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
The White House has repeatedly urged General Musharraf to lift the state of
emergency and restore democracy but said nothing publicly Sunday about
Mr Sharifs return.
Mr Sharifs return was viewed by many political analysts as a sign
that General Musharraf and his governing party, another faction of the
Pakistan Muslim League, are resigned to Mr Sharifs political comeback.
The faction that has backed General Musharraf for the last five years is
likely to suffer the most from Mr Sharifs return and politicians are
already predicting defections from one faction to another.
In his first words to supporters on Sunday, he reiterated that he had
not made any deal to return and that he would put an end to the politics of

614

back-room deals. My deal is with you people, my heart says that there will
be a change and the poor will get employment, he said.
Mr Sharif is likely to take strong stand against any compromise
with the General, playing on the growing frustrations of the public with his
government. These politicians who make deals who bow their heads in
front of a dictator, we have to defeat them, he told supporters.
Keith Jones opined: Now, bowing to pressure from the Bush
Administration, Bhutto has signaled that her PPP will participate in the
national and provincial elections the military regime intends to hold
January 8. And the other major parties, beginning with the Pakistan Muslim
League (Nawaz) of deposed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who returned to
Pakistan, appear set to follow the suit, thereby serving as direct accomplices
of the military regime.
The elections are designed to legitimize and give a democratic faade
to a political set-up in which the military retains decisive control over the
Pakistani state through a strong presidency, a military-dominated National
Security Council with sweeping powers of constitutional oversight over
important government actions, and a judiciary that under Musharrafs
martial law regime has been purged of elements deemed disruptive.
Bhutto is claiming that her PPP has yet to take a final decision on
whether to contest the elections. But this is clearly only so as to overcome
opposition within her own party to such a craven act of collaboration with
Musharraf and so as to provide the PPP an escape hatch should the popular
protests against the government suddenly escalate, whether on account of the
brutal martial law regime or the burgeoning economic crisis.
Nawaz Shariftoo has instructed his party to fulfill all the legal
formalities to participate in the elections and his brother and close advisor,
Shahbaz Sharif, told reporters in London Saturday before joining Nawaz in
his return to Pakistan that if the PPP chooses to contest the elections a
boycott cannot work.
Should the PPP and PML-N contest the elections, there is no question
that the MMA, whose constituent elements have also been filing candidate
nomination papers, will also quickly drop it boycott rhetoric. Indeed, one of
the MMAs foremost leaders, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, has announced
definitively that he and his party, the JUI-F, will participate in elections.

615

Rehman, who is infamous for his close relations to the Musharraf regime,
met with the US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne Patterson Nov 20.
According to Rehman, she strongly urged him to participate in the
military regimes elections.
What can be said with assurance is that King Abdullah of Saudi
Arabia who like Musharraf is a close ally of the Bush Administration and
certainly no advocate of democracy would not have released Sharif from
the terms of his exile in Saudi Arabia and effectively sponsored his return to
Pakistan if he had not been certain that Sharif would not cut across
Washingtons plans to maintain a military-dominated government in
Pakistan.
If all sections of the bourgeois opposition are conniving with the
Musharraf regime and contemplating participating in the January elections,
it is because they all covet a slice of political power and the patronage
prerogative that goes with it and fear that if they boycott the elections
their rivals will benefit.
Robert B Oakley and Joshua Yaphe said: Former Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif returned from exile, apparently with the support of Saudi
Arabia. This probably will mar the end of Musharrafs political career. As
for Bhutto, she greatly compromised her legitimacy this summer by tying
her tether to Musharraf. Sharif may be the future of Pakistan, an
eventuality the United States must prepare for. He commands a strong
following.
Pakistans army will remain a major force uniting the country. Its
cooperation is essential in the fight against al-Qaeda and to prevent crossborder insurgent activities in Afghanistan. Its efforts do not always meet our
expectations. But it has been a long road rebuilding US-Pakistan
relations, and we cannot afford to damage them again at this sensitive
movement.
Shahan Mufti wrote for The Christian Science Monitor. If Mr Nawaz
decides to run in the elections, he is likely to pull in the rest of the
political opposition including former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto
with him. His candidacy could provide a much-needed sheen of legitimacy
to the process. But if the two-time ex-premier heeds what many in his camp
are suggesting and boycotts the election, remaining outside the political
process, he could find himself leading a street movement.
616

If Nawaz Sharif plays according to the new rules set up by

Musharraf, he would be doing the General a favour, says Rasul Bakhsh
Rais, professor of political science at the Lahore University of Management
Sciences, referring specially to Pakistans new Supreme Court and elections
announced under the state of emergency. If he chooses to stay away from the
election, however, it would delegitimize the entire electoral process and put
pressure on Musharraf to get out of the system altogether. Nawaz Sharifs
return will weigh heavily on the political situation in Pakistan, says Ansar
Abbasi
Sharifs return comes on the heels of a visit last week by Musharraf
to Saudi Arabia, where Sharif had lived in exile as guest of the Saudi royal
family since 2000. All the parties involved Musharraf, the Saudi royals,
and Sharif and his brother were tight-lipped about the topics discussed
during the visit.
Sharifs strong ties to Islamist political parties have attracted
suspicion from some Western governments that have traditionally counted
Musharraf as an ally in the US-led war on terrorism. He has the option to
lead the resistance in the streets, which has gone without any solid
leadership so far, says Mr Rais.
Others seem to believe that Sharif is returning under the auspices
of a political deal, much like Ms Bhutto did last month, and that he will
engage in negotiations with Musharraf upon his return. The Saudis have
probably advised him to join the process, says Mr Abbasi, because much
like the Americans, they are concerned with maintaining stability in
Pakistan, he says.
If Bhutto and Sharif boycott the elections, it will mean yet
another political deadlock. Some say the vote could still be held, but the
legitimacy of such an election would be in doubt, said Anwar Syed, a
professor at the Lahore School of Economics. What will happen then? The
people at large may repudiate the election and come out protesting. In other
words the current political crisis may continue.
Syed Saleem Shazad wrote for Asia Times Online. Sharif returned to
the country two months ago, but was hustled straight back onto a plane to
Saudi Arabia. This time there was no such drama as the circumstances have
changed. According to Asia Times Online contacts, the backroom

617

negotiations resulted in him being given the go-ahead to return to

Pakistan provided he did not make trouble.
The deal with Sharif has both internal and external aspects.
Pakistan is concerned that the war on terror is spilling far too much into the
country. Pakistans leading security think-tank, the National Defence
University, has floated the idea that Afghanistan and Pakistan could be
prevented from falling into the clutches of extremism by NATO forces
withdrawing from Afghanistan and being replaced by troops from OIC
With the emergency in Afghanistan spiraling out of control with
every passing day, Washington is giving an ear to this suggestion. But the
biggest problem would be for Muslim countries to find leaders to speak to
the insurgents in a spirit of mutual trust. Apparently the deal brokered by
Saudi Arabia to allow Nawaz Sharif back into Pakistan aims to bring
his brother Shahbaz into the spotlight. In Pakistans charged environment,
anything is worth a try, including this old wine in a new bottle its worked
before.
Musharraf regime considers Pakistan as front-line state in Americas
war on terror, but India is the strategic partner in the war that is waged
against Islamic fascism. Thus, knowing the Indian viewpoint on
Pakistani crisis is as important as knowing about those of the West.
John Cherian observed: The Indian government seems to prefer a
cautious approach and is careful not to be perceived as interfering in
Pakistans internal affairs. It is also of the view that for the foreseeable
future the Pakistan Army will remain the main player in the countrys
politics. A senior Indian official said the Washington would create another
democratic faade for the military to continue its rule in Pakistan.
Washington has shown a preference for authoritarian rulers despite all the
talk of democracy.
India and Pakistan have been involved in substantive talks. Incidents
of cross-border activities have come down substantially. In the last couple of
years, Musharraf has made many proposals to resolve the contentious issue
of Kashmir. But once it became obvious that the Generals powers and
charisma were waning, the Indian establishment began stone-walling
Islamabads initiative.

618

New Delhi has left it to Washington to articulate the fears

relating to Pakistans nuclear arsenal. Musharraf has rejected the Bush
Administrations demands that it be made privy to the location of countrys
nuclear weapons. The Pakistan President insists that under no circumstances
will he compromise with Pakistans sovereignty on this issue.
The Left parties in India have been particularly critical of the
imposition of emergency rule in Pakistan. The general secretary of the
Communist Party of India (Marxist), Parkash Karat, said that events in
Pakistan exemplified the dangers of getting embedded with the US
Dhiraj Nayyar wrote: Since the proclamation of Emergency, the state
forces have been remarkably efficient in rounding up thousands of people
perceived as a threat to Pakistans stability and integrity. Ironically enough,
not a single Islamic radical figures in the list of those detained.
Two things are now eminently clear about Musharrafs term in
power. His flawed idea of managed or guided democracy has failed to
deliver the goods. And his war on extremism has gone very badly, costing
the General a loss of face with his own people. It is time that the General
realized that you either have democracy or you dont. There is no such thing
as a guided democracy.
One can properly gauge the Generals frustration with events. Eight
years in power, and he is now perhaps the most unpopular man, in a long
list of unpopular men, to have wielded power without much success in
Pakistan. The Supreme Court, which was asserting its independence and
threatened not to legitimize his grip on power, proved too much of an irritant
in the end. The Emergency is probably targeted at the judges more than
anyone else.
The United States, which has an important stake in Pakistan, could
play a constructive role by persuading Musharraf to step aside after an
orderly transfer of political power to democratically elected government, and
an orderly transfer of his army chief baton to his chosen successor. At the
same time, the US which is viewed suspiciously by a majority in Pakistan
cannot afford to rant the new leaders, including possibly Benazir Bhutto,
through close association. American involvement in Pakistan must
become more subtle.

619

Madhur Singh opined: Having fought three wars against Pakistan,

India pays close attention to the turbulent politics of its neighbour. And
none of Pakistans many coups and periods of martial law has caused as
much apprehension in New Delhi as the recent action of President Pervez
Musharraf. Indias security establishment views Musharrafs political
troubles from the perspective of regional stability, sharing with Washington
the concern that priority be given to the campaign against forces of Islamist
fundamentalism in Pakistan.
To the extent that enforcing emergency rule occupies the security
forces, Indian security experts say, the danger increases of escalating
infiltration into India of militants from Pakistan. And India has more
reason than most to be concerned about the danger of Pakistans nuclear
material falling into the wrong hands. The analyst has said what a worthy
strategic partner of the Crusaders should say.
Still, India has been careful to avoid condemning Musharrafs
imposition of emergency rule, and has refrained from demanding the
restoration of democracy. New Delhi is reluctant to denounce the man it
has come to reluctantly regard as its best chance for peace with its
neighbour, whether fleeting or long-lasting. This is exactly what the
Crusaders have done.
More importantly, Indias avoidance of demanding a return to
democracy in Pakistan may be attributed to the long-standing belief that
to do business with Pakistan, one has to deal with the army. The army is
the only political party worth its name in Pakistan, says Ashok Behuria,
research fellow at the Delhi-based Institute for Defence and Security
Analysis.
At the same time, however, to hedge its bets, India has been
making quiet overtures to the pro-democracy opposition. When former
Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, after returning to Pakistan, escaped a deadly
attack on her convoy in Karachi, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the
ruling Congress Partys leader, Sonia Gandhi, personally called Bhutto to
express concern. Yet publicly, Indias stance has been reticent. Maintaining a
silence while Washington waves sticks and carrots - serves Indias
purpose just as well.
The political equation is becoming increasingly complex. While
Benazir Bhutto has returned to demanding that Musharraf resign following
620

the breakdown of the political marriage between them brokered by the US,
Musharraf may be trying to bring Nawaz Sharif over to his side.
A Musharraf pact with Sharif would be even stranger than his shortlived alliance with Bhutto. But regardless of the outcome of the political
manoeuvring, New Delhi will have to do business with whoever ends up at
the helm in Islamabad. That means waiting and watching, and keeping
channels of communication open to as many of the main players as
possible.
S M Hali wrote: Indian silence on the state of emergency and the
initial gagging of the electronic media in Pakistan is deafening. Doesnt it
seem odd that there has been hardly a demur from our erstwhile detractors
and critics since the emergency was imposed on November 3, 2007?
Is it that the Indians are taking the Composite Dialogue for peace
between India and Pakistan so seriously that they are conscious of rocking
the tripwire of delicate diplomacy by unnecessary criticism or that they have
matured to the extent that they consider the events in Pakistan to be its own
internal problems? Either instance appears to be too good to be true. If the
present is an extension of the past, India should be crying hoarse to the
world regarding the suspension of the basic rights of people in Pakistan
Take Raja Mohan: India has reasons to mince its words on
General Pervez Musharrafs second coup. It would have served no
purpose if India had chosen to be judgmental about the depressing, but not
entirely surprising turn of events in Pakistan given the historical burden,
New Delhi is condemned to deal with whoever is in power in Islamabad
India is fully conscious of another tragic but enduring reality about Pakistan.
The external geopolitical significance of our western neighbour has always
taken precedence over the need for a more representative political system
within.
Raja Mohan presents seven considerations for India amidst the
prevailing developments:
The spill over of the war against terrorism in FATA.
The growing political and administrative control over Waziristan,
Bajaur and Swat.

621

 Failure of Pakistani security forces to regain control either through

negotiated ceasefire arrangements or use of force.
Growing demoralization within Pakistan security forces.
Al-Qaedas open war against the Musharraf regime.
Talibans credible sanctuary among fellow-Pashtun tribesmen in
Pakistan.
International coalitions frustration at the armys unwillingness to
control the sources of terrorism inside its own territory.
Some of Raja Mohans apparently benign observations are at
best malicious. For the first time in sixty years, the pressure on India
through the freedom fighters in Kashmir has been shifted to Pakistans
western borders. Who is providing the sophisticated weaponry at the
disposal of the Taliban and al-Qaeda being used against Pakistan? Where is
the extensive funding for sustained operations against the well-equipped and
well-trained Pakistani security forces coming from? Who is gaining the most
from the apparent destabilization of Pakistan? Definitely, it is India
Raja Mohan reminds us that nearly three decades ago, when the
Soviet troops entered Afghanistan then Indian Prime Minister, Indira
Gandhi, sent her Foreign Minister PV Narsimha Rao to Islamabad to suggest
a joint Indo-Pak response to the crisis. General Ziaul Haq, who was all set to
play a dramatic role in the new great game, dismissed that offer. Indeed
being cognizant of the Indo-Soviet collusion, it would have been suicidal
of Pakistan to team up with India.
It is imperative that Pakistani template for dealing with the security
imperatives must take cognizance of Indian machinations and its loaded
silence over developments in Pakistan since India itself is largely
responsible for our current predicament decides our own commissions and
omissions.
People and analysts at home kept commenting on the crisis as a
whole, and important events within it. The return of Nawaz Sharif was
one of the events which could not be ignored. The Nation wrote: Saudi
King Abdullah has played a commendable role in the agreement which will
ensure they will not be turned back after they land this time.
622

While press reports tell of promises having been extracted from the
former prime minister not to upset the applecart after his return to Pakistan,
only time will show what exactly are the conditions attached to the
return.
As they arrive the PML-N top leaders face a tough task ahead. To
start with they are required to organize and put life into a badly battered
party. With a large number of its middle ranking leaders having abandoned it
to join the official PML, the party faces a shortage of candidates despite
Mian Nawaz Sharif enjoying widespread personal support. With the two
major leaders back home, desertions are bound to take place in the ruling
PML. How many of the turncoats return to the mother party and whether
they are acceptable to its leadership remains to be seen.
All opposition parties share a perception that elections are being
held under unacceptable conditions. The Emergency persists, General
Musharraf has yet not doffed the uniform, peaceful protestors continue to be
beaten and arrested, leading lawyers are still in jail and recent decisions
given by courts comprising judges having taken oath under PCO have
elicited criticism from former justices and caused worries among the
opposition.
Meanwhile, Attorney General Malik Qayyum has maintained
that Mian Nawaz Sharif is ineligible to contest the elections on account
of being sentenced in the helicopter purchase case. The government needs to
take steps to meet the opposition reservations rather than force it to boycott
the elections, an option it has not ruled out.
Next day, the newspaper added: After a period of seven years and
one botched up attempt this September, Mian Nawaz Sharif is finally back in
Lahore. Though the setting for the upcoming national and provincial
elections is far from ideal, the fact that all the major political parties are
back in the country is a heartening development
It would do the PML-N good not to boycott the elections while
keeping alive its option of a boycott closer to the election date. That should
be the whole point of coming back to face the might of the military regime.
Granted, there are major deviations from what an ideal environment to
participate in elections should be but boycotting the polls at this stage makes
sense only if everybody else is doing it; it would have robbed these flawed
elections of all credibility. Since that isnt happening, the best bet would be
623

to contest The N League can at least try to emulate previous successes.

Participation in the elections is the direction where the road to
democratic normalcy lies.
On third consecutive day the editor wrote: Mian Nawaz Sharifs
entry adds a new dimension to national politics So far the political
chessboard was by and large monopolized by General Musharraf and Ms
Bhutto, though the legal community joined by civil society at times
interfered in the game. Now there is another player challenging the two, who
will have to be informed if they have settled the rules of game. It is difficult
to ignore him if he is able to make use of his position as the PML-N chief
and the APDMs leading light.
By allowing party members to file the nomination papers, albeit
under protest, Mian Nawaz has made a realistic retreat on his maximalist
stand of not participating in elections under Musharraf with or without
uniform. The government would do well not to create any hindrance
through legal whiz kids like Malik Qayyum as he and family members
submit their papers. Many for whom Mians idealism has an appeal would
however prefer that realism does not degenerate into real politick, which
characterizes many other politicians.
Hopefully, there will be an early meeting between Mian Nawaz and
Ms Bhutto who has indicated her keenness to evolve a common strategy to
re-establishing democracy. Despite being traditional rivals they need to
jointly work out what they consider to be prerequisites to a fair and free
election Among the issues they need to agree on is the restoration of the
pre-November judges. If the two join hands, they are likely to be followed
by smaller opposition parties.
Sarmad Bashir observed: The one thing General Musharraf would
have been desperate about was to have a pliant judiciary. And he succeeded
by purging the courts of judges he feared would declare him ineligible to
contest for the presidency. The dismissal of the last pending challenge to his
re-election on Thursday cleared the way for him to take oath for another
term.
Much of the pressure now having gone, though doffing the uniform
to remain his worst nightmare for some time, the can now think of
making the coming elections as credible as possible. One may think that he

624

would now like to show to the world that he is keen to level the field for all
key players to participate in the electoral process.
The first indication to this effect came from his abrupt dash to Saudi
Arabia where he is reported to have been told by the Saudi authorities that
after Benazir Bhuttos return to Pakistan it would be extremely difficult for
them to hold back Mian Nawaz Sharif If everything falls in place then
this could deal a death-blow to the quislings. Most of the PML-Q
members believe that the Sharif familys return to Pakistan would drastically
change the political equation especially in Punjab.
The Generals cronies have been talking about electing him president
in uniform for the next ten years. But they might have forgotten that the
people can be a formidable force. It is only a matter of time before they rise.
And once they do, they will overcome the massacre of the rule of law and
the Constitution committed by the Musharraf government. Those who have
turned their blighted country into an inferno will have to bow to the
wishes of the people desperate to see the lingering khaki shadows disappear
sooner rather than later
Khurshaid Akhtar Khan was of the view that it takes a hundred
years to build and a day to erase it to the ground. The president also has
seemed to be in a hurry during the last few months, to demolish whatever he
nurtured over the last eight years of his absolute rule. The achievements that
he never tired of reminding the nation have begun to crumble one after the
other.
Due to the general public apathy and a political vacuum the voices
and actions of an insignificant minority of militants and extremists have
assumed such alarming proportions that they are challenging the federation
and have taken up arms against its own government
The law has been blatantly compromised and order is defied by
anyone who dares. Might is right has become the order of the day.
Anyone and everyone, individual, institution or group that attained a
position of authority overstepped its limits and became a law unto itself,
constantly trying to expand its powers by encroaching on others, creating
chaos and feuds. The respect for institutions has eroded as they used to
promote self-interests that are not necessarily in conformity with those of the
average citizen. All systems are distorted and modified at the drop of a hat to

625

achieve short-term gains, disregarding the long-term repercussions and

damage to the national solidarity.
All the above is not lost to the general public that is politically aware,
keenly observes the developments but remains silent. It finds little to choose
from among the leaders, who make promises that are not fulfilled,
deliver very little and are eventually forced to make an exit by some
mysterious power, in disgrace amid charges of financial corruption and
incompetence. Instead of strengthening the existing systems, every ruler
whether military or civilian, has tried to introduce new ones that did not
outlive their tenure.
Political maturity has escaped our leaders, whose claim to believe
in democracy is belied by their inherent total lack of mutual political
accommodation that is the basic ingredient of a parliamentary system. The
infighting, impatience with divergent views and intolerance to the very
existence of rival political parties has repeatedly led the way to military
intervention.
The opposition parties are in total disarray, unable to reach common
ground to decide if a boycott or street agitation can be successful. The public
has still not been sufficiently motivated or charged to take to the streets. The
primary concern of the main opposition leaders appears to be their own
personal survival rather than take the thorny road to the discomforts of
prison or personal sacrifice.
PML-Q, MQM and JUI-F have been fully prepared and have
favoured polls to cash in on the goodwill of their five-year rule and the
enormous advertisement campaign financed by the exchequer Peoples
Party, that is the single largest opposition party with a mass appeal, is
handicapped by the short time allowed for the election campaign and the ban
on rallies that will be a big hurdle in mobilizing their vote-bank.
The political scenario is about to change, as the presence of two
main leaders will enthrall a new fervor to the campaigns led by the two
main leaders coming out of the cold, hopefully more mature, responsible and
caring. A boycott of elections does not appear a possibility any more despite
all the rhetoric. The previous ruling coalition may be the only group that has
its act together but new favorites will emerge.

626

A new ray of hope has suddenly started shining from the clouds.
Any plans of mass movement and non-cooperation by the civil society,
lawyers, NGOs, students and the political parties at this stage, demanding an
instant end to the army role in civilian affairs and leading to disturbances,
will be counter productive to the gains made by the two leaders by their
return. An atmosphere of a peaceful transition is on the cards and must not
be destroyed.
Observers, like Sarmad Bashir, continued expressing apprehensions
about forthcoming general elections. The Nation wrote: The Election
Commission has announced a tight election schedule which has been out
rightly rejected by PML-N leader Mian Nawaz Sharif while the PPP
spokesman has questioned its locus standi arguing that any elections under
present conditions would be neither free nor fair and would in fact amount to
a selection.
There is a unanimity in the position that elections held under
Emergency and in a situation where the media is gagged, the courts purged
of independent judges and the erstwhile ruling alliance having already
completed its homework, would be unacceptable to it. A common stand on
participation in elections however is yet to be formulated.
Most of the opposition parties are divided over the issue but none is
willing to take a decision on its own. While the experience of an earlier
boycott in 1985 which led to the political isolation of those who refrained
from taking part in the elections urges them to go for the polls, the postEmergency restrictions faced by them are forcing them to mediate a
boycott.
A few days later, the newspaper added: With the last date for
submitting nomination papers approaching, developments have started
taking place at a fast speed Being parliamentary parties of long standing,
all are keen to take part in the polls but still maintain serious
reservations about the conditions under which they are being held. They
have therefore put up a number of demands. Some of them have been
conceded, though only in part.
It is for the government to take the measures required to make
the elections a credible exercise. What is required under the conditions is to
ensure the participation of all major parties by conceding the oppositions
crucial demands Prominent lawyers who are still in jails should be set free
627

before Monday to enable them to file nomination papers or otherwise take

part in the election activity. A free media and independent judiciary have to
be ensured to create the ambience required for free elections.
With the Emergency lifted and the uniform removed, it might be
possible for General Musharraf then to gather all political parties to hold an
APC to review the election arrangements. Elections marred by boycotts,
protests and unrest would be widely considered flawed. What is more,
any government subsequently formed would be unable to ensure stability.
Khurshid Anwer from Lahore Cantt apprehended: The intention is for
a take-care setup which will take proper care of the opposition and put it in
its place i.e. on the back benches. Also, free and fair means to provide
free play to the chosen parties having NOC from Washington.
Can any person think the elections will be credible under the present
circumstances with a captive Supreme Court and a captive Chief Election
Commissioner? It will be a repeat of the 2002 elections where the
opposition candidates who did win, were soon made lotas after being
accommodated with ministries.
Raoof Hasan wrote: So, we are exactly where General Musharraf
had ordained we would be. As part of the much-trumpeted transition to the
civilian rule, we are precariously perched at the threshold of the historic
general elections that have been scheduled for January 8 next.
Overwhelmed by this momentous showering, we are expected to
bow our heads in eternal gratitude to the benevolent ruler and shut
our ears to the proclamation regarding the unceremonious dismissal of a
democratically elected government in 1999, or the farcical elections held to
piece together a parliament for ratifying legislation hitting at the grassroots
of a democratic polity, or the quarrelsome and rancorous judiciary that was
felled through one stroke of the benefactor, or the arbitrary and
undemocratic gagging of the independent media, or the repeated unleashing
of the brutal state apparatus on the hapless citizens who dared to step out to
voice their opinion, or the unceremonious herding of thousands of political
leaders and workers into lock-ups in the far-flung areas of the country, or the
shenanigans of the politicians (but for few exceptions) who continued to
fight over the crumbs thrown in their general direction, or the executive that
behaved like the plebeians to the viceroy, forever sold in servitude

628

What has transformed the society that, suddenly, it refuses to

give in to the dictate of the military command? What has propelled it in the
direction of defiance in preference to surrender before the lure of the
impending elections? What has injected that refreshing adrenalin into its
veins that it has shed its battered robes of inactivity and taken firm and
decisive steps on the road to unshackling itself from the fetters signifying
subservience to unlawful authority? What has brought about the refreshing
change that is serenading through the seemingly speechless multitudes?
What has engineered this quantum shift that the nation is not shy of
dreaming yet again, for the dawn of a truly enlightened and democratic
polity in the country?
The lawyers are in defiant mould. The media is up in arms. The
students have started emerging from their sanctified abodes. The civil
society stands galvanized. This is quite a change from the way things were
just months ago. While there are many reasons that may have encouraged
this paradigm shift, the primary motivation was provided by the booting
of the judiciary.
Together, the judiciary and the media became a potent force and,
winning over the hearts and minds of those hundreds of thousands who had
been directly and indirectly affected by the destructive and all-intrusive
fangs of the intelligence agencies, it was able to crystallize the thinking of a
whole nation. The judiciary became the powerful base to sustain the
dream of a viable and vibrant national edifice.
The knock-out punch was delivered through the critical haste
with which martial law was proclaimed and an essential pillar of the state
was dismantled. With the other pillars of the state having already given in to
systematic and brutal assaults, the state itself disappeared as an entity. The
move transpired at a time when it had become palpably clear that the
General was going to end up on the losing side of the ruling of the apex
court. That is why his voice became law onto itself.
Consequently, recourse to extra-constitutional measures was
totally bereft of any moral or legal foundation. Equally damaging was the
simultaneous, virtual shackling of the electronic media. The people never
had their rights. It was like their voice had also been taken away.
There is nothing unseen that the forthcoming elections have in
store. The stage is set and the players are all lined up. With the sound of the
629

shot, they shall all head for their pre-ordained destinations and the show will
be enacted true to its scripting and other allied requirements of the
production a non-descript farce garbed in the generally acceptable attire of
what goes around as elections. Of course, there will be petty morsels in it,
whetting the ingrained lustful appetite of the players of all hues and colours
to pounce on. That is the way most of the political parties are making it look
like in their relentless pursuit to plunge headlong into the looming farce.
They shall be denuded of the last vestiges of self-respect and standing, if any
of it survives at all!
The utter disaffection and mistrust in the ranks of the opposition
parties and a total absence of a sensible game plan have the making of an
unremitting disaster. Instead of falling for the morsels, a viable and proactive strategy needs to be formulated for attaining the democratic ideals and
aspirations of the people. One of the most essential pre-requisites for its
success will be cohesion amongst the ranks of all political players.
Dr Ijaz Ahsan discussed the issue of boycott. President of PONAM
and Chairman of the Pakhtoonkhwa Mili Awami Party, Mahmood Khan
Achakzai has said that the struggle against the present regime is a sacred
battle. He said that political parties, lawyers, journalists and civil society
have no other course open to them than wage a struggle for the
restoration of democracy, the constitution, the judiciary and the freedom of
the media.
He said that by not starting a civil disobedience movement, the
political parties have made a grave mistake. He said the country is passing
through a very severe crisis. There is very little time left. The political
parties should immediately unite on a one-point agenda and start a fullfledged movement.
The disunity among the politicians persists. Perhaps it would be
more correct to say that most political parties are united on the stance that
elections should be boycotted. However, as in the past, the leaders of two big
parties, Benazir Bhutto and Maulana Fazlur Rehman, are not coming out
clearly in favour of a boycott
If all the opposition parties boycott the polls, the elections will
lose their credibility. In any equation the only weapon the weaker party
possesses is to refuse to accept the results of the others arbitrary actions. If,
instead, the political parties take part in the elections, they will sanctify it.
630

Then if the ruler rigs the polls, it will be no use. By taking part in the polls,
the parties will help perpetuate his rule.
In the meantime, lawyers, students and civil society are keeping up a
certain tempo. Black bands are being worn, flash protests are being held,
and campus demonstrations are taking place. However, to turn the tables,
full and active participation by the political parties is the need of the hour.
Whatever the political parties have to do it is here and now, otherwise
they will miss the bus.
Dr Faisal Bari observed: Ms Bhutto and Maulana Fazlur Rahman
have hinted that they are not convinced that elections should be boycotted as
that would leave the field open for Muslim League-Q This seems like a
very strange argument to make. The two of them seem to be saying that
even though we know that there is a martial law in the country, there is no
independent judiciary or an independent election commission, there are no
basic rights, there is no Constitution, the whims of one person, backed by the
military might of a standing army, is the law, and there is no hope even of
things changing before elections, we should still go for elections.
This seems like a really bad and far fetched argument. If
Musharraf is not willing to give all parties a fair shot at the polls now, why
will he allow anyone to change anything if he is able to get quite a few QLeaguers in the assemblies? And if the hope is that Musharraf will become
toothless once he gives up his uniform and then, only as a President, he can
be dealt with, the hope is unfounded. What is going to stop the next General
from playing the same game?
Right now the world has seen and knows very clearly that this entire
issue of imposition of martial law was wrong and misguided. And even
though the US needs Musharraf to do its dirty work and kill more Pakistanis,
it still cannot justify what Musharraf did 3 weeks ago. They, even if for form
sake only, have to continuously say that martial law should be removed, and
the Constitution and basic rights restored.
Under the circumstances if the bigger parties of Pakistan, PPP, PMLN, the Jamaat, JUI and so on, boycott the elections, and if elections go ahead
under these circumstances, there will be no credibility for these elections
anywhere in the world. Musharraf might succeed in bringing his selected
group back in power, but it is very unlikely that that arrangement will
work beyond a few days or a few months.
631

On a matter of principle too, if the aim is to get democratic rule

established and entrenched in Pakistan, a boycott of the elections, under
the present conditions, is the only choice open for political parties. If
political parties agree to contest the elections under martial law and with the
judiciary as it is, they will only legitimize what Musharraf has done. As it is,
just the fact that most parties have chosen to file nomination papers before
deciding about the boycott, has led many people in the administration and
the Q League to say that this act of filing nomination papers implies that
these parties have accepted the legality of what was done by Musharraf on
November 3.
If the objective of the politicians is to establish a system that creates a
reasonably well functioning representative system that allows people some
power to articulate their demands and some ability to elect people on that
basis, then the foundational principles of such a system will have to be
established for all and will have to be grounded beyond question. Rule based
on a Constitution and judiciary that can effectively check to ensure that the
Constitution is being followed are the bare minimum for such system
If the larger parties do not boycott the elections and accept the
current conditions and then go to polls in January, the country will
definitely lose big-time and for years and years to come. The choice for
politicians seems clear. Let us see how the game unfolds.
Abdul Rauf from Fateh Jang wrote: The way Imran Khan has
emerged as a leading opposition figure due to his clear and strong
political vision has given a ray of hope to his nation of 160 million. I fully
agree with his decision to boycott the elections as they will likely be unfair
in any case but feel a little sad that no other political party has taken such a
stand.
One has to be a perfect fool not to admit the bias of the Election
Commission, especially after it allowed a serving General to contest the
presidential elections in clear violation of the Constitution of Pakistan. I am
sure had all these parties decided to boycott the elections, the credibility of
the whole exercise would be zero in the eyes of the international
community.
The regime has been rather sure that Benazir would not boycott
the elections and, indeed, the lady has helped the dictatorship flourish by
her decision to contest. The government strategists planned it in a very tricky
632

way knowing fully well that our politicians lust for power would not let
them sit out of the process under any circumstance. Unfortunately, this has
worked and none except Imran Khan has stuck to the people-driven agenda.
Inayatullah opined: If politics is mostly about power securing and
retaining it both Musharraf and Benazir are doing quite well. One has it
and would like to keep it; the other is working hard to grab it. She, to a large
extent, has managed to free herself from the handicap of a number of
corruption cases pending against her in the courts.
She has finally announced that PPP would go ahead and take
part in the elections. This she says is being done under protest. The plea
advanced is that, better to contest polls than to give the kings parties the
benefit of an open field, to stage a come-back.
Nawaz Sharif falls in a different category. He is a hard nut to
crack. Musharrafs recent visit to Saudi Arabia, so the speculation goes, had
much to do with Nawaz Sharifs possible return to Pakistan. conflicting
reports about the Generals visit ranging from asking the Saudi government
to keep him in exile and placing restrictions on his political activities, to his
imminent return, have been appearing in the press.
Now that the PPP has announced that it will not boycott the elections,
what are prospects of these being fair, free and transparent? Not very
bright if one takes into consideration:
General Pervez Musharrafs openly supporting the Q League which
helped him win the presidency;
The restrictions on the freedom of expression and assembly;
The suspension of the Constitution;
The negation of fundamental rights;
Purging of the judiciary;
Muzzling of the media;
Arrest and brutal treatment of the lawyers, human rights activists,
politicians and students protesting the imposition of emergency;

633

 An uneven playing field by keeping a major national leader out of the

country; and
Induction of partisan caretaker governments at the centre and in the
provinces.
Considering that he commands the loyalty and respect of the army
most of the senior officers are more or less handpicked by him and he may
find himself continuing to throw his weight around. One may also remember
that unlike previous presidents he can wield considerable influence as
chairman of the National Security Council. He also enjoys the power to
appoint heads of the armed forces army, navy and air force. He can
dissolve the elected assemblies and dismiss the government.
Above all so used to exercising unquestioned authority he has been
for more than 8 years and conscious as he is of his having acquired a supra
national stature, to expect that he would let a prime minister go his own way
or ignore him would be unrealistic. Pakistanis are in, for a lot more
struggle to win back democracy.
The target of Musharrafs second military coup was the judiciary.
Despite the fact that analysts realized that the brave commando had
knocked out the judiciary for good, the voices in their favour continued to
be raised. The meting of inhuman treatment to senior lawyers and judges
was widely condemned.
The Nation wrote: Give all injuries in one go but spread out acts of
kindness and mercy over time, maximizing the utility they will yield you. Or
so Machiavelli said. The Florentines advice, never out of style in the
country, is applied with equal measure these days. The Punjab government
released 150 political prisoners on Wednesday, including hunger striking
Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf Chief Imran Khan and PML-N Acting President
Javed Hashmi. Key leaders of the lawyers movement, however, still
remain in jail.
Citing the worsening situation of extremist violence in the country as
one of the primary reasons behind the suspension of the Constitution, the
government has cracked down on all but the extremists: the judiciary, the
activists and leaders of liberal and centrist parties, civil society members and
the press. The government should release all detenus. Apart from being
untrue to the fundamental rights in what used to be the Constitution, which
634

has not been thrown away forever, detentions are also extremely
counterproductive for the government; they only create more unrest.
Couple of days later, the newspaper added: While one can justifiably
complain that the spate of post-November 3 arrests were unjust and contrary
to the established norms of the democratic right to peaceful protest, the
stories of the cruel and callous manner of treatment meted out to certain
high-profile detainees tend to compound the sense of injustice. There
have been allegations of torture and unbearable conditions of the cells in
which some prominent people were held
With worldwide condemnation of the imposition of emergency and
the unconstitutional acts carried out under its cover, the continued arrests of
lawyers and political activists, who have not been lucky enough to be among
the 3,500 odd so far released, and restrictions on the movement of judges,
who did not take oath under the PCO, have become a cruel joke. It is about
time the emergency was lifted and measures taken under it rescinded to
create right conditions for fair and free elections.
Zeeshan Ahmad from Lahore opined: Musharraf defended his
undeclared martial law in the name of Emergency by creating the
impression that it was essential to fight terrorists. We all know even
under the Constitution of Pakistan; army can be called out to aid civilian
authority in the restoration of law and order. Now even Army Act has been
amended to allow military to court martial any civilian suspected of terrorist
activity against the military. I see no justification for this law
The President also tries to justify the Emergency by alleging
Supreme Court to be lenient on terrorists. He gave example of the famous
missing persons case. I would like to ask him why state authorities were
unable even to lodge an FIR and without single evidence, how could a
court of law allow intelligence agencies to keep the citizens of Pakistan
indefinitely.
Dr Ghayur Ayub from London observed: Two points caught my
attention during General Musharrafs recent press conference. First, the
nervousness took me back to the day when he had faced the parliament in
the only joint session he has ever attended. After that day, he refused to
address the parliament ever again, accusing the opposition of being illmannered.

635

Second, the stance he took against CJ Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry

for taking action against the privatization process to gain, as he put it, cheap
popularity. If saving billions of rupees of the exchequer in the Steel Mills
case was an action aimed at cheap popularity, I pray the Almighty
blesses this nation with a few more such people who could take many more
similar actions for cheap popularity.
Musharrafs thrust for purging the system of justice included an
amendment to the Legal Practitioners Act. The Nation commented: The
amendment to the Legal Practitioners Act is perceived as the latest in the
series of attempts by the executive to suppress the legal community.
Prior to the amendment, the Bar Council was basically run by its ViceChairman, a lawyer elected by his peers. The Chairmans post, held by the
Attorney General in an ex-officio capacity, was a largely ceremonial one.
The amendment now gives lawyers affected in any way by a decision of the
Bar Council or the Bar Associations an appeal to the Chairman, whose
decision on the said matter will be final. Furthermore, lawyers can now be
punished for misconduct.
In the tussle between the legal fraternity and the military regime that
started after the judicial reference against the deposed Chief Justice on the
9th of March, the Bar Council took to suspending the licenses of certain
lawyers who they thought were being insincere to the cause of the lawyers.
By making his decision, it is now the government that is going to
ultimately decide on the matter
The emergence of legal fraternity as the biggest point of
concentration and the biggest mobilizing factor for resentment against the
government came as a surprise to the military regime, as it has for observers
throughout the world. The idea of lawyers being at the forefront of a
democracy struggle, ahead of workers, students and even activists of the
proper political parties is getting significant news space in the international
media, primarily but not entirely because of the novelty of the sight.
However, it is the judiciary itself that is actually in the crosshairs.
Even though the not so plaint judiciary has refused to take oath under the
PCO, the government has taken steps like empowering the Supreme Court to
shift cases from one High Court to another. Similarly, the treatment meted
out to the deposed judges also lacks grace

636

The newspaper had also expressed its views on establishment of

Islamabad High Court. When one looks at it in isolation, the decision to set
up a High Court for the Islamabad Capital Territory is just another
unnecessary step It also looks a bit odd considering the number of
judges in the Supreme Court itself has been reduced from 17 to 12 while the
planned High Court is, reportedly, going to have nine judges.
But when one pieces this decision with another recent decision of the
government, it is evident that this is not merely a case of inefficient
management. The recent ordinance enabling the Supreme Court to transfer a
case from one High Court to another means that any and all cases that truly
matter can be shifted over to the Islamabad High Court where they will be
heard by the bench composed of judges that the government has handpicked.
This will have serious
The PCO Supreme Court had wasted no time in delivering the goods.
One of its important delivery pertained to Musharrafs eligibility. The
Nation wrote: The full bench of the Supreme Court has dismissed the last
petition challenging the eligibility of General Musharraf as a presidential
candidate What needs to be done simultaneously is to use his newly
acquired powers to lift the emergency, described as virtual-martial law both
at home and abroad, as it deprives people of their basic rights by making
them unjustifiable. Not a day has passed since November 3 without
countrywide protests by political workers, lawyers, journalists and members
of civil society against the repressive measures, besides eliciting
condemnation from abroad and a threat of the cancellation of membership
of the Commonwealth.
President Musharrafs position as a civilian head of state should
provide him an opportunity to redefine his role. Instead of being
considered partisan, openly championing the cause of the PML and at times
presiding over its meetings, he needs to be seen as a neutral head of state
willing to provide a level playing field to all parties
The crisis created by the removal of judges who declined to take
oath under the PCO has to be resolved properly, so that the judiciary is
widely seen to be free. The three-stage plan for a transition to full
democracy enunciated by the President would be meaningless unless the
Parliament is treated as supreme and full powers are vested in the elected
government in accordance with the practice of parliamentary democracies.

637

Ikramullah opined: The last constitutional petition filed by Dr Zahoor

Mehdi was rejected by the SC on Thursday, thus clearing the decks for the
final and official announcement of the presidential election. It can be
safely presumed, unless nature stands in the way, that by the end of
November Musharraf would be sworn in as the President of Pakistan.
The constitutional and legal battle against Musharraf thus over,
the political battles will continue as part of the democratic norms. At the
external level there is pressure on Islamabad against the lifting of the
emergency. The Commonwealth has imposed a temporary ban on Pakistan
till its removal. Musharraf has given a commitment to the British PM that it
would be lifted as soon as possible preferably before the elections
So this is not an ordinary country. We are the centre of global
attention for being the only Muslim country having nuclear capability, which
does not fit in with the strategic strategy of many countries. This is reflected
in the manner such countries are blatantly interfering in Pakistans internal
affairs. Would these countries have dared to behave in a similar manner
towards India?
Zeeshan Ahmad from Lahore opined: With regard to state of
emergency in Pakistan, I would like to emphasize that there is no use of
democracy or election without strong judiciary and strong media. It is
nonsense to ask for democracy while these two organs of state are being
destroyed by the illegal military regime.
This way, even if we are able to hold an election, we will have
another corrupt era of democratic rule like we had from 1988 to 1999.
Have you noticed that not a single word about judges has come from USA
or from EU! Had they really been supporters of the rule of law, they could
never have missed this opportunity.
Remember, the struggle for rule of law can be launched by our
own people alone. Why do we always look towards the outsiders to help us?
The rule of law is as important for any other citizen as it is for lawyers. The
lawyers cant struggle unless their movement is corroborated by general
public. It is true that lawyers do have extra responsibility to the extent that
they must guide the nation as to what is legal and what is illegal. But I think
they have discharged this duty. Now it has become an equal responsibility of
the people to join the struggle for rule of law.

638

US-BB-Musharraf Nexus held on despite appearance of fault

lines. Farzana Raja wrote: The circumstances have deteriorated to a greater
extent. By sacking Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry for second
time along with eight other judges and ordering their confinement General
Musharraf crossed all the limits of democratic norms just to perpetuate his
rule.
The entire leadership of the lawyers community has been thrashed
and incarcerated. While the civilized world was deeply shocked by his
draconian action he kept terming the present situation true democracy and
the third transitory phase towards democracy. Ironically, these peaceful
protesters were booked under terrorism act and would be tried by anti
terrorist courts.
The defeatist attitude of Chaudhrys became more obvious when they
tried to stop the PPPs long march from Lahore through incarceration of Ms
Bhutto and the arrest of 1,300 PPP activists from Punjab. In the entire
episode of this negative politicking the General was a silent spectator. This
clearly indicates his patronage to his protgs who otherwise are political
orphans.
This left Ms Benazir Bhutto with no other alternative but to denounce
the General who not only violated the Constitution, imposed martial law,
bulldoze judiciary and denied a level playing field to the political parties.
Now, Ms Bhutto as a true leader and warrior has taken upon herself the
responsibility to liberate this country from the clutches of a military ruler
with the support of all the political parties irrespective of their internal
contradictions.
The lawyers community, the muzzled media and members of civil
society have been called upon to support her in this fight for freedom. Ms
Benazir Bhutto has also appealed to the western powers and rest of the
civilized world to come to the rescue of the people of Pakistan, who are
going through a nightmare.
General Mirza Aslam Beg opined: The emergency, which disguises
martial law, is a coup against the judiciary, the media and the emerging
civil society, who for the first time are trying to find a place in the struggle
for democracy and the rule of law, whereas, emergency is the last desperate
attempt by the status-quo group to retain power. The world community also
has realized that the general cannot pull it off anymore.
639

Negroponte was in town, to convey the same message. American

attention, therefore, is now focused on regime change, through a peaceful
democratic process. Benazir Bhutto having sensed this change has
decided to take a U-turn, from Deal to Defiance disassociating herself
from the status-quo plan of General Musharraf, and seeking
accommodation with the opposition. She is in contact with the APDM
leadership and has joined the opposition parties movement against the
emergency and the military rule.
Benazirs U-turn is purely a political strategy, which began with a
Deal with the Americans and the army, to enter Pakistan with all the
fanfare of global publicity and with full understanding of sharing power and
privileges with the dictatorial regime. Thus she gained the status of a popular
leader of Pakistan a great political asset, which she is now trying to cash,
as part of the main opposition against the government.
Within a period of less than a month from October 18 to
November 16 the political situation has changed drastically. The
Muttahida Majlis-e-Ammal stands divided and marginalized and the
moderates, liberals and the secular political parties, the bar, the bench and
the media, all have gravitated together, to build-up the political opposition.
There is no difference of opinion in their demands for end of emergency,
restoration of the Constitution, formation of national government and
restoration of the independence of the judiciary.
We are living in very interesting times. The state of emergency, the
cruelty and the curbs on political activists, judiciary and the media, serve as
the catalyst, bringing out the best of the three forces vying for power:
One: The military government, supported by the newly formed caretaker
cabinet, has packed up over fifty dissenting honourable judges and has put
behind the bars, many activists of the bar, the bench, the media, the leaders
and workers of the political parties
Two: The bar and the bench and the media, since March 9, 2007,
have launched the struggle for the independence of the judiciary and
supremacy of the law. Their struggle has helped provide a new
consciousness to the civil society, which is gradually asserting itself. In fact,
it is the Nerve Centre of the movement for change.
Three: a grand national opposition has emerged, with Benazir Bhutto
as the prominent leader, vying for political power and freedom from military
640

rule and has waged an unprecedented struggle for restoration of democracy

to salvage the tarnished image of the country.
In fact, the movement for democracy and the independence of the
judiciary are on a parallel track, seeking supremacy of law, social justice
and freedom, while the forces of status-quo, are on the retreat. The
unexpected, therefore has happened, promising a new socio-political order
emerging out of a situation of internal chaos, conflict and confrontation.
Dr Ijaz Shafi Gilani is right, when he says, General, if you were to
seek my counsel, I would say the most honourable course for you is to Quit
and proceeds to add: I disagree with the view which considers Pakistan a
divided nation. In a curious way it has never been so united on
something, which is so central to civilized behaviour. If one were able to
sustain it, it would be time to celebrate.
Aziz-ud Din Ahmad commented on Negropontes visit. It appears
now that Deputy Secretary Negropontes visit was aimed at advising
General Musharraf how to steal the elections without annoying his critics
back home rather than putting pressure on him to hold free and fair
elections. General Musharraf has already achieved major benefits from the
state of emergency.
By sending home over 100 judges and packing the courts with
justices of his choice he has ensured that the judiciary is no more breathing
down his neck. He has appointed caretaker governments comprising
loyalists and an Election Commission which the opposition has reasons not
to trust. Since emergency, over five thousand activists have been bundled off
to distant jails after being maltreated and in cases severely beaten up by
police. Near foolproof arrangements for stealing the elections are in
place.
Ground has already been prepared for getting the erstwhile
ruling alliance back into power and if that cant be done for having a hung
parliament like the one in 2002 which the offstage players can subsequently
manoeuvre according to their will. While Bhutto was debarred from holding
a public meeting in Rawalpindi and taking out a rally that would have
passed through the major towns of Punjab, the ruling PML was given a free
hand while it gave final touches to its election campaign.

641

And now comes the elections schedule The opposition candidates,

some in jail and others on the run since the imposition of the emergency
have been given three weeks to canvass while General Musharrafs party
has already conducted an election campaign that was spread over for
months.
Keeping in view what continues to happen after Negropontes visit in
Pakistan, many are forced to conclude the brave words he used at his Sunday
press conference demanding Musharraf to doff the uniform, lift the
emergency and release political prisoners were no more than an attempt to
hoodwink the people. Bush Administration is least concerned about
human rights violations in Pakistan and still considers Musharraf an
indispensable ally.
Zaheer Bhatti talked about covert alien agenda and the rulers. With
the declared last blow eventually delivered, it is established that Musharraf
never minces his words, be it the assault on the parliament, Akbar
Bugti, Jamia Hafsa, Northern regions, the judiciary or the Constitution.
This is somewhat better than Ziaul Haq, who termed the Constitution as
nothing but a scrap of paper.
While those in the government camp are enjoying the inevitable
attack on the countrys institutions, there are some who seem to derive
satisfaction from Uncle Sam showing displeasure over the state of
emergency, wanting media curbs removed and detainees freed, in order to
ensure free and fair elections in the country.
Regardless of the fact that all these measures were no guarantee to
fair polls, the Americans rather than urging national reconciliation
across the board, have asked Benazir and Musharraf to mend fences as
if other political entities were irrelevant. To them restoration of judiciary did
not matter since it was the main reason for declaration of emergency sensing
a possible verdict against Musharrafs candidature in uniform for the next
term.
It appalls discerning minds to see how blissfully all political parties
are engrossed in the ensuing power game in the name of the masses,
while the covert American agenda being slowly but surely accomplished.
Instead of an armed attack on nuclear Pakistan, it had been decided to strike
at its ideological roots and fabric, in line with the 9/11 Commission
recommendations, by blurring its identity through cultural invasion in the
642

name of globalization and confidence-building with the belligerent

neighbour, helping it confuse the Kashmir issue with so-called terrorism, and
in the process making inroads into Pakistans social fibre.
Playing the pied piper for the West in her bid for a share in the long
evading power, it may have benefited Benazir in the short-term to declare
for consumption of the power brokers BB nevertheless seems to be
oblivious of the implications of such a stance, impinging directly on state
sovereignty and its strategic interests, which already stood compromised
under the present regime, triggering a spate of suicide bombing and bringing
Pakistan to the brink of civil strife. Unintended as it might have been,
Benazir resorting to the Sindh card at the expense of Punjab, might just
boomerang on her.
It had been a foregone conclusion though, that Benazirs Pakistan
Peoples Party, with its secular and liberal outlook, was a natural ally of the
Musharraf school of thought as opposed to the MMAs religious agenda, but
before aligning herself she would need to tread carefully, with the mood
of the public this time, which is very different. This is also a fact that the
General, weary of the political potential of BBs PPP, wished to keep her at
bay as long as possible, and played the religious fanaticism card to the West
with some degree of success for the better part of his tenure.
The Americans deliberately played ball initially, as their immediate
objective was to find a reliable personal proxy rather than a viable political
government in Pakistan. Even though Pakistan time and again cried wolf to
the West using the religious card the Americans only bought it until such
time they looked for other options, which they have exercised the imminent
choice of Benazir who now presents a greater threat.
It may have suited the West to back the lady in a bid to apparently
improve the democratic faade of Pakistan in order to rehabilitate its own
global image, but in actual fact, it was to find a like-minded partner for
Musharraf towards the fulfillment of its covert agenda
The initiation of plans for the fulfillment of this covert agenda dates
back when RAND Corporation and Brooklings Institute floated the third
option for the resolution of Kashmir, the unfinished agenda of partition of
the Subcontinent, and an area the Americans have eyed since long, to use as
their strategic base for over-seeing China

643

It is fallacy among most of us who tend to get carried away by the

assumption that the US stood defeated in Iraq and Afghanistan over its
ill-advised policy of using force to root out what it had styled as terrorism,
and that it would therefore not risk warming another war theatre in Muslim
countries like Iran, which it actually fears due to its potential nuclear force,
but continues to blame it for fomenting terrorism in Iraq.
The fact is that the US would never want a solution to the
problem of so-called terrorism it had so painstakingly created, and would
rather ensure that it proliferated through ethnic, sectarian or whatever means
in targeted countries. In this direction, the Americans are actually
succeeding. The Pakistani society for instance was never divided between
moderates and extremists, but the seed for such polarization is being planted
through Western agents, and any efforts at national rapprochement, is being
pre-empted.
This is why any suggestions of negotiations and jirgas with
Pakistans tribesmen, are not only spurned by the West but on each such
occasion, American emissaries get into a scramble, shuttle back and forth
holding out an improved carrot, urging Pakistani authorities to do more and
hit harder The sooner Pakistan sees through the American game plan,
the better it would be for the governments in the countries like Pakistan,
and those among the allies who are being used.
Let us face it, that none of the main political parties have lived up
even remotely to the ideals of their mentors. Phrases like in the supreme
national interest and Pakistan comes first and serving the masses etc
have all been rendered meaningless to the people of Pakistan. Right now
Pakistan is faced with its worst crisis of identity and sovereignty and its poor
masses are gasping for breath, while the rulers and contenders to the throne
are obsessed with self-aggrandizement in the name of serving the masses.
Husain Haqqani was of the view that intervention was induced by the
establishment. The return of former PM Nawaz Sharif to a popular
welcome after seven years of exile, on a special plane provided by the King
of Saudi Arabia, serves as a reminder of the folly that is military
intervention in politics. Mr Sharif should have been allowed to return to his
homeland when the Supreme Court ruled that he had an inalienable (right) to
do so.

644

Having failed to implement the law of the land, the General has now
capitulated to the demands from the Saudi Royal family to enable the same
outcome that would have resulted from following the apex courts ruling.
Quite clearly, foreign powers that provide aid to Pakistans ruling
generals are more important in their eyes than Pakistans own
institutions.
Mr Sharifs return should end the unjustified attacks on Ms Bhutto
for negotiating her return to the country. Every politician must know how
to negotiate and Mr Sharif has leveraged himself with the help of his
Saudi mentors just as Ms Bhutto effectively deployed western public
opinion in her favour to create political space.
It is already apparent that at least one segment of the Pakistani
establishment now wants Mr Sharif to work towards reunification of the
two factions of the PML. Mr Sharif might be less acceptable to Musharraf
personally but there is greater acceptance among Pakistans conservative
military establishment for him than for Ms Bhutto and the PPP.
Pakistans military establishment has consistently looked towards
Britain and the US for political guidance though it also gets irritated when
their advice is not to its liking. Under military rule, Pakistan is so dependent
on external assistance and capital flows that the opinions in London and
Washington, and to some extent Riyadh, significantly impact the Generals
political choices.
The way Pakistani military officers are trained, they believe they
have the right to give orders to subordinates and an obligation to take order
from superiors. In the view of Pakistans ruling generals, all Pakistanis
are their subordinates. The only people superior to the Pakistan army are
those who pay for Pakistans militarization and development the aid
donors and investing countries.
Most international intervention in Pakistani politics has been in
favour of and at the behest of Pakistans establishment. Pakistanis must
work out their politics among themselves. Alternatively, if Pakistans
external patrons and friends make it clear that they do not want Pakistan to
become Myanmar-lite, a nation dominated by the military forever;
Pakistans military would start negotiating with the countrys political
parties and civil society instead of dictating to them. Then, Pakistan could
emerge as a normal country with predictable patterns of political change.
645

Sayed Ali Zafar expressed his views on Wests agenda for Pakistan.
Pakistans importance in the world scene today cannot be
underestimated. Though Pakistan is not oil rich, it is an Islamic country
with a vast intellectual base, possessing nuclear technology and has the
advantage of being located geographically in one of the most strategic places
on earth to top it all, Pakistan is widely believed to be an epicenter of
terrorist activities in the world, and hence it remains an area of great interest
to western powers.
While it is true that often we have allowed ourselves to be used by
others for their agenda the root cause for the lack of democracy in
Pakistan lies within ourselves and we cannot hide behind the excuse of
interference by western powers. Powerful countries cannot be blamed for
advancing their interests at the expense of weaker ones if allowed to do so
If you are not jealous of your sovereignty and give an opportunity to others
to interfere in your affairs, then there should be no doubt in anyones mind
that people will use you for their personal gain.
It was not any foreign power, which prompted the sacking of CJP
or required the president to proclaim PCO or emergency and damage the
process towards democracy but the unilateral action of the president, who is
blamed to have acted in personal interest
They (West) consider democracy to be the possible alternative for
Pakistan. Believing that Ms Bhutto has vast support of Pakistani people and
can share power with President Musharraf, UK and US have brokered a
political marriage between the two. The aim of the West is obvious selfinterest but holding free and fair elections is a condition precedent to
achieve it.
What should we as a nation do now in these circumstances?
Obviously, we must not derail the process of elections as that would be
inviting more authoritarian rule. We need to realize that at the current
moment it is vital for Pakistanis to be able to elect their own representatives
who, when elected, can then work and more alienated from their rulers and
the armed forces.
Having achieved the promise of elections, the positive side is that
presently all forces can unite to see the end of emergency. People of
Pakistan are up in arms against it and the policy and thinking in the west too
is that emergency and free and fair elections are incompatible. Most of their
646

think tanks have come to the conclusion that elections under emergency will
be a sham and will only lead to agitation and further turmoil in the country
paving way for extreme elements to flourish.
Surely, President Musharraf can read the writing on the wall that
he has to lift emergency. Political parties must know that their
participation in the election can result in the early lifting of the martial law
and the reverse can prolong it.
Pro-Musharraf Humayun Gauhar saw Pakistan under termite attack.
Things were going honky dory. There was no problem in corruptioninducing democracys progress. It is a game played by the ruling classes for
their own aggrandizement. It does nothing for the poor except impoverish
them further and cause chaos and eventual army rule. Elections were going
to be held on time, Musharraf would have become a civilian president, a new
elected government would have been installed and there would have been a
quantum leap forward. Instead, democracys train was picked up and
flung off the tracks. What went wrong?
America attacked Afghanistan. Inevitably, it lost, as every adventurer
had done before it. The Taliban and al-Qaeda were pushed into Pakistan.
Musharraf was expected to clear the debris, not part of our deal with
America. He did as much as he could earning great opprobrium for himself
and the army. America refused to understand that while Musharraf too
wanted to be rid of foreign terrorists, he could hardly be expected to ask
his army, trained to fight a conventional enemy, to kill 10 innocent
Pakistanis for one terrorist, all Muslims. It went against their grain.
America wouldnt understand that we needed a two-pronged strategy: force
and negotiated agreements with our own tribes
But America had another agenda. It is convinced that Musharraf is
playing a double game, pretending to go against the Taliban while actually
going with them to use as bargaining chips later. Coupled with his earlier
refusals to let America near our nuclear programme or get hold of Dr A Q
Khan; America fell out of love with Musharraf.
It knows that attacking Pakistan frontally would transform the world
into the Planet of the Apes. Nearly six times as big as Iraq and eight times
as big as Afghanistan, Pakistan has to be destroyed from the inside, like
termites do. America unleashed the propaganda that since Pakistan

647

wouldnt or couldnt contain the terrorists our nuclear weapons would soon
fall into their hands.
The Benazir move started about three years ago. That was PlanA. Out of the blue the irrelevant British exhumed her from the political
graveyard and made her relevant again. Mark Lyll Grant, the British High
Commissioner to Pakistan, arranged a meeting between Benazir and Jack
Straw, then British foreign secretary. Straw said that America had to be
involved. The move could be made, but first Musharraf had to be softened.
Musharraf provided just that opportunity when he went for the
chief justice on March 9. It backfired badly. Politicians, political parties and
the political process having been discredited totally, the politics of
opposition quietly moved into the hands of the media, lawyers, and civil
society. Their demand: restore the CJ. America saw the opportunity and
quickly made Plan-B: Musharraf would be weakened or ousted through the
judiciary
Musharraf was badly mauled. He was now at the mercy of the
Supreme Court, which would soon decide whether he was even eligible to
be president. Now plan-A came into action. America persuaded Musharraf
that his best bet was to let Benazir off the hook and back into the country.
Together they could fight terrorism better. Benazir made it plain that she was
coming to implement the US agenda
Plan-A backfired when America realized that far from being the
most popular leader and the largest party in Pakistan, Benazir and her
PPP couldnt even win a simple majority America realized that it had
backed the wrong horse. It didnt bother to hide its disenchantment.
Musharraf made his move. He imposed Emergency-Plus as army
chief, not president. He introduced another Provisional Constitutional Order
that required judges to take a fresh oath, if invited. The anti-Musharraf
judges of the Supreme Court were ousted before they could oust Musharraf.
He shifted the political paradigm again, as the CJ issue and the rise of a
nascent civil society and Benazirs entry had shifted it thrice earlier. Neither
the Americans nor Benazir were prepared for this.
They asked Musharraf to lift the emergency fast. Musharraf took
the wind out of their sails by letting the assemblies dissolve on schedule,
making caretaker governments, announcing an election date and confirming

648

that he would retire from the army before taking oath as president. But he
refused to lift the emergency or provide any timeline.
Plan-C came into action bring the new vice army chief, soon to
become chief, to the fore. John Negroponte, that slayer of governments, met
the vice chief at least twice a few days ago. Why? What business does the
US deputy secretary of state have meeting our vice chief?
The Washington Post of November 11 gives us the answer in its
editorial titled The General Must Go. The breathtaking paragraph of the
editorial by these false purveyors of democracy is Gen Ashfaq Kayani is a
pro-Western moderate who supports the US-sponsored counterinsurgency
program
Obviously Negroponte didnt get any joy out of General Kayani, if
that is what he was foolish enough to suggest to him. General Musharraf
issued another ordinance that keeps him in-charge of the emergency even
after he becomes civilian president. Suddenly, Plan-D came into action.
Get Nawaz Sharif back to compound the confusion. Saudi Arabia said that
it could not forcibly hold Sharif back if Benazir had been allowed to return.
Musharrafs party, the PML-Q, is feeling abandoned used,
abused and discarded. Sharif has a much greater following, especially in
the Punjab that holds the key, than Benazir does. But popularity isnt
enough. There has to be a party machine and winning candidates. It remains
to be seen what he does. If he gangs up with Benazir, as America would
want, they would win the most seats, but can you see fire and water mixing.
If Sharif and Chaudhry cousins put their egos aside and reunite
into the formidable juggernaut that the PML was, only it would form the
government, with partners thrown in for national integration. Pakistan would
be on its way, as President Musharraf always intended, and America would
be thwarted. Enter Plan-E If you cant lickem, joinem. If even that
doesnt work, America would unleash Plan-F; If you cant lickem,
killem. But God the ultimate protector is always there.
Some analysts held the regime responsible instead of blaming foreign
interference. Shamshad Ahmad opined that we have pushed the country
Back to Stone Age, ourselves. Whether or not Richard Armitage said it,
we have already gone back to the stone age. The US did not have to bomb
us to make Tora Bora out of Pakistan. We have done it ourselves. Like the

649

ape-men of the Paleolithic and Neolithic periods of the Stone Age, we are
also fighting among ourselves as enemies of each other, and our sole
equipment for solving our problems now is our instinct devoid of any
tolerance and rationality.
A country without constitution or the rule of law and where there is
no independent judiciary and no fundamental freedoms and rights is no
better than the Stone Age cultures, and has no place in the contemporary
comity of civilized nations. Government and politics, as the world knows
them, are alien to Pakistan. Our scene politically bears resemblance to
Thomas Hobbes concept of primitive anarchy marked by a war of one
against all and to Rousseaus idealization of the noble savage.
Perhaps, Hegel spoke for us when he said that man can never
learn anything from history. We have never been prone to learning any
lessons from history. For us, history is nothing more than a tableau of
crimes, follies and misfortunes of our ancestors. Woefully, our history as a
nation is replete with a series of crises and tragedies which has left us
politically and economically unstable, socially fragmented and physically
disintegrated. And yet, we are bent upon living through our history without
any remorse or respite.
Worlds history is replete with tales of self-centred rulers who
forgot that power never endures and considered their reign as a mere
extension of their egos and idiosyncrasies. The seventeenth century French
monarch, Louis XIV, was one classic example of this mentality. His famous
dictum: Letat, cest moi (I am the state) was an expression of arrogance and
an affront to democratic norms
The finality of those words enunciated with a note of casual selfassurance did speak of the kings determination to have his way but also
showed his contempt for the sovereign will of the people. It is the same
contempt that is being shown today to the sovereign will of the people of
Pakistan. We are now learning what a dual office ruler in Pakistan
considers to be the limits of his power nothing. He owns the country and
runs it with the law of tooth and claw.
In Pakistan, gross abuse of power, frequent assaults on constitutional
supremacy and independence of judiciary, protracted spells of military rule
and poor and corrupt governance have not only cost us our entire
independent statehood, but also left us without any social contract. Ours is
650

a dismal record of constitutional and political delinquency and

unrelenting omissions and commissions with total insensitivity to what the
contemporary world thins of us.
We dont care if the Commonwealth has again expelled us for
violating its fundamental values. Like an enfant terrible we feel proud in
being censured in global forums. We dont care for any value system. We
have no conviction. We dont take anything to heart. Look, how gracefully
we digested the tragedy of 1971 We are not afraid of repeating the same
blunders, and are ready for more of similar tragedies and debacles.
In Pakistan, as in England of the Cromwellian era, fundamental
values of freedom, democracy and human dignity have been breached
with impunity. Constitutions have been violated in letter and spirit with
custom-made judiciary always available to sanctify military coups.
Institutional paralysis has kept the whole nation disenfranchised
It is time we woke up to the ominous reality. Pakistan is being
weakened methodically by keeping it engaged on multiple external as well
as domestic fronts. We are being ingeniously torn apart brick by brick
with the ultimate goal of taking out, in a worst case scenario, our nuclear
capability.
Our foremost challenge in this situation is not what we are required
to do for others interest; it is what we can do to serve our own national
interests and to safeguard our national assets, including our sovereign
independence and national dignity. This we can do under a new genuinely
elected civilian government rooted in the will of the people and based on
constitutional supremacy, rule of law and independence of judiciary.
Javid Husain wrote: Musharrafs second coup on November 3 was
against the system that he himself had established with the assurance that it
had finally closed the door of military intervention in politics, thereby giving
the lie to his claim. Let us see what the president himself had to say about
the state of the country on the occasion when he, acting as the chief of army
staff, imposed a state of emergency throughout Pakistan, suspended the
Constitution and issued a Provisional Constitutional Order to assume
absolute powers, purge the superior judiciary of those judges who had
shown signs of independence, suspended the fundamental rights and muzzle
Pakistans media. It goes without saying that the COAS under the

651

Constitution does not have the power to take any of these actions which
amounted to the imposition of martial law.
The proclamation of emergency begins by stressing: Whereas
there is visible ascendancy in the activities of extremists and incidents of
terrorist attacks, including suicide bombings, IED explosions, rocket firing
and bomb explosions and the banding together of some militant groups have
taken such activities to an unprecedented level of violent intensity posing a
grave threat to the life and property of the citizens of Pakistan. This
statement after eight years of Musharrafs rule and six years of his joining
the so-called war on terrorism was a clear admission of the utter failure of
his government
The measures adopted by the General on November 3 remind me of
the story of the doctor and the patient. It is said that a doctor was called
by a sick man for treatment of his illness. The doctor prescribed some
medicine for the patient. Unfortunately, the medicine instead of helping
worsened the condition of the patient. So the doctor was again called. The
patient expected that the doctor would change the medicine. But the doctor
instead doubled the dose of his earlier medicine bringing the patient to the
deaths door.
The governments rule and policies are primarily responsible for
the mess in which we are, the assumption of absolute powers by the
president and the continuation of the old policies with renewed vigour are
likely to prolong the nations agony and worsen its problems.
It is true that the newly constituted Supreme Court has validated
General Musharrafs election as the president. The Generals election thus
may have acquired a modicum of legality allowing him to take the oath after
taking off his uniform. However, his election will continue to lack political
legitimacy because of the manner in which the Supreme Courts validation
has been obtained following the promulgation of the PCO and the removal
of the former judges of the Supreme Court.
The country is in dire need of a radical change in our political
culture. Our political parties must follow the recognized democratic norms
in political activities. Above all, the people of Pakistan must take to task any
party, politician or official who deviates from the Constitution or violates
democratic principles. As they say eternal vigilance is an indispensable
condition for freedom and democracy.
652

Fakir S Ayazuddin observed: The president has proved himself to be

the most outstanding politician in Pakistan, and while he has shown
nervousness at times, he has nonetheless emerged as the outright winner in
the political sweepstakes. He could not have achieved this without the
greed of his adversaries.
Benazir was offered the prime ministership for Makhdoom Amin
Fahim, the leader of the PPP in the National Assembly three times by
Musharraf. She refused all three times, and would settle for none other
than herself. The cost to her party cannot be calculated
At the same time Nawaz Sharif is holding out in Jeddah for an
equally rigid stance in refusing to even speak with Musharraf. While this
maybe a principled position, he must allow Shahbaz to lead the party in his
absence, and continue the struggle within the country. To carry on in this
manner will be a disastrous handicap for his followers, and will diminish the
showing of the N candidates. He also prevented Shahbaz from becoming
the prime minister, which position was offered to him twice.
In the final analysis, it is also important to have an effective
opposition. To counter a rubberstamp parliament, an opposition is essential
to the well being of a nation. With Aitzaz, Amin Fahim, Shahbaz, all
upright, outstanding, capable gentlemen, it is indeed a pity that they were
not given the chance to lead. Perhaps their time has come.
History will surely place the blame solidly on the PPP and the N for
not placing their prime minister when the offer was on the table, directly
resulting in the removal of the Supreme Court judges, the abeyance of the
Constitution, and now the emergency. The nation is paying a very heavy
price.
Yasmin Zahira from Islamabad wrote: No matter what name or label
is given to the so-called Emergency, it still stinks. No matter how full
throated the justifications we hear, they still ring hollow. No one, but no one,
outside the President Generals charmed circle is falling for them. Dont for
a moment believe that just because the public has not spilled out into the
streets, it is resigned to the situation. Its just that these last 8 years, this
oppressed nation has been so cruelly betrayed, so badly mauled and
brutalized, so sunk in the depths of despair that it doesnt have the strength
to agitate in the streets. But they are quietly seething.

653

Perhaps Im still wet behind the ears, but I honestly feel that if love
for Pakistan is really in the blood and bones of the President General, he
would realize that that only thing left for him to do now is to seek the
nations forgiveness and do some atonement for having monstrously
wronged it. And this he can do only if he restores the Constitution and
reinstates the deposed judges.
Dr Farooq Hassan opined: While arguing major constitutional cases
against Musharrafs regime in the Supreme Court of Pakistan since 2000 I
realized that his only agenda was himself. Both the coups of October 12,
1999 and that of November 3, 2007 were staged to save his army chiefs
job In both cases he reacted very strongly. In the former case he removed
the prime minister and suspended the Constitution. In the latter case too he
acted likewise to remake the Supreme Court and place the deposed judges in
detention after proclaiming emergency.
Musharraf justifies his draconian action under the countrys
security concerns. That end is accomplished by jailing of thousands of
political activities opposed to his regime, the leadership of the civil society
and barbarically outlawing all media that is disseminating contemporary
information to the local and the international public by its honest and hard
working journalists.
But he still insists on holding elections as soon as possible, since that
would justify his democratic credentials, but without constitutional
oversight or an independent judiciary. The most explicit narration of this
perspective comes from none other than the president himself. While
talking to the BBC on November 16 he is reported to have said: It was
judges and opposition politicians not he who were trying to derail the
political and democratic process in PakistanI demand an explanation for
his portrayal in the Western media in recent months. Did I go mad Or is it
some elements in the Supreme Court the chief justice and his coterieand
now some elements in the political field.
I need not elaborate this heart-breaking story any further. But this
much is necessary to stress. He keeps harping that the only institution
that works and is trustworthy is the army. Whatever is the qualitative
excellence of this institution is not for me to comment upon.
The present regime has, however, taken the country back where it
started from. Indeed not only there is no Constitution as in 1999 when the
654

General assumed power, there are no political institutions left to speak of. So
much is the realization of this depression that even the kings party, that
motley group of opportunists has been forced to admit that the emergency
must be lifted before the elections; but they do not realize that without the
cover of this emergency, the president himself becomes powerless.
Of the political institutions the establishment has really left none
untouched. The prime ministers office was transformed to that of a
nominated secretary and the assembly made powerless. The powerful public
belief in the rule of law and constitutionalism and the foundations of the
courts of superior judiciary has been maliciously eroded. Now it is openly
said that there is akin to a law of jungle in the country.
Muhammad Aamir from Rawalpindi observed: The country is
virtually paralyzed, every segment of the society is agitating, everyone is
alarmed, all except Gen Musharraf who says that Emergency is in the best
interest of the country. God knows what the General means by best
interest? Our international credit rating has been pummeled due to
Emergency and the ensuing political stability. The world community is
lamenting arrests and curbs on media and civil society. The General seems
least concerned about the outcry.
Wajahat Latif was of the view that an end game has begun.
Musharraf has issued an order under the PCO pre-empting any challenge to
the emergency (or the PCO) in any court of law. But on the pattern of the
17th Amendment, this order will require endorsement from the next
assembly, which is another reason why the 2008 elections will be rigged.
Historically, military takeovers were sanctioned by the courts under
the so-called doctrine of necessity. The judicial independence that we saw
developing from March 9, this year, was too good to be true. The regime
could no longer take the courts for granted.
The so-called emergency and media restrictions have caused a
backlash that has surprised the presidents foreign allies. The legal
community, the media and the civil society are up in arms everywhere,
notwithstanding thousands of arrests, harassment of families and armtwisting of relatives. Students having joined them, the protests are snow
balling

655

With the people out in the street, tempers running high, opposition
considers a boycott of the elections, it is difficult to see how they will be
held on January 8, 2008. The end game has begun in Pakistan. Neither
John Negroponte, nor King Abdullah is able to help the president now who
is hanging from a thread in spite of all the political power concentrated in his
hands. He has lost the support of the people, and in the end that is what
counts.
Nadeem Syed wrote: Things are not turning out to be as simple as
President Musharraf would have imagined when took some extraordinary
steps to protect his rule. With one strike of pen, he undid all the good he has
been taking credit for from his domestic and foreign audience.
The bane of all the trouble and dispute between him and political
forces is still very much there. Rather it is getting harder with each
passing day. It seems the question of his legitimacy as President will
continue to haunt him. Political forces and wide section of society have
more doubts about his candidature as President now than before.
It seems things have come to a pass. They are either not moving
forward according to a plan or pattern or script, as President and his aides
would have wished in the first place. Even the announcement of elections by
President made little difference. Normally, the political parties forget
everything at elections time. But not this time, it appears.
Among public, all eyes are fixed on the political forces. The people
think that lawyers and judges have played their part to restore democracy in
the country. Now it is the turn of political forces to play their role and lead
the country out of the prevailing crisis. Hence, it will be very important if
Nawaz Sharif or Benazir Bhutto manages to cobble together a grand alliance
committed fully to dislodge Musharraf.
For the last eight years, country is in a grip of constant political
warfare. Military leaders think only in terms of their institutions and so do
the political leadership. Nobody thinks about the country and its people.
They need a big break from all the politics of self-interest and
opportunism.
Dr Haider Mehdi was optimistic. He was of the view that political
metamorphosis in Pakistan is not like that of Frank Kafka, which produced
vermin. The script for Pakistans future, as a country and a nation, was

656

recently authored in the US by President Bushs neocon administration. The

selected lead role was assigned to the president, portrayed as all-seeing, allknowing, omnipotent, the one amongst 160 million to see the light, the
visionary messiah no one other than the General himself.
A former two-time PM who believes that she has an ancestral
claim and an ordained entitlement to rule this country got another major
role. On an intellectual-political level, she is convinced of the Bush
Administrations war on terror and is willing to do whatever it takes to
please her sponsors demands.
The plot and the theme of the story is to neutralize the misled, the
ignorant dark-coloured ignominious 160 million Pakistanis and turn them,
lock-stock-and-barrel into vermin (creatures of no consequence) to serve
the Western multi-national corporations and American capitalism with an
added noble agenda to promote US global imperialism. The direction of this
theatrical masterpiece was assigned to no one other that the globally wellknown, anti-democratic, pro-dictatorship mastermind spy-cum salesman,
Negroponte.
For the villainous roles in this paramount global production, a
great number of people were cast. On top of the list was the Chief Justice
of Pakistan and other judges of the Supreme Court, the independent media
the legal fraternity and all of civil society. The majority of them were
scripted to be locked up and, accordingly, they have been.
Important extras in the acting team include a banker to paint rosy
pictures by manipulating numbers, a US implant in the Cricket Board to
highlight the virtues of commercialized sports, and several ambitious stage
managers in pursuit of taking endless advantage of the spoils as the
impending chaos provides them the possibility of grabbing the ultimate
prized slot of PM.
Suddenly, the scripted metamorphosis plot took a reversed turn.
The hero started to ad lib (improvise) and refused to play his role strictly by
the original lines written in the plot. The other lead role, skeptical of the
heros intentions, started re-reading the script and editing according to her
own version. The special effects team made enormous errors and the
renowned director fell short of his own expectations failing to keep the
actors absolutely faithful the scripted text. And yet, the theatrics continues.

657

Pakistan is an open-air theatre now. The good news for the

masses is that they will not be instantly transformed into vermin as
was deliberately stipulated in the original script. However, be mindful of the
fact that this might only be a temporary respite. The lead-actor has publicly
stated that he has not learned to surrender. The ominous director of this
play and his boss are known not to give up easily and place very little value
on human life, especially when it is of the people of Muslim faith
The lady assigned the lead role may be shown a light at the end of the
tunnel and that is what will determine her political behaviour by the time
the curtain falls. The endgame may still be hidden in secrecy the special
effects team may still be working in full-gear to pull out incredible surprises
for their audience. Beware anything and everything is possible?
The fact of the matter is that living dangerously in the national
interest should be the mantra of our times. In the new Pakistan, during the
contemporary era, national infidelity has become synonymous with national
honour, political deceit with enlightened moderation, and a government
sponsored counter-cultural movement with liberal values. We are told, on
routine basis, to hate ourselves, to reform ourselves, to despise ourselves,
and to learn to think and live like others.
Be mindful, the civil society in this country has undergone a
metamorphosis of the kind that has ignited its soul it will fight
domestically planned repression, foreign dictates and will not give in to the
theatrical modalities being staged now Be mindful dont try to defeat
Pakistans civil society. Your theatrics will backfire!

REVIEW
What happened on November 3 should have happened to the
judiciary long time back. The judges of the superior judiciary have been
habitually guilty of endorsing illegal and unconstitutional acts of military
dictators and political rulers. The deposed judges must have felt the pain
caused by an illegal and unconstitutional act of Musharraf. It must have hurt
them more when they saw that many amongst the lawyers community were
readily available to fill in the vacancies created by their ouster.

658

Musharraf used a fresh PCO to decontaminate the judiciary on finding

that some of its judges had been infected by the virus of justice and
independence. The time-tested PCO formula has worked to the expectations
of the dictator. He must have been quite pleased with the performance of
PCO-judges.
The Supreme Court not only set aside the petition against emergency
rule, but in doing that it also admonished the deposed judges for creating
conditions which necessitated the imposition of emergency rule. Separately,
the court also urged the ECP to expedite swearing in of Musharraf as
president once he doffs the uniform.
It could be inferred from their remarks that there were certainly some
informer judges in the post-November 3 Supreme Court. They must have
been reporting to Musharraf about the thinking of the judges on various
benches hearing cases pertaining to him and his cronies.
Even on the day Musharraf at last doffed his uniform, he could not
resist indulging in self praise. He uttered quite a few things which are
normally left to be said by others who come to bid a farewell. Quite contrary
to the stark ground realities, he claimed that he was leaving behind a finest
army in the world.
No doubt the army now has more gunship helicopters and it might
have trained harder than the past, but there are other essentials for a finest
army, i.e. its state of morale, degree of motivation and belief in the
righteousness of the cause for which it has to fight. The soldiers of finest
armies do not blow up their comrades in the dining rooms by dozens and
they do not give up fighting in hundreds.
On these counts, Pakistan Army has been at its lowest since its
existence. Musharraf joined a war against Muslims for his personal agenda
and out of fear of the US. His act has shattered the belief of rank and file in
the righteousness of their cause. And by hanging on to power he has
tarnished the image of the army to the extent of its obliteration. It was for
this reason that most of the former generals urged the new COAS to focus
on these aspects.
Musharraf also tried to shower some wisdom by saying that people
come and go but the system (or institutions) must stay. His deeds belied his

659

words of wisdom. He said this about a system which allowed him to be the
COAS for three years; not for nine.
The system also strictly prohibited any soldier from indulging in
politics. He contested presidential election in uniform, not once but twice.
Was he boasting about the system or its molestation at his hands? The fact is
that he has always placed his person above the system.
Analysts had been waiting for this moment hoping that it would be a
major step towards the end of military rule. But, they overlooked an
important aspect: when a snake removes his old skin it emerges in a new and
much shinier outfit and it makes no difference in its venomous capability.
Musharraf and 58-2 (B) will remain a deadly combination.
Some political leaders, Imran and Qazi in particular, have been urging
boycott of general elections. Theoretically, their demand for restoration of
post-emergency status cannot be challenged, but arrogant Musharraf wont
let that happen. Moreover, there is little room for moral principles in politics
of Pakistan.
Even if these leaders earnestly desire restoration of deposed judges
and rule of law, the boycott is not the solution. They must take part in
general elections and secure as many seats in assemblies as possible, despite
the challenge of rigging in polls.
This will ensure that they would remain in the mainstream to raise
their voices for the right cause and hope for undoing some of the illegal acts
of the Musharraf regime. In case of boycott, they would render themselves
as political non-entities and incapable of achieving anything through the
political system in vogue; thus, the boycott could prove self-defeating.
29th November 2007

KNOCK-OUT PUNCH - V
660

Chief Justice Dogar administered oath of presidential office to Mr

Musharraf on 29th November. The renewed president advised the
politicians not to think of boycotting the forthcoming general elections. PPP
pledged to contest as a result of a secret meeting with Musharraf at night
preceding the swearing in ceremony.
Fazl also urged APDM not to repeat blunder of boycotting general
elections. On 1st December, the Returning Officer rejected nomination
papers on Shahbaz Sharif over Sabzazar shootout case. Two days later,
APDM and ARD in a meeting chaired by Benazir and attended by Nawaz
Sharif decided to serve the government with Charter of Demands. Two
alliances reached consensus on all points except reinstatement of judges.
The lawyers kept protesting and police kept beating them black and
white. President of Jaranwala Bar Association became the first victim of the
recently amended Legal Practitioner and Bar Councils Act when a judge
suspended his licence for uttering contemptuous remarks against the court.
The United States hailed Musharrafs pledge to lift emergency rule.
Musharraf, however, blamed the US for crisis in Pakistan because of its
inconsistent support. US diplomats remained busy in saving the BBMusharraf deal.

EVENTS
True to the spirit of you scratch my back, I scratch yours, Chief
Justice Dogar administered oath of presidential office to Mr Musharraf on
29th November; less than four weeks ago Musharraf had done the same to
Dogar. The only difference was that Dogar took oath under Provisional
Constitutional Order but Musharraf chose the lines from the Constitution
Held in Abeyance.
In his speech at the ceremony and later on TV, Musharraf started with
accusing the deposed CJP of conspiring to derail democratic process in
Pakistan. He justified his November 3 illegal act arguing that it had become
necessary to save the system and now that his election has been declared
legal, the emergency could be lifted from December 16.

661

In his familiar arrogant style, Musharraf advised the politicians not

to think of boycotting the forthcoming general elections. He also urged his
foreign backers to be patient with implementation of the plan chalked out by
him for the transition to democracy.
The lawyers in Lahore were beaten by police when they tried to
observe Black Day on the swearing in of Musharraf as President for another
five years. Condemnation resolutions were passed by Bars across the
country. Lawyers also met Nawaz and Qazi. Punjab University teachers also
protested emergency.
APDM delayed its decision till Musharrafs address on TV and then
announced that all parties of the alliance, less JUI-F and ANP, would boycott
general elections. They argued that the main issue of restoration of deposed
judges remained unaddressed and without an independent judiciary, there
was no use contesting elections.
The United States hailed Musharrafs pledge to lift emergency rule.
PPP pledged to contest general elections after Benazirs secret meeting with
Musharraf at night preceding the swearing in ceremony. Babar Awan of PPP,
however, planned to challenge the oath under Constitution held in abeyance
in the court.
Facilities to deposed judges were withdrawn. President of Jaranwala
Bar Association became the first victim of the recently amended Legal
Practitioner and Bar Councils Act; a judge suspended his licence for uttering
contemptuous remarks against the court during proceedings of a case.
On 30th November, Musharraf blamed US for the crisis in Pakistan
because of its inconsistent support. He said that he would resign if
unacceptable situation emerged after general elections. Bush congratulated
Musharraf on telephone. A delegation of US lawmakers met Musharraf and
Benazir. Benazir announced party manifesto based on five Es; employment,
education, energy, environment and equality. Musharraf asked caretakers to
ensure free and fair polls.
Fazl urged APDM not to repeat blunder of boycotting general
elections. Cases were registered in Islamabad against RIUJ and PFUJ for
violating section 144. Students of Punjab University staged protest
demonstration against emergency rule.

662

Lawyers, students and human rights activists demonstrated outside

judges colony in Islamabad. Lawyers urged Benazir and Fazl to boycott
polls. Benazir said she was grieved over police torture on lawyers. Latif
Afridi, President PHCBA revealed that the government has evolved a
reconciliatory strategy to end the judicial crisis by reinstating all the deposed
judges except the CJP. What would you call it; personal vendetta?
On 1st December, the Returning Officer rejected nomination papers on
Shahbaz Sharif over Sabzazar shootout case. Another objection was filed
against Nawazs candidature. Three-hour meeting failed to resolve
differences in MMA over boycott. Jamia Binnoria announced its support for
MQM in general elections.
Militancy will grow if polls rigged, warned Benazir. Politics of
agitation wont be tolerated, warned Musharraf. Bush Administration called
for robust and vigorous debate ahead of polls in Pakistan. The man who
devised troop surge in Iraq, Frederick Kagan, urged Bush Administration to
consider seizure plan for Pakistans nuclear assets. Manmohan greeted
Musharraf over his re-election.
Fazl grilled judges for taking oath under PCO in 1999. Two deposed
judges, Rana Bhagwandas and Ghulam Rabbani were hospitalized in PIMS.
Twenty-five ex-judges of Lahore paid homage to judges who refused to take
oath under PCO. Deposed judge of the LHC Justice M A Shahid Siddiqui
issued a contempt of court notice to the Registrar over asking him (judge) to
vacate official residence, seeking explanation within one month that who
instigated the Registrar to serve a notice to a sitting judge.
On 2nd December, Nawaz urged boycott of polls. Benazir said boycott
would benefit those who have no political roots. After criticizing Benazir,
Imran Khan accused Fazlur Rehman of negating national interests for
personal gains. Lawyers said participation in polls would strengthen rulers.
Qazi said that deposed judges wont be left in the lurch. Nawaz urged
masses to act for reinstatement of judges. Traders of Peshawar planned to
present gold crown to deposed judges. Aitzazs detention was extended by
30 days.
On 3rd December, APDM and ARD in a meeting chaired by Benazir
and attended by Nawaz Sharif decided to serve the government with Charter
of Demands. Before the meeting Nawaz had vowed to convince Benazir for
boycott of polls. After the meeting the focus seemed to have shifted to
663

ensuring free and fair polls. The shrewd BB was able to strengthen her
bargaining position with Musharraf as she insisted on holding of polls as
scheduled but on terms to be dictated through Charter of Demands.
Nomination papers of Nawaz were rejected on the basis of award of
sentence in plane hijacking and purchase of helicopter cases. Nawaz decided
not to appeal. ATC summoned CCPO and SHO for not arresting Shahbaz
Sharif as ordered by the court. Supporters of ANP and PPP clashed in
Peshawar in which a woman was killed. A case was registered against Bashir
Ahmad Bilour and three others. Bilour blamed third party for the clash.
The US Ambassador met Nawaz Sharif; the latter told her that the
judges come first. She also met Aitzazs wife, HRCP chief and Pervaiz
Elahi. Spain dropped fraud case against Benazir. The visiting Turkish
president met opposition leaders and hoped that the crisis would end soon.
Islamabad-Rawalpindi chapter of Pakistan Medical Association
decided to join hands with lawyers, journalists, students and others for
restoration of judiciary. Salman of Junoon and Musharrafs son were
embroiled in heated arguments through email.
Maulana Fazlur Rehman got a jolt from within his camp when
lawyers wing and some others resigned from the party over statements
against the deposed judges. Aitzazs detention was extended by one month
by the caretakers; Benazir condemned the extension in his detention. The
deposed judge M A Siddiqui feared for lives of his family and the self.
The Supreme Court disposed of 241 cases in November whereas in
October under the deposed CJP the apex court had decided 3171 cases. A
court spokesman termed the disposal rate satisfactory and denied that
lawyers boycott had affected working of the court.
On 4th December, 24 judges of Lahore High Court were served with
retirement notifications. Protests against eviction of judges from official
residences continued. Two rights activist of US were arrested and then
released. Residences of deposed judges of Supreme Court were allotted to
PCO judges.
Sindh High Court dismissed petitions of Geo TV against ban on its
transmission being not maintainable. The Supreme Court returned similar

664

petitions for the same reason. Deposed judge, Dost Muhammad received
warm welcome in his hometown Bannu.
ARD and APDM teams started drafting the Charter of Demands, but
PPP and PML-N remained divided on restoration of judges. Nawaz received
rousing welcome enroute to Balakot. He said suicide attacks have been the
hallmark of Musharraf regime.
On 5th December, Attorney General directed the deposed judges to
vacate official residences. Justice Tariq Pervez insisted that he was still chief
justice of PHC. Justice Bhagwandas expressed similar views on all the
judges who had not taken oath under PCO. Aitzaz Ahsan planned to launch
judicial bus movement.
The court ordered NAB to come out with clear stance on cases against
Nawaz Sharif. ARD and APDM reached consensus on all points except
reinstatement of judges, which was likely to be deferred till emergence of
National Assembly.

VIEWS
Like the previous articles, herein too the Wests viewpoint is
produced at the beginning. Kim Barker observed that Aitzaz Ahsan was an
irritant for Musharraf. As Musharrafs popularity plummeted, Aitzaz was
almost unanimously elected president of the Supreme Court Bar Association.
Any decision that Musharraf announced, Aitzaz publicly opposed. Most
crucial for the regime, Aitzaz also stepped in as the chief lawyer in a
Supreme Court case arguing that Musharraf could not legally be president
and army chief.
They say Musharraf feared that Aitzaz would win and the court
would throw out his election. As the decision neared, Musharraf declared the
emergency. Police then arrested Aitzaz and rounded up thousands of their
troublesome lawyers and human rights activists. Musharraf fired Justice
Iftikhar and other independent judges and placing them under house arrest.
Aitzaz and three other lawyers leading the protests were separated and
put in solitary confinement. Two are now in the hospital.

665

Last week, in another setback for lawyers, the Supreme Court

threw out Aitzazs challenge to Musharrafs continued rule, paving the way
for him to be sworn in as president on Thursday. Meanwhile Aitzaz sat in
jail, before being moved to house arrest.
Aitzaz, not allowed to talk to journalists except for his brief
comments at the Election Commission, is no stranger to jail or house arrest.
Since the late 1990s, he has been arrested at least 15 times. But this time, it
is somehow different, said Bushra Aitzaz Ahsan, his wife of 34 years.
I have never seen him in this mood, she said, sitting in her husbands
law office, next door to their home. He is always in a very fighting mood,
you know. I think there is something that happened in jail this time that
has really made him very unhappy.
Daniel Markey pleaded that the US should not abandon Musharraf.
The United States should hold its nose and stick with Musharraf. He
currently occupies a unique position in Pakistani politics and could still
serve as an essential transitional figure during the next few weeks, months,
and possibly even years.
In the immediate term, Musharraf offers Washington continuity in
the face of uncertain political transition. He is a familiar face, a leader
with whom the Bush Administration has established a sustained working
relationship. under even the smoothest possible transition scenarios,
Musharrafs departure would interrupt bilateral cooperation on military,
counter-terrorism, and intelligence matters for days or weeks with
uncertain consequences for US security.
And it is not hard to imagine that a new Pakistani leader might up
the ante with Washington, demanding a better price for bilateral
cooperation. The more than $10 billion in assistance the United States has
given Pakistan since 9/11 is no natural limit. New Pakistani leaders might
also back away from some of the bold steps Musharraf has taken during the
past several years
Musharrafs fall would not immediately pave the way for
Jeffersonian democracy There is some chance, however, that a postMusharraf Army would prefer to shield itself from popular protest and
would move quickly to national elections. With Musharrafs departure,
his faction of the PML would fall apart. By most accounts, populist

666

former Prime Minister Sharif would be the natural beneficiary of this

disintegration.
Having opposed Musharraf from his exile in Saudi Arabia and
Britain, Sharif has felt little love from Washington since 9/11. In his
desperation to return to power, he has courted the entire spectrum of
Pakistans political leaders, including the Islamists.
His centre-right base of support now has a stronger antiAmerican, anti-Western streak than in the past. Sharifs constituents
have little interest in implementing policies designed to tackle the deeper
roots of extremism and militancy in Pakistani society or in building
sustainable democratic institutions.
Musharraf can serve as a bridge between Bhutto and the
uniformed military, gradually completing a soft landing out of power
over his term in office. It is no surprise, judging from their troubled history,
that striking a balance of power between Bhutto and Musharraf is proving
difficult.
Their highly publicized courtship might collapse for good in the
coming days or weeks. If so, the United States, Pakistan, Musharraf, and
Bhutto will all lose. At that point, looking past Musharraf will become a
more realistic option for the Bush Administration.
With a watchful eye, Washington should stand by Musharraf not
for what he is an unpopular military leader and not for what he has been
an imperfect ally but for what he might still be: a transitional figure who
offers near-term continuity and medium-term potential for founding a new,
more effective configuration of power and government in Islamabad.
Hussain Haqqani did not agree with Daniel Markey. Washington has
consistently over-estimated Gen Pervez Musharrafs value as an ally in
the war on terror. Under Musharrafs military rule, terrorism in Pakistan has
increased and terrorist safe havens have expanded
After Musharrafs decision in early November to suspend Pakistans
constitution and impose martial law under the guise of emergency rule, even
his limited utility as Washingtons partner has dissipated. And now that
Pakistans police services are busy arresting Supreme Court judges, beating

667

up protesting lawyers, and tracking opposition politicians, they certainly

arent able to focus their energies on flushing out terrorists.
In fact, Musharraf himself is part of the problem. He has dithered
in shutting down homegrown militant networks that were created during the
1990s for proxy war in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. He has been
unwilling to treat the Afghan Taliban as a terrorist threat, and his decision to
make distinctions between al-Qaeda and the Taliban has resulted in the
Afghan groups comeback in recent years
Meanwhile, unqualified US backing has encouraged Musharraf to
suppress dissent at home while posing as a relatively liberal strongman
abroad. Mainstream political parties and moderate civil society groups have
borne the brunt of repression while Islamist parties have been given carte
blanche to expand their influence. Incredibly, jihadi groups have had a freer
hand than civilians.
By abandoning Pervez Musharraf, the United States could signal
that it will not tolerate Pakistan becoming Myanmar. Once Washington
makes it clear that it will no longer support Musharraf. Pakistans military
will start negotiating with countrys political parties and civil society instead
of dictating to them. Only then will Pakistan be able to emerge as a normal
country with predictable patterns of political change, which will make it
easier to ensure the security of its nuclear weapons and to fight the terrorists
who benefit from the countrys present chaos. It is time for Musharraf to go
and for civilian rule to return.
The Washington Post opined: Mr Musharraf won the support of
President Bush six years ago by portraying himself as a leader capable of
uniting Pakistan against al-Qaeda and the Taliban while building secular
democratic institutions. Now he has become the primary obstacle to both
causes.
His crackdown on the countrys judiciary, news media, human rights
advocates and centrist political parties has turned them, along with most of
Pakistans population, irrevocably against him. Mr Musharrafs
assumption of a new term as president is a gross insult to those groups
and institutions, because he acquired the mandate by staging an improper
election, then fired the judges of the Supreme Court before they could rule
on its legality.

668

Mr Musharraf has retreated from his power grab only because of

heavy pressure from Pakistans closest allies. He allowed the leaders of the
two largest political parties to return home from exile at the urging of the
United States, which backed Benazir Bhutto, and Saudi Arabia, which
championed Nawaz Sharif.
The Bush Administration retains a residual and counterproductive attachment to the fading strongman. Last week, Mr Bush told
a reporter, bizarrely, that Mr Musharraf hasnt crossed the line and truly is
somebody who believes in democracy. In fact, this months coup decisively
demonstrated Mr Musharrafs contempt for democracy and pushed him
across a line he cannot erase.
Even if he allows free elections, Mr Musharraf will not cooperate
with civilian leaders he despises. If Pakistans moderate centre is to have a
chance of defeating al-Qaeda and the Taliban, Mr Musharraf will have to
retire from public life. The sooner he and Pakistans army get the message
from Washington, the quicker the current crisis can be ended.
New York Times expressed views on Nawaz Sharif. The triumphant
return of Nawaz Sharifinjected another player into the game: Saudi
Arabia. Mr Sharif presents himself as an uncompromising champion of
democracy and constitutional rule, but his years in office tell a different and
more troubling story
What makes Mr Sharif so formidable today is not his record, but the
strong backing of Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have long been powerful
political and economic players in Pakistan, and they have championed
politicians and parties inclined to favour Saudi-style Sunni fundamentalism.
It was apparently at Saudi insistence that Mr Musharraf let Mr Sharif
return home, after having sent him back on his previous attempt in
September.
Mr Sharifs chief civilian rival in Benazir Bhutto Ms Bhuttos
cause has been damaged by inept and clumsy American support. By
clinging too long to Mr Musharraf, and by pressing Ms Bhutto to negotiate
with him, the Bush Administration has weakened its influence in Pakistan.
For now, Mr Musharraf remains in charge. After his re-election as
president, he finally made good on his often-voiced promise to retire from
the military. He turned over his command to his successor one day before

669

he was sworn in for a new five-year term. His powers, in theory, should be
reduced, but he has made it clear that he wont give up easily. He has set
parliamentary elections for January. If the emergency rule imposed by him
remains in place, it would make a free and fair contest impossible.
Despite these obstacles, both Mr Sharif and Ms Bhutto have filed to
run, while demanding an end to emergency rule and threatening to boycott
the polls if it is not lifted. That is a sound strategy. There is nothing to be
grained by promising Mr Musharraf and his allies a free ride. Their next
step should be joining forces to maximize opposition strength and help
assure the dictatorships defeat. It is not too late for Ms Bhutto to repair her
democratic credentials and for Mr Sharif to establish his.
Amir Taheri wrote: By shedding his uniform, Musharraf has
thrown the ball back to the political leaders especially two former prime
ministers, Benazir Bhuttoand Nawaz Sharif. For the last three weeks, both
have been threatening a boycott of the general elections My guess is that
each will take part.
Both parties have managed to retain parts of their respective
constituencies, especially in Sindh and Punjab. But eight years is a long
time in politics, and theres every possibility that Pakistan may have moved
beyond both former premiers.
Bhutto and Sharif also owe it to their own people to sheath the
sword of boycott. To move Pakistan beyond the current dangerous phase,
Januarys elections must be held with the widest participation and under the
least controversial conditions possible.
Pakistan today faces perhaps the strongest existential threat it
has experienced since its inception in 1947. The terrorist operating in Swat
cant seize power in Islamabad. But they can exhaust the army in a
seemingly endless war, thus encouraging the revival of other divisive forces,
especially in the vast desert of Baluchistan province. A weakened army also
would be unable to provide a minimum of law and order in the major cities
notably Karachi, where sleeper terrorist cells have mushroomed for years.
Musharrafs key word is security, while Bhutto and Sharif
prefer freedom. But the two concepts are interdependent. There can be no
freedom without security. The failure of Pakistans leaders to understand that

670

banal truism has been at the root of the nations checkered experience over
the last half-century.
Pakistans forthcoming election has suddenly assumed a geostrategic
importance beyond that countrys actual importance. The prospect of a
nuclear-armed state collapsing into chaos is one that few would contemplate
with relish Pakistan needs a future oriented election campaign, one
capable of offering the people hope based on reality. Musharraf, Bhutto and
Sharif form an informal triumvirate that can and must play a crucial role.
This may be their last chance to make an historic contribution to their
nations future.
If they fail, they will all go down together. None can succeed by
destroying the others while holding clean, credible elections could
strengthen all three in their respective positions. The outside world should
also offer a helping hand
The message of Pakistans leaders should be unity in diversity,
unity against terror and diversity in competing visions for the nations future.
In January, one of the biggest battles in the War on Terror will be fought in
Pakistan. The whole world will be watching.
M K Bhadrakumar represented the voice of India; strategic partner
of the Crusaders. The United States is watching with anxiety Pakistans
painful march towards democracy, and it does not like the look of it. The
return of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan has completely
altered the political calculus and took Washington by surprise.
By insisting on Sharifs return to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia took
matters into its own hands. Washington should have read the signal that
something was stirring in Riyadh when, a fortnight earlier, the Saudi
ambassador to Pakistan made a characteristic public display of intervening
with President General Pervez Musharraf for the release of the former
director general of the Inter Services Intelligence, Hamid Gul
Unsurprisingly, the specter that is haunting the George W Bush
Administration is whether the baton of the democratic transformation of
Pakistan will pass into the hands of conservative nationalist Islamic forces
instead of the moderate liberals chosen by Washington.

671

Sharif, on his part, point-blank refuses to acknowledge Bushs

recent efforts to bring about Pakistans democratic transformation. He
would recall his association with President Bill Clinton and stress he didnt
know Bush. On Wednesday, Sharif touched on Bushs war on terror.
Referring to military crackdown in Pakistans Swat Valley, Sharif said
Islamabad ought to think before complying with the demands of foreign
powers. He caustically added: This is our country, and we know better how
to solve our problems.
Sharif estimated his remark would find good resonance in Pakistani
opinion. Senior unnamed US officials, in turnpaint Sharif as a
conservative politician who connived with Abdul Qadeer Khans nuclear
proliferation and hobnobbed with the Taliban and al-Qaeda, and argue that
he stands in the way of the emancipation of Pakistani women
The Bush Administration squirms that its techniques of political
management failed to work with the formidable Pakistani establishment. The
rapidity of the unfolding of political events in Islamabad has left Bush
with no option but to keep eulogizing Musharrafs leadership qualities
even as the General systematically rubbished Bhuttos political prospects.
Maybe an apocalyptic vision of a Sharif-led Pakistan may help justify the
Bush Administrations continued support of Musharraf.
Sections of the Pakistani establishment keenly expect Sharif to
unify the Pakistan Muslim League factions to thwart any residual chances
of Bhuttos bid for power. The point is, even though Sharif may have a bitter
feud with Musharraf, that doesnt diminish his acceptability to the Pakistani
establishment, for whom he still remains a former ally.
Sharif may not resort to agitational politics. He could easily be rabble
rouser, but the Saudis wouldnt want him to do anything by way of
stirring up things that threatened to destabilize the existing political order
in Islamabad. Saudi interest lies not in undermining nuclear-armed Pakistan
but to be able to navigate it if the gyre of Shiite Irans influence continues to
widen in the region.
Again, Sharif continues to view Bhutto with distrust. Sharif is
keen on the PML functioning within a united front under the banner of the
All Parties Democratic Movement, but he cant ensure the alliances
cohesion especially the Islamic parties.

672

The regional and international implications are going to be farreaching. If the US strategy, under the garb of creating a truly democratic
regime in Pakistan, was to create a troika in Islamabad that would be
amenable to its manipulation, things havent quite worked as expected.
Pakistans army will remain the dominant force in the countrys
national life.
The new army chief shares Musharrafs basic outlook and, more
important, shares Musharrafs limitations in partnering with the US against
the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Washington cannot afford to damage its equations
with the Pakistani military by threatening to cut off aid
The US will be compelled to factor in with greater sensitivity the
Pakistani militarys adversarial stance with regard to India, which also
includes it widespread resentment about the inconstancy of American
friendship and, more recently, the perceived US tilt toward India as its
preferred strategic partner in the region.
If a democratically elected IJI-type representative government
assumes power in Islamabad at the present juncture that would work greatly
in the Talibans favour. Such a government would include political leaders
who have had extensive dealings with the Taliban in the 1990s. Equally,
such a government might not see eye-to-eye with the USs way of
conducting the war on terror in Afghanistan or with the overall American
approach that there is almost no problem across the region that cant
be resolved by bombing (to quote a British commentator).
Saudi Arabia feels disillusioned by the bloody mess that Bush
Administrations war on terror has created in the region. The criticality of
the Afghanistan situation is worrisome as Saudi national-security concerns
are directly affected. Riyadh estimates that the time may have come to seek
an Islamic solution to the crisis.
Saudi influence will be predominant on any IJI-type government in
Islamabad. The Saudi calculation would be to work toward a political
accommodation of the Taliban as a step in the right direction of isolating
the radical elements, which have gained ascendancy in the AfghanistanPakistan border region.
In sum, Bush Administrations ill-conceived scheme to bring about
a transitional partnership between the Pakistani military and the political

673

center has floundered. The US pursued its partnership project even when it
became apparent that the military wouldnt cohabit with Bhutto. The result
was near impasse.
The Saudis stepped in at that point and a new transition strategy
attuned to Pakistani realities has begun to unfold. Much as the Pakistani
military understands the strategic imperative of keeping a working
relationship with the US and realizes that anything else would be
catastrophic for Pakistans interests, it is also incumbent on Washington to
reconcile that there are limits beyond which it cannot push the general
headquarters in Rawalpindi.
Equally, Washington must accept that Islamic nationalism is a
permanent feature of Pakistani national life. The West cannot impose its
clones on Pakistans democratic life. There is a high probability that Nawaz
Sharif may turn out to be the future of Pakistan.
Barrister Harunur Rashid from Bangladesh wrote: Observers say
that leading politicians are behaving like a chameleon changing colours to
achieve its purpose When President General Pervez Musharraf declared
virtual Martial Law under the guise of emergency rule, Benazir Bhutto
declared that she would have nothing to do with President Musharraf and
would boycott elections under the emergency rule because elections would
not be fair and free. In retrospect, it appears that her statement was directed
to overseas audience so that the US would exert pressure on the President to
lift the emergency.
President Musharraf seems to be an astute politician and knows
how to please the US. He wanted to show that emergency rule had been
declared to fight the Taliban. He has sent his soldiers to fight with the
diehard militants in Swat Since Musharraf met at least two demands and
took action against militants, the Bush Administration has softened its
attitude towards him. Furthermore the US is more concerned with war on
terror in Afghanistan rather than restoration of democracy in Pakistan.
Another deep concern for the US is that the nuclear-armed Pakistan
should not fall into the hands of Islamists as they would like to make nuclear
weapon or its technology easily accessible to the Jihadis who have been
fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Musharraf in the saddle is the
safest bet for the US at present.

674

Benazir Bhutto, an ally of the US, appears to have got the

message from the US and took a 180-degree U-turn from her earlier
position. She now says that her party, the Pakistan Peoples Party, was
preparing to contest the elections unless all parties boycotted the elections.
Accordingly, she could not leave the field open to rivals.
Religious-conservative Nawaz Sharif, another former prime minister,
returned to Pakistan on November 25. President Musharraf had allowed
his return under pressure of Saudi Arabia. Nawaz thanked publicly the
Saudi king for his return Nawaz also received the right message from
Saudi Arabia. He said that his party would participate in elections unless all
parties boycotted it.
Both Nawaz and Benazir know that many pro-Musharraf parties are
contesting the elections and their condition of boycotting the elections is
strategic and appears to be hollow. This demonstrates their lack of
commitment to democracy. The difference between the two leading
politicians is that while Benazir is prepared to share power with President
Musharraf, Nawaz has declared that he will not, because he claims that the
rule of Musharraf is illegal.
The participation in election by parties of Nawaz and Benazir will
invariably put a stamp of legitimacy on the rule of President Musharraf for
another five years Observers believe that the position both Nawaz and
Benazir has adopted may not serve their selfish interests in the long run. At
the end of the day President Musharraf has come out victorious and got
what he wanted. He has outwitted the wily politicians.

At home numerous aspects of the ongoing crisis were commented

upon. The central issue remained the judiciary. Shahzad Khalil from
Sialkot observed: Benazir Bhutto has given an ultimatum to the junta, to
meet her demands, failing which she plans to lead an agitation. I, however,
like millions of other Pakistanis, have a query for Mohtarma; why is she not
demanding restoration of the Judiciary? Are we to understand that she has
her own grouse against the Supreme Court that why it entertained a petition
against NRO?
Mohtarma must understand that Chief Justice Iftikhar, his
brother judges and lawyers like Aitzaz have more credibility than all the
political leaders put together. It was the judiciary, which gave the people

675

relief, when they most needed it. All the suo motto notices were taken to
provide relief from excesses committed against the poor and oppressed
sections of our society.
Khurshid Anwer from Lahore Cantt wrote: I have it on authority
from a Karachi-based columnist of The Nation that on July 20 when the
chief justice won his case, the deity and her devotees in London went
into a state of near mourning on hearing the news. That explains her
complete silence when all and sundry were congratulating Ch Aitzaz Ahsan
on pulling off mission impossible.
Enaam E Hamid from Texas opined: It is high time for the opposition
to formulate a joint strategy to counter the anti-democratic actions of
President Musharraf. Regrettably, PPPs role in this hour of crisis seems to
be dubious. BB seems to be exploiting the situation by making another
underhand deal with the ruling undemocratic junta. None of the PPP
leaders or workers have so far been arrested in the current agitation for
obvious reasons. Same is the position of JUI-F.
Zeeshan Ahmad from Lahore was of the view that it is very
unfortunate that a martial law has been imposed in Pakistan in the name of
Emergency. But to me, even more disturbing thing is that no major political
party has indicated to struggle for the restoration of all deposed judges
of the superior courts.
The politicians and international community have demanded
restoration of the Constitution and holding of elections. But, except for the
lawyers community, no voice has been raised for restoration of the Supreme
and High courts. This seems to be the systematic way of diverting attention
from the real issue to a non-issue.
Another problem for Pakistani nation is that although it wants the
revival of deposed Supreme Court, yet it has no leader to lead them to the
goal. The PPP of Benazir Bhutto has been totally exposed as having no
desire to get the judges restored Only lawyers are struggling for
restoration of the deposed judges. But they are too limited in number to
create any solid impact. This is a very sad situation for Pakistan.
Taimur M Khan from Lahore Cantt wrote: The people of Pakistan
must rise up and demand the restoration of these judges to their preNovember 3 posts. Only by doing so will some of the damage done to this

676

important institution be undone. Otherwise, we will have to live with the

consequences of inaction at this critical juncture.
Gulsher Panhwer from Dadu observed: Excluding Imran Khan, who
is vocal in this demand, the other parties are only paying lip service to the
restoration of the judges. This is because the major political parties fear the
constraints they are going to encounter in governing the country in the
presence of honest judges who are now out of office. Where are the
politicians who previously encouraged confrontation with the executive?
Where are those who paraded the coffin of the doctrine of the necessity?
Mere knocking out of the CJP did not quench the vengeance of the
tolerant and pragmatic Musharraf. He used the language for Justice Iftikhar
which was not liked by many like Sheeba Ajmal from Peshawar. I fail to
understand why the president is repetitively issuing humiliating statements
against the deposed Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Mohammad
Chaudhry. A man who has been honoured not only by his own countrymen,
but also by the international legal fraternity including Harvard Universitys
law school which has conferred on him its highest honour insulted by the
president in every speech he makes. No matter what the president says,
the deposed chief justice will remain the hero of the entire nation. These
attacks against him are in poor taste.
Aitzaz Ahsan was another thorn which had penetrated beyond the
second skin of brave commando to cause constant irritation. He had to be
kept under detention. The News wrote: How can the entire government
and the military and civil establishment be so scared of one man that
they cannot let him get out of his home? Is it because they fear that he may
say something or move a petition in a court? This is not a hypothetical but a
valid question given the existing ground reality. Aitzaz is, by any yardstick, a
popular politician, a brilliant orator and a successful lawyer right now he is
the man the government is so scared of that he has again been caged for 30
days.
Aitzaz must be released forthwith and allowed to campaign. If the
superior courts are helpless in providing this basic right to a very respected
citizen, because of the emergency, President Musharraf must personally
order his release as his continued detention has become a major
international embarrassment for his new presidential tenure

677

As a cynic would say, if Aitzaz cannot be freed since he is deemed

too dangerous perhaps one shouldnt be surprised if all his opponents are
also put under house arrest His continued arrest, that of the deposed
judges and the ban on Geo, make the power structure in Islamabad look
so fragile.
Medea Benjamin opined: Most of those arrested have been
released, but a few key lawyers such as Aitzaz remain in detention, and
the independent judges have not been reinstated. Thats why the demands of
civil society are not just to lift the emergency law, as Musharraf now says he
will do on December 16, but also to release all those arrested, restore the
independent judiciary and restore freedom of the press.
Pervez Musharraf has taken off his uniform to please the West,
but he is still no democrat. In the past month, his regime has beaten and
jailed thousands of this nations best and brightest. Equally shameful is the
fact that the Bush Administration continues to back him, instead of the
backing the democratic civil society struggling under his grip.
Aitzaz Ahsan is now a symbol in Pakistan of the peoples struggle
for democracy. Thats why we decided to sit outside his door, his sub-jail
if you may, in protest of his continued detention, in protest of our
governments backing of a dictator, and in support of the Pakistani people.
Another issue which received the attention of the observers was the
skinning of Musharraf. The Nation wrote: Delivered at the termination of
his forty-six-year career in the Army, including nine years as COAS, General
Musharrafs speech on the eve of handing over command to Gen
Kayani had understandably a strong emotional touch
General Musharraf has rightly pointed out that the Army was
currently under pressure but few would agree that this was on account of
certain misguided people only who underrated its important role in the
security and progress of the country. There is no difference of opinion in
Pakistan regarding the armys crucial role in safeguarding the country
The handing over of the military command by General Musharraf,
which was long overdue, has been widely welcomed by the people. This
provides Gen Kayani an opportunity to improve the image of the army
by keeping it strictly out of politics To strengthen democracy in Pakistan
long-term measures are required to inculcate respect for democratic

678

institutions in the armys rank and file. Rather there is a need for a change in
the present mind-set.
In a subsequent editorial the newspaper added: Musharrafs
promise while taking the oath as a civilian president to preserve and
defend the Constitution would sound ironic to many who criticize him for
having suspended the basic law twice. Interestingly, the oath was
administered to him under the Constitution, which has yet not been
restored.
Musharrafs second tenure has an inauspicious start. With the
entire opposition united against his re-election, the oath taking ceremony
was boycotted by all opposition leaders. Lawyers protests, the longest in the
countrys history, continue unabated There is no end to protests by media
men either of which have entered the third week.
He accused elements in judiciary led by former CJ Iftikhar
Chaudhry of conspiring to obstruct his plan to restore democracy including
the doffing of uniform on October 15. He was apparently not happy with the
media either. He didnt concede he has ever committed an error. He
hoped the two major opposition leaders would indulge in civilized politics
henceforth and desist from repeating what they did in the 1990s.
Instead of displaying flexibility vis--vis the oppositions
preconditions for taking part in the elections, he gave the impression that he
cared little for its views and that he would hold the elections come hell or
high water. Instead of ensuring respect for democracy and human
rights, he frankly told his Western critics not to accept from him the
standards they maintain in their countries. The statement may raise doubts
and suspicions about his promise to hold free and fair elections.
The Presidents critics are likely to accuse him of maintaining the
confrontationist approach that characterized his previous term and say that
despite having doffed the uniform; he continues to retain the military
mindset. Under the conditions there is little likelihood that subsequent
relaxations like a possible withdrawal of the state of emergency would cause
any reduction in the prevailing standoff.
Inayatullah opined: It is indeed unfortunate that he has done so
after staging a second coup when, on November 3, he declared an
emergency, exercising the authority of the chief of army staff, suspended the

679

fundamental rights and put the Constitution in a cold storage. The reason
advanced for this unconstitutional act was that an extraordinary situation had
arisen because of militancy and terrorist activities in certain parts of the
country and that the Supreme Court trespassed into the executives sphere
thus demoralizing the administration.
In a press conference, Musharraf referring to the sacking and
detention of the chief justice of Pakistan, remarked that No one is
above the law. Which law the CJP had violated was not revealed. Referring
to the sharp reaction in the international circles, to his proclamation of
emergency, he mused loudly. Did I go mad? Have I done anything
unconstitutional or illegal? Yes I did it on 3rd November.
He later explained the reasons for this unconstitutional and illegal
act It is amazing that after suspending the constitution of the country
and having dismissed Supreme Court judges, he could say that he had
brought democracy in Pakistan back on track and that I take pride in the
fact that I have actually introduced the essence of democracy in Pakistan.
Power as I have written before, is a heady drink which blurs the vision.
Can fair and free elections be held when the fundamental rights are
to remain suspended (till December 16 leaving only a fortnight or so for the
electoral campaign), when the media has been placed under severe
restrictions and a leading TV channel shut down and when the judiciary has
ceased to be independent?
I was saddened when the BBC correspondent in Pakistan while
reporting Musharrafs swearing in ceremony said that his legacy is a
country in turmoil. I do hope you will find time to read these words of
mine and ponder over the far reaching consequences of your role as the
proud chief of one of the best armies in the world and take steps to protect
its honour and image as a law abiding and constitutionally correct
institution.
Sarmad Bashir wrote: Now that he has hung up the uniform he can
see his successor become as formidable as he has been since he assumed
power in a military coup. From now on it will be Kayani not Musharraf
with whom the West will be dealing vis--vis the ongoing War on Terror
and whom the Kings Party leadership will be looking up to for guidance.
Even though Musharraf has made it clear that he wont give up easily, he

680

might very well understand that with the unity of command gone his powers
stand immediately reduced.
Musharrafs claim that he has created national unity and stabilized
Pakistan notwithstanding, the fact remains that his seven-year rule has only
pushed the country towards anarchy, disruption and chaos. Extremism
spread across the country on his watch. Hundreds of innocent citizens were
kidnapped by the intelligence agencies on suspicion of involvement in
terrorism. Many were killed in custody and the judiciary was sent packing
when it started hearing petitions into mysterious disappearances.
Mr Musharrafs controversial re-election will keep him in charge for
the next five years but he will have to wait for a nod from the powers that
be before ordering the bombing of civilian populations in Baluchistan
and the troubled tribal region on dictation from the Bush Administration.
From now on it will be for Gen Kayani to decide whether to let the army
keep fighting its weakest enemy the hapless people of this country and
conquering its own territory over and over again or to resign to its actual role
of defending Pakistans border.
Its time to permanently roadblock the way of recurring military
interventions, to discourage the Bonapartist tendency of abrogating the
Constitution and to inculcate among our sacred saviour respect for
democracy and human rights. Musharrafs civilized presidency needs to
be tamed rather than letting it turn into an autocracy. Mian Nawaz is
right when he says that the countrys return to civilian rule can be ensured
only by restoring the Constitution and respecting independence of judiciary.
D Shah Khan commented: As politics in Pakistan is seen in the
perspective of how strong or weak leaders are rather than the strength of
their legitimacy, one can expect that a retired general as head of state will
exude, ipso facto authority that would be unquestioned in a state with a
history of militarism. But a powerful head of state will require not strong
and effective prime ministers but those willing to conform themselves to the
contours of their position chalked out for them.
However, it cannot be said that a dyed in the wool politician who has
made his or her way to the prime ministers office through free and fair
election might be ready to act as another Shaukat Aziz. There are bound to
be differences as a military president, even if he has shed his second skin is

681

bound to see a crisis in strictly disciplinary terms while a civilian would

be willing to look at the development in a wider perspective
Moreover, former COAS Musharrafs continuing only in the
presidential office does not necessarily means that he retains his past
political muscularity. His new strength comes not from his uniform,
which he must have hung up by now as a memento of the past but his flimsy
office as president, which is open to contest as history shows
After strenuously trying for eight years to correct the course of
politics in Pakistan Musharraf might now have to contend with the same
old faces he had done his best to keep away from power. With his main
political prop, the kings coalition no more in power with the next election to
decide who will rule Pakistan, and having relinquished his COAS office, the
future for President Musharraf can be more thornier than rosy.
How far would he be willing to reconcile himself to the changed
circumstances will depend on how pragmatic he will be. So far he has
faced no major hindrance as he astutely exercised his position as a benign
military dictator with opposition politicians begging for crumbs. Benazir
Bhuttos secret talks with Musharraf can only be seen in this light, not as a
dialogue between equals.
Musharraf like a wise general has already bolstered his defences
and replaced his soldiers shield with a clutch of legal documents to
strengthen him even more than when he was the COAS-President. Apart
from the state of emergency and promulgating the Pakistan Army Act
(Amendment) Ordinance 2007 which gives sweeping powers to the security
and intelligence agencies to interrogate civilians allegedly involved in
terrorism and other serious offences, he has also issued the Constitution
Amendment Order No 5 of 2007.
But such instruments of coercion have their limitation in politics
if the overall effort of a retired general in power is to reconstruct democratic
traditions in the state, not imposing a naked dictatorship in mufti. The way
for President Pervez Musharraf in the future, therefore is likely to be much
more testing than when he was a military ruler. It will be a painful
realization for the once powerful head of state and army chief that while he
has acquired the highest office in the country he really has very little power.

682

Shakir Lakhani from Karachi said: I saw Pervez Musharraf on TV

wiping tears at the change of command ceremony at the General
Headquarters. At that time, I was about to cry too I thought about the
men who were disappeared and the loot and plunder that became
commonplace during the years he was the most powerful man of this
country
I almost wept while thinking about the way our honourable
judges were treated after the proclamation of emergency. I thought about
the family members of those who were picked up by the state agencies and
the agony and anguish they underwent until the time they came to know
about their loved-ones whereabouts through the intervention of the Supreme
Court.
Would the situation have been different if Pervez Musharraf had
spent an hour everyday in reading national newspapers while still in
uniform? Had he done it, he wouldnt have humiliated the judges of the apex
court. Future generations will refer to him as just another politician who
lived in the times of Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and Barrister
Aitzaz Ahsan.
Hussain H Zaidi wrote: In a proper democratic dispensation the
entry and exit of an army chief is by no means an extra-ordinary event
and therefore does not deserve more than a single-column space in the inside
pages of the national press. However, in a country ruled by the armed forces
directly or indirectly for the better part of its life, the change at the top in the
army is as important, if not more important, an event as a change in the
government.
For whatever reasons, General Musharraf is now Mr Musharraf. But
what does this change signify? To begin with, the change is both a cause
and effect of weakening of President Musharrafs position. The fact that
he had been so reluctant to doff his uniform, which he would term his skin,
only shows the pre-eminent role that the army chief plays in national
politics. Whatever our rulers may claim about democracy taking root in
Pakistan, the fact is that in Pakistan it is the armed forces who call the tune,
while the rest dance to their tune.
When the head of this all-powerful institution has to resign, it
signifies that either the institution is losing its hold or the head of the
institution is losing his clout. The first possible explanation of course cannot
683

be accepted. This leaves us with the second explanation. With the war on
terrorism showing no tangible results, increasing number of suicide attacks
targeting men in uniform, and the extra-constitutional move of the 3 rd of
November evoking worldwide condemnation, the very force the now
retired General drew his strength from decided the change was in
order.
With his uniform off, Mr Musharrafs position will get weakened. No
doubt, courtesy the seventeenth constitutional amendment, particularly the
resurrection of the infamous Article 58-2(b), the office of the president is
enormously powerful. And if the elections produce a hung parliament,
which most probably they will, the presidents office will become more
powerful. But even an enormously powerful president cannot match the
power of the army chief
Though the installation of a civilian president marks the end of the
armys formal political role at least temporarily, the men in uniform will
continue to play a strong political role informally. The army has got so
much embroiled in the countrys politics and its commercial interests so
much expanded that it is well neigh impossible for the top brass to say
good-bye to or even reduce their political role. What they can do, and this is
what they have done, is to switch from being on the throne themselves to
being the power behind the throne.
Would the change of the army high command strengthen
democracy? The answer can be in the affirmative only if a strong
democracy and the armys strong political role are not seen mutually
incompatible. The basis of democracy is popular sovereignty, which means
that it is the people who are the ultimate repository of power and decide how
the state is to be governed This makes the legislature the supreme
institution in democracy. It is empowered to make, amend and repeal laws,
both ordinary and constitutional. The legislature it self is the creation of the
electorate and is ultimately responsible to it. Making the legislature
subservient to any other institution runs counter to the very basis of
democracy.
Of course, one may question the competence of the masses to govern
themselves or decide who is fit to govern them. But if one accepts
democracy, one will have to repose trust in the wisdom and power of the
people. To put it differently, one cannot maintain, without being illogical,
that there should be democracy but the real power should not be vested in
684

the people or the institutions they represent. If one believes in democracy,

one will have to accept popular sovereignty as well. Democracy may be
good or bad, but it cannot be controlled from outside. Controlled
democracy is a self-contradictory term.
For the PPP, the stepping down of Musharraf is something of a
face-saving tactic. Of all opposition parties, the PPP is better placed to form
the next government and if General Musharraf had not shed his military
uniform, the party would have been in an awkward position. For the PMLNthe weakening of Mr Musharrafs position is itself a cause for
celebration. Moreover, with the arch-adversary no more holding the most
powerful office, the political prospects of the party have improved.
Forth-coming general elections were also commented upon by the
political analysts. Aziz-ud-Din Ahmad wrote: It remains to be seen how far
Mian Nawaz Sharifs present stance about elections is dictated by his partys
peculiar needs than principled politics. On Tuesday, he lay down two preconditions for agreeing to take part in the electoral exercise i.e. end of
emergency and reinstatement of the judges who had refused to take oath
under the PCO. According to him doffing of the uniform was meaningless
unless the sacked judges were back in their jobs.
This is a stand supported generally by the lawyers organizations
whose members are keeping up a boycott of the courts presided over by
judges who agreed to sit on the benches under the PCO. On Wednesday, 17
former judges including Justice Wajihuddin issued a joint statement
demanding the reinstatement of the dismissed justices. They also called on
all political parties to boycott the elections if the demand was not met.
Being a mainstream political party, PML-N can ill-afford to boycott
the polls. But the party says it is yet to decide whether to contest or not. As
things stand however the PML-N faces disabilities which can adversely
affect its performance. Though back in Pakistan and despite having
submitted his nomination papers, Nawaz faces the threat of
disqualification. Attorney General Malik Abdul Qayyum says he cannot
contest on account of his conviction in the helicopter purchase case.
The government has already got an application filed for his
(Shahbazs) arrest in the Sabzazar Police encounter case. In case both the
leaders are out of the fray, the PML-N election prospects will
deteriorate. According to the opponents the principled position in fact is
685

meant to pressure the government to allow them to contest the elections and
if that fails to happen make a virtue of necessity by taking a principled
stand.
The PML-N leaders have become converts to the idea of an
independent judiciary and free media only recently Mian Nawaz
Sharifs conversion to democratic ideals may be genuine. After all, people
learn from their mistakes. By demanding the reinstatement of the ousted
judges he speaks for thousands who were inspired by a pro-active Supreme
Court and scores of judges who bravely refused to take oath under PCO.
Mian Nawaz can bring together all those who stand for ideals
rather than real politick in case he persists in the stands he has taken and is
not seen to be involved in backdoor deals to secure his position in the
coming elections. Imran Khan has practically abandoned the APDM after the
alliance components allowed their members to submit nomination papers.
The lawyers and the civil society in general will also be disheartened if Mian
Nawaz was seen to be beating a retreat.
Dr Ijaz Ahsan talked about the boycott. The two main objectives of
the emergency have been attained. These were: firstly, to pre-empt an
unfavourable judgment by the Supreme Court on the question of
Musharrafs eligibility as a presidential candidate; secondly, to remove
unwanted judges, to avoid any such problem in the future.
Such being the case, the emergency could be lifted any time. The
APDM is meeting today to decide about boycott of the elections. If, as
seems likely, Benazir and Fazlur Rehman refuse to cooperate with the
other opposition parties who all favour a boycott, the boycott will lose most
of its meaning, and the other parties also might decide to participate.
The Nation wrote: While President Musharraf again urged the
opposition to take part in elections, the APDM announced its components
would boycott the polls unless what he called unconstitutional actions taken
after the promulgation of Emergency were taken back, tying the lifting of the
Emergency to the last date for the withdrawal of nomination papers has led
to a perception that the Emergency might remain in force if the
opposition does not participate in the elections under conditions that the
APDM thinks suit only the President.

686

All opposition parties disagree with the President that the

Emergency was meant as a measure to deal with terrorism or with an
alleged conspiracy to derail democracy. The oppositions view is shared by
the independent media at home and abroad that the powers assumed under
emergency were in the main used to retire independent judges and put
restrictions on the opposition. While the militants in Swat continued to
steadily advance for more than two weeks after the November 3 peaceful
protests were banned, lawyers and political activists beaten up and arrested.
The APDM considers that in order to have fair elections an
independent judiciary and a free media are a sine qua non Two major
components of the opposition i.e. the PPP and JUI-F have however decided
to take part in elections, indicating a split in the opposition ranks which will
benefit neither those boycotting the elections nor the ones who desire to take
part There is a need for the APDM and the PPP urgently to formulate
a joint stand that ensures transparent elections, and for that a NawazBenazir meeting in depth is indispensable.
Raoof Hasan opined: The question of his legitimacy will not only
continue to haunt the fate of the country, it is bound to become increasingly
untenable with the passage of time. The manner in which he tried to secure
his election, by booting out the judiciary, gagging the media and imposing a
virtual martial law, was completely bereft of any ethical, legal or
constitutional basis and remains so irrespective of the steps that he may take,
or may contemplate to take in the future.
His illegitimacy is rooted in the unconstitutional dismissal of a
democratically elected government in 1999 and the proclamation of a
provincial constitutional order to run the country. All subsequent steps have
been perceived and perpetrated to validate the original aberration, which
simply refuses to go away. As a matter of fact, it was inherent in the action
of that fateful day that he would have to continue taking recourse to further
illegal and unconstitutional steps to hang on to power.
Much of the power that he is so wont of brandishing has gone away
with the doffing of his uniform. This has been further accentuated by his
having to accept Nawaz Sharif back in the country. Let there be no doubt
about the fact that this is not the way he wanted things to progress. He
would have opted for an easy passage to the election day for his preferred
political concoction that has been pieced together by his handpicked
sycophants
687

There is, therefore, no doubt about General Musharrafs preference

regarding the parties that he would want to emerge victorious from the sham
elections that he intends to conduct on January 8, 2008. The critical question
is whether, in spite of knowing his intentions, the political parties, or the
ones that still stand out of the loop, are going to extend a helping hand in
legitimizing the forthcoming farce?
While PML-Q or whatever would remain of it till the election day,
and the MQM are lined up to reap the promised dividends, the PPP-P
has shown little inclination to consider the possibility of boycotting the
elections. It is also understandable as the party can no longer boast of
democratic credentials since the promulgation of the infamous NRO,
indemnifying all the financial wrongs committed by its leader
As leader of the APDM that was also created at his initiative, a
major responsibility rests on the shoulders of Nawaz Sharif. He is also
head of a mainstream political party with broad-based support in all the
provinces of the country. His decision is going to be critical in the sense that
it would provide the requisite direction for other opposition political parties
to either go for the elections, or boycott them.
The most effective option for the entire opposition would have
been a collective boycott. Under the prevalent circumstances, that does not
come forth as a possibility as some of the opposition political parties,
because of divergent reasons, are determined to go along with the game plan
of General Musharraf. A partial boycott, without the provision of being
able to bring the people out on the streets for prolonged agitation, would be
like offering the spoils of elections on a platter to the chosen few of General
Musharraf.
Barring a miracle of a unified stance by all parties of the opposition,
this emerges as a fallback alternative for Nawaz Sharif and the other APDM
parties as it would also motivate the silent majority to step out and vote for
the parties that stand for the ascendancy of the Constitution and the
promulgation of the rule of law. This may also pave the way for correcting
the inherent aberration that continues to plague the country.
Ikramullah wrote: The split in the opposition parties over the
boycott issue has thus come in the open. The PPP chairperson has declared
that her party would not leave the electoral field open and uncontested by
boycotting the polls Under the circumstances when the major demands of
688

the opposition mainstream parties have been already met and General
Musharraf has finally taken oath after doffing the uniformat the same time
announced the lifting of the emergency on December 16, while pledging to
hold free and fair elections under the caretaker PM, is a question whether the
masses will come out on the streets for the restoration of the judges.
With all the due respect for the honourable judges who have not
taken the oath as required by the PCO and as dictated by their conscience,
the political culture of the third world countries to which Pakistan is no
exception has throughout demonstrated consistently that the election fever is
so domineering that it deters many other factors from entering the field
and where personal ambition to become members of the national and
provincial assemblies assumes priority over all other considerations of
higher moral value
Another question is that if APDMs one-point agenda does not meet
success by December 16, would the political parties stick to their stance of
boycotting the upcoming elections? The APDM would then have three
options:
One: to eat the humble pie and participate in elections as the bluff did
not work but earned them the goodwill and active support of the
lawyers community as well as the retired judges.
Two: stand by the threat of the boycott which may not win massive
support, even then the lawyers community and the media could
certainly put some life in their struggle at least in the urban areas
Three: while maintaining the posture of boycotting the elections by
their parties, their candidates who have already filed their nominations
without formal support of their party leaders, would go ahead and
contest the elections. The boycott, even if stuck by the PML-N, JI and
Tehreek-e-Insaaf is not likely to stall and block the January 2008
elections as per the present indicators on the ground.
Lubna Khalique from Lahore observed: Imran Khan was the first to
announce a decision to boycott the elections, alleging that with Pervez
Musharraf at the helm of affairs; free, fair and transparent elections could
not take place. It is up to every political leader whether to contest the
polls or not; although those clamouring for democracy should not resort to
negative tactics at this stage. Only the elections are a means to ascertaining
689

where it will serve the people in accordance with its election manifesto after
coming into power.
But what Imran Khan did at his recent press conference in Islamabad
was quite disappointing. It was not expected of a decent, educated and
well-mannered person like him. Imran Khan tore his nomination papers to
dramatize his decision to boycott the elections His tearing of the
nomination papers was nothing but a political gimmick.
Momina Bilal from Lahore wrote: If politicians are blasted for
wrongdoings then, in all fairness, they should also be appreciated and
commended if they do something good. I appreciate PPP Chairperson
Mohtarma Benazir Bhuttos positive stance on the forthcoming polls
Bhutto rightly justified her partys decision to contest the general election.
She also urged other political parties to also contest the polls fully and
actively, because in case of their boycott government candidates will
have a walkover.
Nasir Mahmood Shafiq from Peshawar noted: The APDM has
announced its decision of boycott the elections and demanded that the
government restore the deposed judges. The decision is bold one. The
lawyers fraternity and society were looking to the political parties to pursue
the cause.
The APDM should now come to the streets and joined hands with the
lawyers. The PPP and the JUI-F are not yet convinced of the idea of
boycotting the elections. As far as Benazir Bhutto is concerned, she had a
meeting with Musharraf before he took oath as president for another term.
Her presence in Pakistan is under a deal with establishment and her refusal
to join the struggle for reinstatement of the judges is understandable
because the petition against the NRO is pending before the Supreme Court.
M B Naqvi opined: If the idea of a boycott means boycotting the
election and going home to sleep, it would surely leave the field to all others
no matter if they were opportunists. To be significant, the boycott should
accompany a fierce popular agitation for democratic freedoms,
beginning with the restoration or the Supreme Court and High Courts as they
existed on November 2 last and the Constitution being rescued from the
deforming amendments that have been forced by successive generals to
make the president all powerful at the expense of a show boy Prime
Minister, including what this latest PCO has done. The question of
690

provincial autonomy that will satisfy smaller provinces can no longer be

postponed indefinitely. Without an all-out political struggle, boycott means
nothing. It is a silly thing if it stands alone as some kind of virtuous gesture.
Amina Jilani talked about rigging. The heralds of doom and gloom
have it that the 2008 elections will surpass all previous rigging records. If
that happens, we have to, for now, say goodbye to any weeding out process
and suffer on once again, with the usual suspects having been rounded up.
We can say goodbye to any hope of rebuilding the institutions of state which
have been trampled into the ground through myopia, greed and selfaggrandizement. One major problem with the players of Pakistans national
game, in every single field that can be named, is that if they are given an
inch they tend to take five miles that has been their downfall.
Observers also expressed views on BB-Mush-Bush Nexus. Hassan
Siddiqul from Islamabad wrote: A recent New York Times report say, that
President Musharraf had told the US before the enforcement of emergency
that if the US wants the war against terrorism to continue, it should forget
about elections and democracy and let the army in Pakistan rule.
This quite means that the US doesnt care about civil law or peace
or any other thing. What it does care about is achieving its targets.
Whether it is done through army rule or at the price of Pakistan killing its
people in Swat does not matter to Washington. Unfortunately, the price is
paid by Pakistan itself.
Tooba Alam from Lahore observed: Lately, US Ambassador to
Pakistan Anne W Patterson has been in the news alongside mainstream
politicians of the country. She is continuously holding meetings with
different political leaders and urging them to participate in the general
elections. Recently she met Nawaz Sharif and Maulana Fazlur Rehman and
tried to convince them to take part in the polls.
The honourable ambassador must know that there is a very fine
line between diplomacy and interference. I cant imagine the Pakistani
ambassador to the US interfering in the domestic politics of America by
meeting US presidential hopefuls and advising them on what they should be
doing.
The News noted: Benazir Bhutto is quite wide off the mark when
she talks about Kahuta meaning Pakistans nuclear arsenal falling into

691

the hands of extremists or when she raises the fear that Taliban, now
retreating in Swat, could come to Islamabad Ms Bhutto knows perfectly
well that both these possibilities have not even one in a million chance of
becoming a reality.
When Benazir Bhutto harps on this theme (nuclear arsenal), she
appears to be doing so to play to the western (read American) galleries.
This makes her look a bit insecure and nave, still trying to get the attention
and support of hardliners in the west as against relying on her intrinsic
popular support and voter strength within the country
Ms Bhuttos second fear that Taliban may take over Islamabad also
appears to be intended more for a western audience. Of course the federal
capital had to deal with the extremists at Lal Masjid but that was only
because it took the powers that be inordinately long to decide to oust the
militants Ms Bhuttos promise to take the fight to the extremists and leave
no stone unturned in battling the militants is a welcome one. Even Nawaz
Sharif has the right credentials to be able to bring these militants to
justice and not for the sake of pleasing a foreign power but for Pakistans
own interest.
Wajid Shamsul Hasan praised Benazir and her foreign backers.
Foreign media believes that he (Nawaz) has been sent back to counter
PPP leader Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto whose politics stands for a liberal,
enlightened and democratic Pakistan as envisioned by its founder I would
not like to subscribe to such interpretations but there are others who would
still like to.
His critics say that his intended Shariah-isation was contrary to our
founding fathers raisen detre in whose Pakistan religion was not to have
anything to do with the business of the state perhaps was the one single
reason that gave initial popularity to Musharraf. His self-proclaimed
enlightened moderation to keep himself in power exposed him.
Ms Bhutto spent eight years in exile to create awareness in the
West that Pakistan needs democracy to be a useful member of the
international community to be part of a global effort against the scourage of
intolerance and as a key player for consolidating interfaith forces for
peaceful coexistence. She finally convinced those who considered Musharraf
as the best man for the job and look for the democratic options. It was a
gigantic effort
692

PPP chairperson while commandeering newer heights of popularity

continues to be the favourite punching bag for those who want to hide
their sins of omission and commission against democracy. They swipe at
her constantly and are critical of her clout in the US and the West. One
wishes to ask them who is better in matters of countries and individuals.
The Americans and their Western democratic allies have
contributed immensely to pushing Pakistan on the democratic goal.
Their support for Ms Bhutto having played larger than life role for
democracy and empowerment of the people for three decades besides being
enlightened, liberal and secular in the mould of Jinnah is understandable.
What about others and their foreign mentors? Their friendly kings
and princelings could not stop Mr Musharraf from forcibly bundling them
off from Rawalpindi to Jeddah and not letting them re-turn until Mr
Musharraf got himself elected. It was only after Ms Bhuttos triumphant
home-coming and her persistent pressure for providing level playing field
for others as well that opened the doors for them otherwise they would
have remained in the Holy Lands warming the parchment of Supreme
Court order that had declared their forced exile to Jeddah as illegal.
And finallyI was anxiously waiting to hear from Riyadh its
governments support for democracy in Pakistan or the condemnation of the
sacking of the judiciary, arrests of thousands of lawyers, political activists
if not much but at least something of the sort that kept cascading officially
from the United States to pressurize Musharraf.
Nawaz was treated as a villain by BB-Mush-Bush troika. The Nation
wrote: Bushs observation that he does not know Mian Nawaz Sharif well
enough shows how ignorant he is about a two-time prime minister of the
country, which is serving as a frontline state in his War on Terror for the last
seven years He expressed his administrations reservations about Mian
Nawazs commitment to fight terrorism, saying his relations with
religious parties raised serious doubts about his ability to do so.
Bush should not have ignored the fact that Mian Nawaz himself had
been the target of terrorism especially during his second tenure. There had
been at least two attempts on his life soon after he launched a massive
crackdown on sectarian outfits in the countrys largest province. He cannot
be accused of patronizing religious extremists merely for attempting to
enforce the Islamic order in the country. It seems the US President only
693

lends an ear to the administrations officials who fear that Mian Nawazs
role in a future government might undermine global efforts to hunt down
militants and also block initiatives to modernize Pakistans economy and
society.
Mr Bush is not only being too intrusive in our affairs but his
comments also clearly indicate that he is more interested in having a
pliant regime to take care of US interests rather than in Pakistans return
to democracy. But he needs to keep in mind that his so-called counterterrorism strategy blindly followed by Islamabad in the last seven years has
exacerbated extremism here and turned the world more unstable than ever.
Wajahat Latif observed: The Generals mission to prevent his
return through personal intervention with the Saudi King had failed. It
was believed that the Saudis were not prepared to keep Nawaz Sharif out of
the present political scenario; mainly because, Ms Benazir Bhutto had
already returned with the help of the US government amid rumours of a deal
with Musharraf.
A friend of mine who teaches at the School of Political Science in
Paris says, Pakistani politics is not for the faint-hearted: so suddenly
does it twist and turn. Serious political adversaries can patch up overnight.
When the Supreme Court of Pakistan allowed Mian Nawaz Sharif to return
to the country, people were certain General Musharraf would not be able to
stop him.
The high-handedness with which he was bundled back to Jeddah was
unthinkable. In utter contempt for law, human rights, ignoring all standards
of decent behaviour, the regime deported Mian Nawaz Sharif on September
10 when, armed with a Supreme Court order, he tried to enter his own
country.
If Musharraf thought he had scored a political point with this action,
he was mistaken. This deportation, reported to the entire world on
television cameras, boosted Mian Nawaz Sharifs popularity in
Pakistan. The defiance of the regime by landing at Islamabad, only to be
forcibly deported, went in his favour.
Through sheer persistence Mian Nawaz Sharif has occupied high
moral ground in Pakistani politics. He has been steadfast in his support for
democracy and condemnation of military rule. The first statement he made

694

last Saturday was that he had made no deal with the regime: he stood for the
restoration of the judiciary and democracy. He is willing to boycott the 2008
election under Musharraf, but his party would take the final decision after
consulting their partners in the All Parties Democratic Movement.
Imran Husain opined: The manner in which the Supreme Court
judgment allowing Nawaz Sharifs inalienable right was flouted a few
weeks ago was indeed regrettable. What is significant is that his correct and
just stand has been vindicated and his credibility totally restored.
The advent of fall is always incredible. It brings with it the
awesome, resounding, brilliant colours that honour Gods awesome
creations; natural and unspoiled beauty; pure, as only His creations can be;
whispering, yet unabashedly loud. The colder the climate the more
incredible the impact The gloominess of the shortened day is insignificant
in the sheer magnificence of it all.
That is until winter quickly sets in and the vividly coloured leaves
begin to fall off, giving credence to the name; fall. Then saddened bare
branches bring you back to the stark reality of the forthcoming, harsh
months. Before the rats; fat, thin and winkle-pickers fanciers, start
scurrying through the corridors shouting treason, let me quickly set the
record straight. Fall as in autumn, the reason. No dark sinister implications
here.
Tearing one away from this vision of beauty is the exciting thought of
the dawning of the new day, a long awaited one, that will usher in a new
civilian presidency or at least that is what we are told. But a civilian
president under cover of emergency rule, doctrine of necessity, PCO and
whatever else you can think of, mind you. And armed with dreaded 58-2(b)

The most important factor facing possible successors to

government is to ensure stability and allow the transition, however fragile
it may appear at this time, to some form of operational democracy where the
power actually moves to the chief executive. It is absolutely clear that proxy
power as has been the case during the outgoing government is unacceptable,
not democratic and certainly not constitutional whether General
Musharraf considered his role supervisory or otherwise.

695

Most now fear that the elections will be so heavily rigged that
there would be further fragmentation of the political situation leading to
weak minority governments that would eventually succumb to another
intervention prompted by necessity. With things the way they are in the
country that eventually could spell the final disaster for Jinnahs vision.
Observers and analysts tell us that Musharraf will never permit
the restoration of the Supreme Court as was on November 3 because that
will spell disaster for him. Recent events have proven that the word never
does not hold good. The fact is that the action taken on that date,
questionable by admission of Musharraf himself, has certainly eroded
whatever limited credibility remained at the end of the eight year period.
Imposition of emergency under circumstances similar to those
prevailing in Pakistan today is undoubtedly a constitutional alternative. But
intent plays a huge part in proclamation of an act that restricts human rights
beyond that of terrorists, anarchists and their partners. If intent becomes
questionable then the action is immediately suspect and falls within the
purview of gross violation of the sanctity of freedom.
Eight long years Pakistan has been held in abeyance while person
prevailed and let me quickly add to the quote, those who profess to be
righteous are overcome with insufferable arrogance leading to the belief that
it is possible to fool all of the people all of the time.
A political strategy needs to be developed that will serve the nation
both in the short and long term. It should be totally need based without
considering individuals. At this juncture compromising principles will be
disastrous. Every stakeholder has a role to play in the present circumstances
but none more than the army. Since it holds the reins of power the onus is on
it to ensure a smooth constitutional transition, even more so if the person
exercising that power happens to be a former chief of the institution.
Mansoor Ijaz, while writing for LA Times, opined that none of these
was the right person for Pakistan. Musharraf finally bowed to international
pressure Wednesday and resigned Pakistans most powerful government
position: army chief of staff whether he keeps those promise, and whether
Pakistan can be returned to a path of civilian government under the rule of
law will depend heavily on what its political party leaders and former
Prime Ministers, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, do in the next weeks.

696

Sharif is the most problematic proposition for Pakistans future

Sharif was never Pakistans savior. Of course, neither Musharraf nor
Bhutto is a better choice to fix what ails Pakistan. During two terms in
office, Bhuttolooted the treasury As for Musharraf, his imposition of
emergency rule on Nov 3, which allowed him to dissolve the court that
preferred the rule of law to his dictates, betrays his true colours.
The truth is, all three of these leaders have had their chances to
rule and spent them destroying the very fabric of what could provide
Pakistan with a chance at greatness: a functioning civil society built on the
vitality and industriousness of its people.
Given the players and the circumstances, the elections in January
will resolve little. There could well be continuing civil strife, in which a
pinstripe revolution (led by the lawyers who fueled much of the opposition
to Musharraf) could result in the educated middle class taking back the
country.
If Pakistans leaders of yesterday, Sharif and Bhutto, want to bring
hope to Pakistan tomorrow, they should use the petro-dollars of their Arab
benefactors and their ill-gotten gains to fund the movement sparked by the
lawyers and the middle class. Pakistan requires a revolution, not a bunch
of has-been, corrupt politicians who self-servingly and half-heartedly
claim they want to fix what they themselves tore apart.
The crisis as a whole revolved around the man who has been bent
upon perpetuating his rule by hook or crook. Farrukh Shahzad from
Islamabad was of the view that this imposition of law, or the so-called
Emergency, has once again revealed inner most thoughts in the mind of
General Musharraf who wants to retain power at any cost, even by holding
the Constitution of the country in abeyance.
The General is, as usual, terming this decision to be in the larger
national interest but it is obvious he was anticipating an unfavourable verdict
from the Supreme Court against his candidature of President in uniform. He
has said that country is threatened both internally and externally. If so, this is
the making of his prolonged dictatorship. He should opt for an early exit if
he really wants to save the country from anarchy or risk to its integrity.
Shamshad Ahmad wrote: He has finally made the move that he had
been promising for the past few years, and has tearfully taken off his

697

uniform which in recent years he had started considering as his skin. He

has now bared himself and vacated the office of the army chief for the next
senior most General in the line of succession.
He has already taken the oath as a civilian president for a second
term, but several questions of legitimacy continue to haunt his
presidency. In particular, two basic issues, namely, his eligibility in
uniform and his re-election through the same assemblies that had elected
him last time and were reaching the end of their tenure will always
stigmatize his credentials in terms of legitimacy and legal or moral
authority.
For some reason, General Musharraf considers himself to be
indispensable for the country. According to him, he had a choice between
the country and the constitution, and he has opted for the country, and has
decided to remain president for another term through all means because in
his view, the country will not survive without him. This reminds us of
Machiavelli
Musharraf is somehow also convinced that he alone knows what
is good for this benighted country. In his own authority and wisdom he
has been taking arbitrary decisions which have since his 9/11 policy
turnaround kept Pakistan locked in a state of war, earned us dubious
distinctions of being among the top lists of worlds notorious dictatorships,
and most corrupt most unsafe, most violent and most dangerous states.
To the nations dismay, in terms of our role and relevance in the
region, we are today bracketed with Afghanistan, not India. This was
never the case in the pre-October 1999 period when under a civilian
leadership, Pakistan became a nuclear power at par with India and was
moving ahead with dignity as a democratic state and a responsible regional
and global power. We have lost our democratic character and are no longer
seen as a responsible nuclear power. And yet General Musharraf insists
that his continued leadership is indispensable for the future of this country.
Irrespective of what our constitution stipulates, he would still like
to empower himself, in addition to the authority he already enjoys to
dismiss a civilian parliament under Article 58(2)b, with more of the de
facto powers of the army chief. Knowing that he was to soon relinquish the
office of army chief, he hurriedly transferred emergency powers including
the powers to amend the Constitution from army chief to the president.
698

This was a person to person exclusive transfer of power designed

only to ensure that General Musharraf, even after becoming Mr Musharraf,
continues to own the Constitution and the law. It will be he alone who will
decide as to when the emergency or undeclared martial law should go.
No wonder, he considers himself to be the most law-abiding and
constitutional-minded person we never heard anything like this ever
before. Nowhere in the world is the state power concentrated so densely in
one person by name. The nation and the world at large stand aghast and are
asking for sanity to return to this beleaguered country.
The question now is how long in our country will the constitutional
supremacy and the rule of law remain subservient to the will of an
individual. How long will the man in uniform continue to subjugate the
countrys judiciary? Since March this year, we have seen a sea-change in our
nations mindset. The people are no longer ready to be ruled as a lifeless
nation.
They will now not allow their fundamental values and freedoms to
remain hostage to an individuals whims. They want immediate restoration
of the Constitution, and as an immediate first step, they would expect the
country to go back to the pre-November 3 status quo ante.
The people also want a genuine farewell to arms. They want peace
within and peace without, and would like their armed forces to be back
in their hearts as the same old respected professional military force that
once they loved as their heroes capable of defending the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of the country. To regain their prestige and honour they
must go back to their constitutional and professional role, as had the Quaid
envisioned for them.
M I Khan from Peshawar had his reservations on Musharrafs
overtures. According to him, he didnt fear criticism because he was
absolutely clean and had no skeletons in his cupboard. Mr President,
your first skeleton is that you put in abeyance the sacred constitution of this
country of which you profess to be a soldier and a protector and which you
say runs in your veins like blood. You did this not once but twice, and we are
now a state without the constitution.
Your second skeleton is the assault on the judiciary of this country
through dismissal of a majority of the Supreme Court and high court judges

699

from their sacred positions. You put a majority of the esteemed judges under
active house arrest, thus humiliating the whole judicial system.
Your third skeleton is that you snatched the basic human rights of
the 160 million people of this country for the perpetuation of your own rule,
but in the name of national interest. You insulted parliament by using it as a
rubberstamp, thus reducing it to a non-entity.
Your fourth skeleton is that you took away the eyes and ears of
your nation by blacking out independent television channels, because
you think the people of this country are fools who cannot distinguish truth
falsehood and thus should remain in the darkness of your official
propaganda machine.
Mr President, you kept making promises to your nation only to break
them. These are only a few of the skeletons that decorate your cupboard.
You may not like to see them, but the people of Pakistan can see them very
clearly. So please have another look inside your cupboard if you really
want to see the reality. The reality is that the honourable president does
not have skeletons as yet but plenty of fresh and decaying corpses which
would require time to turn into skeletons.
Imtiaz Alam opined: No doubt, President Musharraf has lost too
much ground after November 3. Most vocal sections of civil society are on
the streets against his self-perpetuation. An anti-Musharraf environment is
being created before the election starts Most worrying aspect of the
current situation is that all opposition parties are expressing serious
reservation about the impartiality of the coming elections.
The whole game is now focused on the outcome of next elections
and the opposition must win this round. And if the opposition does win
this round, it can cleanup the whole Constitution of all autocratic deviations
and decide the fate of, at least, two PCOs issued by Musharraf. The time is
to the people, mobilize them and get rid of last vestiges of authoritarianism.
Dr Farida Malik talked about the choice; confrontation or
compromise. The President has lost his support. Except for the Khaki
League and its direct beneficiaries the public at large wants him out. For the
first time in fifty years of military rule the legal community has decided to
oppose the establishment and its illegal practices

700

Surprisingly, the political parties are divided in their stand have

settled for short-term gains at the cost of permanent national advantage.
So far only three leaders have openly opposed the retired general: Nawaz
Sharif, Imran Khan and Aitzaz Ahsan. As usual the political right is either
indifferent or supportive of the military rulers.
People at large are frustrated enough to come out on the streets
but remain directionless. In the past there have been several protests that
have resulted in the fall of governments but the beneficiaries have always
been the generals, except in 1971 uprising in which the establishment
suffered great losses and was on the verge of dismemberment.
It is clear that only democracy can save Pakistan. The West and the
General may have their own interests but Pakistan needs true democracy and
a functional parliament to replace one mans rule. Every struggle poses its
own challenges and rewards. Let 2008 be the year of change with a mass
movement and street power. Now that Nawaz Sharif is back, he can join
the skipper and together lead the charge. Restoration or rule of law followed
by a free and fair election has to be the goal of this uprising against the
establishment. Pakistan has to be green not khaki anymore.
Javed Jabbar, in an interview to Counterpunch, urged the politicians to
show maturity. Replying to a question about emergency, he said: First of
all, the consequences will be extremely negative in the long term for
Pakistanis institutional development and cohesion. It has been a terrible
blow to the process to strengthening the independence and autonomy of
institutions: the media, the judiciary, the checks and balances.
The second consequence will be a degree of introspection in the
media itself. Sometimes, not always, but sometime private media have used
new freedoms in a somewhat unbridled, if not excessive, way. All freedoms
should be subject to some sense of moderation. To show for example during
live telecasts the killing and willful gratuitous violence is, on one hand,
reporting what you are seeing, but on the other hand it is inciting people to
revenge or apathy or insensitivity. On the long-term basis, more important,
the President Musharraf should make distinctions between what suits his
interests and what is in the countrys interests.
On US motivations in dealing with Musharraf and Benazir, he said:
On the face of it there is the interest of the US to align themselves with
elements whom they think are in tune with their ideals and values. This is a
701

superficial reading. Yes, certainly, Musharraf and Benazir represent those

parts and citizens of Pakistan that abhor violence, that are against extremism
and fanaticism. Equally, however, the degree to which Pakistan has
collaborated and cooperated with the US has clearly alienated the
people in Pakistan who have these same liberal values.
There is a need to assert Pakistani autonomy and identity, and it
has been done to be fair Pakistan is not just putty in the hands of the US
government. No Pakistani will simply say, yes, sir to whatever the State
Department or US government wants.
The best step would be the restoration of the Constitution without
any dilution of its democratic, political nature. Number two; a distinctive
and clear separation between the civil political process and the role of
military. Number three; a genuinely independent and powerful election
commission with complete executive authority at the grassroots level to
ensure truly authentic elections. Finally, number four, maturity and strength
from the leadership of the political parties to cooperate and prevent the
situation from further deterioration.
The News commented on the meetings of main opposition leaders.
The late-night meetings of Dec 3have opened up the possibility that
finally the opposition may be getting its act together. The Benazir-Nawaz
meeting was especially noteworthy as both leaders showed a lot of
flexibility on contentious issues, with Ms Bhutto opening up to the
possibility of joining the APDM in a boycott and Mr Sharif agreeing to
contest the polls if the government agreed to charter of demands they would
jointly put up with a short deadline
The charter of demands they agreed to present would be tough call
for President Musharraf and his regime as it will seek to undo the political
structure erected in months and years to get positive election results for his
supporters and allies. The main points of the charter are already known
an independent election commission, a genuinely neutral caretaker set-up,
release of political and judicial prisoners, rolling back all the politically
motivated postings and transfers of key officials, suspending the nazims and
neutralizing their influence, complete media freedom and no engineering of
the election results.
To a large extent the government itself has pushed these mainstream
parties to sit on a table and create a joint front. When President Musharraf
702

praised the return of both Benazir Bhutto and the Sharif family from exile to
participate in the elections, what was the point in rejecting the nomination
papers of both the Sharif brothers, other than making a crude attempt
to push them out of the electoral contest so that the official PML gets
some benefit? If some one is, or has been, a bank defaulter and that
disqualifies him from taking part in the elections, then half of the official
PML would be thrown out
The one issue on which every party is raising its voice loud and
vociferously is the credibility of the regime to hold a genuinely free and fair
election. This is the biggest challenge facing President Musharraf and has
already indicated that if the results of Jan 8 polls are unacceptable, he may
quit the scene. This may be seen as a sign of weakness but his best option
as the civilian president of the country would be to honestly and sincerely
rise above the political fray, stop patronizing some of his past allies, sit down
with the main political leaders giving them due respect, create a transparent
and fear-free atmosphere and that way he will make the elections noncontroversial and more about issues rather than his own person.
Farzana Bari was of the view that under the present circumstances,
the entire burden to keep the focus on the central issue of independence of
judiciary and to sustain this resistance movement falls on the shoulders of
civil society. It becomes the social responsibility of the educated middle
class and the civil society to protect the gains made after giving so many
sacrifices.
Independence of judiciary and media are the issues, which deeply
concern the middle classes. This does not mean that these issues are not
important for the lower middle class or poor. However, this is not their
priority. Therefore, it will be nave to expect that the masses from rural areas
and from the labour class of the urban centres will join this movement and
will make it a success.
The middle class must be prepared to play its historic role. They
need strategies on how to sustain the movement. There is an urgent need for
better networking and coordination among various sections of society such
as lawyers, journalists, human rights activists and students. Civil society has
to keep the momentum going by organizing protests, hunger strikes and
rallies. The next few days will be critically important in this region.

703

Through their activism, civil society should pressurize political

parties to stay out of election until the superior judiciary is restored.
This must be the precondition for the political parties to contest election. It is
equally important for civil society to expand this movement into a mass
movement by considering what issues are critical for the masses. This will
motivate them to join the movement.
Movement must continue despite the limitations, opined Afiya
Shaherbano. We lose the game but we keep our consciences intact and find
more of our kind that dont want to hide under the pretence of real politick
or the idea that politics is the art of the possible, a game of compromises or
that it necessarily should be about keeping options open. Do we really
need to be reminded that in fact these are the very politics that have led to a
weakening of representative processes and a trust deficit that we loosely call
political apathy? The people didnt lose their politics; theyve stopped
believing in opportunist, power mongering, option-seeking politicians
and compromised leaders.
Civil society activists would do well to remember that regardless of
the limited numbers they could mobilize politically, they carry a credibility
that every dictator at some point seeks out his/her own legitimacy. At the
very least they allude to instances where they upheld a demand of civil
society, repeatedly. Otherwise they would just ignore us. But they cant. It is
precisely because some segments of civil society are seen as independent of
the state and market, that they earn their credibility.
It takes years, decades even, but when a crisis comes up we see that
these organized movements that continued their struggle from the margins
still provide the most principled, clear visions and political stands. The next
generation of activists learns from them the historical benfits of being part of
a political process that may be limited in numbers but is steeped in clarity
and earnest passion. Surely we would like to see that translated into political
expression rather than filling our parliament with dime a dozen
functionaries, who chose the disrespectful path of expediency.
There is a criticism of the recent civic movement that has become
politically active post-Nov 3. The first criticism is regarding its
membership that it represents the upper class elite who has nothing to lose
and do not represent working class issues and therefore make a mockery of
protest politics.

704

There are two quick and limited responses that can be made here.
First, the vanguard of civil society movements has tended to; both
historically and globally, emerge from the elite intelligentsia or the
bourgeoisie. To be class conscious, one need not necessarily be working
class. Second, this criticism has surprisingly been completely absent when
civil society remains inactive
That there are so many today in Pakistan who are proudly and
unapologetically insisting on holding on to their idealism is something that
thrills the optimists and threaten those who lack credibility on their
compromised politics Idealists need not privilege their ideas over others
the point is to pull ideas together but through a collective expression of their
independence, not one that seeks relevance in the system or by constantly
running after changing goal-posts. Its courageous to dream and even
more so to attempt to realize that dream from the margins. This scares
the pragmatists the most because they do not dare to dream anymore once
they are inside the belly of the beast.
Nasim Zehra saw movement dynamics and electoral dynamics
converging. On December 3 Pakistanis witnessed important developments
within Pakistans political context. Circumstances had pushed competing
politicians together despite their different priorities they chose to move
forward together on a peaceful but genuine democratic path. Settling old
accounts have to be done through genuine electoral politics operating
within a genuinely independent election commission, an independent
judiciary and an independent media.
The discussions during the December 3 meeting which essentially
brought the entire opposition, now under the umbrella of ARD and the
APDM, together have resulted in the decision to address the concerns of
Pakistans nascent movement politics and electoral politics. Together
these two leadershave now agreed to draw up a Charter of Demands.
This convergence of the imperatives of movement politics and
electoral politics has been prompted by President Pervez Musharrafs
November 3 imposition of quasi-martial law and by the current conditions of
pre-poll rigging that exist. The obvious ones are the pro-PML-Q and proMusharraf caretaker government, the provincial governors appointed by
President Musharraf, the provincial administrative structures especially in
Punjab and Sindh that remain loyal to the former PML-Q chief ministers and

705

an election commission that has worked as an organ of the Musharraf

regime not a genuinely independent commission
Significantly, all this has been possible because of the issues that
Pakistans movement politics is now raising the absence of rule of law,
the unaccountability of in power, the trashing of the Constitution and the
Superior Courts at will and the determining of Pakistans future in
accordance to an individuals wisdom, no matter how well-meaning. Hence
for the politicians, what are for the citizens in the movement politics crucial
principles, become essentially practical requirements. Against this backdrop
it is not surprising that the dynamic of movement politics has had its impact
on electoral politics.
Men in presidents camp who have cheered him on as he continued to
remain in the political blunder land of his making are now raising concerns.
Sheikh Rashid, the most vocal of presidents men and a solid constituency
politicians himself has finally talked of the weakness of his partys
leadership. When everyone argued incessantly that the president must opt for
Grand National reconciliation, the presidents men tutored him in the
politics of divide and rule, of manipulation and of irreconcilability. Now
the systems of political manipulation have become redundant. The attempts
to roll back the clock on movement politics will not work.
Movement dynamics and electoral dynamics have converged. Old
ways of violence-based state control will not work. Pakistanis do not want
violence but many are likely to resist the exercise of accountable power. The
proposed (COD) charter to be put out by the political parties must ensure
that issues of principles and politics are all addressed. That alone is the way
to steer Pakistans movement and electoral politics towards a non-violent
non-anarchic path. The President too must reconcile with the reality.
Mowahid Hussain Shah talked about characteristics of Pakistani
politics and the need for change. Flattery and back-biting are cardinal
features of politicking in Pakistan, characterized by buttering those present
and bad-mouthing the abscent. Camouflaged by the smokescreen of nonstop praise and tattling is the unbridled pursuit of wealth and power. At its
center is personality-worship at a level of idolatry. A false impression is
created that the personality is so unique that, if it exists, there will be a
deluge Predictably, then, a pattern is fixed of people working overtime
praising their own leaders while they pillory leaders of rival groups. There is

706

little self-examination
predominates.

or

self-accountability.

Smug

righteousness

Self-delusion leads to self-denial. For example, pro-government

circles have deceived themselves into believing that they are popular, despite
mounting evidence to the contrary. For their part, so-called opposition
elements have convinced themselves that they are the torch-bearers of
democracy when, in fact, their own autocratic mind-set has torpedoed
representative democracy.
There is talk of patriotism; just talk. The damage done to the
nation while wearing the garb of phony patriotism is self-evident. Patriots
dont plunder nor do they seek to perpetuate themselves in power till
eternity. (Yet) the core agenda remains Power First.
Pakistan todayis entering into the zone of consequences the
consequences of its geo-political and domestic policies. The margin of error
gradually has shrunk. Pakistan can no longer afford business as usual. Too
often, over-clever schemes have a way of imploding.
Thus far, the preponderance of cajolery and intrigue has obscured
the compelling need for hard work and hard thinking. But the challenges
now are already transparent and require immediate redress. What is
untenable cannot be sustainable.
Sometimes nations advance under adversity As German
philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche said: What does not destroy me makes me
stronger. There is an old Chinese saying that a journey of a thousand miles
begins with a single step. The first fundamental step that needs to be
taken is a simple recognition that the nation is on the wrong track.
Kamal Siddiqi, however, was of the view that the things were going
according to plan for those that matter. The main point of contention
between the PML-N and PPP remains the issue of the deposed judges.
For Mian Nawaz Sharif the main issue is the reinstatement of the deposed
judges, many of whom are being kept in sub-human conditions in different
parts of the country. For Ms Bhutto, the main demand is the suspension of
the local bodies set up during the general elections.
The two other issues on which talk has been subdued, has been the
restriction on the third time PMs and Article 58-2(b) If there is no decision

707

or settlement on these, the two main political parties would be fighting

elections under a cloud. Possibly these two conditions will be used as
bargaining chips to bring the mainstream parties into the ring. Political
pundits say that there are expectations that the government we will have in
2008 will be a coalition one.
One needs to ask what was the understanding under which Mian
Nawaz Sharif was allowed to come back to Pakistan within weeks of being
deported under adverse and angry circumstances by the military
government. Why the whole drama a month or so back? At the time of his
departure, Sharif had said that he would return very soon, what did he know
then that we did not? Also, what are the rules of the games as explained to
him? This week a NAB court will hear a case against Mian Nawaz Sharif
and Mian Shahbaz Sharif.
Meanwhile, attention to the conditions in which the judges and
eminent lawyers are being kept came to light when the health of former
SCBA president Munir A Malik deteriorated rapidly Justice Tariq
Mehmood has also complained of kidney infection. The wife of another
judge complained that her husband was being kept in miserable conditions
in a Punjab jail in order to teach him a lesson.
Speaking of the caretaker cabinet, the president seems to have given
them a hard task; to conduct free and fair polls. This cannot be possible
given the composition of the cabinets. A large percentage of those in the
federal and provincial cabinets have been nominated by parties aligned to
the government. They have been placed there to serve their party
interests.
The fact that the government is not allowing in many independent
political observers, forcing the American Ambassador to take up the issue
with the President seems to suggest that things are going according to plan
for those that matter. For the rest of us, the best thing to do is; watch and
pray.

REVIEW
Musharraf won and he was sworn in for second term by the
provisionally constitutionalized Chief Justice. The two men reciting the lines

708

one after the other, taken from the Constitution held in abeyance, must have
cherished the invention of PCO technology.
Two events are worth mention in this context. The verses of Holy
Quraan chosen for the recitation by the Qari, inadvertently or deliberately,
were the same which Yazid recited when Zainab (Allah Be Pleased with
Her) was brought before her. Like Yazid, Musharraf too seemed to have
unfounded belief that to be in the power, by hook or crook, meant bestowing
of honour by Almighty Allah.
The other event was Musharraf-Benazir meeting at night at third
partys residence. This meeting indicated that the two were in agreement on
issues of judiciary and presidential term. Having achieved the unanimity of
views on major issues, the date for lifting the Emergency Rule was fixed.
Despite having knocked out his opponent, Musharraf could not resist
exposing the inadequacies of his character. He accused the ousted Chief
Justice and other judges of conspiring against him. Hearing the allegation of
sazish, one was reminded mumblers mumblings in which he had said that
they played siasat with us and we played siasat of NRO and we won.
Exactly in the same manner the judges of the Supreme Court were blamed
for playing sazish and Musharraf came out with the sazish of imposing
martial law in the garb of Emergency Plus and won.
His victory was the result of delivering the knock-out punch about
which he had been deliberating since 20th July. He did not keep his evil
intentions a secret because he cared little for differentiating right from
wrong, legal from illegal or moral from immoral. In his philosophy of life all
that matters, is power, nothing else but power, which he possessed as COAS
and used ruthlessly.
Musharrafs vengeance was not quenched by knocking out of the CJP
along with more than fifty judges. He took steps beyond the PCO to ensure
that entire system of justice was forced to submit to the will of the executive
and incapacitated to the extent that it could never dare challenging
executives will.
On the other side, the CJP was guilty of being complacent, even after
cutting across the line of military dictator and his foreign backers. In his
eagerness to dispense justice, the CJP annoyed Musharraf by pinching the
dictator at points considered to be the strongest. First, he ruled against the

709

privatization of Pakistan Steel Mills exposing regimes much-hyped honesty.

Secondly, by taking up the cases of Missing Persons, the CJP exposed as to
how the regime won laurels from the West for his invaluable contribution to
the cause of the Crusades.
It seemed that the Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry never
realized that the COAS, who could topple a democratically elected prime
minister with heaviest mandate, wont hesitate knocking out a government
employee may it be a chief justice. Iftikhar Chaudhry paid the price of
negligent.
The CJP, now under detention, will have plenty of time to ponder as to
what went wrong; when and where. He will certainly find blood on hands of
many of his brothers in the system of justice. The PCO Chief Justice stands
out conspicuously, who while administering oath to Musharraf, also
performed the last rites of system of justice in Pakistan.
To conclude, it may be said that the Executive has decisively
knocked out the Judiciary. It is immaterial arguing that the Executive had all
the state might at his back and he resorted to foul play all along. The winner
could boast that the deposed judges were now part of history.
With the judiciary put on the mat by a military ruler, the ruled,
including the judges, have been deprived of trustworthy means that can now
provide justice to the suppressed people? Surely, the ball is in the court of
the politicians or political parties. Will the politicians accept the invitation to
have a bout with the military dictator?
There is no doubt that the politicians are the representatives of the
people. They should do what the people want. And people of Pakistan want
to get rid of the dictator and undoing all the damage done by him,
particularly to the judiciary. Their demand has moral and legal ground.
But, it has to be remembered that politicians, despite being the
representatives of the people, are the ones to whom the people voluntarily
consent to rule them for specified period. The underlying implication is
often forgotten; the politicians are potential Executives.
In their heart of heart, the politicians may be having the same feelings
about the judges which the dictator has. Therefore, people cannot leave it to
them to accomplish the task of reinstatement of the judiciary, if they are

710

sincerely interested in dispensation of justice. The people must force the

politicians to deliver as the battle would now be fought in political arena.
The nation must not forget the sacrifices of lawyers for the
independence of judiciary. Their boycott of courts spread over months has
also to be seen in the economic context. They belong to the category of daily
wagers. Musharraf regime has been fully aware of this limitation of the
lawyers and hoped that their boycott wont last for long. That did not
happen. Whether or not their movement succeeded/succeeds in attaining its
goal, their struggle would certainly find prominent place in our history.
6th December 2007

711

BOYCOTT OR NOT
The intensity of events in political arena has diverted the attention
away from battle between military dictator and judiciary, but it could not be
ignored altogether because it has the main factor behind the revival of
political activism. This battle will now be finally decided in forthcoming
polls wherein will of the people will be expressed.
Nawaz Sharif claimed that he had tried his best to convince Benazir
and Fazl for boycott. PPP, meanwhile, succeeded in side-tracking the issue
of judges and shifted the focus on to holding of free and fair elections as
ARD-APDM team completed the drafting of 15-point Charter of Demands.
Lawyers, journalists and students continued their protest. Imran Khan
addressed lawyers in Gujranwala and urged Opposition to unite for the
restoration of pre-November 3 judiciary. Full bench of LHC ruled that the
case of deposed judges cannot be reopened. Aitzaz spurned polls and
decided to withdraw his nomination papers.
British Envoy said his country was not demanding restoration of
judges as it was not going to happen because unhappiness with the judiciary
was the central issue for imposition of the emergency rule. In the same
context, Ramady was surprised over US silence over judges ordeal.

EVENTS
Lawyers boycotted courts across the country on 6 th December, held
protest rallies and urged masses to boycott polls. They were thrashed in
Multan. Female lawyers observed hunger strike in Peshawar. At least 12
protesters were held outside GOR Lahore. Journalists also continued their
protest. LUMS students owed to continue their struggle against government.
The committee of the ARD-APDM completed drafting 15-point
Charter of Demands. The committee unanimously agreed on 13 points but
two points, including key issue of restoration of deposed judges, were left to
be decided by Benazir and Nawaz Sharif. The details of the demands were
not disclosed.

712

Tariq Butt reported that PPP leaders who acted as members of the
committee were in favour of reinstatement of the deposed judges but Benazir
was against it. She favoured ties with Israel and saw no harm in IAEA probe
of A Q Khan. She planned to leave for Dubai for few days. PPP and JUI-F
held lengthy discussions on seat adjustments in the forth-coming elections.
Caretaker government stopped NAB from prosecuting politicians until
polls. Shahbaz Sharif was granted bail before arrest when he voluntarily
appeared before the court. Nawaz was prevented from meeting the deposed
CJP. He said history wont forgive if action against judges was accepted.
Full bench of LHC ruled that the case of deposed judges cannot be
reopened. They have ceased to be judges for good. Attorney General said
that the deposed judges would get full retirement benefits. Detained Justice
Tariq Mehmood was shifted from Lahore to his residence in Islamabad.
Saudi Ambassador, Asseri called on the deposed Justice Iftikhar on 7 th
December and invited him for Haj, the CJP politely declined politically
motivated pilgrimage. The regime said it had no knowledge of the meeting.
Close confidante of the CJP, Athar Minallah disclosed that similar invitation
was also extended prior to March 9 and after his restoration.
Benazir kept double talking on restoration of judges. She insisted that
deadline for their restoration should be 9 th January, a day after the general
elections. She left for Dubai without deciding the fate of Charter of
Demands. Nawaz met envoys and repeated his call for restoration of judges.
Aitzaz Ahsan proposed a solution to the crisis envisaging the
restoration of pre-November 3 judiciary; no one in PPP owned this proposal.
He also urged lawyers community to persuade political parties to boycott
polls and if the boycott option is let down the bar associations should take
oaths from all the candidates contesting the polls.
Justice Wajihuddin was arrested from Gujrat Bar Council where he
had gone address bar members on their request. He was brought to Lahore
and deported to Karachi. Some lawyers were injured in scuffle with the
police. Wajihuddin hoped lawyers movement would succeed. Sharifs wrote
to ECP on rejection of their papers. The ECP advised them to approach the
tribunal. Journalists protest continued; IJT students also demonstrated. The
retired General Musharraf decided not to vacate the Army House.

713

French, Swedish and Spanish ambassadors were stopped from

meeting Aitzaz. They expressed concern over human rights situation and
said fair polls after massive arrests wont be possible. Boucher issued ruling
in advance that Pakistani elections would be fair if not perfect.
On 8th December, All Pakistan Lawyers Representatives Convention
unanimously decided to boycott polls and asked political parties to join
them. In his message to the Convention Aitzaz Ahsan said he stood by the
lawyers, not any political party.
Nawaz Sharif while addressing his supporters in Gujranwala and
Sheikhupura said polls would be meaningless without the restoration of the
deposed judges. He vowed to wipe out Kings party if his party decided to
take part in polls. Imran Khan addressed lawyers in Gujranwala and urged
Opposition to unite for restoration of pre-Nov 3 judiciary. PPP finally said
that restoration of the judges would be decided by the next parliament.
Three workers of PPP were shot dead in Nasirabad. PPP filed a
corruption reference against Tauqir Zia, who was now contesting polls on its
ticket. Bail of Shahbaz Sharif was confirmed. Saudi Embassy denied
conveying any message to the deposed CJP. Kurd was shifted from jail to his
residence.
On 9th December, APDM failed to take definite stand on polls and
preferred middle path by allowing member parties to decide individually
whether to take part or boycott elections. Benazir promised that she would
oppose Musharrafs post-Nov 3 actions in the new assembly. But, she was
unlikely to fulfill her promise on reinstatement of the CJP.
More than 20 students of various universities of Lahore observed
hunger strike to protest arrest of fellow students and pro-Musharraf students
also held a rally. ECP election symbols to the political parties. Attorney
General rushed to Dubai, probably to meet Benazir. Three more Supreme
Court judges were appointed.
On 10th December, Nawaz Sharif addressed a public gathering in
Faisalabad and said he tried his best to convince Benazir and Fazl for
boycott, but now the field cannot be left open for kings men. He promised
that deposed judges would return when good time comes.

714

The parties of the APDM which decided not to participate in general

elections expelled those parties from the alliance which had decided to
contest the polls. Achakzai was appointed as the new convener who said
contesting polls tantamount to legitimizing the electoral process. Qazi
accused PML-N of betraying APDM and the nation.
Kings party concocted five Ds to match Benazirs five Es. There is
no harm in using fascinating Es and Ds, when the manifestos have to be
rendered redundant the day after the polls. Musharraf expressed concern
over stern action taken against students particularly of LUMS. The cunning
commando having used the stick realized the nuisance power of the student
community. Human Rights Day was observed as Black Day by journalists.
On 11th December, Musharraf said Chief Justice Iftikhar wanted to
remove him illegally (so I demolished the entire judiciary). The deposed
judge refuted Musharrafs statement by reminding him that he was not even
a member of the bench which the brave commando feared of acting
illegally. Rice hailed Musharrafs steps towards democracy. Interior
Minister said Aitzaz Ahsan could be free if he gives up judicial bus plan.
Hanif Abbasi and six Nazims joined PML-N.
Next day, Sharifs moved CEC against rejection of their papers.
Aitzaz spurned polls and decided to withdraw on 15 th December. Lawyers
were angry over Nawazs decision to contest elections despite his party
being the only one demanding restoration of deposed judges. No chance of
rigging polls, said Musharraf.

VIEWS
The boycott of polls was the most commented upon issue of the
period. As soon as this issue was raised, Benazir tried to sidetrack it with
need for drafting Charter of Demands. Jahanzeb Abid from Rawalpindi
wrote: The dream of bringing democracy to Pakistan seems to have
shattered as the two former prime ministers are still pondering over the
option of boycotting the general elections.
Moreover, Benazir Bhutto is unlikely to campaign for the
restoration of the deposed judges in the given circumstances. As always, a
committee has been formed to draw a charter of demands and decide on the

715

future course of action regarding the polls boycott. I doubt if such cosmetic
measures can help restore the judiciary and bring back democracy to
Pakistan.
Taimur M Khan from Lahore was of the view that an election boycott
without the PPP will not have the required impact. Hence, Mr Sharif
apparently has no choice but to demonstrate his electoral strength in order to
remain politically relevant. A boycott would also relieve pressure on the
PML-Q, which would benefit Mr Musharraf I believe the PML-N should
take part in the elections and use the election process to accelerate its
movement. Whatever Mr Sharif decides, he must not compromise on his
stance that all deposed judges must be reinstated unconditionally as that
is the only means of ensuring transparent elections.
Bilal Hasan Minto opined: The trouble with this is that, as soon as
Martial Law is lifted, Musharraf will become an ordinary civilian president
with only Article 58-2(b) of the Constitution available for use against a
future government. It is unlikely that this power to dissolve the
Parliament is all that the US and Musharraf himself are counting on for
arm-twisting the next government.
Two other possibilities may therefore be under consideration by
our American masters. First, to transfer some of their eggs to other basket,
namely a weak but elected government which will work with a weaker than
before Musharraf so that the two can dance to the USs tune with the
possibility of one being used against the other if need be. The second is that
before he lifts Martial Law, but after the last date for withdrawal of
nomination papers (December 14), Musharraf will make sweeping
amendments to the Constitution giving himself huge powers and secure his
place as the USs indispensable ally.
If making further amendments to the Constitution that give
Musharraf more powers is a possibility and given his love for power, it
certainly is the political parties not boycotting the elections need to
rethink their decision. It must be understood that Musharraf does not need
a future parliament to ratify an amendment that he has or may still make in
the Constitution. His Supreme Court has already given him the authority to
amend the Constitution without requiring that such amendments be
approved by the next parliament

716

One argument against boycott is that it will give the

establishment a free hand to install their handpicked people in
government. That is stating the obvious but it is hardly an argument. The
point of boycott is not just to boycott and then sit at home waiting for
someone to take notice, sympathize and come to rescue. The point of
boycott is, firstly, to take away the elections legitimacy and secondly, to
mobilize a movement to force the establishment into conceding that the only
elections acceptable are those that are held under the dispensation that
existed on November 2.
But it appears that despite the fact that Musharraf is much weaker
today and despite the ready made support that lawyers and civil society are
willing to lend them, the political parties are not confident and afraid to
even attempt to launch a movement. Perhaps they are only worthy of the
kind of elections they are about to get.
The political parties are being urged to adopt a politics of
reconciliation by those who would like the coming farcical elections to be
perceived as legitimate. It is not entirely clear as to what this rhetoric
means other than an invitation to do deals and become part of an unstable
future government setup acceptable to the establishment. It is even more
unclear as to how one reconciles with a whole scale massacre of the
judiciary, arbitrary mass arrests and detentions Politics that entails
reconciling with all this is just what the political parties need to adopt if
they wish to lose even the last iota of the little respect and credibility
they may still have in the eyes of the people.
The News wrote: There are no two opinions about the fact that an
independent judiciary is critical not only to restoration of full democracy
but to a genuinely free and fair election as well as the fundamental rights and
freedoms of the citizens. In this regard, the remarks of another senior and
respected lawyer, also in the thick of the lawyers movement, Munir A
Malik, need to be carefully heeded. He has said that political parties must
place the restoration of the superior judiciary, to its pre-November 3 state, on
the top of their lists to the government, warning that if this is not done then
these parties would have the most to lose given how the post-November 3
judiciary could be used in achieving the kind of election results that the
presidents camp would like.
The entire election edifice has been constructed in such a manner that
any unwanted political candidate can be excised from the process at any
717

stage. That is where the system could be rigged as has been amply
demonstrated by the rejection of nomination papers of both Nawaz Sharif
and Shahbaz Sharif. Both the brothers understand that they stand no chance
of getting justice and so have decided not to even challenge the rejection of
their nomination papers.
Having said all this, the arguments for contesting the polls and not
leaving the field open to allies of the regime are also compelling. Political
parties wait for years to get their chance of going to the people, test their
strength, mobilize their supporters and seek a popular mandate. Such an
opportunity cannot and should not be thrown away, as Maulana Fazlur
Rehman argues. The dilemma of the opposition is serious and complex and
needs careful handling.
It is in this context that the proposal of Mr Ahsan should be seen
as a possible middle ground between those advocating boycott and those
favouring a run at the hustling. In an open letter to the SCBA, he has
expressed the fear that the struggle for the judiciary could be relegated to the
back-burner if all the parties decided to contest the elections. This will not
be the case if one or both the major political parties decide on a boycott. So
if everybody participates then Mr Ahsan has proposed a mechanism to keep
the lawyers movement going and also allow the parties to contest the polls.
His suggestion that all candidates come to their local district bars and
take an oath to work for restoration of the superior judiciary if elected, will
bind them morally and politically, to take up this cause in the next
parliament. The process of this oath, as suggested by Mr Ahsan, would
galvanize the lawyers movement with candidates to the bar and taking this
oath in public and in full view of the media.
This is novel and possibly practical way of involving the
politicians with the lawyers movement and still keeps the issue of an
independent judiciary alive. However, Mr Ahsan may well find that not all
the parties would agree on making the restoration of the superior
judiciary as the top item on their list of demands.
In another editorial the newspaper commented on the PML-N decision
to contest polls instead of boycotting. Now that the PML-N has decided to
contest the Jan 8 elections, significantly transforming the political scenario,
one dark shadow over the fairness of the polls, the inadvisable ouster of the
Sharif brothers from the contest, still looms large. The PML-N decision has
718

rendered the APDM more or less irrelevant and pro-boycott parties

will now devise their own strategy.
And for the PML-Q the presence of the PML-N could also mean
a loss of votes from people who would normally ballot against the PPP, but
can now choose between two league factions. As always, the fact that the
Sharifs have been out of power, and as such have been able to speak out
vocally on issues such as US intervention in Pakistan or the price hike, adds
to their popular weight.
In this situation, a dilemma also arises for the ruling group and
indeed for President Musharraf. A two-third majority in the new assembly
is essential for the presidential camp, so that the necessary parliamentary
stamp of approval can be given to post-Nov 3 decisions. The decision by the
PML-N to take part in polls makes this task harder at least in a free and
fair election if organized
While the PML-N decision is likely to quickly inject some passion
into what has, till now, been a lackluster poll campaign, there are
indications that agents based in capitals overseas may have played a part in
exerting pressure to ensure that neither the PML-N nor the PPP boycott
polls. Such intervention can never be a good omen but it does mean, that,
for the present public attention will become increasingly focused on the poll
and the individual contests taking place within what will now be a multiparty battle for supremacy.
Shafqat Mahmood observed: Despite frequent pronouncements of
providing everyone a level playing field, a caretaker setup of cronies,
sycophants and Q League members continues in place. Government
officials specially put at the district level by the previous provincial
governments for the election period are openly being allowed to help
government-backed candidates. Local governments, a majority of whom
are of the previous ruling alliance, are also pitching in to help.
Another example of election manoeuvring is the rejection of
Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharifs papers. In the case of Nawaz Sharif the
excuse is a conviction in the hijacking case, in which he has already been
pardoned by the then President Mr Rafiq Tarar The reasoning given in the
rejection of Shahbaz Sharifs papers is not only legally flawed but also
absurd.

719

Actually, it is only silly as far as the legal reasoning goes otherwise it

is perfectly logical from Mr Musharrafs point of view. His suspension of the
Constitution was an obviously illegal act. Although the PCO Supreme Court
has given him some cover, the real indemnity can only come through a
constitutional amendment endorsed by the next parliament. For this, he
would require a two-thirds majority and this could only be available to him
if his friends and supporters win in large numbers.
This obviously would not be possible if the election is fair and
free. The Q League is a reviled party and now after the arrival of Nawaz
Sharif, its back has been broken. His other allies particularly the MQM
would win a certain number of seats but it would not be enough for him to
pass a constitutional amendment. For that, he would need at least one major
party, perhaps the PPP, to help but there would be a fair amount of cost
associated with it
Does a boycott by the major parties help or hinder Mr
Musharrafs game plan? One point of view is that if there was a boycott,
he would merrily get his own people elected and then get them to indemnify
his abrogation of the Constitution. The other view is that if all major parties
boycott, there would be no legitimacy left in the elections and they cant
proceed. It is also said that this would be the end of Musharraf as his
recovery from this crisis plan will become unstuck.
The second view can prevail only and only if both the PPP and PMLN decide to boycott. If they do it will have a cascading effect and many of
the regional parties may also join them This will not only erode Mr
Musharrafs legitimacy at home but crucially for him, abroad. It will
then be very difficult for him to survive. Those people who think that
without the major parties he will be able to carry on regardless are mistaken.
Legitimacy of the elections is critical for him at this stage and without it; the
system put in place by him will collapse.
What if the two major parties cannot agree on a boycott? The
common perception is that PPP wants to contest. Not only, it is the only
means for the party to bid for power but also because Benazir Bhutto might
lose the concessions granted to her in the shape of removal of cases against
her. The decisive test of whether there will be a boycott is of course the
charter of demands, which until early Thursday have not been finalized.

720

The sticking point is the reinstatement of the real judiciary of the

country. Ms Bhutto does not want to put this in because she would not want
to place any demand that Mr Musharraf is not likely to concede. And he will
not agree on the question of judiciary. Mr Nawaz Sharif on the other hand
thinks that the issue of judiciarys reinstatement is central to the crises we
face today.
One thing is clear. If the PPP goes ahead and contests the election,
the PML-N cannot sit back and boycott. It will have to jump into the fray to
protect its vote bank and its political space. The key to the boycott, and
perhaps with the future of Pervez Musharraf, is in the hands of Benazir
Bhutto. Whichever way she goes, will determine whether elections can take
place or whether Mr Musharraf can survive? It is her call.
Rahimullah Yusufzai suggested a way out of boycott debate. The
civil society, led by the lawyers, has put so much moral pressure on the
opposition political parties that most are finding it difficult to contest the
elections until the rehabilitation of the 55 courageous judges of the Supreme
Court of Pakistan and the high courts of Sindh, Lahore and Peshawar who
refused to take oath under the extra-constitutional PCO or were not invited
to do so by the powers that be due to the realization that they were
independent-minded and, therefore, likely to take orders from the executive
branch of the government. Some of the political parties have been pushed
into a position where boycott of the elections appears the most popular
option even if it is impractical and difficult to implement in the Pakistani
context.
With tempers running high amid polarization of the pro and antiboycott lobbies, the need for a tolerant and informed debate on the issue
was sorely being felt. One personally saw Maulana Fazlur Rehman being
hackled at a recent SAFMA conference in Islamabad when he failed to
demand reinstatement of deposed Chief Justiceand instead insisted that he
wanted supremacy of the judiciary and not of some individuals who had
earlier taken oath under PCO. The lawyers are so charged up that they want
to keep the spotlight on the issue of the restoration of the pre-November 3
status quo before imposition of the emergency, which in reality was martial
law, and honourable reinstatement of the 55 deposed judges.
As the president of the SCBA, Aitzaz Ahsan has cautiously made
proposals that could defuse the situation and offer a way out of the
impasse. Ideally, he would like all major political parties to boycott the
721

elections and thus vindicate the stand taken by the agitating lawyers. Aitzaz
Ahsan knows that this is easier said than done and has, therefore, also
proposed the second best option. Under this option, the lawyers stand would
still be vindicated in case one or the other major political alliancedecides
to boycott the elections.
The third scenario appears the most likely one in view of the strong
possibility that some opposition political parties would take part in the polls.
Thus the incarcerated Aitzaz Ahsan has proposed that in case all major
parties decide to contest the elections, a strategy must be devised to use
the momentum of the electoral campaign to the advantage of the
lawyers and the civil society seeking restoration of the dismissed judges.
His strategy to achieve this objective is to formulate an oath that candidates
for the coming assembly elections would publicly take and sign at bar rooms
in district headquarters all over the country.
Aitzaz Ahsans proposals are timely and realistic. As he pointed
out in his letter, the hustle and bustle of the election campaign may push into
the background the lawyers demand for restoration of judges as the political
workers and all other activists become pre-occupied with issues concerning
the polls. Elections are fun for most fun-starved Pakistanis
Until, now, these elections are the most uncertain and lackluster in
Pakistans history. The confusion prevalent in the ranks of political
parties has filtered down to the voters and there is still no real
electioneering. Those advocating boycott of the polls have made no roadmap
to mobilize voters
In these desperate circumstances, all those wanting restoration of
the ousted judges should consider Aitzaz Ahsans proposals and possibly
implement them. The struggle for real democracy isnt going to end with
holding of general elections on January 8. If anything, any rigging in those
elections or an effective boycott would create conditions that could
ultimately lead to the restoration of the deposed judges and the return of
judicial activism for making Pakistan a more democratic country thats more
caring towards its people.
Mir Jamilur Rahman wrote: Boycott essentially is a trade union
action which the labour takes for the acceptance of its demands, which are
generally related to wages and perks. A political party would be committing
a folly to go on strike or boycott elections to press for its demands. A
722

political party brings the changes from within the parliament. Political
parties contest elections to get into the parliament and become lawmakers. It
will be strange sight if the MNAs were to boycott the session or go on strike
for a raise in their salaries and perks when they have the power to do so by
making a law to this effect.
Boycott could not be the end in itself; it has to be a means to an
end to be of any consequence. That end would obviously be to bring people
on the streets to unhinge President Musharraf. The boycott lobby is wrong in
its appraisal that it can bring down President Musharraf by street agitation.
First, people are not in a mood and they see no tangible reason to join
a street movement against President Musharraf. Second, the boycott lobby
and other opportunists would have discovered by now that it would be a
Herculean task to destabilize President Musharraf. He is a moderate and
tolerant leader but at the same time he is tenacious and could hardly be
expected to give in to political and street pressures.
Imtiaz Alam opined: Dozens of smaller parties in the APDM, which
have been more enthusiastic about boycotting elections since they have
nothing to lose, have been isolated after former prime minister Mian Nawaz
Sharif and his PML-N decided to participate and not to let the electoral field
open to their rival league of defectors The best bet for the democratic
opposition parties is a closer alliance between Benazir Bhutto and
Nawaz Sharif.
On the issue of the pre-PCO-II judges, the PPP differed over the
practicability of their reinstatement after their removal has been
adjudicated by the POC-II apex court that has also upheld the November 3
proclamation, actions of the PCO and the emergency. The only forum left
for their restoration is next parliament on whose boycott the APDM was
quite naively insisting.
It is quite intriguing that the APDM, instead of forcing President
Musharraf to resign, wanted him to restore the judges who could have
performed the job of ousting him. On the contrary, this is the job of political
parties to overthrow one government or the other through democratic means
and not the least of judiciary. Both the judiciary and the media had to pay
heavily for the lack of potent political activism on the part of political
parties. Judicial activism is good for the hapless citizens and rule of law,
but it is no substitute to political activism.
723

The mainstream political forces, despite having the disadvantage of a

PCO-II judiciary, could not afford to make their participation in elections
conditional upon the restoration of the judges removed under the PCO-II.
Mixing their restoration with the participation in or boycott of the
elections was entirely misplaced. It took away the focus from the too
crucial issue of holding free and fair elections on which depended the fate of
the future political setup and the revival of democracy along with an
independent judiciary and free media.
Most importantly, the restoration of democracy, independence of
judiciary and a free media depend on how Ms Bhutto, Mr Sharif,
Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the ANP and Baloch nationalists play their
cards. They must agree to work together not just before the elections, but
also after the elections. The bars, civil society and the media should avoid
flying their lofty banners of liberal values against the democratic opposition.
Their spirit and principle is same, fields are different. Civil society must
remain vigilant, but must not extend beyond its role and size.
The boycotter must realize that they are playing into the hands of
undemocratic forces by leaving the field open to the kings parties. Since
they are least prepared for an effective boycott, they must stop substituting
real action of participating in elections with demagogy. Civil society
must not fall into their trap and avoid jumping over the shoulders of
politicians. It must concentrate its energies on helping to bring in the best lot
to new parliament. This is time to unify on principles and not to get divided
over tactical issues. Above all, this is time to go to the people and not let
their mandate once again hijacked by the usurpers of peoples rights and the
boycotters must avoid extending a helping hand to those who want to
hoodwink peoples sovereignty. Let the people decide.
M B Naqvi wrote: Unending confusion grips the opposition parties
over assessing the Musharraf Regime Mark II, along with the scarcely
neutral caretakers and the changes made under the emergency, the PCO and
the new media ordinances. It is a continuation of the previous
government; it is sure to what Musharraf wants. Thus the country is
basically polarized between Musharraf partisans and those who claim to be
anti-Musharraf forces, while everybody knows that his regime now intends
to rule through naked force, with a deceptive faade of democracy-seeming
institutions.

724

This new Musharraf regime is a creature of the virtual martial law of

Nov 3 a logical reaction of his dictatorship when challenged and is
engaged in two major operations: first, to acquire more powers than before
for the recently retired general to rule repressively for another five years
while claiming to run a democracy. Secondly, he wants to keep all his
foreign and domestic supporters happy by his unchanged social, economic
and foreign policies.
How strong is this regime? Musharrafs strength should not be
underrated. He is supported formally by PML-Q grandees, the MQM, the
PPP-S, and the PPP-P. Those who participate in the Jan 8 election being
organized and managed by him in conditions created by the emergency, the
PCO and the muzzling of the media should be counted as his supporters,
their opposition-sounding noises notwithstanding. The JUIs of Maulana
Fazlur Rahman and Samiul Haq come under this category, as does Ms
Benazir Bhuttos PPP.
So, who remains in the boycott camp? Under the mean and
opportunistic principle of not leaving the field to others, the Jamaat-eIslami will participate because JUI is doing so, the PML-N has also decided
to play the game because the PPP is doing it. Maybe a few small parties
might finally remain in the boycott camp, though even that is not certain. A
via media has emanated from the interned Aitzaz Ahsan
What the parties have done risks the ending of the momentum of
the lawyers movement. The shape of politics and immediate issues will
look vastly different in the post-election period. Politics will be all about
government-making, deals and alliances under the smiling visage of the exgeneral. Reviving the previous years issues will be so much more difficult.
To recall, the Aitzaz proposal was a testimony of his loyalty to Benazir
Bhutto and his readiness to sacrifice personal ambition for her uncertain
favours.
But all this is superficial. Look closely. All Pakistans social and
economic elites support Musharraf. A large number of bigger landlords
simply love Musharraf so long as he is in power. All big industrialists,
bankers, big business magnates and conscienceless successful professionals
have always been on the side of military dictators. This is an awesome array
of forces.

725

Who else is a supporter of dictatorship? Well, why forget the only

hyper power there is. Look at the crowded drawing rooms of political
leaders in Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi and Peshawar, waiting to be graced by
western ambassadors Finally, the strongest supporter of Musharraf was his
military constituency.
Those who want undiluted democracy, made by the people with
independent judiciary, free media and the citizens rights made enforceable,
have to replace this regime by a more popular one without giving up their
vigil. This is a challenge to a formidable foe. History shows that
phenomenally powerful and cruel regimes can be overthrown by a
people provided they become aware of both their rights and are prepared
to fight for them. Nothing is more powerful than an aware and united
people.
This is a simple truth, but it is not the whole truth. A peoples
awareness needs leadership not for hero-worshipping but for functional
purposes. This role is normally played by a host of factors: political parties,
intelligentsia, media, especially press, blogs and what is now the worldwide
explosion of knowledge, creating the climate of the time. In Pakistan, one
says with a heavy heart that political parties have been too venal, too
opportunistic (misusing the term pragmatism) and have hardly ever risen to a
situation
The lawyers community led by men like Aitzaz Ahsan, Munir
Malik, Ali Ahmed Kurd, Hamid Khan rose to the occasion. The people
were electrified and poured out of their humble homes to shower love and
respect for their cause represented by the lawyers and the chief justice.
Where does this authentic leadership stand vis--vis the peoples struggle for
what is their liberation? It is all about the latter. It must continue and gather
strength.
Instead of taking up the cause of the lawyers, judges and journalists
and to accept the leadership of the new icons of the people, which would
have enhanced their own, they have responded to Musharrafs cause and
George Bushs message. They deserted their own peoples cause, as if
Musharraf Mark II can be any better. Why lawyers cannot form a party of
a new kind to offer a new leadership for attaining democracy to save
Pakistan, as Justice Wajihuddin has said.

726

Amber Darr said: I sympathized with them when Nawaz Sharif was
summarily deported from Islamabad Airport on Sept 10 and I watched with
hope when they vowed not to rest until the restoration of the pre-Nov 3
judiciary and sought to unite all political parties on this agenda. My
optimism, however, appears to have been misplaced. Cowed by the
pressure from within the party and from certain unnamed external forces,
Nawaz Sharif has decided to lead the PML-N into the elections. The
greatest tragedy of this entire episode is the blow that has been dealt to the
deposed judiciary.
There is some political merit in the argument that the party cadres are
likely to have supported participation in the elections If the PPP
participates in the elections, then a boycott by the PML-N even though
it may be bolstered by the support of the Tehrik-e-Insaaf and the Jamaat-eIslami fails to derail the electoral process.
It is also likely that compelling reasons were put forth by the
unknown external hands for Nawaz Sharif and his party not to boycott
the elections. It is a fact that as long as President Musharraf delivers on the
American agenda, he has the unflinching support of President Bush. His
infractions of Pakistani law, which are in any event labeled as domestic
matters, are of no concern to the Americans.
The Saudis brokered Nawaz Sharifs recent return to Pakistan
because they had received a bad press for their alleged role in his abduction
on Sep 10. This does not mean, however, that the permission granted to
Nawaz Sharif was unconstitutional. Nawaz Sharif is likely to have been
briefed to accept the presidency of Musharraf and to raise opposition to the
elections only with the support of the other major parties and then too in a
manner that did not jeopardize President Musharrafs continuance in office.
Whatever the reasons behind this ultimate decision, it has dashed all
hopes of the lawyers and civil society which had looked to Nawaz Sharif,
as the leader of one of the largest political parties in Pakistan, to champion
the cause of the judiciary. It was no surprise to anyone that Benazir Bhutto
and her party were not interested in the restoration of the pre-Nov 3
judiciary. After all, as not the petition challenging the grand NRO, sub judice
before that judiciary? And, after all, was there not sufficient indication in the
then prevailing atmosphere of judicial independence that the ordinance
would be examined on merits and would be found to be inherently

727

discriminatory, contrary to Article 25 of the Constitution and therefore

void?
Nawaz Sharif, however, should know better. Had it not been for an
independent-minded judiciary, his petition seeking the right to return to
Pakistan to participate in the elections would not even have been fixed for
hearing, let alone be heard and decided in his favour. I had expected that he
would have recognized the power of an independent judiciary and the
respect he would have had for the moral courage they had to withstand the
pressure of an all powerful government and to rule in favour of his return to
Pakistan would be unassailable
None of these hopes and expectations, that I am sure I share with
other concerned citizens, translated into reality. As before, Pakistani
politicians with the lone exception of Imran Khan, who has taken a stand
and appears to be firm on it have deemed it more expedient to wade into
the quicksand of compromise than the high road of principle. Had either
Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif been confident of their parties support and
their popularity with the masses they would not have shied away from
boycotting the election.
This compromise on the issue of the judiciary, expedient though it
may seem today, is going to haunt them in the aftermath of the elections
when they challenge the inevitable rigging. There is no glory for those who
lack moral courage. Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif should not expect
any in the forthcoming elections.

Rigging was another election-related issue which was widely

discussed. Kamila Hyat observed: But with just over a month remaining till
polling, it is interesting that some of the issues that are most often debated
by people everywhere including US-led global policies of injustice, the
state of the battle against militancy and the issue of terrorism have not
really been touched upon by any of the key contestants In the absence of a
detailed plans for the future, which address key issues such as sovereignty
and extremism, elections become little more than a battle of strength
between powerful individuals.
It is also true that, so far, people have not become genuinely engaged
in the electoral process. If, in fact, rallies and public meetings remain banned
throughout the coming month as seems to be the plan this involvement
may never be generated. Without people, the entire meaning of an election
728

becomes hazy and immediately places the advantage in the hands of

wealthier candidates, able to turn to media campaigns to reach voters, and
therefore not as dependent as their less affluent rivals on the ability to gather
people, and whip of spirit through mass public gatherings.
There is another concern that continues to peek over the horizon. The
repeated references made by opposition parties to the possibility of rigging
are a reminder of the scale of the threat this presents As has been the case
during recent electoral contests at all levels, the methods used are today far
subtler, and often the worst damage is done well beyond the day ballots
are actually cast watched by observers from around the world. Changes
in constituency boundaries, transfers and postings of key officials, and last
minute changes in the location of polling bothare just some examples.
For the 2008 polls, there are already accounts from across the Punjab
of the special privileges enjoyed by former ministers. Citing security
concerns a number of the former members of federal and provincial
cabinets continue to enjoy full protocol in terms of vehicles and police
guards assigned to them
There is more. The process of scrutinizing papers, which finished on
December 2, was this time round organized in a way that allowed candidates
to have their scrutiny completed in the absence of rivals thus denying
them a chance to raise questions or challenges. In some cases this system has
been used by election officials to facilitate those they favour.
The allegations that printing presses, which can replicate ballots
produced by the security printing press of Pakistan, and are being used in the
private sector to produce extra ballots that can be bought by candidates
with the means to do so are also alarming. There are also allegations that
some such ballots are being provided to powerful party bosses to favoured
candidates.
The question is how such flaws can be remedied. If they remain in
place, and doubts continue to exist over the authenticity of the process
that lies at the heart of the democracy, then the entire, immensely expensive
effort involved in organizing polls becomes largely meaningless. After all, if
elections become a means only to bring handpicked candidates to power,
then they serve only a cosmetic purpose, while stripping people of anything
but an illusion of power.

729

There are of course means to prevent this from happening. But this is
possible only if the Election Commission is independent, non-partisan and
takes full control of all stages of the process leading up to balloting, as well
as the counting of votes. Even now, there is time for the EC to play an
active, purposeful role in polls and rise up to the task assigned to it. The
body must exhibit both autonomy and authority, seize full control of the
process, pre-empt rigging attempts
Adnan Adil focused on Pervaiz Elahi in this context. The landscape
on the Mall Road and Gulbergs Main Boulevard in Lahore is dotted with
banners displaying bicycle, the election symbol of PML-Q. The prime
advertisement site is believed to have been devoted to partys publicity
campaign for gratis, which otherwise is sold off by the city authorities for
millions of rupees. This is one prominent example of how the kings party
is receiving official patronage in the run-up to the general elections. The
list is long from doling out of public funds to gerrymandering and the use
of police to buy votes.
The worst hit by Musharraf partys election campaign in
Punjabs public exchequer that stands bankrupted due to overspending of
outgoing Chief Minister. Insiders say that in the first five months of the
current fiscal year, former chief minister Pervaiz Elahi had released more
than 1000 billion out of 1200 billions available for the entire years
development projects.
In the last couple of months alone, the chief minister is believed to
have reallocated the entire development outlay and spent more than Rs
four billion on the development schemes in his home district Gujrat which is
also his electoral constituency, cutting down the share of some other
districts. Moreover, in last three months more than Rs four billion are said to
have been spent on media campaign projecting the so-called achievements
of the Punjab government.
As a result of ruthless spending for the kings partys election
support, Punjab government has gone broke. To pay the salaries to the
government officials for the month of December, Punjab government
borrowed money from the separate accounts of the LDA and the FDA. For
the payment of January salaries, the provincial government is looking
towards the funds transfers from ADB

730

Still, the caretaker government is focusing all its attention to

provide money to those projects at the local level that were initiated on
political grounds to help PML-Q candidates in the election. Insiders say that
former chief minister Punjab allocated more than Rs 10 million for
development schemes of each union council of the Punjab on the
recommendation of the partys candidates.
To buy local luminaries support, the Punjab government is
believed to have dished out loans on political grounds from the Punjab
Provincial Cooperative Bank which is in red with Rs 7 billion outstanding
due to non-payment of political loans. To meet the cooperative banks
deficit, the provincial exchequer will have to bail it out. The former rulers of
Punjab have allegedly sold out most of their industrial units and coincidently
all the parties that bought these units have received huge loans from the
Bank of Punjab. Among the beneficiaries of the Punjab Bank are those who
matter in Islamabad.
In the last couple of months, thousands of new departments (such as
prosecution department) have been created to employ people on
recommendations ignoring merit and to buy political support. Many of the
newly employed people belong to Gujrat district. These officials would
also work as election staff to conduct the polling.
The caretaker chief minister is believed to be a close friend of the
rulers from Gujrat. The caretaker administration has not transferred any
secretary of the provincial government or the staff members of the chief
minister secretariat or any DPO or DCO. It is alleged that some police
officials have helped the PML-Q bigwigs to buy thousands of national
identity cards in certain constituencies to ensure the victory of the partys
candidates.
These district officials were posted keeping in view their loyalty
to the rulers of Punjab and a majority of them have a reputation that leaves
much to be desired. A number of DCOs are retired PCS officials who were
re-employed to beef up the loyalist group. Insiders say no foreign investment
project in the Punjab was allowed unless a handsome commission was
received by a top civil servant supervising the provincial administration.
To keep the bureaucracy in line, a strong impression has been
created that Pervaiz Elahi would be the next prime minister. Official
estimates say that the kings party would bag more than 90 national seats out
731

of 148 in the Punjab. In case, PML-N boycotts the polls the number is likely
to cross 120. Conversely, a PPP-PML-N seat adjustment may upset the
entire plan.
According to insiders, senior officers sitting in the Punjab
Secretariat are receiving orders from the former secretary to the chief
minister in the name of former CM. Sources say that secretaries and other
senior officers fear in case of defiance they would have to face the negative
consequences if the Chaudharys again come into power. In fact, the way
bureaucratic postings have been made, the present caretaker government
could not be effective in getting its orders implemented even if by chance it
starts acting neutral.
One major threat to the kings party was from the media. The
imposition of the Emergency Plus effectively gagged the vocal part of
the electronic media, stopping the oppositions point of view from reaching
the masses. While the stick was employed to control the television channels
and stopping the official advertisement for independent newspapers, carrot
was used to buy the support of some influential opinion makers. In
November, the discretionary fund of the chief minister, which runs in
billions of rupees and is beyond audit, was believed to have been distributed
for this purpose.
Keeping in view the fact that the entire system is loaded against the
opposition parties, and to ensure the victory of the PML-Q, the prospects of
the opposition parties to have a level-playing field in the general
elections seem remote to say the least. Unless a caretaker chief minister
with a new cabinet is set up and a massive reshuffle is made in the
bureaucracy, the holding of fair elections is not likely.
Last but not least, the date of general elections has been announced
abruptly keeping in mind the convenience of the kings party which was
using state resources for the last one year to prepare for this and opposition
parties have very little time to mobilize their support and run the election
campaign. A neutral caretaker administration and postponement of elections
for a couple of months could ensure a level-playing field for the opposition
and break the stranglehold of the Chaudhrys on Punjab.
Nasim Zehra opined: The PCOs clause 3(2) which reads No
judgment, decree, writ, order or process whatever shall be made or issued by
any court or tribunal against the president or the prime minister or any
732

authority designated by the president blocks the Supreme Courts

constitutionally mandated authority to judicially review and audit
exercise of executive authority. The president can then operate
unaccountable.
Only when the Constitution is restored to pre-Nov 3 form, will this
condition of no accountability for the president alter. Until then the
reconstructed Supreme Court has surrendered its responsibility to
redress the complaint of any Pakistani against any state excesses tracing
their origin to the president. Hence, no presidential order, whether seeking
amendment in the Army Act or the Legal Practitioners Act, can be
challenged. Significantly, the courts are also unable to rectify the excesses of
the state committed against the media if the state institution is functioning in
accordance with the desires of the president.
Clearly, under the powers the president gave to himself on Nov 3
he stands beyond reproach. Under the doctrine of necessity the
reconstructed court has also adhered to his commands. No one could
question the subsequent laws that he in his supreme wisdom has imposed on
the country. The current reality is that the president functions entirely free of
any legal or constitutional fetters.
Then there is the election process and its problems Election 2008
promises to be an unusually skewed affair. There is the absence of a levelplaying field for the opposition. The manner in which the Sindh and Punjab
governments have used state resources to promote their candidates just
before the interim setup was put in place speaks volumes for fair and free
elections.
There is fear of rigging on election day itself whether by harassing
opponents, picking them up two days before the elections, or messing with
the results. The role of the Nazims at the district level will work against the
opposition, and yet the EC is unable to implement its own orders that
Nazims cannot participate in the campaigning.
Whatever its mandate and whatever the intentions of the senior
officials of the Election Commission, it has neither been able to take
action against those violating the rights of aspiring candidates or right
the wrongs committed by its own staff. For example, the rejection of
Shahbaz Sharifs nomination papers by the Election Commission has been
questioned by the candidate himself. He has given solid evidence that each
733

of the three charges leveled against him as justification for rejecting his
papers cannot stand on legal or constitutional grounds.
Similarly, the very specific incident involving the arrest of PPP
candidate Sarfraz Bugti reportedly by Military Intelligence on Nov 22,
preventing him from filing his nomination papers for a provincial assembly
seat in Balochistan, was reported to the Election Commission The EC has
taken no substantive action.
Indeed, the Election Commission is neither autonomous nor
powerful. It does not have the authority or the administrative mechanisms to
implement its own orders. Holding accountable powerful provincial chief
secretaries is far beyond the ECs capacity and authority.
Farahnaz Isphahani, a PPP candidate, was of the view that the
prospect of poll rigging was no longer a subject only of speculation.
General Musharraf appears so worried about the result of elections that in a
recent interview he went to the extent of saying that he would leave office if
the situation in Pakistan worsened. It is unclear what qualifies as an
untenable situation for the General. After all things are quite bad as they
stand. Pakistans political parties and civil society have suspected
Musharrafs intentions for some time. Some of his former sympathizers,
especially in the United States, are now wondering aloud whether Musharraf
can be trusted to hold a fair poll and keep his word given his track record of
broken promises.
The prospect of poll rigging is no longer a subject only of
speculation by Pakistans democracy activists. The international media is
discovering what Pakistanis have known for many months: that the
government has taken several steps designed to create a pliant parliament
just as independent judges were removed from superior courts to ensure a
pliant judiciary.
The debate about the absence of level playing-field notwithstanding,
political parties with grassroots support cannot ignore their basic duty
towards the people in terms of presenting the outlines of a programme that
attracts peoples attention and addresses their basic needs. In this, the PPP
has taken the lead and revealed its manifesto with a clear social democratic
vision. The party remains engaged with other opposition parties on the
fundamental issue of ensuring a transparent and free poll.

734

The issue of judiciary could not be ignored in any debate on the

ongoing crisis. Dr Masooda Bano commented on BBs silence about
deposed judges. What can one say about PPPs continued refusal to support
the demand for the reinstatement of the pre-emergency judges by boycotting
the elections but that is simply shameful because it shows that the party
actually supports the emergency imposed on December 3.
It has to be remembered that the target of the emergency was the
judiciary and not the parliament. By refusing to ask for reinstatement of
the judges, PPP is legitimizing General Musharrafs concerns for
imposing the emergency. It is also shameful because it confirms that the
party actually does not want an independent judiciary or who can let this rare
opportunity for establishing independence of the judiciary slip by. Finally, it
is shameful for the way Benazir Bhutto has shifted emphasis on this issue
after the visit of US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte and what
has been reported as her main reason for opposing this demand.
It has been reported in the media that one of the pleas taken by
Benazir Bhutto for not asking for reinstatement of the pre-emergency judges
is that she cannot support judges who took suo moto notice of the Lal
Masjid operation and asked for the reconstruction of the Jamia Hafsa. If
true, this most bizarre explanation for not supporting the judges
The government might call the dead militants but there is enough
evidence that many of them were students. Even if they were militants, the
state needs to provide some proof of its claims, which were never provided.
In any civilized society, the state would not have dared commit such
barbarity and if it did no independent Supreme Court would avoid taking
notice of it. It was bad enough that sitting abroad Benazir Bhutto had
approved of the military operation on the Jamia Hafsa. It is worse if she is
even remotely referring to this issue as one of the main causes of the partys
resistance to the demand of the reinstatement of the judges.
PPP plea to settle this issue in the parliament rather than making it a
cause to boycott the elections is but a face-saver and nothing else. Who can
trust PPP under its current leadership? Ever since the start of the lawyers
movement, Benazir Bhutto has been back-stabbing it by entering
negotiations and deals with General Musharraf.
Even after the imposition of the emergency, she was reluctant to
come out strongly against him and sat on the fence in the initial days. Then
735

she started to make a few tough statements and threats of protest and even
went outside the house of the Chief Justice, announcing her support for the
judges. However, as many had suspected, it all turned out to be political
gimmicks to gain some legitimacy.
The hypocrisy marking PPPs politics is amazing. In the same
way, the claim that it cannot boycott the elections because it has in the past
faced the consequences of boycotting elections under Zia regime does not
hold. 2007 is a very different context in Pakistan. General Zia did not have
the pressures that have led General Musharraf to take off the uniform.
There was no lawyers movement and there was no independent media.
Today the story is different.
The lawyers must carry on the struggle for the reinstatement of
the judges and students and all conscientious Pakistanis must support them.
It must be remembered that it is eventually the public that holds the key to
reform. Benazir can make all the claims that her deal making in the US
convinced Bush Administration to make General Musharraf doff his
uniform. But, the reality is that the growing public demonstrations led by the
lawyers that established to the West that Pakistan couldnt be controlled
through General Musharraf anymore.
Nasir Kamal from Mardan opined: Their reinstatement is the need of
the hour. Unless the deposed judges are reinstated, Pakistans judiciary can
hardly be considered independent. What happened on Nov 3 has tarnished
Pakistans image, because the absence of an independent judiciary in the
country is being criticized around the world. Ms Bhutto and Maulana
Fazlur Rehmans refusal to honour the APDMs decision on a boycott of
the elections is equally difficult to digest.
Jawaid Raja from Rawalpindi wanted to remind Benazir Bhutto not
to forsake the judges. The lure of power should not blind her. She should
avoid being part of Musharrafs system. In the name of pragmatism Ms
Bhutto is showing total disregard for the wishes of Pakistani people. It
seems she has lost touch with reality and with the true feelings of the
masses. They want her to be her old self, the daughter of the East and not
the daughter of the West.
Samia Altaf wrote: How then can we get something out of the elite
democracy that we will inevitably inherit? Not by imagining a battle won,
not by wishing for some ideal unfettered democracy, but by working towards
736

a system of some checks and balances that limits the accumulation of power
and the abuse of office by ruling groups, a system that advances human
rights and access to justice, and one that enlarges the space for hearing the
voices from below.
By some quirk, this was a scenario beginning to unfold with the
assertion of independence by the judiciary, by its questioning of arbitrary
executive authority, by it taking up the causes of ordinary citizens. This was
the first institutional development in over sixty years that promised a
meaningful step towards good governance in the interest of ordinary
citizens. And even before one could be sure it was for real, the fourth
dictator (the enlightened) smothered it, quickly and ruthlessly, risking even
his careful varnished image of moderation in the process.
Going back to free and fair elections, back to true democracy, as
promised by a dictator, ruling under an emergency, to a bunch of democrats
ready to cut a deal, is not going to do much good. It will be very old wine in
the very old bottles. Well-wishers of Pakistan at home an abroad need to
grasp the one promising development in an otherwise sorry history.
They have to agree on a one-point agenda the Supreme Court has to be
restored; the independence of the judiciary has to be guaranteed.
This is the only leverage we have at the moment, the one issue on
which a broad coalition can unite. This is where the fight for true
democracy begins. Whoever is next anointed by God would need to be put
to this test of scrutiny. Otherwise, the moment and the opening would be
lost. Those who are fighting would need to go on fighting.
Crushing of dissent by the regime was strongly criticized. The News
wrote on a specific incident. The serving of notices to the LUMS by police
in Lahore on Tuesday, informing the administration that at least four faculty
members and two students were wanted for questioning regarding charges
against them under regulations against assembly and for disturbing public
order, indicates that the authorities are unwilling to abandon their ruthless
crushing of dissent.
A senior police official is also reported to have visited the LUMS
campus, and warned people present not to take part in any further protest
action, as there were already FIRs against them. The police action created
considerable panic on campus as indeed, it was intended to do

737

The fact is that the students, and indeed the professors at LUMS,
deserve applause for standing up in favour of civil society and against
dictatorship and imposition of emergency rule in the country. That they are
now being punished for their stance reflects the true face of authority today
in Pakistan. But the fact also is the protests that have been flickering across
civil society, with vigils outside the homes of judges, at the offices of banned
television channels and at other places will not easily die away.
Cowardly actions, such as those taken by police at LUMS, will not be
able to easily crush the ongoing campaign. Indeed, the police presence
outside the university best depicts the situation of this tussle between state
and a peaceful civil society, which has so far refused to be cowed down by
the tactics used against it.
Nadeem Iqbal opined that the role of police in the ongoing crisis was
quite contrary to their professional obligations as reflected in the oath
administered to its officers. Ido hereby solemnly affirm that I shall be
faithful and bear true allegiance to Pakistan and to the Constitution of the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan; that, as a member of the Police, I shall
honestly, impartially and truly serve the people without fear, favour or
affection, malice or ill-will; that I will, to the best of my ability, skill and
knowledge discharge, according to law, such functions and duties as may be
entrusted to me as member of the Police and in such a manner as to uphold
and protect the dignity and rights of the citizens; that I shall abide by the
principles contained in the Code of Conduct for police officers.
This, surprisingly, is the oath to which every member of the Police
has to subscribe to at the time of his or her appointment. In the backdrop of
the controversial PCO that forced the judges of the higher courts to
abdicate their oaths in favour of the rulers, no such process is followed to
change the oath to the policemen that makes binding upon him to protect
the dignity and rights of the citizens.
The ever-ready policemen have conveniently surrendered their oaths
in favour of the rulers that be. The analyst went on to explain how police
has been doing and to come to the conclusion that police has been
violating oath honestly, impartially and truly.
Dr Ijaz Shafi Gilani observed that the people were shying away from
protests. A silent but widespread civic dissent against martial law is
prevalent across the country and a violent armed resistance exists on its tiny
738

and remote periphery in the Tribal Areas and Swat. Since the middle ground
appears to have been squeezed out, a vast majority of civic dissenters are
cautious that innocent agitation and civil disobedience could unknowingly
swing to the other end of the pendulum. One may be giving too much
credit to the wisdom of the ordinary dissenting man and woman, but
apparently they are fearful of anarchy, while the rulers actions make
them wonder whether they should really come out on the streets and launch
an agitation. Nevertheless, the basic contradiction remains that while most
people are opposed to emergency rule the streets are empty.
Kamal Siddiqi too, wasnt impressed by the scale of protests. We are
back to square one. In place of the Charter of Democracy, we now have
the Charter of Demands For one, neither Ms Bhutto nor Mian Nawaz
Sharif seem too keen to take on the government or come to some workable
joint strategy between themselves. Ms Bhutto seems to have lost her
opportunity to shake the government when she changed her mind of taking
to the streets to challenge the imposition of the emergency. She has been
elusive in outlining what political strategy she would be adopting. It seems
as if she is waiting for another deal to take place.
Both Ms Bhutto and Maulana Fazlur Rehman are not in favour of a
boycott of the elections but for different reasons. Ms Bhutto has a past to
haunt her The MMA and Mian Nawaz, who has already been disqualified
from participating, are more interested in some form of united protest. It
may remain a dream. Mian Nawaz wants to take up the cause of the
deposed judge; Ms Bhutto does not want to.
With less than a month to go to general elections, the mood looks
somber, and somewhat cold. In the past, people have come out and
politicians have campaigned in much more adverse weather. But this time it
seems that the people are unsure about whether elections would be held
or not
The issue of foreign interference continued to be commented
upon. The News observed: The Saudi Ambassador in Pakistan has become
the first diplomat to be allowed to meet deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar
Mohammad Chaudhry in his confinement in Islamabad after almost every
political leader..., besides representatives of the judiciary, lawyers and the
civil society was denied that privilege. Other diplomats, the US ambassador

739

among them being the most prominent, have been meeting political party
leaders individually and in groups
All these examples and historical facts tend to prove that the
Pakistani leadership, both in the government and the opposition, in or
outside the civil or military establishment, tends to be more receptive to
foreign advice. In fact it would be fair to say that it is perhaps even prone to
sometimes uncalled-for pressures instead of heeding logic and reason from
saner minds within the countrys intellectual spectrum.
How the foreign hand has taken over this dominating role in what is
otherwise a purely domestic and internal affair should be a matter of
serious national concern and our independent think tanks, if any, should
begin to study this phenomenon focusing on why our leadership has
repeatedly failed to resolve their differences by refusing to listen to advice
from within the country, sweeping away every argument, proposal or
suggestion made by domestic actors. All help being offered and accepted
from brotherly and friendly countries, is in the name of strengthening
Pakistan but it may well be construed otherwise.
As for the meeting between the Saudi Ambassador and the chief
justice, it appears that he has been offered an invitation to visit Saudi Arabia,
ostensibly for Hajj. This may well be a genuine and generous offer had it
been made and accepted in normal times. But at this particular moment in
our history, any mention of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry flying to Jeddah would
immediately give rise to accusations of blatant intervention and would in
most likelihood be seen as yet another instance of the Saudi family taking
away into exile a challenger to the Pakistani establishment.
Understandably enough, Justice Chaudhry is reported to have
declined any such invitation and, if reports are correct, he even declined to
discuss anything but the situation of the judiciary in Pakistan. for a change,
someone has taken a stand which is indeed refreshing and will hopefully
lead to a reduction in the role of outsiders in determining Pakistans political
landscape.
Saiqa Khan from Lahore wrote: I was surprised by the British high
commissioners remarks regarding the judiciary Britain and the US make
lofty claims of moral superiority and of their being champions of democracy
and human rights. They are supposed to be civilized and democratic, but
wherever it suits them they back dictatorial and regressive regimes. In
740

this instance, the British high commissioner has forgotten that our judiciary
is based on British principles at least principles that used to exist in Britain
before the Blair era.
Azam Khalil opined: The entire leadership of the PML-Q has
embarked on a single point agenda and that was to subvert the process
of reconciliation started by the president. These leaders perhaps had no
capacity to see beyond their nose, they forget in pursuit of personal gain that
a strategic belt of Pakistan was fast descending into a veritable war zone.
The war of attrition begun by religious extremists has the capacity to bleed
Pakistan into instability and therefore it is only internal unity that can save
the country. It was, therefore, a shortsighted move on the part of the PML-Q
leadership to move towards internal confrontation.
Perhaps these leaders forget that while they may survive politically
for some more time in case they join in the process of reconciliation, there
will be only defeat and disaster for them in case they continue to follow
the policy of confrontation and destruction.
Coming back to Benazir Bhutto who was riding on a crest of support,
one may add that while elections in time may be favourable to her party a
delay may hurt her prospects and provide crucial time to her political
adversaries to regroup and then mount a good challenge. There are several
weak links in her armour and already some in the party are skeptical about
her choice of close aides. One hopes that Ms Bhutto will not repeat the
mistakes of the past. As for the question if Pervez Musharraf and Benazir
Bhutto will be a dream team, the answer could be both yes and no.
Babar Sattar found transitional logic flawed. Prior to November
3, the transitionists were urging the judiciary to misinterpret our fundamental
law to help General Musharraf claw on to power. Now they want political
parties to contest elections to facilitate our countrys smooth transition to
another oblivion. The Generals survival is contingent on preserving power
and obtaining legitimacy. When the Constitution became a hurdle the
transitionists advocated carving out an exception for the General to allow
Pakistan to move forward. The court didnt oblige and the General scrapped
the fundamental law and fired the justices. Thus once again he is confronted
with his erstwhile predicament: he wields power bereft of all legitimacy. So
now the transitionists wish political parties to accord him the required
legitimacy so the country can move along.

741

But is moving along advisable if we are headed in the wrong

direction? What good it would do for the country or democracy if political
parties exhaust their already strained credibility to throw a blanket of
legitimacy upon the Generals authoritarian ways? Democracy after all isnt
an end, but only a process. To be useful the concept of self-governance
needs to be put into effect by constructing self-sustaining institutional
structures rooted in principles and backed by procedural safeguards.
Elections are an essential feature of democracy. But in the absence of other
vital attributes, such as rule of law and separation of powers, the outcome of
balloting process cannot be claimed a democratic dispensation.
The rule of law and a system of separation of powers together with
the electioneering process constitute the form and substance of democracy.
The rule of law simply means that government authority can be
legitimately exercised only in accordance with written and publicly
disclosed laws, adopted and enforced in accordance with required procedural
formalities (due process).
The existence of a power based in law as well as the ambit and extent
of such power is to be determined objectively and that makes an independent
judicature quintessential feature of rule of law. An independent court is a
prerequisite as well as a vanguard of the democratic process. Without
which elections would only produce a caricature of democracy
The difference between the command of a policeman and a
gunman is captured by the word legitimacy. If we continue to demand
the concept of legitimacy to include all ground realities, the very concept
will lose meaning. If the Constitution has no sanctity and can be abrogated at
will by whoever wields military force in the country, would an elected
government exercise any power other than that delegated to it by the
military?
If we sacrifice our independent justices at the altar of expediency, the
resultant expressive, institutional and intellectual harm will be
consequential. First of all, this is the first time in the countrys history that
the judicature, as an institution, has rejected an unconstitutional order
backed by force. It is clear that the General wishes to make an example out
of the defiant justices, and for good reason. If this trend of adhering to the
principles at the cost of personal liberty and livelihood catches on, it could
sound the death-knell of our prevailing culture of unscrupulous pragmatism

742

that worships even ill-begotten success. But on the other hand if it dies
down, we as a nation would have sold our soul and spirit to the devil.
Second, in a common law jurisdiction the judgments produced by
courts form the law. This makes the intellect of judges almost as important
as his integrity and independence. It is indeed a marvel that intellect and
integrity mostly go hand in hand. By sacrificing the brightest legal minds
on the bench merely to preserve the Generals ego and his personal rule,
we will condemn our judicature to at least a decade of mediocrity
Finally, building institutions and institutional conventions takes
decades, but not their undoing. We are currently watching the
deconstruction of a judiciary that was finally recognizing its constitutional
mandate as an independent branch of the state and not an extension of the
executive. While it offered no quick fixes to the myriad problems
confronting Pakistan, it did provide the promise of a neutral arbiter to a
citizen who was wronged by the state or by other powerful elements in the
society. That promise is being taken away and we are being asked to
reconcile with the reality of our prevailing morbid power structures.
The General seems to welcome a return to days of the troika in
his third stage of democratic transition as a mark of political maturity. What
a travesty for the rule of law! We already have a troika in our constitutional
scheme. It is called tracheotomy of power between the executive, the
judiciary and the legislature. Just because we wont allow this constitutional
scheme of institutions wielding and separating state power to function we
need to rely on a troika of individuals to run this country. By annihilating the
judiciary as protector of the constitution and the supreme dispute resolution
body, we will once again return to the depraved culture of palace intrigues
wherein the military functions as an arbiter of last resort.
All reasonable minds understand that elections under PCO would
constitute a funeral service for the independent judiciary. But in finalizing
their charter of demands, the issue of restoration of justices was reportedly
the major stumbling block for the opposition parties. Can our political
parties become more shameless? One hoped (despite common sense) the
BB would have acquired a conscience in her days of exile or even the
foresight to recognize this national moment as a window of opportunity to
wash her past sins in abiding by principles. She would not just be the prime
beneficiary of regime change in the immediate term, but could also have
made a long-term investment in the longevity of her party. But her politics
743

has made it clear that this conflict over judges is one between the elite and
the people of Pakistan, and she wouldnt want the rules of the game to
change when it is finally her turn again to loot the spoils.
Other aspects of the crisis were also commented upon. Dr Muzaffar
Iqbal wrote: The one who vowed never to let the most corrupt ruler of our
living memory back into the country dashed to Dubai to extend a welcome.
Then he rushed to Jeddah for what we are not supposed to know, but
everyone knows that at the end of that loop stood the personal Boeing 777 of
a king, waiting to bring back the man who now stands disqualified from
running from a constituency in Lahore. All these U-turns are called
pragmatism! So much for the moral strength of a man, who came to save
this country through a midnight coup.
Yet another strange character in this race to nowhere is the maulana
whose stomach stands out more than his beard the same man who used
to raise the slogan of aurat ki hukmarani na manzoor, every once in a while
and then make a trip to Islamabad to fill his pockets during the two stints of
the very woman whose rule he did not accept.
A minimum level of common sense demands that one should foresee
the nature of state and government after the farce being orchestrated for
January 8, 2008 has been played out. Those who are clamoring for
participation in elections under protest or without protest are certainly
hoping to win. Once this process goes through, there will be a parliament,
which will elect a new prime minister. Can they not imagine the kind of
government that would emerge out of this exercise? What would be the
role of the man who has now shed his uniform but who continues to wield
an unrepresentative authority in the future set-up?
Is it not obvious to everyone who claims to be a politician that this
recipe for disaster already carries a self-destructive future? Can they not see
that the man who has held arbitrary power for eight long years, and whose
PCOs have removed all legal protection of state and society will continue to
do so and with his role, their own positions will be those of mere puppets
who must move with every slight twist and turn of the hand that holds the
strings? Is this not plain to their Oxford-educated minds? Or are all the
horses lined up on the track really the same?
Raja Nusrat Ali from Gujrat opined: There is no doubt that after
having left the post of army chief General Pervez Musharraf will not be
744

able to afford the holding of free and fair elections. What suits him is that his
minions regain power that the opposition is divided and/or there is a hung
parliament. Also his sole aim seems to be to hang on to the presidency,
even if that comes at the expense of political stability in Pakistan.
Masood Hasan did it in his peculiar style. In just about nine months,
whatever else President Musharraf may have achieved, he can certainly be
credited with having unleashed a veritable army of writers, opinion
makers, columnists, anchor persons, talk show hosts and the like who have
spoken and written with passion and biting sarcasm about the farce that has
been played out in this country. The electronic media having been gagged
and Geo actually strangulated, it has been left to the print media to come out
guns blazing.
President Musharraf often moaned about the silent majority
remaining silent but when they started to express their opinions, the hail of
words were too hot to handle and there was a hasty retreat and regrouping.
All across Pakistan and elsewhere the Pakistani people have gathered and
given voice to their grievances. Candle-night vigils, house arrests, street
agitation, gagged mouths and black arm bands, brawls with gangs of brutal
policemen peppered with plain clothes men with clear orders to teach the
unruly a lesson they would not forget, resistance groups and protests
emanating from the most unlikely places and the students finally waking up
and taking a hard look at their environment and their countrys decline all
this and more has continued to unfurl at an impressive speed.
It is nine months almost to the day when the Chief Justice was
insulted, browbeaten and humiliated by a posse of swaggering army officials
and spooks but when the plot didnt unfold as had been famously scripted by
the good guys, panic set in. From then on, one draconian announcement
has led to another and rules have not just been bent but mutilated to an
extent that defies explanation. White has continued to rapidly and
effortlessly become black and vice versa. Such is the spread of these rules of
self-perpetuation that at any given time, most citizens would have a hard
time determining where it all starts and where it all ends.
Adversity of course is also a wonderful thing because it separates
the men from boys, the sincere from the lackeys and the honest from the
frauds. It reveals clearly who are people of substance and who are there to
exploit the moment, make a killing and move on. On the scarred battlefield
that is now Pakistan, many real men and women who stood up for their
745

rights and ours, spoken with genuine pain and concern about what is also
their country too.
From the politicians not much can ever be expected and the see-saw
of boycott or not, closed door meetings with shadowy emissaries of
embattled and frightened rulers, denials and acceptance, formulas and deals
we have been seeing all this and more. it is not for the likes of me to make
any comment being apolitical and nave in such matters, but what many of
us do know is that there has been only one man who has remained
steadfast in his stand from day one and that is Imran Khan
He has shown us, we all who shift and sway with the winds of the
day, that there is another way. People dismiss him saying he will never win,
he will never be any body important, he will not be successful and he will be
ditched by all his fellow-travelers, but my point is, so what? What about
the things he has already achieved? So what if he loses the election? So
what if all he has at the end of the day is sand inexorably drifting through his
fingers? He has to this day stood tall and committed and that is sterling stuff
in a land of fakes.
Aasim Sajjad Akhtar was of the view that it was time to make the
right choice. Indeed Musharraf and his aides and abettors seem to be
caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, it is impossible
to continue engaging in unbridled state repression at a time when the
primary focus seems to be creating the pretence that free and fair elections
can take place. However, the demands for the restoration of the preNovember 3 judiciary, lifting of all media curbs, and the departure of
Musharraf and his cotrie of supporters just do not seem to be going away.
Undoubtedly the mainstream opposition parties positions have
had, and will continue to have, a great bearing on how an already
complex situation will evolve. If they do decide to participate in the socalled elections, it can be expected that the principled demands of lawyers,
students and journalists will slowly but surely fade into the background as
the hustle and bustle of election campaigning however muted it may be
takes over our lives. On the other hand, if they agree to boycott, the
movement will surely intensify.
Presumably the leadership of the mainstream opposition is also
convinced that the worst form of democracy trumps unrepresentative
rule of any kind and accordingly is willing to take part in flawed elections
746

in the hope that the end result will move Pakistan a little bit further along
towards democracy. Underlying this way of looking at things is an
acceptance that the military is and will remain a permanent player in
Pakistans politics and that it is at least premature and most unrealistic to
rush for an end to the militarys political role.
It is true that all of the efforts of the past nine months have not given
rise to a countervailing power to the military establishment that can force a
reconfiguration in the state. This is why we are facing the prospect of
mainstream parties participating in the elections and thereby allowing the
military-dominated political system to survive into the immediate future. But
the mainstream parties are surely also aware that there is now almost
zero tolerance for the militarys political role and those who support it
amongst a growing section of the population. In more ways than one, if they
do not support this growing movement for change now, they are potentially
shooting themselves in the foot in times to come.
Political parties have been manipulated and fractured to the point
where they no longer enjoy an organic link with the people of Pakistan, or at
the very least the relationship is characterized by cynicism. They can neither
settle for mediocrity and accept American-sponsored change, nor they can
take a risk, trust the forces of genuine change and rescue themselves from
possible extinction. If ever there was a time to make the right choice, this
is it.

REVIEW
The decision to boycott the forthcoming general elections seemed to
be correct if viewed purely in the light of principles. The parties which have
decided to stay away from polling booths, however, must bear in mind that
the dictator, even without his second skin, cannot be coerced to meet their
demand. He would certainly go ahead with his plan of transition to
democracy and the so-called civilized world would go along with him.
Their boycott would only result in keeping them away from the
assemblies and they would not be there to plead for the independence of the
judiciary. The boycott placed an obligation on these political parties to
mobilize a popular movement for the rule of law, failing which they would

747

attain nothing. Instead, they would facilitate smooth sailing for the
Musharraf-Benazir-US Axis.
All the boycotting political parties, non-political organizations and
individuals must merge into one entity with clear agenda to restore postNovember 3 status and removal of Musharraf. The merger should be
temporary, till achievement of the objectives. The new entity, possibly
named as DMP (Democratic Movement of Pakistan) should be led by a
group of able leaders, instead of one man.
Benazir has come to terms with Musharraf on the core issue of
restoration of judiciary. The things seemed moving according to
Crusaders plan in which Musharraf and Benazir would share power in the
future political dispensation in Pakistan.
Musharrafs decision not to vacate the Army House is meant to create
the illusion of army at his back even after the removal of second skin. It also
proved that how scared the brave commando is? Nobody knows it better
than him that he risks his life every hour of the day, but sticking on to the
Army House in the vicinity of Murree Brewery may reduce but cannot
eliminate the threat altogether.
21st January 2008

748

BIGS FOR BALLOT

Having cleansed the superior judiciary of terrorist judges and
silenced the guns of electronic media in just six weeks, the great strategist of
the war against terror lifted the Emergency Rule on 15th December.
Musharraf also amended the Constitution on the eve of lifting of the
emergency; the changes brought by the military dictator were exempted
from parliaments approval.
Lawyers observed complete strike across Punjab, staged rallies, held
meetings and demanded reinstatement of deposed judges. The lawyers
blackened the faces of two colleagues in Hyderabad, who had attended
Sindh High Court. In Peshawar, they smashed cabins of fellow lawyers who
agreed to become PCO judges.
With the decision of the PML-N to participate in the polls, all the
larger parties were in the run. Restoration of judges, however, topped PMLN manifesto. PML-Q looked for middle path on judges issue. Achakzai
urged people to boycott the polls and rise up for restoration of judiciary.

EVENTS
On 13th December, Qazi and Imran addressed Bar in Rawalpindi.
Benazir predicted 142 PPP MNAs in new assembly. Muhammad Ali Bucha
joined Aitzaz as he withdrew from polls. AG said President would wrap up
emergency tomorrow as five presidential orders would be issued. High Court
judges appointment age would be reduced from 45 to 40 years. SCBA
finalized arrangements for launching the bus movement for the restoration
judges who were deposed for refusing to take oath under PCO.
Pervaiz Elahi alleged that Benazir has planned to rig polls. Benazir
demanded additional security. The regime constituted three-member
committee for help to let BB off the hook in cases pending before the
foreign courts. Maulana Samiul Haq announced boycott of polls and asked
party members to withdraw nomination papers. A UN human rights envoy
alleged that Musharraf has already rigged polls.
All illegal and unconstitutional actions taken during emergency were
validated which cannot be challenged in courts. Musharraf reiterated that by
749

no means the deposed judges would be reinstated. In spite of that the

military dictator saw harmony in three pillars of the state. Supreme Court
and high courts judges were sworn in afresh under the Constitution.
Deposed CJP was stopped from seeing off Bhagwandas on his
retirement on 16th December. Nahid Khan opted out of politics over award of
party tickets in PPP. Next day, EC rejected Sharifs review petitions.
Allegations of pre-poll rigging continued to be hurled by all on daily basis.
Police roughed up protesters marching towards judges colony in
Islamabad on 17th December; 25 of them were taken into custody. PBC
vowed to continue lawyers struggle. Detained lawyer, Tariq Mehmood, was
denied treatment at PIMS. in Lahore, students demanded for free judiciary
and media.
APDM held a protest meeting in Islamabad on 19th December which
was attended by Justice Wajihuddin. Benazir termed Musharraf rule as dark
era of dictatorship. Lawyers denounced amendments in the Constitution.
Former SC judges formed committee for rule of law; rejected constitutional
amendments; and demanded restoration of pre-Nov 3 judiciary. US House
imposed conditions on aid to Pakistan which included independent judiciary,
free media, no harassment of journalists and activists.
Two persons were killed and five wounded in a bomb blast in PML-Q
meeting in Bekar, Dera Bugti area on 19th December. Sirajul Haq said there
was no hope for fair polls in the absence of free judiciary and media. Polls
will be fair, the EU delegation was assured. AG met Altaf Hussain in
London. Next day, Aitzaz warned of massive protest over deposed judges
issue. Justice Tariq Mehmood, who was freed to celebrate Eid, was
rearrested.

VIEWS
The issue of boycott or participation remained under scrutiny.
Umme Lalla from Mardan wrote: Nationalists and moderates like PKMAP
and PTI, two severe critics of the military establishment, are playing into the
hands of the Jamaat-e-Islami. The Jamaat is known for its well-established
links with the military. A boycott of the elections by right-wing parties like
the Jamaat will definitely help the PML-Q to get more seats.

750

It is a proven fact that a change through the ballot not only promotes
a healthy environment but also strengthens the democratic process and
institutions. Therefore, all those who have been chosen to boycott the Jan 8
elections will encourage the politics of confrontation and not help
democracy.
M Rizwan Afzal from Rawalpindi observed: It is a fact that the
general public has not taken to the streets in large numbers to denounce the
assault on the judiciary and the media. This indifference reflects that the
people are waiting for the general elections so that they can record their
grievances through the ballot. Political parties, instead of boycotting the
general elections, should participate in them and bring about a genuine
political change in Pakistan.
Sanam Zahra from Islamabad was of the view that the state of
emergency has been lifted and the constitution restored with a few
amendments. In his recent address to the nation, the president also promised
to hold the general elections in a free and fair manner. Hencein such
circumstances, the boycott decision taken by minor political parties
seems to be emotional and is destined to isolate them politically.
M Saleem Chaudhry from the US wrote: In a recent statement, the
Jamiat Ulema Islam-F chief, Maulana Fazlur Rehman has said that there is
no justification for boycotting the general elections as the state of emergency
has been lifted by President Musharraf. It seems that the maulana is too
nave to understand the implications of a number of amendments to the
statute book introduced by President Musharraf which are tantamount to
mutilating the constitution. Participation in the polls can only be called an
act of sheer opportunism.
The News expressed its views with reference to Aitzaz Ahsan. The
decision taken by SCBA President Aitzaz Ahsan to withdraw nomination
papers he had filed from a Lahore constituency as a candidate of the PPP,
has immediately raised his status as a man of principle The unilateral
decision will also unboubtedly further distance the veteran politician from
the central leadership of the PPP, which over the past few months has
adopted a seemingly lukewarm attitude towards Aitzaz and the struggle he
has been participating in alongside so many other lawyers, since March this
year. But at the same time, Aitzaz, who is already emerging alongside
Munir A Malik, other leaders of the legal community and even the deposed
judges as a hero for the people, will win still more popular appeal.
751

M Saleem Chaudhry from USA wrote: He has made the right

decision in staying on as the leader of the lawyers by sticking to their line of
action, through the withdrawal of his nomination papers for the so-called
elections. In doing so he is providing guidance to Pakistanis on the elections.
This move is bound to make him the undisputed leader not only of his
lawyer colleagues but also the nation at large.
Dr Masooda Bano was quite harsh in criticizing the political parties
for not boycotting the polls. So now the PML-N too is out of the ranks of
the real opposition. Whether pushed into this decision due to the PPPs
refusal to boycott the elections or due to external pressure, the decision is a
short-sighted one. The credibility that Nawaz Sharif was developing as a
genuine opposition leader due to his steady critique of Musharraf
regime has been sacrificed. There is no doubt about that.
Let us remind ourselves of the justification presented for the two
scenarios: one, where the opposition boycotts the elections; the other where
it takes part in them. The strength of the former was that it would deprive
Musharraf of any remaining legitimacy in the west and combined with
political struggles on the streets, can bring the final end to his game. Most
importantly, the strategy had the core issue of the reinstatement of the judges
right on top of the agenda. Since there are hardly any merits to the other
approach, they were presented to be more as compulsion because otherwise
the PML-Q will take all the seats.
The intellectual bankruptcy of the latter argument is so obvious
that it is difficult to see how the PPP could take this position without it
being part of a bigger plot designed by the western governments for
Pakistan. For, imagine, if the PPP had gone along with the APDM and
boycotted the elections, could the parliament produced out of elections
contested mainly by the PML-Q and others like Fazlur Rehman had survived
the public outcry? And sustained outcry would have eventually forced an
end to Musharraf regime.
Despite having hired US lobbying firms to build her case and
constantly making efforts to establish links with the US government, Benazir
Bhutto was having little success in getting the doors opened to her in the
west till the lawyers movement. This is evident from her failure to get
appointment with senior government officials within the US administration
during 2001-2006 despite making many attempts at it.

752

The perception that Benazir is the darling of the west is a

misnomer. On their own merit, neither of the two politicians would have
had the west back them. it is only after the lawyers movement showed no
signs of succumbing to pressure that the western governments were forced to
explore other strategies to support Musharrafs survival
This shift in the mood of the western public is all a brilliant
evidence of success of the lawyers sacrifices. The current legitimacy being
provided to Musharraf by taking part in the elections and putting the judges
issues on the backburner is evidence of the bankruptcy of the current
political elite. The latter, for its part, has over time become so corrupt that it
does not have the spine to stand up and provide leadership to fight the army
and limit outside interference even when the public is ready for change. I
have to concede today that as a constant critic of Musharrafs regime, I
today have to say that my opponents were correct: that these politicians
themselves are the biggest cause of military rule in Pakistan; the army is not
to be blamed.
The focus of current struggle has to shift towards these politicians
now. The lawyers movement that built the very space that allowed these
politicians to come back has to now build the strategy to get them out.
Students, activists and journalists have to start working on a mass grassroots
movement. The election would be over by mid-January but the real work of
mobilization will begin after that. It has to be long-term commitment but we
must have it if Pakistan is to survive. And the good news is that we have a
good leader in the making: cynics can keep writing off Imran Khan, but
another fact based on my fieldwork within various parts of the country and
discussions with Pakistani students at Oxford is that he increasingly
represents the hope of young Pakistanis.
The News was of the view that Musharraf must reciprocate the PPP
and PML-Ns decision to take part in the polls. Benazir Bhutto and PML-N
leader Nawaz Sharif seem to have realized that they may not be able to
succeed against the might of the establishment, its allies and collaborators
unless they joined hands and faced the challenge head on. Ms Bhutto has
thus been making positive statements about electoral adjustments with Mr
Sharifs party on a seat-to-seat basis, which sounds to be right strategy to
consolidate their support bases and avoid self-defeating electoral battles
which could help any third party.

753

The two leaders who have opted to stay out of the race, Qazi Hussain
Ahmed and Imran Khan, would also be playing the role of vote watchers and
critical monitors of any alleged attempts to engineer the elections. The
continuing epic movement of the lawyers and civil society would also
play a similar watchdog role. Thus the 2008 election is slowly moving to
become what President Pervez Musharraf had once described as the mother
of all elections.
While Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif have to prove their strength in the
polls, Mr Musharraf has a much more difficult task to accomplish. He
has to prove his words, repeated frequently, that he is neutral and will
not support any political party. This needs more than a few statements to
establish, especially if one looks at the way state and government resources
have been commandeered by the former Punjab chief minister as he and his
party go about trying to gain an upper hand in the electorally crucial
province.
Now that Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif have refused to boycott the polls,
as previously demanded by Mr Musharraf, it would be appropriate if their
positive gesture is reciprocated by a similar gesture by the president.
Although the charter of demands which Ms Bhuttos PPP and Mr Sharifs
PML-N had drawn up has not been officially released, some 13 out of the 15
points had been agreed upon. It would be massive confidence-building
measure if President Musharraf looked at those 13 unanimous demands and
tried to implement all or most of them in the interest of fairness and equity.
Kamila Hyat observed: Abandoning earlier promises, and refusing to
look beyond the possibility of short-term gain, all the major parties have
opted to participate in an electoral exercise which will act chiefly to
grant legitimacy to a setup that has consistently shown contempt for the
law of the land and for all those who have attempted to uphold it.
The reports that, in their decision to participate, key political players
including the PML-N and the PPP had come under pressure from foreign
capitals, notably Riyadh and Washington, are even more disturbing. The fact
that these parties believe there is more to be gained by following instructions
issued from the distant quarters, rather than building a stable future for their
parties by putting the interests of Pakistans people foremost on the list of
priorities, explains why there is so much cynicism regarding their role in
the affairs of Pakistan.

754

The situation that has now emerged means that the lawyers, who
have spearheaded the struggle for the peoples basic right of justice,
now stand essentially alone. The political parties have opted to walk away
from their principled stand. The proposal put forward by Aitzaz Ahsanhas
already been rejected by hard-line lawyers, who continue to seek boycott
The question of what kind of democracy political parties hope will
emerge after polls has not been adequately answered by them. Another
period of parliamentary subservience to autocratic rule, as has been seen
since 2002, will after all serve little purpose beyond constructing the
faade of a democratic setup
The question now is how the lawyers and other civil society groups
that have joined them in their struggle can most effectively continue their
brave effort. It is true that, without any backing from the larger political
parties, their quest becomes a harder one. But it is also true that their
perseverance has created a small, but significant movement which could
have an important impact on future events in the country.
Regardless of what happens in the weeks and months ahead, the
sequence of events seen recently has underscored certain facts. It has been
proven that, as many had feared, political parties lack integrity, commitment
or the good sense to see that by refusing to stand up for what is just, they
are further discrediting themselves in the eyes of people They have
further convinced people that little can be expected in the way of principle
from these groups.
Ahmad R Shahid from UK opined: It is good that Nawaz Sharif has
decided to contest the elections rather than leave the field to the proestablishment PML-Q, even though many sections of society have called for
a boycott. Even Aitzaz Ahsan has decided to boycott the elections despite
the partys decision to participate. It is something totally new in Pakistan
that politics has moved beyond the military and the pro- and antiestablishment parties
It is quite possible for civil society to become so strong in the years
to come that it starts influencing the policies of the mainstream political
parties. Yet for two particular reasons it has hitherto failed to win over the
big parties: 1) It is mainly the upper middle class or the professional class
that is the core of civil society. 2) It has hitherto failed to impress the lower
middle and the lower classes, which are more concerned about issues other
755

than the rule of law. Until the size of the upper middle class remains low
there will be few takers for the concept of a society based on laws.
Kamal Siddiqi wrote: The decision of Mian Nawaz Sharif to let his
party contest the elections despite the fact that he himself cannot be a
candidate, came out of the blue. Top leaders of the party were unaware of
this decision till the last moment. Some of them privately commented that
since it was not their decision and defied any logic in terms of the stand
taken by the party till then, it would be a good idea to ask Mian Sahab only
about why this has been decided.
The move by the PML-N has sabotaged any attempt by the
opposition to present a united front. Even the lawyers have become
disheartened. The job has been done for the General. Chaudhry Aitzaz has
said that if the parties do not boycott the elections, the efforts of the lawyers
are wasted. Aitzaz continues to stand steadfast in the boycott and has even
withdrawn his papers
Our expectations for most part have been dashed not by Mian
Sahab but by Ms Bhutto who continues to flirt with the government
despite the fact that almost none of her demands have been taken seriously.
Article 58-2(b) stays. The possibility of allowing third time PMs is there.
But does that mean she will be re-elected? But local bodies will stay. The
caretaker governments are anything but neutral
Our human rights crusader Hina Jilani has said that the elections have
already been rigged. The goal posts have been moved and the field has
been set. In all this, one wonders what the role of the international election
observers will be. Needless to say, Ms Jilani will be branded anti-Pakistan
and her patriotism will be once again questioned. At the same time, it is
ironic that the same rightwing elements who once termed Ms Jilani and Ms
Asma Jahangir as anti-Pakistan and against Islam are now turning them, and
other such lawyers for help in tracing missing persons or high-lighting
human rights violations.
Shafqat Mahmood was of the view: The decision by the PML-N to
participate in the elections has broken up the All Parties Democratic
Movement and evoked a negative reaction from the lawyers and civil society
activists. Both have accused the party of giving legitimacy to a

756

fraudulent election and of betraying the movement to restore the real

judiciary of the country.
The key to boycott was unanimity in the opposition. It either had
to be total or not at all. Once it became clear that the PPP and the JUI-F
would participate, the situation became very difficult for the APDM and, in
particular, for Nawaz Sharif. His stakes were greater than those of the other
parties in alliance.
Nawaz Sharif argues that as long as the strategy is correct, the
tactics can be flexible. The ultimate purpose, he believes, is to restore the
judiciary, as this will automatically mean the end of Musharraf. But his party
had to determine whether a boycott would bring this goal closer or taking
part in the election. With the PPP, the PML-Q, the JUI-F and the ANP
participating, it did not think a boycott would. It decided therefore to go
ahead with the polls.
The other APDM parties obviously thought otherwise. They stuck to
what they called their principled stand; that without the restoration of the
real judiciary, participation in the elections would be meaningless. In
particular, Imran Khan had no doubt in his mind that participating in a
rigged election would mean playing Musharrafs game and he did not
think that this would in any way helping restoring the judiciary or realizing
the goal of real democracy.
Are principled stands relevant in politics or is it a game of tactics
where political compulsions and pragmatism should be given greater
importance? The easy answer is that of course principles are more important
and probably make for better politics in the long run. However, as Keynes
famously remarked, in the long run we will all be dead. Does it then make
sense for someone like Imran to stick to what can be called politics of
purity?
Let us look at some other aspects of politics. In what is called
liberal democracy, political campaigns are not possible without
money In fact, money question is so important that some individuals, not
all, have gone to the extent of justifying corruption.
A National Assembly election costs close to ten million at least.
How can this be possible without the partys ability to raise money or choose
loaded candidates? And, if it does, it becomes hostage to people with money

757

or must be ready to pay back if and when it comes into power. If this is the
case, how will the parties like Imran Khans PTI fare that are neither keen to
seek money from interest groups nor attract rich candidates.
There are no easy answers. One would like to believe that in the
best of all possible worlds, truth, integrity and purity will always
triumph over cynical pragmatism, but does it? In Pakistani politics, there
are two further peculiarities that test the pragmatic ability of political parties.
One relates to relations with the army and the other to the American
connection; these two constituting the famous two As of our politics.
The case of Imran on these two As is rather extreme. He has
continued to talk an essentially anti-American stand and has also used strong
words about militarys interference in politics. By any standard calculation
of Pakistani power structure, he has no chance of ever getting into
power if he continues in this vein. Should he modulate his stand or continue
calling a spade a spade irrespective of the consequences?
Perhaps, there is a middle ground where political compulsions
and principles can coexist. Nawaz Sharif would argue that he has found it
by participating in the elections without giving up on the issue of the
judiciarys restoration. Imran Khan would not agree and argue that a
peoples movement, and not participating in the elections, is the right road.
Who is right, only time will tell?
The election and lifting of emergency was also widely commented
upon. Dr Asad Sadick from Germany wrote: The Attorney General has
announced yet again that emergency will be lifted by Dec 16. Do I,
therefore, understand that the reasons for the state of emergency have been
taken care of, e.g. the war on terror has been won, the deteriorating political
situation in the country has been remedied and law and order is now normal?
Or was the state of emergency just to get Gen President installed as Mr
President? We Pakistanis are always taken for a ride.
The News opined: After an agonizing 42 days, President Pervez
Musharraf has finally revoked the state of emergency and repealed the PCO,
restoring the countrys constitution, thus bringing Pakistan back on the rails
of some form of rule by the book as against the embarrassing and
internationally unacceptable rule of one man. But what can initially be said
about the highly complicated legal and constitutional orders issued to revert
to the pre-Nov 3 position is that the book by which the country would now
758

be governed is no longer the same. It has been amended, for some still a
highly controversial and debatable issue, to fully protect and indemnify all
acts, decisions and orders issued during that 42-day extra-constitutional
period.
The revocation of the proclamation of emergency or the repeal of the
PCO shall not affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired,
accrued and incurred under the original proclamation orders of the
emergency or the PCO and the oath of judges. Thus an attempt has been
made to cover the tracks as far as possible and if there is any problem in
future, a provision has been kept which provides that if any difficulty arises
in giving effect to any of the provisions, the president may make more such
provisions and pass such orders as he may deem fit.
While these constitutional steps would be analyzed by the legal
community and relevant experts in detail in due course of time, what is
obvious is that the entire exercise was undertaken by the president on
Nov 3 to preempt the Supreme Court of Pakistan headed by Justice
Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry from creating legal and constitutional hurdles
in his re-election as president of Pakistan for the next five years. Once the
then General Musharraf decided to take the huge plunge and the
unconstitutional decision to dismember the Supreme Court was taken, it was
probably decided to fix some other institutions
What is important is how the country will be governed now that
fundamental rights have been restored, some pretence of rule of law has
been established and apparently one-man rule has given way to a system
run under some written codes and clauses. Though it is true that President
Musharraf has secured his flanks, inducted a new pliant and cooperative
judiciary in the centre and the provinces, corrected the legal and
constitutional language wherever he felt it was necessary and now feels
more confident, it has yet to be seen how the people react in the upcoming
polls and before
If the people find no change in their lives, if the situation remains
the same in terms of curbs and pressures on the civil society and in how
people are governed, then December 15 may not mean much. In that case,
we all will continue to believe that the worst is not yet over and the struggle
has to go on.

759

Imtiaz Alam wrote: A recent advertisement by the ministry of

information made the untenable claim: Emergency imposed to protect
democracy, emergency lifted to promote democracy. What a tautology?
It shows how the regime has battled for survival since March of this year.
Indeed, emergency has been lifted but not before leaving a bitter taste of yet
another mutilation of the Constitution this time after having brought down
the institution of a proactive judiciary.
The regime has narrowly survived its first round of the current
battle, but at a huge cost of exploding whatever legitimacy it was left with.
It had to suspend and amend the Constitution and assume absolute powers to
first dismantle the PCO-I judiciary in order to get the presidential election
sanctioned by the court of its favourite judges. It infuriated not only the
bench and the bar, but also the whole civil society. Amid announcement of
general elections, these were the ugliest things to do to enrage the whole
political class and the people at large.
Carrying a huge burden of bringing down one of the pillars of state
and extremely curbing the electronic media, the regime is faced with yet
another dilemma, of continuing to rig the elections or allowing a fairly
free elections: if it does stop the rigging process, it faces the rout of the
Kings parties in fair elections; and if continues to rig the electoral process, it
will ignite greater mass protests and rebellion.
As Musharraf faces the lowest public rating, as shown by recent
opinion surveys, the electoral prospects of the parties aligned with
Musharraf becomes worse. They had planned it province-wise with local
leaderships running the show and leaving it to local feudal/tribal alignments
and influential constituent fiefdoms to succeed. The result is that the progovernment conglomerate is nowhere seen at the national level without any
national leader leading it. This reductionist approach, dictated by the urge
of the great helmsman still occupying Army House, has marginalized
the PML-Q before it could be tested in the political fray.
The next 20 days can change the whole electoral algebra and set the
direction for the next parliament, which is destined to become more
powerful than the one we got in 2002. If the elections are not massively
rigged the opposition will have overwhelming majority in the next
parliament. And if they are massively rigged, we will witness unprecedented
agitation immediately after the election. The rigging elements will make the
election bloodier and absolute rigging would lead to bloodshed.
760

However, there is no running away from the elections. Only those

elements would want to disrupt them which want to bring about yet another
martial law. Seeing the electoral process getting out of hand, the experienced
engineers can also go to any extent to disrupt them. It is the duty of the new
army chief to keep the intelligence agencies out of this vicious game, as they
are being increasingly accused of interfering on the side of the Kings
parties.
After having committed so many mistakes since March, President
Musharraf should accept the 13 demands being made for free elections
by the opposition parties. He must suspend the local governments, lift all
curbs on media, reshuffle the bureaucracy and, in consultation with the
opposition, appoint more authoritative Election Commission and neutral
caretaker governments. The only safe option is free and fair election, and by
holding transparent election Musharraf can regain some credibility that he
has lost altogether.
M B Naqvi opined: Emergency has been ended, but not before it
did its work: amended the Constitution further; the president can do without
the unusual Indemnity Act to validate his illegal and unconstitutional acts;
the judiciary has been purged and at least one troublesome judge has
probably been exiled. Such measures have completed the framework within
which the 2008 elections will be held.
While there is no uncertainty about the locals identity: one person
and one institution, viz. ex-Gen Musharraf and the Pakistan Army. There is
now no pretence of sovereignty; all the shots are being called by the US
and its friends in the Middle East and Europe, ably implemented by
collaborators in Pakistan, Musharraf and the army. And Americans have said
it Who should know better? Pakistanis, voters or absenters, should expect
the results desired by these powers that be.
The consequences of ignoring popular wishes and pretending that
people would accept all schemes of retired Gen Musharraf; is a dangerous
delusion. A price will have to be paid for defrauding the people.
Shouldnt the authority be afraid of the disappointment and anger of the
people? The military has dominated Pakistans politics for 55 years This is
a clear and perhaps final reversion to the colonial period.
The country happens to be polarized between this semi-foreign, semicomprador regime, on the other hand, and a growing number of Pakistanis,
761

on the other. This is not a violent confrontation from the peoples side.
The regime is likely to instigate people to violence so they can be crushed
with greater state violence. When this confrontation will mature and come to
a head cannot be foreseen because much depends on the authoritys
behaviour.
How to create a democratic dispensation where people matter and
their problems are resolved through combined official and public actions?
Would the elections that the agencies will manage create a democratic
dispensation? Insofar as anyone can see, Pakistan will get governments
like those that followed the mysterious death of Gen Zia-ul-Haq in which
the troika ruled
Meanwhile, lets not forget the economic situation: the food inflation
is playing havoc; other inflations are bound to increase. The economy is
actually threatened with meltdown This cannot go on. The debt servicing
burden is increasing despite the relief expatriate Pakistanis are providing.
Unless these imbalances and deficits are rectified, the economic future is
bleak. It will be far more conducive to political agitation that may arise
from election results.
Nasim Zehra commented: Admittedly, the holding of general
elections is a necessary component of a democratic system, yet there are
many other factors in Pakistans current power and political context that will
undermine the credibility of the Jan 8 election process. Having had to opt for
a less-than-ideal decision of an election boycott to protest against the
undemocratic conditions, the opposition political parties are wisely
contesting the polls.
Most in the opposition intend to use this election process and its
outcome to protest against the prevailing unconstitutional and undemocratic
conditions. Their participation will paradoxically lend legitimacy to the
otherwise controversial election process. But indeed here is where the
advantage to the current incumbency ends.
Here is where the paradoxical impact of the oppositions election
participation will then turn into one-way advantage for only the protesting
opposition. Thousands in the mobilized crowds now out cheering the
electioneering PPP-PML-N leadership can potentially turn into antiincumbency crowds. There is, therefore, no guarantee what the
forthcoming election process has in store.
762

What has already been established beyond doubt is that over all the
Election Commission has failed to ensure a level playing field for all the
contesting parties. There has hardly been any satisfactory response by the
Election Commission to the endless PPP complaints which are also against
intelligence agencies harassing of candidates.
It is evident that as president, Gen Musharraf seeks survival and
control in the post election phase. That can only be ensured if two-thirds of
the 342-seats in the National Assembly go to Gen Musharrafs political
supporters. Musharraf needs supporters in the assembly for the
indemnification of the constitutional amendments he has made during the
42-day emergency period
While lifting the emergency President Musharraf explained its
imposition within the context of a judges conspiracy against him, and hence
his decision to sadly turn to what he referred to as a last resort. A relieved
Gen Musharraf told the nation Thanks to be God, we have defeated that
conspiracy The wave of terrorism and militancy has been stopped under
the emergency and there had been considerable improvement in the overall
situation. Gen Musharraf was also relieved that there was now
harmony among the pillars of the State. Particularly his concern was the
conspiring judiciary.
The cause of the harmony is the presence of mostly a new
judiciary. But beyond the cause of the harmony there is the question of
why is there need for harmony? The judiciary is constitutionally bound to
ensure that authority is not exercised beyond the limits laid down by the
Constitution. And there may well be less than harmonious times between the
two when the judiciary seeks to rein the unconstitutional functioning of the
executive or of its branches.
Obviously, General Musharrafs story of some dangerous
conspiracy does not jibe with what the Pakistani nation has experienced,
especially since Nov 3. It has experienced endless unconstitutional and
illegal moves. And even at present while Gen Musharraf insists he has no
favourites in the election race and he promises the nation a fair and free
election
Kamila Hyat talked of likely scenario after lifting of the emergency.
Already, post-poll scenarios are being discussed. The media reports that the
assembly which will take shape has already been drawn up, down to the last
763

detail, with a large number of seats to be allotted to both the PML-Q and
the PPP, provides some insight into plans. Many predict that the next
National Assembly will indeed be a hung one, giving President Musharraf
a great deal of power in the manoeuvring and negotiation that will be
required to form a viable coalition government.
The doubts regarding the transparency of the process of polling,
which under Pakistans constitution is supervised by the judiciary, has also
added to the question marks over the election. But, regardless of these
factors, the polls will produce a parliament of one kind or the other
Outside parliament, there is also the matter of what other players who have
emerged on the political scene can do.
But the movement by citizens seems already to be conscious of the
fact that democracy, after all, is a mere process, which should aim to
provide people a greater sense of social equity and justice. It is not an end in
itself, but only a means to strive for these ends. A pretence of democracy, a
charade in which shadows who have little real commitment to the interests
of the people of Pakistan flitter across the national stage, does not represent
democracy in anything but its most corrupted and distorted form.
For these reasons, it is important to keep in sight what the right
thing is and what meaningful goals for the country should be, even if it does
not seem possible to attain these immediately. In this sense it is encouraging
that the lifting of emergency has been recognized widely as just another
step in the game of an autocrat, the setting up of yet another smokescreen,
and not as the significant event official circles have attempted to portray it
as. If there were any doubts on this count, they have been removed by the
presidents declaration that agitation would not be tolerated and curbs on
the media would not be lifted.
Analysts also commented various aspects of elections in general.
Rahimullah Yusufzai was of the view that the polls would be on presidents
terms. The coming polls have been variously described as the mother of all
elections and the battle for Pakistan. One would disagree with this
assessment because these elections are meant to perpetuate the status quo
instead of inspiring hope and bringing a decisive change in the country.
Like all previous polls, the coming elections will be a simple
battle for power between contestants with almost similar political
agendas. Even the composition of the parties is the same with rich and
764

winnable candidates getting the bulk of the party tickets to contest the
polls. Turncoats are being welcomed back into parties that they had
ditched Dynastic politics is being further strengthened with party leaders
fielding wives, brothers, sons, and other relations as candidate on general
and reserved assembly seats.
Those hoping for a positive change in the country as a result of the
Jan 8 general elections ought to realize that the polls are being held on
President Gen Musharrafs terms. Qazi Hussain Ahmads Jamaat-eIslami, Imran Khans Tehrik-e-Insaf, Mahmood Khan Achakzaiand some
of the Baloch and Sindhi nationalist parties rejected those terms and
preferred to boycott the elections. For them restoration of the pre-Nov 3
judiciary prior to Gen Musharrafs second coup was more important than
taking part in the polls.
Parties that have decided to contest the polls on President Gen
Musharrafs self-serving terms shouldnt be faulted for taking the plunge
because politicians are required to show flexibility in keeping with domestic
and international compulsions and make the best use of any opportunity that
presents itself in the course of their political struggle. There was no way
Benazir Bhutto would have kept her PPP out of the electoral contest
after having returned home from nine years of an unavoidable self-exile and
secured certain important concessions, including the NRO granting her
amnesty from corruption charges, from Gen Musharraf through the
intervention of the US and her other Western backers.
With the PPP determined to contest the polls and the PML-Q and its
allied parties already in the field with open support from President Gen
Musharraf and the interim governments installed in the centre and the four
provinces on their recommendations, Nawaz Sharifs PML-N had to take
the plunge and participate in the elections. It was under tremendous
pressure from its candidates, workers and supporters to contest the elections.
In case of boycott, it would have lost its voters to other parties and been
thrown out of electoral politics and assemblies for an unspecified period of
time,
Weaker political parties and alliances and split mandates in the
elections would certainly suit President Gen Musharraf and his allies.
With all the resources of the state at his command and still enjoying the
goodwill of the US and the Pakistan Army, the president has played his
cards well and imposed himself and his brand of politics on the people
765

of Pakistan. the only chance for opposition political parties and the civil
society to come out of this hopeless situation is to defeat the president and
his allies in the elections or spearhead a countrywide protest movement in
case the polls are rigged.
Ikram Sehgal wrote on party prospects. A straw poll shows that in a
free and fair poll (unless something drastic happens between now and Jan 8)
the PML-N gets 60-65 of the 148 National Assembly seats in the Punjab.
Mian Nawaz Sharif is well behind in Sindh, the NWFP and in Baluchistan,
would be lucky getting 10-12 seats of the remaining 124 available seats.
Ms Bhuttos PPP has a solid majority in Sindh, at least 35-37 out of
the 61 National Assembly seats, and will win a bloc of between 25and 30
seats in (mostly southern) Punjab. In the NWFP and Balochistan the PPP
will be lucky to get four or five seats, and will probably get not more than
70-75 seats in all. Assuming that this is the case, Mr Sharif and Ms Bhutto
would be about even.
The PML-Q should manage 40-45 seats in Punjab and about 15-18
National Assembly seats in the other provinces, or between 60-65 seats in
all. The MQM will win 16 or 17 seats in urban Sindh. The MMA will be
almost wiped out in the plains of the NWFP. Seat adjustments will get
Maulana Fazlur Rehmans JUI-F 10-12 seats in southern NWFP and
northern Balochistan, enabling it to manage possibly two to three seats more
if the Jamaat-e-Islami voters turn up to support JUI-F candidates in the
mountains of northern NWFP, traditionally a Jamaat stronghold.
Resurgent after the 2002 debacle the ANP should win 10-12
National Assembly seats in the NWFP and Balochistan, nothing in Punjab or
Sindh. In addition to this, 18 to 20 independents are expected to get elected
as well. In a hung parliament any one who cobbles together a workable
majority will be able to become prime minister
Fantasy stops here, all credible information points to free and
fair poll being very unlikely in Punjab, as well as certain selected seats in
Sindh, the NWFP and Balochistan. The game plan is for Pervaiz Elahis
election machine to rig and bag as much as 90 National Assembly seats in
Punjab (or even more). Some of his collaborators are getting cold feet at the
possible reaction, cautioning that this attempt at a landslide could well
boomerang as it did in 1971

766

The scheme being hatched by the Pervaiz Elahi clique to fulfill

his dream of becoming prime minister of Pakistan is a disaster in the
making for Pakistan. Contrary to widespread public perception, the rank and
file of the Army has never been involved in ballot-stuffing in any general
elections in Pakistan. As opposed to the wholesale manipulation in 2002, a
handful of intelligence apparatchiks may still involve themselves in
perpetuating electoral manipulation in 2008. Most of the electoral fraud will
be handiwork of public officials and the police in Punjab.
In another article the analyst added: Whether there is a fair election
or a rigged one only the numbers will change. There will be a hung
parliament and whatever Ms Bhutto may profess at the moment her party is
poised to come into an alliance with the PML-Q at the federal level and
in Punjab, this will leave the PML-N, which will be the majority party (if
not outright) in Punjab, out in the cold. This leaves Pervez Musharraf very
much in place ruling the roost as a civilian president; does he really need to
go in for overkill? The bad news is that in a straw poll conducted among
those who know him well for over four decades concluded that he is
incapable of letting go; it is not in his personality profile to stay above the
fray.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal opined: It is now the season of political pundits,
sooth-sayers, fortune-tellers, seat adjustments, election alliances and above
all saving the country yet one more time. There are just too many saviours,
too many visionaries, all parading their own solutions to the myriad
problems faced by a state conquered by its own generals over and over.
Those who have now stepped into the fray with all their tricks of
emotionally-charged speeches, behind the scene deals and hidden
agendas will once again make promises they never wish to keep.
This nauseating outrage has happened too many times each time
the end result is the same, though players have changed a bit over the last
sixty years. With the clock ticking and the General smiling at the win-win
situation he has finally orchestrated for himself, the future looks grim for
the state and society that has never really seen any real bright spot on
the horizon. January 8, 2008 is not too far. In less than a month, the nation
will face a new dilemma which has, in fact, already been foretold: a hung
parliament
The root of the malady behind all this is, of course politics sans
principles. Pragmatism has been the only policy of all those who have so far
767

emerged on Pakistans turbid political scene. Even those who have now
assumed a high moral position by sticking to the boycott option have
always been losers when it comes to principles.
The one exception in the present phase of politics sans principles
is Imran Khan. If he is a principled politician, then it becomes imperative
for him to first build his own party on some solid principles. This is a long
path of course, but the only path that has any hope of an eventual
replacement of lota politics in this land of ours. It may take him ten years to
gain an organizational structure that would make his party a formidable
force in Pakistan. But to be sure, it will be a party that can look forward to a
long and stable future for itself and for Pakistan.
Whats required is not only a long-term vision, but also the
energy, zeal, the dedication and devotion for a long haul. Imran Khan has
flaundered on this count in the past. He has not been able to devote energies
for building a political party based on solid principles. Even the first blue
print for the establishment of such a party has yet to emerge.
Imagine a political party built on solid principles and with a
programme of reform and development of institutions, which can replace the
present structure of state and society, coming into power in 2020 with
massive grassroots support. It will bring with it a new political culture, a
new moral standard of integrity and a new vision for this unfortunate,
visionless state. It will inaugurate an era of principled politics, a time to
dream and look forward to rebuilding national character destroyed by
politics sans principles.
Mir Jamilur Rahman opined: Unlike the general elections of 2002,
we have two political bigwigs, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, personally
leading the campaign of their respective parties. That will certainly make a
difference. It can safely be predicted that the PPP and the PML-N will have
more seats than they had in the last elections. Lest we forget, the PPP had
polled the highest number of votes in 2002 when its charismatic leader was
in self-imposed exile. The PPP with Benazir Bhutto leading the campaign
will certainly improve its presence in the assemblies.
Nawaz Sharif has wisely withdrawn his boycott threat. Had he
carried it out, he would have been the bigger loser. He would have lost a
good opportunity of rejuvenating the PML-N. Qazi Hussain Ahmed as usual
has taken a wrong decision at the most crucial time. He has thrown his party,
768

the Jamaat-e-Islami, out of the electoral process. He has damaged the JI

irreparably and disunited the MMA.
The case of Imran Khan, the major boycotter, is quite enigmatic.
He has behaved like that hard-working student who had been studying
diligently, but flunked the test by not taking it. It would never be known how
many seats his Tehreek-e-Insaf might have won, had it contested the
elections.
Aitzaz Ahsan, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association
and a PPP candidate from a Lahore constituency, will not be able to
contribute much to the reinstatement of the sacked judges by boycotting
the elections. It will be a great loss if he doesnt reach the National
Assembly. He has proved his mettle as a great parliamentarian.
Whatever gains the PPP and the PML-N make in the
forthcoming elections will be at the cost of the PML-Q. The PML-N will
also attract the votes of the Jamaat-e-Islami. The Jamaat will remind its
voters that they should strictly observe the boycott urging them not to cast
their votes for any candidate. But most of the voters will not pay any heed to
this advice.
Politicians should realize that in the post-election period they will
need the experience and status of President Musharraf in the formation of
governments not only in the centre but also in the provinces. If it is a hung
parliament, then the help of President Musharraf becomes more
imperative in the formation of a coalition government.
Hassan Iqbal Wajid from Rawalpindi expressed his views on
manifesto of the PML-Q. The PML-Q has launched its manifesto by saying,
Islam first, then Pakistan. This is contrary to President Musharrafs
rhetoric, who always says Pakistan comes first. The Q League was a staunch
supporter of this slogan when they were in power, but what has forced
them to change their basic position? Is this a drift from their old policy or
eyewash to please the Islamic segment of Pakistani society?
Shireen M Mazari commented: The dilemma now for the protesting
civil society is where to move to in terms of furthering their commitments in
terms of democracy and freedom. Simply boycotting the electoral process
will not achieve much. An opportunity has been missed by not putting up
alternate candidates in case the present scenario emerged where the major

769

players were not going to boycott the elections. There are also rumblings
within the ranks of lawyers and not all are happy with the boycott movement
it would appear. As for the commitment of the contesting parties to the
establishment of an independent judiciary, while the Sharifs continue to
maintain some credibility on this count, Ms Bhutto has changed her tune
over the last few weeks
Coming back to civil society political activism, its limitations have
been shown in Pakistani political context. First, if one wants to impact
political change, one can do it from outside the system. So, there are two
paths that must be adopted simultaneously.
The first is to seek a political entry point either by joining existing
parties in order to alter their workings or by coalescing under a new party
with a new fresh leadership. The entry into existing parties will not alter
their leadership or agendas unless the intrusions are in exceptionally large
numbers and also involve more activism from rural constituencies.
The second is to coalesce a public-service political organization
that prepares data on issues for public dissention and for the elected
politicians. After all, at the end of the day it is agendas that need to be
influenced so there has to be interaction between the body of elected
representatives regardless of the merits or otherwise of the elections
themselves and civil society, especially an informed and proactive civil
society.
Meanwhile, the shenanigans of the electoral process are
disheartening for the many ordinary members of civil society who chose to
stand up and be counted for the cause of the judiciary and freedom of media.
After all, look at the contestants: the same names; the same faces in all
the parties; and the same games, especially in the rural constituencies.
Where new faces have come, they reflect opportunism as in some of the
women seat nominees of the PPP, and already even within the party there is
disquietude.
Road to disillusionment is what those opposing civil society activism
are counting on. That is why it is important to keep faith and chart a new
direction for the future so that the protest is cemented into something more
concrete. Even now there are small developments that show a ray of hope
As for the elections overall, the parties participating are themselves making
a mockery of it all by shouting out that the elections are already rigged. If
770

that be the case, why are they participating? Could it be the lures of the
exchequer at the end of the electoral victory? Clearly in Pakistan the more
things seemingly change, the more the actually remain the same.
Saira Minto wrote: In the past one month the biggest dilemma faced
by our gutless, spiritless and, ironically, apolitical political parties has
been to boycott or not to boycott the election fraud planned as the New Year
gift for the nation from our high and mighty
They are evidently there only to hog limelight and of course the
material gains that being in government gets them. Totally comfortable with
the idea of military rulers, they consider themselves especially blessed
when deals modeled by foreign kings and presidents come their way;
given such an opportunity slogans of sovereignty, democracy or liberty are
promptly dumped. If it was not for the judiciary, lawyers, students, media or
civil society, we perhaps wouldnt even have achieved a dignified level of
protest against the regime.
Honesty is indeed rare to find, however, it is terrifying to see how
hundreds of those aspiring to be lawmakers in this country are devoid of it.
If they were honest, there was no mystery shrouding the writing on the wall.
What is it that has not already been rigged, adulteratedthat one should
expect this election favouring the nation and not one individual? The
presidents obvious dislike for campaigners of democracy in his recent
interviews and speeches leave nothing regarding the future of our country, to
imagination.
Election in any case is a misnomer for the circus that is staged
whenever necessary to get a few chosen, compliant ones in the parliament.
Year after year those, who enter parliament as guardians of Constitution,
allow its abuse watching silently or endorsing approval without as much as a
whimper. Despite their dismal performance they get an opportunity to
contest and get elected every time the election charade is orchestrated
The utter confusion in the political field where feudal elite and
military have finally struck a successful working relationship, middle class
progressives and the rest of the civil society can either passively wait as the
herd is driven to a pre-determined destination or adopt a more proactive role.
Taking cue from the on-going protest movements involving professionals
and intelligentsia, they can actually sow the seed for the third option that
is missing and long awaited for in our political arena.
771

There are individuals and professionals whose personal stature as

guardians of democratic thought stands taller than anything they have done
in the parliament as representatives of their election worthy parties. Aitzaz
Ahsan is one such individual. As far as my memory goes he has been in the
forefront of pro-democracy movements especially those involving lawyers.
Living under the shadow of conventional politics, Mr Ahsan has so
far only been protesting as a lawyer and has not shown a personal ideology,
a vision for the country which as a true democrat should come naturally to
him. Also while leading the lawyers he has often shown charisma, the
scarce ingredient that makes the whole package more palatable for the
masses
We have many torch-bearers waiting to lead this journey of change.
Lawyers and judges country-wide have shown unprecedented support for
democracy. Another huge promise comes from teachers and students
with whose participation a movement of political awareness has taken roots
among the next generation With all these spirited and eager trail blazers
among us, who needs the old, non-happening, degenerated, apolitical
political parties?
Ayesha T Haq wrote: Political forces need to realize that civil
societys struggle will really begin after the election. There has been an
awakening and awareness that we all need the shade of that judicial tree.
Political forces should be aware that those who elect them to power have no
alternative but a strong state structure, which includes a strong judiciary. The
elite have alternatives, until they lock horns that is, but the poor have none.
For them it is a daily issue of survival. They need a judicial system that
dispenses justice, a police system that is fair, a social system that is just
These are people with huge reservoirs of courage. The constitution is
something they have owned; it is not any document, it is one they would like
to build a strong state upon. The talk these days of political tactics, deals
and negotiations may be all about clever politics but not everyone thinks
so. The danger many say is that when major political parties cut deals, they
allow the status quo to continue and to the people of Pakistan deal is a four
letter word.
We need to change the parameters of the Pakistani state; will
elections do that? Most likely not. The debate that is raging outside, which
has fuelled a movement that has fired the imagination of Pakistans lawyers,
772

journalists, students and educated middle and professional classes will have
to be taken to the streets and inside parliament so our elected representatives
can finally represent those who send them to sit in the assemblies. These
new parliamentarians will have much to deal with: A new and fiercely
independent media that having survived a martial law government, will seek
to assert itself. A judiciary that had been sent home and will be winding its
way back to the courts on the famous judicial bus; and most importantly, a
nation that has decided to take its country back.
Burhanuddin Hasan opined: It is good omen that after long and
arduous haggling, the three major parties the PPP, the PML-N and the
PML-Q are likely to win majority seats in Punjab while the PPP along with
the PML-Q and the MQM will bag maximum number of seats in Sindh,
particularly Karachi. The JUI, like previous elections, will win majority of
seats in NWFP.
Ms Bhutto has given a timely call to the international community to
send a clear message that it will not be an accessory to the crime of electoral
rigging in Pakistan. It must not wait to see if the elections on Jan 8 are free
and fair. It must insist on a minimum set of benchmarks to be met for the
elections to be recognized as free and fair. If the benchmarks are ignored,
the international community must be prepared to signal its displeasure
to the Musharraf regime in specific and tangible ways.
The president has accepted all the major demands of the political
parties except the restoration of the Supreme Court judges. He should
swallow this bitter pill in the larger national interest. After all, he had
admitted that filing of the reference against the chief justice was a mistake
which opened the Pandoras Box of lawyers agitation and consequent
human rights abuses which are still continuing. If the president preaches
reconciliation to political parties, he should apply it to himself as well to
pull this thorn out from the nations flesh. There is hardly any doubt that no
true democratic system can work without rule of law and an independent
judiciary.
Asif Ezdi focused on dictators foreign backers. The testimony given
on Dec 6 by American Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher before
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee shows once again that Washington
continues to oppose the democratic aspirations of the people of Pakistan
and is supporting Musharraf in his plan to cling to power. Boucher predicted
that the upcoming parliamentary elections are not going to be perfect. In
773

plain language, Washington knows that the elections will be rigged but is not
unduly agitated at the prospect. He also expressed the hope for an election
that really does reflect the choices made by the people of Pakistan. In other
words, Washington would not like Musharraf to rig the election so massively
that it completely lacks all credibility.
The policy of Bush Administration has been to help Musharraf stay
in power by legitimizing the coup through a parliamentary election in which
parties allied to him (first and foremost the PPP) gain the upper hand.
Washington has therefore been urging Musharraf to hold the elections and to
work out a power-sharing arrangement with Benazir Bhutto. It has also been
pressing the major political parties, in particular the PPP, to participate in the
elections. A lifting of the emergency has been centerpiece of Washingtons
strategy after the coup. It would serve two purposes: give the elections the
semblance of being free and fair, though not perfect, and enable the
political parties to claim that they had wrested concessions from Musharraf
and thus provide a face-saving way for them to participate in the polls.
Noticeably lacking in American official statements after Musharrafs
second coup has been any plea for a reinstatement of the judges that he has
dismissed in his effort to neuter the superior judiciary. Privatlely,
American officials are known to have shown understanding, if not
support, for Musharrafs decision to fire them and have been saying that
there could not be a return to the situation before Nov 3.
Other western countries have followed Washingtons lead in this
matter. For instance, the British Ambassador had the audacity to tell a
Youth Parliament that London is not demanding the reinstatement of the
deposed judges as it was not going to happen and because unhappiness with
the judiciary was the central issue in the imposition of the emergency.
Instead of demanding the restoration of the past position, we are asking for
an independent judiciary for the future, the British Ambassador reportedly
said.
When the British Ambassador declares that there can be an
independent judiciary for the future under the PCO judges or without a
restoration of those dismissed under the emergency, he must be either nave
or he takes the people of Pakistan to be completely gullible, and our
politicians to be so power-hungry, opportunistic, petty-minded and venal that
they will go to any lengths at the prospect of power and a share of the loot.
Since the ambassadors of Her Britannic Majesty are usually quite smart, the
774

possibility that this ambassador is nave should be ruled out. If the

ambassador looks at the unanimous demand from civil society for the
reinstatement of the dismissed judges, he will also realize that he is
mistaken in supposing that the people of Pakistan are so credulous as to
think that the judiciary can be independent for the future if the past
dismissal of the judges is accepted.
But the British Ambassador could well be right in assuming that most
of our politicians are incapable of seeing any further than the end of their
noses, which means thinking beyond their self-enrichment and selfaggrandizement. They have failed to grasp that the present crisis is not
about change of government; it is about putting the country on the
constitutional path
An independent judiciary lies at the heart of the matter. As
Human Rights Watch has pointed out, it is hard to imagine how the country
can have a credible election without independent judiciary. If Musharraf can
get away with sacking and detaining several judges of the Supreme Court
and removing all checks on his authority it seems a bit much to expect him
to play by the rules in the election.
After having initially made noises to express support for the
dismissed judges, Benazir changed her position under counseling from
Washington, which told her that this would jeopardize her chances of
gaining power. Since then, the PPP leader has carefully refrained from
calling for the restoration of the Supreme Court has only been speaking of
an independent judiciary.
Pakistan is today at a critical turning point. The future history of the
country is being written. This is too important a matter to be left to the
political class. If instead we follow the lead given by the judges, the
lawyers, the journalists and civil society, there is a good chance that we will
succeed in burying dictatorship for good in our country despite our
politicians.
A Blogwatch message posted by VM read: Supporters of Mr
Musharraf keep trying to create the impression that he has support
beyond what he really has. The gist of their argumentis arguably, a
mixture of some truths, half-truths and outright lies.

775

The questions I would like to ask them are: How can anyone be
given the right to dismiss any judge of the superior court? How can anyone
have the power to arbitrarily order the detention of members of civil society
and then continue to hold them without charge? How can one person have
the power to single-handedly amend the Constitution whenever he pleases?
How can one person, no matter how powerful, indemnify himself all his
actions be they within, or outside, the ambit of the Constitution of the
country? How can the Constitution be suspended, superseded with a
provisional constitutional order and then again be restored, at any time? I
dont know which other modern-day country unless it is blatant
dictatorship gives all these powers to any one person in society.
Dr A P Sangdil from Norway expressed his views on Masheeran-eIblees. My friends and I have been discussing as to who has a better legal
mind Sharifuddin Pirzada or Advocate General Malik Qayyum. My
bet is on Pirzada. He has a more fertile brain than Malik Qayyums; he has
bailed his clients out of far tighter spots than his peer. And he operates from
behind the scene. Besides, Pirzada has a long history to show for his
performance while Malik Qayyum is a novice by comparison.
Even The New York Times published a profile of Pirzada as a lawyer
who is available to contest any case as long as his fee is right, without his
conscience pricking him. In other words, his conscience too is on sale to the
right bidder. But my friends contend that Malik Qayyum has taken faster
strides in a short time and, given the chance, he might leave Pirzada gasping
for breath. Without men like these, the state of our judiciary would not
have been what it is today.

REVIEW
Musharraf held the Constitution of Pakistan in abeyance second time
in eight years. After rendering it ineffective, he then mutilated the
Constitution with the help of Pirzada and Qayyum. He and his legal aides
then tried to grant legitimacy to his criminal acts by framing clauses
prohibiting any of those being challenged in a court of law.
The dictator under constant pressure exerted by the lawyers, have
been seeking refuge in the counsel of his legal Masheers. Keeping in view
his impulsive obedience to the legal counsels, it can be said that Musharraf

776

would obey them if they advise him to tell his successors to place a copy of
the order that none of his acts could be challenged in his coffin for the
angels to comply with.
As long as there are men who are ready to act as Kangaroo courts, no
dictator would find it difficult to deliver a knockout punch on any national
institution. This fact makes it very difficult for the movement for
restoration of judiciary to succeed.
Political leaders, being executives in the making, wont be very keen
to see a judiciary so independent that it could cause them any inconvenience.
Therefore, the onus is now on the people of Pakistan to accomplish this
sacred task of defeating the dictator and his collaborators by electing the
right people in the forthcoming elections.
24th January 2008

777

SHE ASKED FOR IT

Things seemed to be moving according to the plans of the strikers of
the Mother of all Deals and their facilitators. The much awaited day when
political marriage of convenience between a dictator and democratic leader
was to be consumed was less than two weeks away the applecart seemed to
have been upset.
On 27th December, two days after the Christmas, Benazir Bhutto was
killed in suicide attack in Rawalpindi. Was it doing of ordinary mortals, or of
the superpower is yet to be determined. Many, including the deceased, had
apprehended such attack but no one had prepared for the consequences.
Sudden murder of Benazir was protested by the activists and
supporters of the PPP, affectionately called as jiyalas, in manner they know
better. Angry rioters looted and burnt public property and also targeted the
opponents. The fanning of ethnic bitterness was quite natural in a charged
situation. The goal of democracy in the form of polls seemed to be eluding.

EVENTS
On 23rd December, the AG said amendments in the Constitution need
no approval of the parliament. Aitzaz was rearrested; he and deposed CJP
were prevented from offering Eid prayer contrary to the claim of the Interior
Minister that they were free to celebrate Eid anywhere. PPP and PML-N
could join hands to defeat PML-Q heavy-weights. Next day, Benazir
promised basic needs and genuine democracy; Nawaz believed that elections
would end fascism; Pervaiz claimed it is prosperity vs corruption and APDM
asked people to stay away from polls.
On 25th December, Benazir vowed out extremists and so did
Musharraf; Nawaz said he would not go for any personal vendetta and
Pervaiz Elahi saw PML-N in PPPs pocket. Shujaat said Nawaz has become
circus lion (not realizing that a circus lion is still better than circus monkey).
One MQM activist and one ANP leader were killed in Karachi.
Next day, Benazir repeated rigging charges; Nawaz said Q League is
doomed; Shujaat said same to you; and APDM criticized Nawaz and Benazir

778

for taking part in polls. Explosion preceded PPP rally in Peshawar. Pakistan
banned observers from Commonwealth and was thus even with it. Lawyers
observed countrywide Black Day. Imran Khan urged people to join APDM
for launching of movement for restoration of judiciary.
On 27th December, Benazir was among 30 people killed outside Liaqat
Bagh in Rawalpindi; the killers seemed to have hunted her in pair; more than
100 people were wounded. Politicians were shocked and the world
condemned her assassination. Nawaz visited hospital and termed the killing
unbelievable. Musharraf was told in high-level briefing that Benazir was not
hit by the bullet. Rice phoned Zardari and Fahim. UN condemned Benazirs
killing.
PPP jiyalas went on rampage across the country; two people were shot
dead in Lahore, two in Sindh and ten in Karachi. President and Prime
Minister appealed for calm. PPP announced 40-day mourning and complete
shutter-down on 28th December. Four people were killed and seven wounded
as workers of Q and N Leagues exchanged fire on Islamabad highway.
Benazir was buried amid stark display of tolerance and moderation
by her partys jiyalas. At least 27 people were killed apart from widespread
looting and arson in which six trains, 200 banks and 650 vehicles were
torched. Army was deployed in 16 districts of Sindh to check the onslaught
of moderation. Zardari was tipped as new party chief.
The regime blamed Baitullah, the US accused Zawahiri and PPP
blamed the Establishment. Bush and Brown wanted elections on schedule.
Hillary wanted international probe. Western leaders and experts termed her
killing a setback in fight against terrorism. Swiss court closed the money
laundering case.
Reportedly, Benazir had been warned by a friendly country. PPP was
not impressed by the taped conversation produced by the interior ministry
and termed government explanation a pack of lies. Deposed CJP said it was
attack on democracy. Cause of death became controversial. Musharraf
condoled with Zardari and Fahim.
Country stayed in the grip of violence perpetrated by the workers of
the most moderate and enlightened political party. Curfew was imposed in
Jacobabad, Kashmor and Sukkur; 900 vehicles were torched in Sindh alone
and death toll crossed fifty. Musharraf wanted tough action against

779

moderate looters, but wanted PPP to decide election date. For the first time
Fahim urged party supporters to remain peaceful.
Qazi and Nawaz visited Benazirs grave. The latter after having
announced boycott of polls said PML-N would contest polls, if PPP does.
Sherry said that she saw bullet wound on Benazirs forehead. PPP wanted
Rafiq Hariri-style investigation. The regime rejected foreign probe. Baitullah
denied hand in BBs killing. Germany saw nuclear threat in Pakistan crisis.
Bilawal was named party chairman in pursuance of the will of Benazir
and renamed as Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. Asif Zardari became co-chairman.
PPP wanted January polls on schedule and demanded UN probe. Musharraf
showed willingness to consider world help in probe.
Incidents of violence started decreasing. Shujaat accused Zardari of
dishonouring Quaid-i-Azam by calling his party Qatal League. Rawalpindi
police chief denied stopping BBs autopsy. PML-Q wanted delay in polls.
Aitzaz was stopped from attending Soyem.
On 31st December, PPP warned that delay in polls would cause civil
disobedience. Nawaz was in agreement with PPP on polls. Pervaiz Elahi said
Nawaz was playing second fiddle to Zardari. PML-Q lobbied for delay in
polls. Rail service was restored.
Caretaker government apologized for the blunder of Interior Ministry
spokesman who had alleged that Benazir died because she hit the lever of
her bullet proof land cruiser. Legal experts rejected government plea on
autopsy and termed it mandatory even if Zardari had refused.
The regime took exception to Hillarys comment that Pakistani troops
were involved in killing of Benazir. Nancy Pelosi demanded world probe
into Benazirs killing. US presidential hopefuls questioned support to
Musharraf. The US was against indefinite delay in elections.
On 1st January, 2008, Senator Latif Khosa claimed that Benazir was
about to disclose rigging plan; presidential spokesman dismissed the claim
as ridiculous. Rauf Klasra raised few questions about Rehman Maliks
absence from the scene of murder. Zardari rejected al-Qaeda hand in the
murder of his spouse.
Railways resumed Karachi-Peshawar train service. Khalid Mustafa
reported that Pakistans economy suffered colossal loss of about Rupees 435
780

billion in four days of display of moderation and tolerance. Arbab Ghulam

Rahim claimed that PPP hired criminals for looting. He should have known
that PPP and his coalition partners, MQM, dont have to hire criminals when
plenty of them are available within their rank and file.
The caretakers extended Aitzaz Ahsans detention. PPP insisted on
polls on 8th January. PML-Q said it would abide by EC decision. Nawaz
wanted probe by pre-Nov 3 judges. Pakistan Bar Council wanted the
deposed CJP to head the probe. Congressmen sought pressure from Bush for
Hariri-like UN probe into murder of Benazir.

VIEWS
The issues discussed by the analysts and observers, before the
murder of Benazir Bhutto, were the same as hither-to-fore. Advocate Nasir
Kamal from Mardan expressed his views on the lifting of the emergency. I
am surprised at the statement of President Pervez Musharraf that the
emergency was declared to achieve certain objectives and that the law and
order situation has now improved.
He continued: In my opinion, the statement is not true as terrorist
activities in all forms and manifestations are at an all-time high. As far as the
restitution of the Constitution is concerned, President Musharraf has given
a legal cover to all the actions he took after the proclaiming of
emergency on Nov 3 by making amendments to the statute book, which is
unconstitutional.
Asif Ezdi wrote: The lifting of the state of emergency, when
President Musharraf announced on December 15, contained little by way of
surprises. Far from rolling back the unconstitutional steps taken since Nov
3, the lifting of the state of emergency was accompanied by measures that
seek to entrench them further and give them a paramount life. What is
curiously called the revival of the Constitution is in fact its further
disfigurement.
There is a maxim which says that what you have won through force
you can only keep through more force. Recent events in Pakistan provide
an object lesson in the truth of this saying. Having got himself elected,
Musharraf could not have stayed in power if he had not taken the further

781

unconstitutional step of dismissing the judges and suspending the

Constitution.
During the next few months, we will be seeing more of this
chicanery. First, a rigging of the elections; then, some wheeling and dealing
with the newly elected members of the National Assembly in an attempt to
install a government that will do Musharrafs bidding. And finally, a
ratification by the new parliament of his election and of indemnity of all
the acts on November 3 and after.
After the elections, the likely scenario could see a delay in the
calling of the National Assembly till a majority has been put together
behind a prime minister who will support the president. Ideally, he should be
some one like Shaukat Aziz, who spent his three years in office honing the
art of being the Generals sidekick.
The Bush Administration has presumably assured Ms Bhutto that she
can become prime minister if she sticks to the script written in Washington.
If her recent actions are any guide, she will. Then the requisite pressure will
be applied on the quarter concerned and if a power-sharing deal can be
worked out then Ms Bhutto may indeed become the next prime minister. Of
course, in the bargain the prime ministers wings will be clipped.
Pakistan is today in the midst of a democratic revolultion. This
revolution started when Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry refused
to bow to the presidents order to resign. It is a revolution unlike any other. It
has been led not by the politicians but by civil society, with the lawyers,
journalists, human rights activists and students forming the vanguard. It will
succeed only when the Constitution is restored in the form in which it
existed before the coup of November 3 and the judges of the superior
judiciary who were dismissed when they refused to take oath under the PCO
are reinstated.
The divergence of views between the political parties and the
lawyers on the question of an election boycott highlights the different aims
they are pursuing. Most of our politicians are as usual mainly interested
in grabing power. After the elections, they will be ready for horse-tradding
with the regime and the restoration of the Constitution will not be high on
their agenda. That is why the president has little to fear from them. The
threat comes from the judges and the lawyers, because they are fighting for
the higher principles of democracy and the rule of law and are not likely to
782

be susceptible to any kind of horse-trading. They have kept the flag of

democracy flying and the flame of freedom burning.
As long as the current situation exists, a de facto state of emergency
is still in place, the swords of Damocles will keep hanging over the entire
polity and this will only end up creating conditions for further political
instability. After eight years of dictatorship and political stagnation, Pakistan
simply cannot afford that.
The real cause of the ongoing constitutional crisis, the deposed
judiciary, could not be overlooked by analysts. Dr Masooda Bano opined:
the current question for those leading the struggle for the restoration of the
sacked judges is: can the lawyers or civil society achieve much on their
own when the main political parties have actually worked against their
demands? Without a grassroots political party mobilization, can change
come? True, the act of the political parties has been a major impediment to
pushing forward the demand for the restoration of the deposed judges but to
think that the story will end with the elections is also a fallacy.
Imagine the psyche of the ruler who claims to know what is best for
the country and who constantly claims himself to be its only saviour. Yet, the
headlines of the daily papers shout out loud that opinion polls tell us that
close to 70 percent of the Public thinks he is wrong. However confident we
might be, we all want assurances beyond a point. So, how do authoritarian
rulers survive against open public scorn?
There are two strategies: refusal to believe, and selling ones soul to
eternal fears. General Musharraf has to rely on both these strategies. There
is refusal to believe that the public has actually had enough of him. At the
same time, he knows that he is not wanted. The end result is that the regime
lives in fear of the judges, who have neither the domestic political parties
nor the international community behind them. The judges are locked up in
their houses and denied the freedom to meet each other or to interact with
the public.
Imagine the post-election parliament. How fair they will be is
anyones guess but one thing is clear: no party is likely to get an absolute
majority. In the given circumstances, there will be the same old haggling,
give-and-takes and compromises to formulate a government. The coalition,
which is likely to form the government, is unlikely to have the cohesion to
push through tough reforms as going by the past record the establishment
783

will put in enough material incentives to buy out some of these

representatives to get the desired outcomes. This is the only way that
President Musharraf will be secure in his presidency...
When the system being put in place by active manoeuvring of the US
and the UK has failed to address any of the underlying problems of
governance in Pakistan, then there has to be a miracle for the public to
suddenly become optimistic about the newly established parliament.
Under these circumstances, the judges whenever they are released will
attract large crowds from within those sections of the civil society which
have been actively involved within the lawyers movement. Even if their
restoration becomes impossible, these judges will become a focal point for
any future struggle for reform. The public energies can be diverted by the
elections but so much has happened in Pakistan since March 2007 that
people are not going to be satisfied with more of the same old politics. The
judges thus remain a potent force for change. After all, some day they will
come out!
Engr S T Hussain from Lahore wrote: The decision of Aitzaz Ahsan
to pull out of the general elections and stand alongside the lawyers
fraternity, which has spearheaded the struggle for the restoration of peoples
fundamental rights to justice, rule of law, an independent judiciary and the
media, is commendable. The lawyers, who are protesting against the
removal of judges and the curbs on the media are men of integrity who want
Pakistan to be a civilized, progressive and modern Muslim state.
It is a fact that the majority of Pakistanis stands by the sacked judges
who refused to take oath under the PCO. The majority is with the legal
community, journalists and the media representatives who did not make
unethical compromises and did not go for material benefits. The president
has failed to understand that the present legal crisis is not just about
change of government. It is actually about putting the country back on
the constitutional path, the future of the country depends on burying
dictatorship forever.
Nasim Zehra observed: Other than the PML-N most political
parties are not totally committed to the restoration of the pre-Nov 3
judiciary. The MQMs position is that we support judicial activism but
adventurism of judges is not acceptable. The PPP position is that we
support an independent judiciarybut we are not for personalities. The
JUI-Fs position is that these deposed judges too took oath under the PCO,
784

so they do not deserve to be made heroes. These positions are politically

convenient, mostly an extension of their alliance loyalty with retired General
Pervez Musharraf or a reflection, as in the case of the PPP, of some concerns
that extend beyond national borders.
Personalities matter for the promotion of principles. In times of
change and transition the personalities that stand for principles get closely
associated with principles. Personalities make principles living entities,
make them dynamic and forceful. If personalities were not important then
PPPs politics of Bhuttoism must also be set aside. These PCO judges of
1999 came a long way towards judicial independence and are our
national heroes. When they said no to oath-taking after the imposition of
the emergency they all knew they were standing up to sacrifice their careers.
They knew they would take on the army chief who was hell bent on having
his own way. They still did not dither.
In Pakistan we have not been able to effect the much needed sociopolitical change from the power end. Many of us engaged with power, albeit
on our own terms, to seek change through engagement. The yield was zero.
Power seeks status quo, it seeks survival. Hence, power needs to be
contested through power. The post-March period in Pakistan has
demonstrated that peoples power driven by the peaceful force of reason,
logic and right can begin to emerge as a counter-point to conventional
power.
Pakistan is experiencing the gradual ascendancy of constitutional
power. The lawyers, the deposed judges, the media and other citizens group
will not let the issue of restoration of the judiciary disappear. The politicians,
especially the PML-N which in the past ransacked the Supreme Court of
Pakistan, now want to join forces with those fighting for a genuinely
independent judiciary. The peoples movement is strengthened and the
inevitable chaos following a clearly rigged election will further strengthen
the call for an independent judiciary.
Judiciary is central to checks and balances in the exercise of
executive and state power. A credibly and competently functioning judicial
system ensures that constitutional rule is upheld under all circumstances.
Without judicial monitoring of executive authority a nation is made
vulnerable to the weaknesses, and indeed the whims, of those who wield
power. Pakistans own political history abundantly testifies this

785

Musharrafs reported allegation against the CJP and Aitzaz

Ahsans involvement in hatching a conspiracy against him and against
Pakistan is backed by no convincing evidence. Surely he does not expect
the people of Pakistan to take his allegation seriously.
But such are the plays of power and of authority. No matter what the
intentions, such power play is unacceptable. And ultimately this alone is the
overriding theme of the 2008 election. Much of what has been underscored
by Pakistans citizens led by the lawyers, media, professional groups and
advocacy groups, is being highlighted in the election campaign. The people
of Pakistan now demand fair play.
It is this struggle and the national focus on it that take us forward on
our path to genuine constitutional democracy. We must have the courage of
our conviction. This battle that we peacefully fight is what will make us true
inheritors of the Quaid In the post-November phase constitutionalism has
steeled the resolve of a growing number pf Pakistanis. They recognize that
there can be no real democracy with a destroyed judiciary.
Ikram Sehgal was one of those who endeavored complicating the
simple issue of restoration. Mian Nawaz Sharif is genuinely a good
human being, but it is sometimes difficult to swallow his holier-thanthou attitude. Visiting former Justice Fakhruddin Ebrahim he said,
restoration of the superior judiciary is synonymous with the existence of
Pakistan Ten years on Mian Sahib not only shows no signs of being
contrite about PML-Ns unacceptable conduct then but he also gives the
world the impression it never happened.
As opposed to the pretensions of Mian Nawaz Sharif, the real
champion of the legal fraternity, Senator Aitzaz Ahsan, has withdrawn his
candidacy for the NA in keeping with the decision of the lawyers to boycott
the Jan 8 elections. While there were extenuating circumstances, the overkill
of Nov 3 could have been avoided; therefore the lawyers principled stand
has to be respected! While one agrees only partially with the elections
boycott, Aitzaz Ahsans courage could be eulogized; the more important
thing is that in boycotting the elections he finally stood up against the
wishes of his party leader.
Given his silence during the wholesale violation of many other
principles during his partys rule and thereafter, including that of accepting
pardon under NRO, this is a milestone by itself. A decade earlier, Ms
786

Benazir had sidelined Aitzaz Ahsan during her second stint as prime minister
despite his brilliance and capability; perhaps because of it. Now as a national
leader of some consequence the potential of any political party would
only be enhanced by his joining their ranks, nevertheless he has not
shown any inclination in leaving the PPP.
Adherence to principles cannot be selective about favourites; they
require that the superior judiciary who refused to take oath on 30 Jan 2000
under PCO-1 (1999) be restored along with those of the superior judiciary
affected by PCO-2. One would prefer going back to the CJ Sajjad Ali Shah
period but maybe it could open a legal Pandoras Box, why not at least
restore the 7 heroes of the superior judiciary in existence before PCO-1? The
judges who took oath under PCO-1 are legally and morally no different from
those who took oath under PCO-2.
No discussion on judiciary could be complete without the mention of
Aitzaz Ahsan. The News commented on his arrest after release. The manner
in which former interior minister and president of the Supreme Court Bar
Association Aitzaz Ahsan was rearrested at the motorway rest-station of
Chakri over the Eid holidays, on the way from Lahore to Islamabad, proves
that the rule of law, and indeed the laws of civilized behaviour have
totally collapsed in the country. Aitzaz, whose detention orders were lifted
for three days ahead of Eidul Azha, had spent the day visiting deposed
judges in Lahore, and later at night set out by road to Islamabad, where he
hoped to offer prayers alongside deposed chief justice
When he asked to see an arrest warrant, a loaded gun was pointed
towards him, and he was forced into an open police van. He was then driven
around the Chakri and Chakwal area for several hours, exposed to ice cold
winds, before being deposited back at his house in Lahore seven hours
after his arrest. He has remained in detention since then, and is reportedly
suffering from high fever brought on by prolonged exposure to cold.
It would seem then that authorities have learnt nothing from the
ignominy that has come their way as a result of the treatment meted out to
Munir A Malik, who is still recuperating in Karachi after coming close to
death. It appears the state is unable to find any way, other than brute force, to
deal with dissent. What they do not seem to realize is that such actions are
only adding to the deep sense of anger already running through society and
widening the fissures that exist between citizens and the state.

787

The actions taken against Aitzaz, his arrest, and the way it was
carried out, proves that the mindset prevalent before the lifting of the
emergency is still in full active mode and that the installation of caretaker
governments at the centre and the provinces has brought about no change. It
also shows that there is no semblance of democracy, or law, in the
country
Ayesha Tammy Haq wrote: Aitzaz Ahsan, confined in solitary in
Adiala Jail and then moved to house arrest, was released on Dec 12 at
midnight. He decided not to waste any time and went out to visit the
deposed judges, meet with lawyers and talk to the press. So while the
government thought they were cool, calm and in control, their reaction to
Mr Ahsans 24 hours of liberty showed exactly how cool, calm and in
control they were. What was it that scared them so much? Mr Ahsan is not
known for violence, does not wield a weapon and has never been engaged in
any kind of anti-state activity, unless you call winning the most important
case in Pakistans, indeed some say in the worlds, history anti-state
activity.
Prior to ninth of March he was best known for his oratory in and out
of parliament and his legal skills in the courtroom. After July 20 he was the
man who had won the biggest case in the history. The parties were two
Goliaths, the Chief Justice of Pakistan versus the Chief of the Army Staff.
Lesser men would have taken the case to the conclusion the army chief
would have liked to see off the rails and out of the court. Mr Ahsan knew
that, while the entire nation was watching and had a stake in the result; it
was this 13-member bench and not 160 million people that would restore the
chief justice. To do this he had to strike a balance between the national
movement he was leading outside court and creating and maintaining a
cordial atmosphere in court. He managed it well.
It made him the countrys number one lawyer and at the same
time the person most feared by the establishment, and in particular by the
president. This is borne out by the fact that he appeared set to win yet
another landmark case, the eligibility of a sitting army chief to contest a
presidential election; he was the first person to be arrested on Nov 3. His
arrest was followed by the arrests of other main leaders
On the evening of Dec 20, having spent 50 days in jail, Mr Ahsan,
after informing the authorities of his plans, set off for Islamabad with his son
to say his Eid prayers at the Faisal Mosque. A short distance outside
788

Rawalpindi he was stopped at gunpoint by plainclothes policemen, who

threatened him, roughed him up and threw him into the back of an open
police van. They then proceeded to drive him around Chakwal and its
environs for several hours, where he was exposed to the freezing night air in
what appeared to be a deliberate effort to ensure that he get pneumonia
and be rendered incapacitated and unable to lead the lawyers.
What is it about Mr Ahsan and his colleagues that worries the
Presidency so much? Is it that they are the only real challenge to this
dictatorial order? Is it that they are major constitutional roadblocks on the
road to parliament and that the political parties do not appear to have the
strength and maturity to deal with this mammoth constitutional pileup?
Perhaps it is that they are clear on what is to be done. Their agenda is
simple rule of law and constitutionality.
What is it that the lawyers have done? Why are they being punished?
Where is the clash of ideology? Is it that they want Pakistan to be a strong
state with strong institutions that work for and protect its 160 million
citizens and not a select few? Is it that they respect all institutions, including
the military, but require that they do not stray out of the limits set out for
them by the Constitution? The withdrawal of release orders and the manner
in which they were withdrawn signify a big defeat for a government Mr
Ahsans 24 hours of liberty showed that the lawyers movement was alive
and powerful and the only force that can, and has the will to, challenge
the legality of the actions taken by the president since Nov 3.
Forthcoming elections could also not be ignored. The News wrote:
Benazir Bhuttos demand that the January 8 elections be held under the
supervision of the Pakistan Army is fraught with many serious implications.
When almost all her political speeches are directed mainly against the role of
the army in Pakistani politics, this apparent U-turn raises some questions
If Ms Bhutto is banking on a transformed, neutral and impartial role of the
army under the new army chief and is hoping that he may already have
moved out of the shadow of his previous chief, she may be fishing in
unknown waters.
`Both the Election Commission and President Pervez Musharraf
have rejected Ms Bhuttos demand. The president reiterated his directions
to the provincial governments to ensure that the government machinery is
not used by any party. The Election Commission said that the army could be

789

called to very sensitive stations and a list of such stations would be issued in
this regard.
Whatever the compulsion, this appears to be a premature
attempting on her part to pull the army into the political fray. Yet it still
remains the immediate responsibility of President Musharraf and his
administration, to take steps which make the elections truly free, fair and
transparent exercise. It should not only be so, it should be seen to be so.
Mere lip service will not do.
The newspaper also commented on restrictions imposed on monitors.
The restrictions announced by the Election Commission of Pakistan on
foreign observers and monitors of the January 8 pollsalbeit in the name of
providing them securitydenying them free movement, no surprise visits,
carrying out exit polls or even talking to voters emerging from polling
stations, will only add to the growing mistrust and lack of confidence in
the entire process. After all, how many such exit polls or surveys can a few
hundred observers undertake when the canvas of the elections is spread over
thousands of polling stations across the length and breadth of the country
If denied that right, a much bigger question mark around the conduct
of the entire exercise may be raised, because when every observer and
monitor reports that he was not allowed to move freely or pay a surprise visit
to any polling station, half of his job would have been achieved by pointing
accusing fingers at the administration. Is this not what the government is
trying to prevent by inviting these observers? So the logic is denying them
free access is beyond understanding.
Already the atmosphere has been polluted sufficiently by opposition
parties and even some independents and former PML-Q top shots who are
accusing the government of a massive rigging plan This noise has forced
the government to go on the back foot in defence and even President Pervez
Musharraf had to come out forcefully in his Mazar-e-Quaid speech, saying
the rigging charges were baseless and he was not afraid of any PPP-PML
movement. That is his commando style of confronting the challenge head
on. But obviously he does not want a situation immediately after the
massive election exercise which leads to a broader political
confrontation involving even those moderate political parties with whom he
has been playing the game of deals and compromises to reach this stage.

790

The editor also talked of lotas. As the profiles of the electoral contest
in various constituencies of the country begin to emerge, it is apparent that a
sizeable number of candidates have switched from one party to another
with quite bewildering frequency. This time around, for instance, some of
those who had contested in 2002 on a PML-Q ticket have switched back to
their mother party, the PML-N. Others have shown still greater ideological
flexibility and are today campaigning behind the red, green and black
colours of the PPP.
The chameleon mentality, which enables candidates to change
colours as the situation requires, apparently prevails everywhere. This
feature of electoral politics says a great deal about the political culture
that has evolved in Pakistan. The elements of principle or loyalty to a
particular cause, which may have existed in the 1960s and 1970s have
largely vanished. For many candidates, and for families involved in politics,
the reasons for contesting polls are centred more on expediency rather than
any interest in serving their constituents, or their country
The situation means that, sadly, political parties have a smaller and
smaller role to play. In many cases, voters will be casting their ballots on the
basis of loyalty to individuals whether on the basis of merit or feudal
affiliation. And indeed, the declining impact of political parties has
encouraged a resurgence of voting based along the lines of clan. This is an
unfortunate situation, given that at present what the country needs most
of all is a sense of direction, a clear vision for the future and politicians
with loyalty and commitment who are willing to work towards it, rather than
focusing almost solely on a personal quest for power.
Huma Yusuf wrote: Well, even if one were to give the president the
benefit of doubt and trust that the January 8 elections are not going to be
rigged, his recent speech has made it clear exactly how free and fair the
voting process will be. The trajectory does not bode well
To begin with, the integrity of the polling has already been
compromised by decisions regarding the way in which the elections will be
monitored. The election commission has laid down a code of conduct for
foreign observers that curtails their ability to oversee polling
It doesnt help matters that army personnel will be posted at
sensitive polling stations across the country on Election Day. The coercive
power to put it politely that army, rangers and police personnel have on
791

citizens at the voting booths is well documented. Genuinely free votes can
only be cast in an atmosphere free of duress and intimidation and in which
citizens can act of their own volition without having to be answerable to the
law-enforcing personnel stationed nearby.
Pakistanis know that they are walking into a compromised
election, an electoral stage-show that can only result in farcical democratic
setup. And if all the song and dance doesnt lead up to a grand finale, then
why bother buying tickets that is, casting votes in the first place.
If foreign observers are being prevented from monitoring the election
to ensure that it is free and fair, why dont Pakistani citizens organize
their own teams of observers who can report any wrong doing that occurs
at polling stations? Why cant the stories of intimidated voters and women
who are barred from casting the ballot be circulated through non-official
circuits such as street theatre? Since the show must go on; why not play an
active part, rather than be forcefully relegated to the wings?
Imtiaz Alam expressed his views on electioneering and the prospects.
The two mainstream leaders, Ms Benazir Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Sharif,
have infused political life into an otherwise rigged process. In political
terms, Election 2008 is getting closer to the elections of 1988. Of course,
with its own distinctions: instead of one, two popular opposition leaders are
on a massive mobilization campaign. Unlike 1988, when the transition to
civilian rule was completed prior to the general elections, transition to
civilian rule this time is not yet completed, with a general turning into a
civilian president along with the kings party being openly backed by
sections of the establishment. This time the electoral process remains
shrouded by serious complaints of pre-poll rigging; and the election not
result in a smooth transition; it may produce a greater political conflict.
What is the politics of electioneering?
The three-way contest in most constituencies of Punjab is going to
the greater advantage of the PPP. Roughly speaking, if the PML-N will
dominate urban Punjab, the PPP will emerge stronger in rural Punjab. And
both the parties are likely to dominate the electoral scene in the majority
province. Percentages are very difficult to work out at this stage. A clear
picture may emerge after the completion of the election campaign
Although there are three major parties in the run, so far only Ms
Bhutto is emerging as the most prospective candidate for premiership after
792

the nomination papers of both the Sharifs were rejected and Pervaiz Elahi
chose to remain a provincial leader How far people will come out on Jan
8 will decide the destiny of the next parliament.
Rahimullah Yusufzai identified the seekers the PMs job. Chaudhry
Pervaiz Elahi and Benazir Bhutto dont hide their ambition to become
Pakistans next prime minister. Nawaz Sharif has been saying he has no lust
for power and could stand aside to let someone else get this job in the larger
interest of the country and for the sake of promoting democracy and rule of
law. But his supporters still raise slogans of Wazir-i-Azam Nawaz Sharif at
his election meetings and obviously he hasnt stopped them from doing so.
However, there is another candidate for prime minister who is
equally ambitious but has been unable to produce the numbers thus far to
seek the job. He is none other than Maulana Fazlur Rehman, one of the most
pragmatic as well as controversial politicians in the country. His followers
openly express the wish that the maulana should become the prime minister.
For that matter, prime ministers under the all-powerful President
General Pervez Musharraf werent required to do much as he singlehandedly ran the country, commanded the armed forces, intruded into the
domain of other constitutional office-holders and formulated foreign and
domestic policies for eight long years Still nothing could dampen the
enthusiasm of those seeking the prime ministers job.
Shafqat Mahmood compiled the score on rigging. Sadly, with the
departure of the real judiciary, there is very little faith in the supervisory and
watchdog role of those currently holding office. It must be remembered that
returning officers in the districts who are from the judiciary, come directly
under the high courts. If they are not seen as neutral or fair, little faith can be
put in the subordinate judges acting as election official.
There are 272 National Assembly constituencies but people say, there
is no need to tamper with the results in every one. Forty to fifty
constituencies are enough to influence the result of the national election
and they are the ones that will be homed in to. The real battle ground of this
kind of gerrymandering in Punjab and to a certain extent Sindh. Baluchistan
and NWFP would be left alone.
The selection of the fifty constituencies to be rigged will be carefully
done. There is no need to rig the seats where the ruling party candidate

793

is sure winner and vice versa where he or she is certain to lose. The target
would be the marginal constituencies where the injection of ten or fifteen
thousand votes can make a substantial difference
Once the targeted constituencies have been chosen, the next process
begins. In every national constituency there are almost 300 odd polling
stations. There is no need to interfere in all of them and about 40 or so
will be selected. In these the polling staff, which largely comprises school
teachers, will be carefully chosen and briefed, as will be the police guard.
The real game starts after the voting and the counting is over. It is
a requirement of law that a final result will be given to all polling agents and
this will be done but those whose party has lost dont go to the headquarters
and even the others are tardy. Meanwhile, a false tally sheet will be prepared
and signed and dispatched to the returning officer. In it, an average 300 extra
votes would be added to the ruling party candidate.
The returning officer will then quickly tally these results and make an
official statement declaring the ruling party candidate a winner. Let us say
that the polling agents from these 40-targeted polling stations and their
candidates shout and scream that results given to them are different from
those officially declared
If ruling party is thus able to take advantage in 40 odd
constituencies it is already sitting pretty. Add to this its 60 odd real
winners and you have it reaching a total of a hundred. The election is
virtually won and the allegations of rigging will be dismissed as the usual
laments of the losers. Let me repeat again that no one is saying the
government has any such plans to rig. A scenario is being painted only to say
that were it so inclined, it is not difficult. These methods have been tried and
tested in the last local election. They worked then, they could work now.
M B Naqvi identified regimes strength and the way to counter that.
It cannot be over-emphasized that the country is in a bad shape. There
is intense polarization between the military-led social and economic elite
and the Army are described as the establishment, operating mainly through
the agencies. A dictatorship with a democratic faade is holding an election
which is controversial at home and suspect abroad.
The regime is a powerful one. It enjoys the support of the only
superpower and its allies in the Middle East and NATO members in Europe

794

and most other US allies, including India. The regime has also solid support
from the social and economic elites of the country. Politically it is supported
by the PML-Q, the MQM, the PPP-S and the PPP-Patriots. The West has
assured that both the PPP and the PML-N also lend support to Musharraf
regime by participating in its election, despite their reservations and despite
popular objections.
The task of regime is to fight the wars of the US-led west, to keep
the people of Pakistan quiet and run the country the way the West wants. It
is a joint endeavour of the conservative forces of this country and around the
globe represented by the US. The task therefore comes to this: It ought to go
peacefully and constitutionally; no violence should be introduced, otherwise
there would be a free for all in this largely armed country where most
institutions of the state are crumbling.
As for the real strength of the regime, over 600,000, indeed over
800,000, rifles and bigger guns are behind the regime; the opponents run the
risk of suffering horrendous losses if violence is permitted. The task is thus
not easy. But it can be done it has been done many times elsewhere. The
secret of success is peoples power. Should the people unite behind the
right or adequate leadership, they can achieve almost anything
It is for this reason that all non-democratic regimes want to keep the
people divided and preferably in conflict among themselves. The first
requirement therefore is uniting behind an enlightened leadership and
insisting upon a rational and adequate programme of reforms that would
guarantee all freedoms to the people, plus an economic development that
actually gives something to the impoverished. The promised economic
betterment has now to be specific as to what precisely would the state start
doing and how.
Dr Farzana Bari urged democratic/secular forces to unite and lead the
movement. The decision of major political parties to contest elections
without resolving the issue of the restoration of the judiciary has come as a
big disappointment to the general public. This has created a huge gulf
between the people and the political parties. People refuse to be engaged in
an election process which cannot be anything but a farce. In the absence of
an independent judiciary, it is impossible to hold free and fair elections.
Instead of engaging in election campaigns, people are articulating their
resentment and resolve to restore the ousted judiciary by holding protests
and demonstrations all over the country.
795

It must be understood that the present political movement launched

by civil society groups and intelligentsia is not about election boycott
alone. It is about establishing a democratic secular state where the judiciary,
media, parliament and executive are independent. This is about ensuring
substantive democracy where the rights of all citizens irrespective of their
creed, caste, class and gender are ensured and protected.
The decision of liberal and centralist parties to contest elections that
will be held under the supervision of the PCO judges and the alliance of
secular forces with the JI in the APDM does not leave much choice for the
citizens. Also this situation creates a dilemma for the civil society groups
who are at the forefront of the protest movement. They know the
movement cannot succeed until the political parties join forces with them.
Nevertheless, they are reluctant to join hands with the APDM due to the
above mentioned analysis. This makes the current political situation highly
complicated and has serious repercussions for the current political
movement.
The only way out of the present dilemma is that all democratic and
secular forces must walk on a separate track. They must not blur their
identity by mingling with retrogressive religious parties of the APDM. They
should make their own alliance and should be ready to lead this secular
movement. Therefore; it is critically important for the democratic/secular
forces in the country to unite and lead the movement under its own
banner and with its own identity.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal visualized the post-election scenarios. While
imagining various post-election scenarios for Pakistan, one needs more
than quixotic optimism to see any ray of light. No matter who forms the
next government, there is no smooth sailing here. The man who is now
elevated himself to a civilian President will not tolerate the emergence of
independent judiciary and in the absence of representative, independent
institutions; the state would be governed through personal agendas.
What has changed over the course of the last military
dictatorship is not gong to be reversed by a new quasi-military setup. One
cannot hope to go back to the times when newspapers would report
overnight snowfall in the Swat Valley just because of elections in January.
More than likely, the news would still be about intense shelling overnight in
villages and hamlets whose names romantic (like Gutt Puchar and Shawar)

796

bring back the nostalgia of other times when it was possible to think of white
fluffy snow in these remote areas of the country.
What has changed in Pakistan may not be irreversible, but it will take
a concerted and determined effort by a very experienced and thoughtful
political leadership to restore a semblance of state writ and provide the
minimum level of security needed by the citizens. Such leadership is
simply not present at the moment.
Until recently, one could at least think of judiciary and a certain
segment of civil society as possible starting points for a change, but the
results of the last judicial activism do not encourage hope. Abandoned by all,
the honourable judges who kept their honour are more likely to become
a golden chapter in history, rather than a golden road to a bright future.
No matter what the post-election scenarios are, there is little
possibility that Pakistans military leadership will accept subordination
to any representative government. Those who will come to power, will
have to negotiate a new sharing of power, given the present scenario, it is not
within their power to put the generals back into the barracks.
Possibilities of meaningful and basic change have become almost
non-existent for Pakistan. Its populace has been reduced to managing affairs
upon which survival depends; hence no political participation of the kind
that can bring any real change is possible. No wonder, there has been no
long march although almost the entire political leadership issued calls for it
at one or the other point during the recent struggle for the restoration of
judiciary.
During post-murder days, the people remembered Benazir Bhutto
in good words and condemned all those who were responsible for her
untimely death. Tooba Alam from Karachi wrote: After the suicide attacks
of October 18, it became clear that Ms Bhutto was on the hit list of the
terrorists.
Still, she continued to hold public meetings and participated in large
political rallies. In spite of her failure, though arguably, to deliver in the two
brief stints in power, she will be remembered as courageous politician
who dared stand up against extremism. She was killed due to her outright
opposition to religious fanatism. She didnt bow to the dictates of extremist

797

forces and overtly

Talibanization.

expressed

her

displeasure

over

the

rampant

Jafar Alam from Karachi said: Benazir Bhuttos killing is a

despicable act. Militants targeted her because she was one of the few
politicians of Pakistan who openly criticized and disapproved of the strict
interpretation of Islam. She lost her father at 26 but remained steadfast in
pursuit of democratic ideals. She had the distinction of becoming the first
female prime minister of any Muslim country Her assassination should be
condemned in the strongest words.
Yasir Shah from Canada observed: She returned to Pakistan because
she considered it her duty to help us achieve the dreams that the founding
fathers had for the country Whether this country can ever recover from
this horrific tragedy is a question that will not be answered for a long time,
but one thing is for certain, our hearts will never heal from this loss
Sardar Alam from Swat wrote: A revolutionary leader passed away.
This was her fate, as it was to be expected because all her life she had fought
against dictatorship. Her death is an unimaginable loss and all Pakistanis
will remember her. A lot of us wanted her to come into power again and root
out militancy and Talibanization, but alas our hopes are now dashed forever
and Benazir is no more with us It feels like the country has been dealt a
death blow.
Yousuf Masti Khan from Karachi opined: Her death is a great loss for
Pakistan and proves that President Musharraf and his government failed
to protect the life of a great leader. The only way forward for the sake of
the nation is for President Musharraf to step down and the formation of a
national government.
Imaan Hazir from Islamabad observed: No one is safe anymore; what
is happening to this country? Of course, many people disliked Ms Bhutto
and her politics but the answer surely did not lie in killing her. The only
thing that this will achieve is that it will destabilize even more. The sick
fiends behind such acts need to be dealt with an iron hand and pushed for
their crimes against humanity.
Naeem Sadiq from Karachi wrote: Never before have had I witnessed
the people in such a state of pain and sorrow. In these trying moments, the
people of Pakistan are confused, uncertain and anxious about the

798

future. Pakistan stands at crossroads today and it must decide whether to

take the peaceful, progressive and democratic path or disintegrate under the
illegitimate rule of a dictator.
At this time, following demands should be met to unify the entire
nation in this hour of grief:
President Musharrafs should resign and be held accountable for
violating Constitution before a court of law.
The 1973 Constitution as of October 12, 1999 should be restored.
The pre-November 3 judiciary should be reinstituted.
A neutral and caretaker government along with an independent EC
should be appointed to hold general elections within three months.
Abdullah Mustafa Billaly from Peshawar opined: The future looks
bleak and one can only hope that 1971 is not repeated. Then the myopic
dictators of that time were blind to what was happening and it seems that
history is repeating itself. It is time for Musharraf to step down and leave.
Enough is enough.
Sheeba Ajmal from Peshawar regretted: How much we criticized her
policies for defending the American war on terror but never had we wanted
such a brutal end to her life. Ms Bhutto had the will and desire to bring
change at the grassroots level. Her sudden death has plunged the country
into political turmoil.
Ms Bhutto returned to Pakistan with the support of the Americans.
They had their own vested interests and they could not find a better person
to serve their interests. She was caught in Americas trap and this
resulted in her tragic death
Our law-enforcement agencies and forces seem to become active and
efficient only when it comes to clamping down on citizens raising their
collective voice for their fundamental rights. I appeal to every other citizen
to boycott the elections to show solidarity with Benazir Bhutto and her
cause to restore democracy in its true form.
M Jamal Khan from Mardan wrote: After the gruesome assassination
of Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and the massive unrest and lawlessness in

799

every nook and corner of the country, does President Musharraf still
considers himself indispensable?
Seema Arif opined: She represented the intellectual, progressive
segment of Pakistani society and believed in moderation, enlightenment and
peace. She remained steadfast in the pursuit of democratic ideals in Pakistan.
Her death has left us in dire straits but in her words: we all risk our lives
but will never surrender our land to the extremists.
Shabiul Hassan Syed from Peshawar noted: Her assassination
brings up three important questions: Why did a serious security lapse
occur? How did the sharpshooter manage to come so close to the Benazir
Bhuttos vehicle? Why was the site hosed down immediately after the
assassination took place?
We have lost a leader of international repute who was honoured,
respected and listened to by the entire international community. She was the
one people trusted in and was duly called the symbol of the federation.
History is witness to the fact that in times of crises, the Bhutto family always
saved Pakistan from disintegration by giving huge sacrifices. The PPP
derives its power from the masses and has been the sole anti-establishment
movement in Pakistan
M Ikram from Islamabad observed: Some reports say a bullet killed
Benazir Bhutto. Others state that it was a piece of shrapnel that caused her
death. But can the real cause of death reduce the damage that the entire
Pakistani nation is going to suffer as it has just lost Benazir Bhutto? While
receiving Ms Bhuttos body, our Sindhi brethren were aggrieved justifiably
that another great leader from the Indus has been slain in Punjab.
Fawad Ali Shah from Rawalpindi wrote: Benazir is gone The PPP
will have to select a new chairperson tomorrow if not today. They should
select someone who is the most capable person in the party, and not
someone whose only talent is that he or she from the Bhutto family. Perhaps
one person could be Aitzaz Ahsan whose politics is based on issues his
entry will be a very pleasant change for the countrys politics and should
further increase the PPPs popularity.
Kashif Mumtaz from Karachi was of the view that Pakistan being
what it is these days, the assassination of Ms Benazir Bhutto was bound
to set off violence across the country: the usual burning of banks, other

800

public and private buildings, vehicle, unofficial wheel-jams enforced by

stone-throwers, indiscriminate firing, and, of course, attacks on police
stations. This frenzy was to be expected after one of Pakistans greatest
political tragedies, even though little of it is really justified.
But what defies comprehension, let alone there being no
justification for it, is the burning of a hospital in Karachi on Thursday
night. There are no reports on whether any of the gravely ill among the
patients died because of their sudden exposure to the cold when they were
forced out of the building. Or, take the attacks on trains in Sindh. In two
cases, the carriages were burned after the passengers had been forced to
disembark; a perverse form of humaneness, if you like.
It doesnt need pointing out that there is politics behind such
violence, destruction and mayhem. It is elements who seek unrest and
chaos in furtherance of their respective political agendas who ignite
violence dont blame the agencies alone. Its also the result of the
governments abdication of its primary responsibility to maintain peace and
safeguard peoples lives and property. But ultimately its also a frightening
sign of the kind of country Pakistan has become since the late 1970s.
A day after the murder, The News wrote: Pakistan faced yet another
catastrophic day in its battered history on Black Thursday yesterday when
within a few hundred yards of where her father was hanged by a military
dictator and at the same spot where another popular prime minister of
Pakistan was shot dead years ago, Benazir Bhutto, the unfortunate daughter
of the East, the most popular leader of the country, the bold and fearless
crusader for democratic and human rights, the only leader who genuinely
represented the federation that is Pakistan, was assassinated by an assassins
bullet in Rawalpindi, just 70 days after she returned from self-exile.
Her death, unbelievable and stunning for everyone, throws the
entire political edifice, the painfully excruciating march of the country
towards a democratic polity, the carefully crafted plan for peaceful transfer
of power to an elected leadership and the reluctant strategy of an
authoritarian regime to yield to the will of the people, up into turbulent
smoke and bloody dust
The course of the countrys history had been unquestionably
altered once again, with the most important member of the Bhutto family,
the person who had shown immense sagacity and maturity in working
801

patiently with an authoritarian regime, despite all the criticism heaped on her
for allegedly betraying the peoples cause, was removed summarily from the
scene by a sharpshooters bullet in her neck or a fanatic wearing a suicide
jacket.
Benazir Bhutto was expressly aware of the threat to her life and she
had been saying so publicly, even before she decided to end her self-exile in
October She also made new and ferocious enemies on her way. These
enemies, or those who were scared of her, made her as their prime target
and finally succeeded in Rawalpindi yesterday.
More importantly her assassination threatens to derail the entire
process of Pakistan returning to an elected democratic rule, especially
by a coalition of moderate and liberal leaders who could confront the
growing menace of religious extremism and fanaticism. This strategy had
the full blessings of the West, specially the United States Her death will be
felt as a severe blow to US interests in Pakistan and in the region. Pakistan,
it would be fair to predict, is now in for very turbulent times.
The next day, the paper commented on the rioting. The massive
outpouring of rage that has followed the assassination of Benazir Bhutto
is threatening to run completely out of control. Already, within hours of
the tragedy, trains and railway stations were set alight, government buildings
burnt, incidents of firing and a number of deaths occurred and the army and
paramilitary troops deployed in a number of towns and cities with shoot-atsight orders.
The situation is, as would be expected, most volatile in Sindh
where there is a real fear of the unrest intensifying. The fact that the reaction
to the murder has been countrywide with a deep sense of shock and outrage
visible everywhere underscores the fact that Benazir was genuinely a
national leader and the PPP a party that linked provinces. It can only be
hoped that the fallout following her death does not create new national
fissures, which would only inflict damage to federal integrity.
The immediate question though is how to control the intensifying
violence now breaking out across the country. As the jail breakout in Sindh
and the chaos seen everywhere underscores, there is a real danger of events
bubbling out of control, and of criminal elements taking advantage of the
situation. As is natural, the rather lame calls for peace made by leaders

802

who are being perceived by many PPP supporters as being at least indirectly
responsible for Benazirs death, have fallen on deaf ears.
As a step towards reintroducing calm and averting large-scale
disruption, several steps can be taken. One is to request PPP leaders, in
particular Asif Ali Zardari, to make a public call for order, preferably
over national television and radio networks. His words will carry more
weight than those of the countrys current rulers. Another is to ensure that a
just and above board inquiry is ordered into the murder
This wrath has already created an immensely dangerous situation in
the country. Life in all cities has been badly disrupted; a sense of insecurity
prevails everywhere. In Larkana, fires have blazed even as Benazir was
being buried. The question of how, and to what extent, these emotions can
be brought under control in the coming days will largely determine the
immediate course of political events in Pakistan, as the country faces yet
another crisis and another period of violence which for now threatens to
grow and engulf the entire country.
The same day, The News talked of future course. That the sudden
death of PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto has thrown Pakistans political
future into turmoil appears to be an understatement. All possible scenarios
envisaged by President Pervez Musharraf, win the active help and support of
the United States and with Benazir Bhutto a key player, may well have
evaporated into thin air. With the country physically turning into an inferno
and moving towards chaos, the option of an election on January 8 no
longer exists, whether anyone participates in it or not.
The PML-N of Nawaz Sharif has already gone back into the hardline mode and Mr Sharif while boycotting the polls has not minced any
words to demand that President Pervez Musharraf should go. Contacts have
already been established by Mr Sharif with his APDM leaders A hard
pressed caretaker government has been assigned by President Musharraf to
discuss the January 8 polls with all the political parties so that an agreed
decision, probably to postpone it, may be taken.
With the explosive intensity of the reaction in the country directly
matching the destructive intensity of the Rawalpindi blast that killed Ms
Bhutto, any political initiative which does not match the highest
expectations of the enraged general public will be a non-starter. Hence, the
insipid government decision to ask caretaker Prime Minister
803

Mohammadmian Soomro to contact all political parties may or may not

work but it apparently looks too little for the moment.
A real attempt, a credible one at that will have to be made to
restore some confidence in the government. A genuine government of
national consensus could be a starter but only if the main opposition parties
and the wounded PPP agree. They would not, unless they get major
concessions which may include the restoration of the decimated judiciary,
rolling back some of the controversial constitutional amendments and
creating a new and independent election commission, to name a few.
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto has thus not only devastated
the PPP, it has also dealt a crushing blow to the establishment and all its
strategic plans. Why, while providing security to the late PPP leader, all
these serious consequences were not taken into account by the many think
tanks and legal and constitutional wizards of the government of the
government is beyond understanding
The official PML-Q is running helter-shelter and its offices round the
country have been ransacked, so much so that high police officials appointed
by the Punjab government were made to publicly apologize to the masses
after they were given a severe beating in Gujrat, the home town of the
Chaudhrys. This is not good news for the regime. A massive reconciliation
exercise is now due, a genuine one and without taking into account any
egos, big or small.
In a subsequent editorial the editor pondered over the controversies
about the killer. There was a talk of bullets or pellets in her neck and skull.
The caretaker interior minister went on record on a TV channel saying that
bullets had hit her. Doctors said her windpipe had been damaged beyond
repair and she stopped breathing 20 minutes before she was pronounced
dead. All this brought considerable criticism and justifiably so on the
abject failure of the government to provide her with adequate
security No postmortem was ordered or done, the crime scene was
reportedly hosed down and she was quickly wrapped up, put in a casket and
dispatched in the darkness of the night, as was her father
Within hours of her last take off a team of doctors was assembled to
report that the cause of death was neither a bullet nor a pellet. An interior
ministry spokesman repeatedly asserted that she hit her head against a lever
of her vehicle and fractured her skull. The spokesman also showed a video
804

with a gunman aiming at her and confirmed that three bullets were fired.
Where did they land was never mentioned. So in fact what the spokesman
was trying to prove was that her death was sheer accident and not the
result of an assassins bullet or a suicide bomber.
The doctor who had claimed bullets hit her changed his statement
overnight. The spokesman said a postmortem was refused by Asif Ali
Zardari, a fact yet to be confirmed. All these claims and statements were
swiftly and forcefully denied by other parties. A spokesman of Mr Mehsud
vehemently said he had nothing to do with the attack
There can be nothing more serious and crucial to ending the
countrywide outbreak of violence and devastation than a credible and proper
handling of the situation, the centre of which is the issue of how the PPP
leader died. The undue haste and desperation shown by the government
in scoring points in a fluid situation is going to lead to more frustration
and anger Any aspersions cast on the government for trying to manipulate
this situation will have far-reaching consequences for all those in power.
Under a separate heading the editor added: The unusual press
conference by interior ministry spokesman Brigadier Javed Iqbal Cheema
on the death of Benazir Bhutto has created a controversy that threatens
to linger on for weeks, perhaps even months and years. Cheema, releasing
the transcript of a conversation that allegedly took place between South
Waziristan Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud, and an associate, has
stated that the militant leader was behind the assassination. He also
maintained that Benazir was not shot
At least one PPP legal aide has instantly denied the veracity of these
claims. More details are expected to be provided in the days ahead by the
PPP leadership. The problem is that the lack of official credibility makes
it almost impossible to separate fact from fiction. This is all the more so
as, on several occasions, the PPPs late leader had laid blame for attacks on
herself on other quarters, close to Islamabad government.
So grave is the nature of assassination and so profound its potential
impact on the future of Pakistan, that truth must be uncovered Only an
inquiry by a credible, neutral panel of international experts would hold
any weight with people and it is unfortunate the government has
dismissed the possibility of permitting such an investigation, despite the fact
that Benazirs death is no smaller matter.
805

It must be noted that even if the official claims regarding the

involvement of Baitullah Mehsud are accepted at face value (these were
denied on Saturday by a spokesman claiming to speak for Mehsud), the
regime itself must take responsibility for allowing so dangerous a
criminal to operate freely
In the transcript of Baitullah Mehsuds conversation, released to the
press by Cheema, there is a mention of Badrwallah in the context of one of
the militants who allegedly carried out the attack, possibly a reference to a
member of the al-Badr jihadi organization. It may be noted that the Pakistan
establishment is widely believed to have played a role in the setting up of
this shadowy group. It is also unclear why, since Mehsud conveniently
revealed his location and the home he is staying at in the intercepted phone
conversation, why no effort has been made to apprehend him.
This may have served a more useful purpose than releasing a plethora
of material to the press, which in fact would have only ended up alerting him
that is, if all what Brigadier Cheema said is true. There are, as such, still
many questions that need answers. The controversy over Benazirs killing
is unlikely to fade away soon and it seems certain more doubts and
suspicions will crop up in the days ahead. These need to be dispelled to
bring closure to the case, and to the untimely death of a key political leader.
The paper also condemned the stopping of Aitzaz from attending BBs
last rites. The long association of Mr Ahsan with Benazir Bhutto is no
secret as they had been pioneers in the countrys struggle for democracy and
against military authoritarianism. How on earth could his presence among
the hundreds of thousands of other party leaders and supporters, even
dissenters and disgruntled family members, threaten any one sitting in
Islamabad or elsewhere. If Aitzaz had to be punished for his sins of
challenging an unconstitutional rule or a nervous administration, denying
him attendance of the last ever procession of his leader, with her in a basket,
is tantamount to a cruel and inhuman restriction and shows the regime in
poor light. There has to be some limit to the ruthlessness that we can
tolerate or callousness others have to demonstrate.
It also commented on the new leadership of the PPP. The decision of
the Pakistan Peoples Party on Sunday to hand over the party command
effectively to Asif Ali Zardari, the grieving husband of its slain leader, as cochairman, with son Bilawal stepping in as the figurehead chairman, until he
is sufficiently groomed to make its own decisions, comes as the natural
806

and easier choice in the current crisis in which one wrong step could not
only throw the party into disarray but also result in grave consequences for
the countrys political future.
There is no doubt that Zardari would be calling the shots. His
image of the past notwithstanding, the role and perception about Mr Zardari
has undergone a sea change in recent years, especially with his long years of
incarceration, his great fight against military authoritarianism and lately his
pragmatism to deal with the establishment. It is no secret that late Benazir
Bhutto was primarily under the Zardari influence to start a secret dialogue
with the Musharraf regime.
His assumption thus of a central role in guiding the PPP in this
critical hour would provide the continuity of policies which the late leader
was pursuing. She has left clear policy directions in her will and it is but
obvious that she wanted her husband to continue and carry on the mission
that she had started. The shifting of power from the ill-fated Bhutto dynasty
which has so often been compared to the Kennedys of America or the
Gandhis of India with a lot of common attributes political ambition,
glamour, tragedy, the highs and the lows, to count a few poses serious
challenges to Mr Zardari. His first and the crucial task would be to keep
the party united and energized to go into the forthcoming elections
forcefully and cash the inevitable and huge sympathy vote, in Sindh and
throughout the country.
The first decision of the new PPP leadership to go for the
elections in the next nine days is also a continuation of Benazirs will. It is a
bold and sensible one though it remains to be seen how the current spate of
violence would yield to a peaceful and free campaign atmosphere, given the
intense emotions shown against the PML-Q leadership. Mr Zardari called on
his supporters to convert their anger into a vote for PPP but it may be easier
said than done.
But the PPP leadership is confident that its workers will turn off the
switch of violent protest and seek the democratic revenge. The government
has thus been put in a difficult situation as any postponement of polls may
provoke more protests and may lead to further deterioration of the law and
order situation.
The paper stressed upon the need for credibility of the investigations.
The voices seeking an international probe into the assassination of
807

Benazir Bhutto have swollen into a chorus. The new co-chairperson of the
PPP, Asif Ali Zardari, has called for the UN-led probe, along the lines of the
international investigation carried out into the killing of former Lebanese
Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
As controversy over Benazirs killing has grown, with the PPP
angrily dismissing the version of events put forward by the government, in
which it has been claimed Ms Bhutto died after hitting her head against the
sunroof lever of her vehicle, two key US figures (Hillary Clinton and Nancy
Pelosi) have also sought an international probe.
These demands coming from too many quarters make sense. It is
now obvious that few believe the official version of events. Baitullah
Mehsud, named by the interior ministry as being behind the assassination
has denied any involvement and while his word may lack credibility, the
fact is that the levels of trust in the governments proclamations are even
lower. It is though worth keeping in mind that an international probe will
almost certainly not offer any quick answers, or satisfy people whose grief
has been added to what seems to be some rather clumsy handling of the
whole issue by the government.
The UN investigation in Hariris murder has still to be concluded,
almost three years after his death. But the slow, cautious approach taken by
the UN underscores the need to proceed with care, and meticulously
examine evidence. This contrasts with the quick-fire strategy adopted by
the Pakistan government, which within a day of the death, claimed to have
identified those responsible and established the exact sequence in what is
clearly a rather complicated chain of happenings.
The murder was bitterly commented upon by the analysts. Babar
Sattar wrote: The shock and sorrow at Bhuttos killing quite expectedly
aroused a violent reaction across the country. Such violence will in all
probability subside as more time passes after the burial ceremony and reality
of this tragedy sinks in. While in the immediate-term this one event will
characterize the politics of Pakistan, its medium to long-term consequences
for the county cannot even be meaningfully fathomed at this stage.
Bhuttos assassination is both a product of and has consequences for
three fault lines that define the reality and the future of our state and our
nation: the extremist-moderate divide; the centre-province divide; the civilmilitary divide. Bhutto led Pakistans only mainstream liberal political party
808

that dominated the centre-left of the countrys ideological spectrum and the
mass appeal across all four federating units.
Bhutto was a liberal voice who had vowed to fight obscurantism and
terrorism in Pakistan. Her assassination has raised more questions about
the strength and influence of the forces of obscurantism within the state
of Pakistan. The question of responsibility for this murder will continue to
be raised in the days to come
In retrospect one feels almost silly at being stunned by the successful
assassination. Were we not leading up to this eventually? Bhutto was a highrisk target. Her foes kept attacking her. The ruling regime did little to
safeguard her life and security she kept protesting and the ruling regime
kept belittling her demands as politics
The issue of accountability for this national tragedy is not easy.
But the time to act is now before the simmering anger and resentment
acquires a form that begins to threaten the existence of our federation and
the soul of this nation. General Musharraf presides over this country and the
buck must stop with him and not any minions. Blaming al-Qaeda or Taliban
or unidentifiable terrorists is a no-brainer. Al-Qaeda or the Taliban are not
responsible to ensure the integrity of Pakistan and the security of this nation,
its leaders and its citizens.
First of all, the General must own up his failure and step aside.
This nation must fight to save itself from the scourge of terror, but we have a
better chance without the General being in charge. Second, an independent
investigation team must be assembled to probe this murder. Given that this
will be a fact-finding mission, this team must have an international
component that can bring to the table not just forensic and scientific
expertise, but also credibility
Nawaz Sharif as a leader of the other mainstream national party
that is identified predominantly with Punjab will have a role to play in
stemming the alienation of Sindh and other minority provinces. Holding
national elections at this juncture is simply not a viable option. A
government of national unity must be formed to rule Pakistan in the interim
period As a prominent national leader belonging to the majority province,
Nawaz Sharif must fight for the representation of the minority federating
units in such national government.

809

This is a time in Pakistans history when all state institutions and

individuals leading them must tread with care and caution and make
deliberate strides toward national reconciliation. And in this context the role
of the military and the army chief cannot be overemphasized. They must
understand that no administrative solution can rescue us from the storm we
are weathering. The army must strengthen and support civilian political
forces to embrace this challenge and steer the country to safer shores by
stepping aside from politics as a neutral institution of national unity.
Huma Yusuf viewed it as setback to the hope about democracy. Now
more than ever the possibility that democracy cannot be revived in Pakistan
is becoming increasingly plausible. There are widespread calls to
President Musharraf to step down from power after failing to stem the
terrorist threat as well as owing to his inability to provide adequate security
for opposition candidates. But who can occupy the power vacuum that will
be created by his resignation?
Events unfolding immediately after the announcement of Bhuttos
demise also exposed the vulnerability of any hope for democracy. The
emergency meeting of the UN Security Council had worried many that
foreign intervention might be imminent, even though that eventuality has not
yet materialized. In the unlikely, though not inconceivable, event that foreign
security forces or international organizations are invited to help control the
situation as it spirals out of control al-Qaeda is claiming responsibility for
Bhuttos death while over 1,000 vehicles were burnt in Karachi on Thursday,
a small indication of simmering emotions across the nation democratic
standards will be suspended. After all, a nations democratic setup is
necessarily self-sufficient.
Meanwhile, Nawaz Sharif, the only opposition politician who
approached Bhutto in his ability to muster popular support, inspired little
confidence on Thursday. His televised address from the premises of the
Rawalpindi General Hospital highlighted his ashen features, wavering voice
and sense of bewilderment. Instead of rallying the nation, he started playing
the blame game; pointing fingers instead of paving the way forward. His
brief comments suggest that an extended bout of political bashing that in no
way strengthens the democratic process is in store for the nation.
Even in an ideal, dreamlike situation whereby elections continue as
planned and people turn out in significant numbers to vote in the PPP in an
effort to champion its pro-democracy, secular platform, the future of
810

democracy in the country remains uncertain. After all, the leadership of the
PPP has been thrown into disarray by Mohtramas passing. It is not yet clear
who can fill her ever-stylish shoes. We cab be certain, however, that the only
thing that can match Bhuttos charisma is competent leadership. She used
her political legacy, her power as a public speaker, her popularity among her
constituency, and her own victimization time in solitary confinement,
years in self-imposed exile, Zardaris extended imprisonment to trump
charges of corruption Who amongst her supporters can muster the
competency, integrity, and resilience required to sustain the fight for
Bhuttos dream of a democratic Pakistan?
Shireen M Mazari talked about rioting in revenge. The tears that
flowed from this hapless nation in the face of Benazir Bhuttos murder were
also accompanied by a frustrated rage that led to anarchy on the streets of
the country both in the cities and rural areas. While the tears may dry up,
the rage shows no signs of ending. As usual the innocent suffer in the
frontlines as trains, cars and buses are burnt, offices trashed and banks
looted. Criminal elements have capitalized on the opportunity offered. But
the most despicable aspect has been the fanning of provincial hatred at a
time when the nation needs a healing and reconciliatory touch just as it
needs time to grieve and come to terms with this tragic national loss.
Clearly, we are deeply divided polity and a deeply angered and
frustrated one. There are no strong institutions to provide the ordinary
citizen with redress of grievances; no system that works without influence
or graft; no prospects to reward capabilities; and, top it all, there is an
insensitive and unresponsive elite
Perhaps all our present leaders, both in and out of power, carry
an excessive baggage of mutual suspicion and hate and therefore cannot
placate the angry soul of hurted nation. US continues to harp on the electionon-time theme but in the face of the latest national tragedy, before elections
can offer a meaningful return to democracy, civil society needs to heal its
wounds just as politicians need to move out of their tedious groove of power
hunger.
The whole political fabric needs to be changed qualitatively and the
basic demands of civil society that is the need to restore independent state
structures, including the judiciary, and basic freedoms including freedom of
expression through a free media need to find a respective leadership.
Unless the edifice of the state is made credible, what will elections achieve
811

except more of the same nepotism, corruption and frustration? Under such
conditions, extremism and violence will continue to find willing takers and
will continue to lose the innocent and the vulnerable to their murderous
designs. During her lifetime Ms Bhutto was unable to wrest the nation
away from the clutches of violence, terrorism and extremism; let the
nation pay her a lasting tribute by willing itself out of the clutches of these
lethal evils and from the injustices and repression weighing it down. That is
our only hope.
Mir Jamilur Rahman pleaded for no boycott. The violent reaction of
the supporters of the PPP is understandable, but they are defeating the
very cause for which Shaheed Benazir Bhutto had stood for and fought for
and for which she sacrificed her life. Rioting and torching public and private
property would not bring her back. Neither would it help in fighting
terrorism which is the cause of her death. The grief and anger that the people
generally and the PPP supporters especially have showed and expressed
instantly was but natural. However, the priority task ahead for the PPP
leaders is to appeal for calm and peace.
President Musharraf has acted wisely and with compassion by
announcing three-day official mourning for her death. Pakistani flag will fly
at half mast during the mourning period. By this action president has paid a
great tribute to Benazir Bhutto, an opposition leader and his sharp critic, for
her courage, sagacity and political acumen. He understands that in her death
the country and the nation have suffered a great loss which will take years to
recover.
While the PPP was mourning its leaders assassination, Mian Nawaz
Sharif announced that his party PML-N would boycott the elections as a
mark of protest to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. It is a hasty decision
and would damage his standing in his own party. Yes, the violent death of
Mohtarma is very tragic. But Mohtarma when alive had spurned the
boycott choice which had forced Nawaz Sharif to withdraw his boycott
threat. Mr Sharif ought to realize that this boycott will harm the democratic
process and the country may be thrown back to square one
In a day or two, President Musharraf will have to make some tough
decisions. Topping the agenda will be the fate of general elections scheduled
for Jan 8, only ten days away. Many voices will be raised that elections be
postponed The political leaders should have the astuteness to understand

812

that if the impending elections are postponed, then only God knows
when they will be held.
Aasim Sajjad Akhtar tried picking up the pieces of BBs murder. At
this time one tends to forget that here was an individual who had just
reemerged after almost a decade in the political wilderness, attempting to
lead her party back into power. Yes, she had come back to Pakistan in
large part due to the efforts of Washington, and there was serious doubt
over the extent to which she could exercise any meaningful autonomy vis-vis both the military establishment and her American backers if and when
she did come to power.
Yet it has to be said that out of all the mainstream politicians in
Pakistan, Benazir was perhaps the best equipped to take on the
challenge. It is another matter altogether that the Pakistan Peoples Party of
today hardly resembles the radical populist PPP of the late 1960s and the
early 1970s, and that Benazir was not attempting to restructure the state and
the society as much as she was trying to create space for herself and her
party within the prevailing military-dominated system.
She was killed in a calculated and professional way, and while Bush
and Musharraf and the western corporate media more generally have all
expectedly ascribed the assassination to extremists, it would not be wrong
to suggest that a large number of Pakistanis believe that this was an
inside job.
In any case, if, as expected, the question of who killed Benazir will
remain a convenient mystery ascribed to mythical extremists, what should
not be forgotten is that this is yet another clear indicator that the state has
failed to uphold its basic responsibility, namely to protect the right to life
of its citizens.
Whether or not Musharraf or any other individual was directly
involved in Benazirs death is beside the point. What matters is that
Musharraf and the military top brass that is still backing him have
brought this country to the brink of total disaster. That yet another
general who promised to save the country has actually done the exact
opposite should not come as a surprise to anyone.
As always, the men in khaki and their clients who have brought
things to a pass can be counted on only to make things worse. Musharraf

813

will desperately cling onto power, the GHQ will continue to rely on
American largesse to maintain its dominance, and the establishment
politicians will continue to induce working people into a web of patronage
and dependence. And it will be these forces that will invoke the need to
save Pakistan. The rest of us must finally explode the myth of this
Pakistan, for if there is to be even a glimmer of hope in these darkest days, it
will come from those of us who are brave enough to challenge a 60-year old
state project that must be done away with.
Chris Cork tried identifying Benazirs legacy. What is going to be the
legacy of Benazir Bhutto? Twice prime minister of a large and populous
nation and the first woman prime minister of a Muslim nation; twice
removed from government under a cloud and in both her terms in power
having achieved, by the estimates of many observers, very little other
than a considerable expansion of her personal wealth at the expense of the
national exchequer. Where is the legislation empowering other women that
you might have expected her to drive through in either of her terms of
office? Legislation to roll back oppressive and discriminatory laws? None
that I can find.
She was a great campaigner, and that can never be taken away from
her, and the sight of her hoarse and ragged-voiced in her final speech before
the party faithful was of an orator at the height of their powers. Yet she went
from that final engagement to commit the folly that led to her death. The
bomber may or may not have killed herbut she gave him the opportunity.
She could have lived, as did every other person in the bomb and the
bulletproof car she was traveling in but she chose to die, and in that fatal
self-serving moment the wolf took her throat. Could she have saved
democracy in Pakistan? We will now never know, but the irony is that
her removal from the stage may just create the space that will allow others to
take the democratic flag forwards; which in the end means that she did not
die in vain.
Fasi Zaka opined that she should not be remembered as a leader
whose death created a slaughter in grief. Benazir was always the torchbearer of two major groups in the country, the poor working classes and
the intelligentsia that wanted a welfare state to eradicate out elitist
institutions that prevented the under-classes from rising above their Perspex
ceilings.

814

When Musharraf came, the intelligentsia turned turncoat in

supporting someone who promised doing her agenda without corruption. But
as we have seen, a dictator cannot create lasting change if he does not
buy in the will of the people. The extremists grew in their isolation, and the
people thrived through their political complacency. But its all come to a
head now, even before Benazirs death when Musharraf showed that he was
at heart, a dictator. How shortsighted the intelligentsias were.
Even now, the nation is shell-shocked. How does one grieve when
someone has been larger than life, when someone had become a living
symbol? Those who have recovered from the shock are seething with anger,
and it is blinding anger If only all those who have been traumatized by her
loss can recover their bearings from violence, we want her always to be
remembered as a daughter of the east and not a leader whose memory
created a slaughter in grief.
Ayesha T Haq observed that her death was stranger than fiction. By
law an investigation into a matter like this is the responsibility of the
state. This is not something they can opt out of. It is mandatory. The state is
required to conduct a thorough investigation; which includes a post-mortem
and the sealing-off of the crime scene and only people with special
equipment, gloves and soft shoes allowed to cross. The law also regards the
washing down of a crime scene tampering with the evidence. Its called
forensics. Forensic science is so advanced these days that with an expert, the
right equipment and a secure crime scene you can solve these mysteries
Ask General Musharraf about the importance of forensic evidence
and investigations. He has devoted whole chunks of his autobiography, In
the Line of Fire, to the investigations carried out on the attacks on him. Did
you know that mobile phones leave fingerprints on the airwaves? The man
in charge of those investigations is now the chief of army staff
What is equally surprising is that there has been no demand from
any quarter, not even her party, to carry out a post-mortem and
investigation. And then, I am sure much to the relief of the government; she
is buried quickly and quietly, at least as quietly as you can the most popular
political leader in the country
Everyone who should be making a noise is very quiet except for
Ms Bhuttos main rival, Mian Nawaz Sharif, who has been most vocal.
He has demanded what Ms Bhutto had been demanding before she was
815

assassinated. Free and fair elections monitored by an independent

commission under the watchful eye of an independent caretaker setup. Mr
Sharif has added to this the resignation of the president.
The US State Department has said there should be an inquiry,
perhaps the government will honour that request and round up the usual
suspects. And today if anyone is offered up as a suspect in this case there can
be no question of a conviction as there is no evidence.
Ishtiaq Ahmed was of view that her assassination must be seen an
exercise in deterrence. She committed herself to working closely with the
United States in the war on terror and even to let the Americans interrogate
Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, a national hero who is fondly referred to as the
father of the Islamic or Pakistani atomic bomb. Moreover, this time she had
taken a more strident posture in favour of democracy and human rights.
Such posturing most certainly earned her the wrath of a whole range of
fanatics.
An al-Qaeda statement describes her death as the end of Americas
most precious asset in Pakistan. Her assassination must therefore be seen
an exercise in deterrence. The deterrence theory of punishment is premised
on the assumption that the culprit should not only be punished severely, but
also serve as an example to others, so that nobody dares break the law or
defy the will of the state.
One can extend the same reasoning to non-state actors such terrorist
organizations and fanatical ideological movements. They follow their own
codes of chaste behaviour and good conduct and punish brutality when those
rules are violated.
The assassination of a national-level leader who was also a wellknown international figure will only add greater disapprobation to
Pakistans reputation as an authoritarian, military-dominated polity in
which religious fanatics get away with impunity when the assault women
and religious minorities, where the ruling classes are thoroughly corrupt and
heartless, and the poor and needy are treated as dirt.
Can the heartless killing of Benazir Bhutto shock us and shame us in
realizing that by not protesting and opposing resolutely all forms of
tyranny we have forfeited the right to live and think as a free nation. If it
does, then she may have served a purpose much greater than her dreams.

816

Babar Ayaz pondered about what would be next after Benazir. The
greater tragedy is that no other leader of this blighted country has
countrywide support, from the snowcapped mountains of Karakoram to the
seashores of Karachi and Balochistan. With all her past follies, it is accepted
even by her foes that she led a party which is an adhesive to keep the
Federation of Pakistan. It is also that her understanding of domestic and
international politics was for better than her political peers.
Most importantly, she was the only popular leader of the country
(President Musharraf does not fall in her league) who understood that the
fundamental contradiction of the Muslim polities is between the forces of
modernity, liberalism, democracy and the fascist militant Islamic forces. In
fact it is not only the issue of Muslim societies, the Christian, Jews and
Hindu societies are also seeing vehement and violent resistance to the flood
of globalized secular culture and values.
It is the fear of being swept away by the changing relations of
production, that heralds changed social relations and pattern of thinking. It is
the challenge posed by scientific rational thinking that has made extremists
of all major religions in the world to come out vigorously against rationality.
It is this fear that has made these forces intolerant and noisy. It is this
inevitable progress of mankind that is being resisted by the likes of al-Qaeda
in Muslim societies, by BJP and Hindutva in India, by evangelists in
America and by hardcore Jews in Israel.
Those who undermine the importance of this political formulation
have lots of disconnected arguments. They blame Benazir Bhutto for
supporting an American agenda when she boldly said: We can sacrifice
our lives but not the future of our children to the militants. They brushed
aside this as an American agenda to polarize the Muslim societies.
The question is: can any country now afford not to challenge
religious extremism? Nobody grudges the right of the religious parties who
remain within the democratic norms, but it is the fascist and violent means
of subjugating the people that has to be resisted.
And Benazir Bhutto was the only national leader who had the
courage to rise to this call of history on her own soil. She was in a position
to provide peoples support to this cause, which Musharraf had tried to fight
without political backing. On the contrary he was often taking sides with
fanatics. He isolated himself by attacking the judiciary and the civil
817

society The PPP should evolve a collective leadership giving

representation to all provinces, as no individual would be able to keep it
intact as BB never allowed other leaders to grow; else the party my split.
Kamal Siddiqi framed few questions for which he felt Pakistanis
would have no answers. Let us face the facts: we may possibly never
know who killed Benazir Bhutto. More so, we may also possibly never
know how she died. Also, we can only speculate why this brave woman was
killed. Was it al-Qaeda, as claimed by the government, or possibly someone
else? Was she killed because she was the most prominent symbol of
moderate Islam or because she was openly challenging the militants?
Ms Bhutto has said that she had written a letter to the president
identifying those she thought would be responsible. We will possibly never
see that letter. But the media did come out with some names at that time. Ms
Bhutto never contradicted those news stories. The PPP says that the claim
by the government that the Baitullah Mehsud group was behind the
attack is a pack of lies. Who do we believe?
In a feeble attempt to address the grief and anger of the people, the
government has said that a judicial inquiry will be held into the matter. Will
this suffer the same fate as the inquiry held into the May 12 incidents in
Karachi, or that which was supposed to inquire into the Oct 18 blasts? The
credibility of the government, one is compelled to say, is an all time
low
It is not too difficult to understand why so many people have come
out of the streets in cities, towns and villages all over Pakistan to protest
against the government for not being able to protect Ms Bhutto adequately.
People are upset not only at the death of Ms Bhutto, but of the
governments growing helplessness in the war against terror and also the
manner in which Pakistan is moving towards a state of despair.
Why is the government supporting people with questionable
credentials when people with proven track records can be co-opted to strive
for a better Pakistan? Is it not shame that successive unrepresentative
governments have tried their level best to keep the PPP out of power?
And even when the PPP is in power, there are some within the establishment
that continued to unsettle, undermine and challenge the elected
representatives

818

Today, as Ms Bhutto is no more, there are questions being asked not

only about the elections but about democracy and the future of Pakistan?
There are some, like Aitzaz Ahsan, who was interior minister in Ms Bhuttos
first cabinet, who say that they fear for the future of Pakistan.
There are many questions that are being asked at this stage. For
one, who will replace Ms Bhutto as leader of the PPP will it be Mr Zardari,
her husband, or Makhdoom Amin Fahim, who has been the interim head of
the party during Ms Bhuttos exile? Will a Bhutto be able to save the PPP or
will it now break up since there is no Bhutto old enough to take up the
mantle? Will Pakistan lose its only national political party? Another is
whether elections will be delayed, and if so till when. But the larger
question, and one that most Pakistanis are asking, is, how and when will the
government respond to the open challenge that religious militants have
thrown to the government time and again?
Razeshta Sethna termed Benazir as peoples politician. She
negotiated to stay in the running right until the end. Then, she lost her
battle to those elements she vowed to cleanse. Its hard to believe that
Benazir Bhutto has been assassinated Islamic militants put her on their hit
list because she had close connections with Washington; she had previously
paid attention to madressahs when she was in power and this time around
had returned with a stark message to cleanse Pakistan of militancy.
She pledged that her party, if given the opportunity would find a way
out to ensure the politics of hatred and intolerance was eradicated. Posing to
be the darling of the west and speaking about how she would tackle
militancy in her country, but if given yet another chance, one would have
hoped Ms Bhutto could have delivered a fraction of what she promised.
Interestingly, the question that comes to mind is not only who did it,
but why and what they would have to gain in her absence, especially with
the forthcoming elections around the corner. For militants with al-Qaeda
linkages, murdering a westernized, secular woman leader who they saw as a
traitor to their faith, culture and society would be incentive enough in itself.
The elections would be left in jeopardy with President Musharrafs
position even shakier than before.
The Pakistani interior ministry has announced the hand of
Baitullah Mehsud, an influential Taliban leader fighting against the state in
South Waziristan. His spokesman denies the involvement. If these linkages
819

are authentic, then one would say that an entire cluster of cells could have
had a role in Bhuttos assassination including internal jihadi groups
flourishing under the auspices of certain elements within Pakistani
intelligence coupled with connections to al-Qaedas.
Ms Bhutto was undoubtedly a fearless woman with conviction Was
she a saviour this time around for the lost people of Pakistan or a wily
politician who thought she might be invincible, despite warnings that her
security could not be guaranteed? Why did she flirt with danger and
death? Was she simply courageous and stubborn?
No stranger to violence it seemed, BB sounded even more
determined to fight terrorism and not give in to the extremists by staying
away from the thousands of supporters who thronged at rallies to hear her
speak, to catch a glimpse of her smiling, waving and acknowledging their
presence often through the sunroof of her bullet-proof vehicle. One could
say Benazir was the peoples politician; she loved to touch hearts
In the wiser Benazir, Pakistan has lost a woman politician who
drew people into her fold with her courage to stand up to those forces
that persist in wrecking the stability and sanity of this country, openly
challenging the writ of the state through unprecedented acts of violence.
Kamila Hyat talked about dynasties and democracies. The Bhutto
dynasty will continue. This has been the key message from the emotional
Central Executive Committee meeting of the PPP held at Naudero, two days
after the burial of Benazir Bhutto The task of fulfilling the apparent need
to ensure a Bhutto name remains at the apex of the party has fallen to
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, still in his teens. Bilawal, whose elevation to party
leadership had been predicted over the past few days, inherits not only his
mothers name, but also one of the bloodiest legacies in modern politics.
In many ways, indeed in too many ways, the entire affair is
uncomfortably reminiscent of a monarchy. Patterns of inherited rule, the
appointment of powerful regents, the process of passing on the role of
leadership from parent to child, even the writing out of political wills to
determine succession, should not exist within a party whose written rules
emphasize internal democracy and lay down a system of elected leadership.
But, some allowances, at least for the present, must be made for the
tragic circumstances in which this sudden vacuum has emerged. The flaws

820

that today weaken the PPP, that tie it down to an archaic pattern of family
dominance, are largely the result of policies followed by both the
Bhuttos father and daughter who have till now led the party. The
conversion of the PPP into a truly democratic party, where the organization
stands above the individual, cannot happen overnight
It is encouraging that, according to reports, the entire issue of
succession was discussed in detail by the partys CEC. The notes of dissent
voiced over the roles to be assigned to both Bilawal and Asif Ali Zardari
indicate the flames of democratic decision-making still burn even if only
faintly. The need to ensure the party remains unified, and can capitalize
fully on what is expected to be an overwhelming sympathy vote Asif
Zardari and Bilawal Bhutto are naturally better placed than anyone else to
capture that emotional vote, and guarantee the party a huge success.
It is also true that, at present, the country needs a PPP that
remains strong, intact and unified. Any loss of this cohesion, which some
had feared could come had Asif Ali Zardari not played a key role at this
time, would have been disastrous. The fact is that the PPP remains a crucial
source of federal unity. The outpourings of grief seen everywhere in the
countryfollowing the assassination of Benazir boldly underscores this
reality.
At a time when there is a real risk of instability and the federal
disharmony that is emerging as one of the greatest national threats, the PPP
leadership has played an immensely positive role. Attempts to bring up
the issue of Sindh-Punjab friction following Benazirs assassination have
been firmly quashed, and Asif Ali Zardaris forceful efforts for this purpose
at his press conference on Sunday have been well received.
It is vital the party now attempt to overcome its flaws, to
gradually break free of the cult of Bhuttos and to recognize that its
future lies in proving itself as a true party of people, able to present their
interests, and to do so effectively under a leadership elected on the basis of
its proven ability, and not its last name By doing so they would give a
much prized gift, and a legacy of genuine democracy, both to their party, and
to their country.
Ikram Sehgal visualized the impact of Benazirs murder on Jan 8
polls. The great promise that Ms Benazir had to offer to this country now
remains with us only as frustrated aspirations. Benazirs assassination was
821

a tragedy waiting to happen, she knew it, and all of us knew it. To carry on
regardless in the face of such imminent and terminal danger requires a
special courage, for which no eulogy can be enough.
Musharrafs earlier successes are now increasingly being
overcome by his failures. Every day that goes by puts us deeper into a
mess. As someone who values his friendship, one now acknowledge with a
heavy heart that he must seriously re-evaluate his own position. While
conceding it could well be otherwise, almost everybody believes that free
and fair elections cannot be held while he remains president With Ms
Bhuttos tragic assassination the stakes have gone up exponentially for the
country, for whatever reason this represents a watershed of sorts, a crossing
over the feel-safe line between the Musharraf who used to find solutions and
the Musharraf who has now become part of the problem.
The institutions of president and chief justice must be balanced to
prevent winner-take-all in a democracy from becoming a camouflaged
dictatorship. The president should not be a political entity, he or she being
elected by exercise of adult franchise. The chief justice should administer a
financially independent judiciary with the NAB under his authority.
Democracy envisages genuinely elected clean representatives of the
people eventually coming to power, vital ground for the unity and integrity
of the country. If President Musharraf goes through with the electoral
exercise on Tuesday, Jan 8, 2008, to quote his words come hell or high
water, that is exactly where this country will be, somewhere between hell
and high water.
Hamid Waleed wrote: The assassination of Benazir Bhutto,
opposition leader and Chairperson of Pakistan Peoples Party, has
completely changed the election scenario in the country and holding the
election on time has become a big challenge for the government It is
worth mentioning here that President PML-N, Mian Nawaz Sharif has
already announced that his party will boycott the elections in the wake of
Benazir Bhuttos assassination.
PPP leadership is likely to take a decision regarding their
participation in elections The Bhutto family will first be looking toward
selecting the political heir of Benazir Bhutto, and then make a decision
about their participation in elections. The political circles have a general
impression that PPP leadership would prefer to boycott elections until issues
822

relating to next leadership are resolved. On the other hand, some other
circles have opined that PPP would prefer to let the elections be held in
time in order to utilize the fully charged sentiments of voters and
supporters.
PPP and PML-N, the two major opposition parties, have
repeatedly accused the ruling party of rigging the elections. President
Pervez Musharraf, taking notice of the oppositions accusations, has
maintained that those who participate in rigging do so as grist for their
campaign mills. Despite the fact that the Election Commission has released
CDs containing the electoral lists to facilitate voters, many discrepancies
have still been pointed out.
The opposition is also apprehensive that the powerful town and
city Nazims are using their influence and resources to support candidates
of the erstwhile ruling alliance Claims have been made that high-ranking
government officers have organized pre-poll rigging. The disconcerting
reports have forced an otherwise cautious Shahbaz Sharif to say that polling
stations might be besieged and the country will descend into chaos if polls
are rigged.
The elections, it seems, will fail to reflect public aspirations. Any
such situation will put the country into further chaos. Unavoidable
circumstances may cripple the country especially if one of the major parties
including PPP and PML-N refused to accept the elections. Also, the
mainstream political parties are committed to launch public campaigns for
the restoration of judiciary after the election, which means that the
government would have to face adverse circumstances in case the
opposition succeeded in establishing that the caretaker setup has rigged
the elections.
Shahzada Irfan Ahmed commented on lifting of emergency. Though
emergency has been lifted, President Musharraf has achieved all that he
wanted to, the removal of an independent judiciary and gagging the media.
There is no doubt that the declaration of emergency by President Musharraf
was essentially an attempt to pull a coup against an important liberal
dimension of Pakistan the independent judiciary. He was afraid that the
Supreme Court of Pakistan would bar him from becoming president once
again and the media that had gained independence through decades of
struggle would expose his designs before the masses.

823

Experts in the political arena believe the imposition of emergency

has adversely hit the process aimed at restoring true democracy in the
country. For months, the US had been facilitating a rapprochement with
Benazir Bhutto that could enable President Musharraf to make a transition to
democracy. Under the proposed plan President Musharraf would remain
president and Benazir Bhutto be allowed to assume power as prime minister
of Pakistan. Though to achieve the desired results, it was necessary to
remove the constitutional bar on a persons becoming prime minister for
third term.
As every cloud has a silver lining, the imposition of emergency has
given birth to a movement launched by different sections of the society. It
has been a highly encouraging development that they are not ready to buy
any argument that lacks logic and is not substantiated with undeniable facts.
There was hardly any common person (one without any personal interest)
who could believe President Musharraf when he tried to justify his act
of imposing emergency by saying that he did so to counter the working of
some members of the judiciary at cross purposes with the executive and the
legislature in the fight against terrorism and extremism, interference by some
members of the judiciary in government policy, overstepping of some
judges of their limits of judicial authority
A major impact of imposition of emergency, which is still present
even after it has been lifted, has been the gagging of an independent
media that had become the pulse of Pakistanis, both inside the country and
abroad. Common Pakistanis are fast becoming aware of their rights like
citizens in mature democracies
In the situation following the emergency, one of the major areas of
concern is the insecurity among the business and investments flowing
into the country. The step to impose state of emergency has had a
detrimental impact on business activities, seriously affecting the view that
Pakistan is a safe and stable country to host services in.
Many believe that the damage to the economy is already done and
investors confidence in its future is on the wane. Our countrys perception
as a politically stable nation is further eroded around the globe. It will take
time and extraordinary efforts from democratic forces to gain foreign
investors and businessmens confidence.

824

Anjum Niaz observed that Musharraf continued damaging himself.

Perhaps I am swayed by emotion like the rest of our writers and television
analysts who now claim that Benazir Bhutto, had she lived, could have taken
Pakistan out of the abyss. Until three months ago, BB by many was
condemned for supporting Musharraf and toeing the American and British
agenda. Many of her critics, myself included, said she had made a Faustian
deal that was not for the cause of democracy but her personal cause. But
emotions are still raw and the television channels insist on defying her.
Nobody is willing to think beyond Benazir Bhutto.
Musharraf continues to damage himself; he continues to damage
the vital institutions that lend him support. He has to halt. Let 2008 be a
year of making amends for him. He can yet undo the wrong that he was led
to believe as right by his coterie. He must look around him and distance
himself from his advisors who continue to lead him into a labyrinth of lies
instead of pulling him out. Such men and women are dangerous. They have
to be dropped.
Musharraf is so weakened that he may not be able to resist
America and Britain and others from infiltrating our sensitive institutions
on the pretext of securing Pakistan from disintegrating and its nukes falling
into Taliban jihadi control. Fate is not favouring Musharraf and the
caretakers who are proving to be a colossal failure. Cravenly they have gone
into hiding while their President scoops up the blame of events far beyond
his intellectual, moral and cerebral capabilities. Today he is liked only by
those who stand to benefit.
Co-Chairman of PPP, Senator Asif Ali Zardari stridently demands the
UN, US and UK to intervene in the investigation of his wifes shahadat; the
most influential newspaper in the world, The New York Times launches a
frontal attack on our army and the President; the US presidential
candidates both in the Democrat and Republican parties make stinging
statements against Musharraf; British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and
other world leaders look for slipping through our cracks and meddle; the
ICG screams blue murder and blames the Pakistani military and jihadi
groups, whom it accuses of being in bed together.
Enough! Foreigners must be told where they get off; but by the same
token Brig Javed Iqbal Cheema must stop his phantasmagoric statements
as the Interior Ministry spokesman and start telling us the truth; President
Musharraf needs new advisers and new friends and honest New Year
825

resolutions that we the people can believe in and not dismiss as poppycock:
He must mop-up his skewed up plans and begin anew.

REVIEW
The murder of Benazir was no surprise, not even for the victim. She
had feared this to happen since her return to Pakistan and names of the
possible murderers were mentioned by her in a letter written to Musharraf.
The persons named may not be the real killers but mere agents of someone
with a pressing motive. The manner in which the regime has handled the
case so far it can be inferred that the real killers would never be brought to
the book.
In the prevalent turbulent situation in Pakistan the obvious suspect
would be the Islamic militants on the basis that Benazir had voluntarily
identified herself as one the members of Bushy-Mushy gang. This gang
would prefer any clues about involvement of militants in the murder to
justify the war it has been fighting for the last six years.
In view of the above it could be possible that she fell into the trap of
the US by striking a deal with Musharraf. Her murder blamed on the Pashtun
militants can now help winning the support of Pakistani masses that have
turned bitterly against the US war on terror. Remember, Americans can do
anything to win their holy war.
The killing of Benazir proved once again that Musharraf has been
lucky in circumventing the difficult situations. The Crusaders had lost faith
in him, but after the murder of Benazir they have been left with no choice
except continuing relying on him and supporting him, for the time-being, for
furtherance of their agenda in the context of Pakistan.
Nevertheless, Bush and Musharraf must admit that, if she has been
murdered by the militants, then this has been an excellent execution of the
strategy of pre-emptive strikes. Incidentally, Pakistan too has been lucky as
BB-Musharraf combine would have proved for deadlier than any other.
Jiyalas of the PPP paid befitting tributes to their leader. She had
plundered the public money when she was alive and in power; her death
brought rampant looting of public and private property by the followers of

826

her legacy. These moderate people showed their true colour when they hit
back with vengeance; even the Islamic extremists would have envied.
The successors of the slain leader also showed their true self. They
matched Musharrafs enlightened moderate military dictatorship with
enlightened moderate democratic monarchy and to do that they had to
temper with ancestral family name of Bilawals name.
The most annoying part of the successors behaviour has been the
manner in which the enlightened moderates have been remembering their
deceased leader as Shaheed. They had no shame in using an orthodox
Islamic term after having rejected the concept of Jihad. It is said that of the
Doomsday, prophets and shaheeds would rise in each others company; only
Allah knows which prophet would have the company of Benazir.
27th January 2008

827

EVER-ESCALATING WAR
The mercenary, Musharraf, escalated the war on terror both in
territorial limits and its scope. During first week of November he had
arrested more that fifty judges of the superior judiciary after having them
accused of supporting/sponsoring terrorism. Then he expanded the war to
the Valley of Swat. The violence begot the violence and on 27 th December
Benazir was killed in Rawalpindi.
The US as usual kept muttering the mantra of do more and during
second week of December Benazir also joined the mantra. She did not waste
time in blaming the regime for rise in militancy. The US also kept
mentioning Pakistani nukes in dispatches.
On the Eastern Front things progressed in accordance with the wishes
of the Crusaders. The so-called composite dialogue ran out of esteem.
However, Indian counterpart of the visiting Foreign Secretary of Pakistan
told the guest that meaningful dialogue could be pursued after stabilization
of political situation in Pakistan.

WESTERN FRONT
Killings on the soil of Musharrafs Pakistan for the peace of Karzais
Afghanistan continued. Amir Muqam escaped suicide attack at his residence
in Peshawar of 9th November; four persons were killed. Two security
personnel were killed and five wounded in bomb explosion in Kabal area of
Swat. Fourteen security personnel were wounded in roadside bombing in the
same area. Next day, eight security personnel were abducted in Swat.
On 11th November, fighters of Maulana Fazlullah arrested Mufti
Muhammad Ali Shah on charges of embezzlement and links with military
circles. Clashes erupted in Swat after three-day calm. Internet caf was
blown up in Peshawar.
Army took command of operation in Swat and used Gunship
helicopters killing seven and wounding eight people on 12 th November. DG
ISPR refused to confirm the casualties because no ground troops were
employed; only flying machines were used for the killings.

828

On 13th November, four militants were killed and dozens of people

wounded as army used gunship helicopters on second consecutive day in
Swat. One security personnel was killed and ten wounded in roadside
bombing near Miranshah. A man was killed while planting an explosion
device in Peshawar. Army operation continued on third day killing 65 people
in Shangla and Batkhela; militants claimed killing 31 soldiers. Eight soldiers
were wounded in attack near Kabal.
Army-led operation in Swat continued on 15 th November in which
gunship helicopters were used indiscriminately; the death toll reached 146.
ATC ordered release of Rashid Rauf so that the regime could extradite him
to London. One soldier was killed and two wounded in roadside bombing
near Bannu. Next day, gunship helicopters killed several militants and
civilians in Swat.
At least 42 people, including 28 militants were killed in Swat by
gunship helicopters and artillery fire on 17th November. Militants claimed
killing 30 to 40 soldiers and capturing 12 policemen. Widow of slain
journalist was killed in a blast in front of her house. At least 38 people were
killed and 90 wounded in sectarian clash which had started in Kurram
Agency on 16th November.
The death toll in sectarian clash in Kurram Agency rose to 80 on 18 th
November. In Swat, gunship helicopters and artillery kept pounding
positions of militants. Next day, 18 people were killed as the army
launched its offensive under the cover of gunship helicopters and artillery
barrage which targeted Shakkar Ghar, Manja Kabal, Bandi, Kanju, Nagui
and Kabal. Army ordered the residents to vacate the area and militants urged
them to stay on.
Death toll in Shia-Sunni clash in Kurram rose to 119; the Governor
alleged that clash has been triggered to distract the government from Swat
operation. Tribesmen abducted six soldiers and political tehsildar in Bajaur
Agency in retaliation to arrest of their men near Mingora. One man was
killed in a blast in Hangu.
On 20th November, sixty militants and thirty civilians were killed in
gunship helicopters and artillery blitz. A police post was destroyed in rocket
fire in Dir. Next day, at least 40 militants and civilians were killed in artillery
and gunship helicopters fire in Swat.

829

On 22nd November, 35 more militants and civilians were killed in

ongoing operation in Swat; troops consolidated their control over Alpuri.
Nine video shops were destroyed in blast in Mardan. Next day, curfew was
imposed in Malakand and Swat as 38 more militants and civilians were
killed. Fazlur Rehman accused Musharraf toeing foreign line to enslave
people of Pakistan.
At least 30 people were killed on 24th November in two suicide
bombings in Rawalpindi in front GHQ and inside the gate of ISI offices in
Ojhri Camp. Fighting erupted once again in Parachinar and at least 50
people were killed in clashes. In Swat, two militants were among four killed.
Troops launched the much awaited ground offensive in Swat and
thirty people were killed on 25th November. In South Waziristan, the
militants set on fire the food stuff of aid agencies. Ground offensive
supported by artillery and gunship helicopters continued in Swat next day; at
least 20 more people were reported killed.
Army attained upper hand in Swat as it captured Najia Top and shut
down Fazlullahs FM radio station on 27 th November. Jirga was allowed 24
hours to convince fighters to lay down arms. Next day, army seized
Fazlullahs base as death toll of militants rose to 250. Eight FC men were
kidnapped in Ghalanai. Rockets hit police lines in Tank. Tribesmen held a
protest rally in Tall and demanded removal of check posts. In Peshawar, 19
people were wounded in a blast. Explosives and grenades were recovered
from police lines in Islamabad.
On 29th November, five soldiers were killed in two landmine blasts in
North Waziristan. Fourteen people, including ten civilians, were killed in
artillery shelling in Swat. Brother of Fazlullah along with 14 others was
arrested at a check post.
Security forces arrested 11 people in the ongoing operation in Swat on
30 November. By 2nd December, security forces were poised for capture of
Matta, a tehsil headquarters in Swat. In Ghalanai, Taliban attacked a cockfighting fare and killed three and wounded six persons. Rail track was blown
up near Landikotal; CD shops were damaged in bomb blast.
th

On 3rd December, 30 militants were arrested in Swat as the troops kept

pushing the offensive forward. Six people were killed and five wounded due

830

to bomb blast in a madrassa in Qila Saifullah. The blast occurred in a room

where an Afghan had stayed for the night.
A woman suicide bomber blew herself in front of ISI office in
Peshawar Cantonment on 4th December. Six Levies men were kidnapped in
Bajaur. In Swat, troops consolidated their positions. Next day the
government announced the plan to establish a cantonment in Matta. An
Afghan refugee was killed in security forces fire near Miranshah.
Following the Jamia Hafsa precedence, the army blew up the houses
of Fazlullah and his brother on 6th December. The regime claimed that
militants were on the run and militants said their retreat was tactical. Three
soldiers were wounded when a convoy was fired at near Miranshah. Pillion
riding in Bajaur Agency was banned after militants blew up a Levies post.
Locals burnt houses of militants in Swat on 7 th December. The
governor announced compensation for the affected people. Army arrested 22
suspected militants. Attack on a police post in Mardan left one policeman
and a militant dead. Next day, Army said operation in Swat was completed;
reports on casualties were rejected. Fazlullah admitted of being injured.
Militants killed one soldier of Bajaur Scouts and wounded three more.
At least 13 people, including three policemen were killed as a suicide
car bomber attacked a police post in Swat on 9th December. Two rockets
were fired at PAF base in Peshawar. In Mardan, a police station was
damaged in rocket attack. In Bara area, militants shot dead an outlaw.
Seven soldiers escaped from the militants captivity in Swat on 10 th
December. A suicide bomber rammed his car in to a school bus in Kamra
wounding nine, including seven school kids. Member of peace jirga was shot
dead in Kurram agency. Mahsud Jirga blamed the government for
dishonouring the pact.
Four persons, including Fazlullahs commander, were killed in an air
strike and army claimed capturing a gang of suicide bombers. Three CD
shops were blown up in Peshawar. An official of Commissionerate for
Afghan refugees was kidnapped from Darra Adamkhel area.
Ten soldiers were killed in an ambush in North Waziristan on 12 th
December and fifteen militants were killed in retaliatory action by security
forces. Levies post was blown up in Bajaur Agency. Next day, security

831

forces took control of Charbagh in Swat. Five more soldiers succumbed to

injuries received in an ambush in North Waziristan.
On 14th December, security forces arrested 14 suspected militants in
Swat. Four car riders were shot dead in Matta area. Troops blocked road to
Asadkhel in North Waziristan. One person was injured in blast in CD shop in
Peshawar. Policeman was injured in rocket attack on a post in Lakki Marwat
and NGOs office was set on fire.
At least seven persons were killed when a suicide bomber blew
himself up at the gate of ASC Centre at Nowshera on 15 th December. In
Swat, houses of two militants were razed; a driver was killed for violating
curfew; and four suspects were arrested. A military vehicle was damaged in
roadside bombing on Bannu-Tall Road. Rashid Rauf who was involved in
London hijacking escaped from police custody.
CD shops were blown up in Mardan on 16 th December. Militants
kidnapped two barbers in Charsada area. Three persons were killed as tribal
clashes erupted in Kurram Agency. An official of Mohmand Rifles was
killed by militants. Three soldiers were wounded in roadside bombing in
Dattakhel area.
At least 12 soldiers were killed and 5 wounded in a suicide attack in
Kohat Cantonment on 17th December. Musharraf said terrorists would not be
allowed to disturb stability of his regime. Troops arrested 17 suspects in
Swat; took control of a Taliban hospital and destroyed houses of two
militants. In Waziristan, militants fired rockets on a military camp before
announcing ceasefire on the eve of Eid. Two persons were injured in grenade
attack in Parachinar.
Four soldiers, including two captains, went missing from Mattani area
on 18 December. Former MNA was abducted from Mohmand Agency. One
person was killed and five wounded in Parachinar. Pakistan and the US
agreed to bolster defence ties. Next day a case was registered against two
policemen over escape of Rashid Rauf. Foreign Office admitted that the US
aid bill tasted bad.
th

Four blasts rocked Peshawar on 20th December. The probe body

seemed to have passed the buck to junior policemen, reported Shakeel
Anjum. Next day, at least 54 people were killed and 96 wounded in a
suicide attack in Charsada; by 23rd December the police had arrested 51

832

people, mostly Afghan refugees. Sherpao demanded objective investigation

into the blast. Thirteen people were killed in suicide attack in Mingora. Eight
people were killed in violence in Kurram Agency. Cable network was
destroyed in an explosion in Mardan. Two bomb blasts targeted CD shops in
Nowshera.
One person was killed and two wounded as FC troops opened fire in
Ghalanai area on 24th December. Four more CD shops were destroyed in
Peshawar. Violence continued in Kurram Agency as death toll reached ten
and 20 were wounded.
Security forces targeted militants hideout in Swat on 25 th December.
Two motorcyclists were shot dead by security forces near Miranshah. Five
persons were killed in sectarian violence in Kurram Agency. Next day,
thirty-two more were killed in Kurram Agency clashes. Police checkpost
was destroyed in Bannu. Troops arrested 18 suspected militants in Swat. In
Bajaur, militants freed seven security men. Over a dozen shops were
damaged in blast in D I Khan.
Eight people, including a PML-Q leader were killed in a blast in Swat
on 28 December. Next day, two people were shot dead for violating curfew
in the Swat Valley. On 30 th December, twenty more people were killed in
clashes in Kurram Agency. Taliban released former minister in Swat. Two
abducted FC soldiers were released in North Waziristan. Two suicide
bombers killed themselves accidentally in Haroonabad. On 31 st December,
11 more lives were lost in Kurram Agency.
th

Five people were killed in South Waziristan clashes on 1 st January,

2008 and four FC men were abducted. Two more people were killed in
Kurram Agency. Next day, 22 militants were killed in South Waziristan.
Pakistani and US officials rejected the report that special squad has been put
on alert to secure Pakistans nuclear weapons.
On 3rd January, six people were killed in Kurram Agency clashes.
Security forces arrested seventy suspected militants in Swat operation. Three
people were killed and five wounded in Kurram Agency fighting on 4 th
January. FC fort in Tank was attacked by rockets. Five Christians were
kidnapped in South Waziristan. One policeman was killed and SHO hurt in
firing in Lakki Marwat. Several houses were damaged as troops shelled
suspected locations. Tehrik-i-Taliban warned of attacks in settled areas.

833

On 5th January, at least seven of a family died and five were wounded
as collateral damage when army fired artillery shells on suspected hideout.
Next day, a man was killed and six shops damaged in explosions in
Peshawar. Security forces pressed on their operation in Swat. In Buner, 18
shops were damaged in a blast.
Militants, including foreigners, killed nine pro-government peace
broker tribesmen in two attacks on offices of peace committees on 7 th
January. Nine Taliban were killed in various incidents in Bajaur and
Mohmand. Eight soldiers were wounded in suicide attack in Swat. Police in
Sargodha claimed arresting five suicide bombers.
On 8th January, a soldier was killed in attack on FC fort in South
Waziristan. Operation in Swat continued in which army declared arresting
more than 500 people. Eight shops were blown up in Buner. Eleven rockets
were fired on Army Officers Colony in Peshawar. A retired major with six
others was arrested in connection with attack on PAF bus in Sargodha.
Musharraf did not falter in cooperating with Bush in his holy war.
On 17 December, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the United States discussed the
threat of Improvised Explosive Devices. A week later, Boucher hailed major
counter-terrorism operation in Swat. Musharraf and Karzai, during latters
visit to Islamabad on 26th December, agreed on their intelligence forces
joining hand against terrorism. During first week of January, Owais took
oath as Governor NWFP. General Orakzai had opposed military action
against Mahsud.
th

The US, however, remained unsatisfied over the performance of its

ally. On 15 November, it was reported that the US had started exploring
alternative routes for logistic support of troops deployed in Afghanistan
because of the situation in Pakistan. On 2 nd December, Bush once again
threatened direct action inside Pakistan. On 6th January 2008, US
administration debated striking targets in Pakistans tribal areas; Gen Wahid
Arshad reacted angrily to the reports.
Swat operation was widely commented upon during the period. On
14 November, The Nation wrote: As the jirga-militant negotiations for the
release of eight security personnel, including a major and a captain, in the
custody of Maulvi Fazlullahs fighters in Swat failed to make any headway,
the army decided to move in and take command of the operation. It
th

834

would conduct the operation in coordination with the paramilitary forces

already stationed there.
The bitter experience in the tribal region, where only this year an
estimated 250 security personnel are reported to have laid down lives
without being able to eliminate the violent pro-Taliban elements in one
district alone, should have counseled a different line of action, that is,
engagement through talks with the militants. Initial setbacks to the talks
ought not to have been taken as a conclusive rebuff.
Next day the paper added: Corps Commander Peshawar Muhammad
Masood Alam has rightly said that force is not the solution to anything.
The statement came only a day after the army finally, moved in to take
command of the ongoing operation against militants in Swat, who now
control six of the eight sub-districts of Malakand Division The security
forces must exercise restraint while carrying out operation in the densely
populated areas especially after complaints by the local residents that many
civilians were also injured in Tuesdays shelling.
On 2nd December, the paper commented on Fazlullahs threat.
Although the security forces have, on the face of it, made substantial
headway in restoring normal life in Swat, ominous clouds of militants
regrouping in the valley have not entirely dissipated. Maulana Fazlullah
resurfaced on the air on Friday, hurling threats to troops. His illegally
operated FM radio had been shut down almost a week back, but he somehow
had found a way of setting up another and using it to deliver a warning to the
government forces
Maulana Fazlullahs rationale for vacating certain positions to
save civilian lives coming under indiscriminate fire from the security
forces would be taken with a pinch of salt. DG ISPRhas maintained that
the troops were taking extreme precautions to avoid civilian casualties
Some suspect collaborators, including 19 policemen, and 11
militants, have been arrested. But neither the reoccupation of positions nor
the arrests complete the picture. The question where the militant exponents
of Sharia rule who beat a retreat have disappeared remains. As long as there
is no clear answer the fear of their resurgence will last.
A week later, The News wrote: It now seems that, after over a
month of fighting, troops have got the decisive upper hand in Swat In

835

the context of longer term peace, some of the reports coming through are
worrying. They include suggestions that some key militant leaders, including
Fazlullah himself, have moved to other areas in NWFP such as Kohistan or
Dir in some cases to the considerable consternation of local people. There
are also allegations that they have indeed been assisted in finding safe
havens by powerful individuals or groups. This of course leaves open the
possibility of a rise in these regions of the kind of militancy, accompanied by
warped religious extremism
There are other dangers too. Ironically, death, or apparent
victimization, sometimes creates powerful pivotal forces around which
dissent blossoms. In some cases, this can prove more dangerous than the
following enjoyed by living leaders. The news that troops entering Imam
Dehri blew up the houses of Fazlullah and key allies, stating this was done
on the demand of local people, is disturbing because it suggests unnecessary
brutality and the deliberate display of force
The military action that took place needs to be followed by
measures to win hearts of people, by helping them recover from the losses
suffered, rebuilding homes damaged in the conflict and setting up better
structures of education Indeed, Swat should not be treated as an isolated
instance. The same strategy of winning over people used elsewhere, too,
across NWFP, as a means to combat rising militancy could be used in this
case as well.
On 13th December the paper added: The capture of a person in
Mingora reported by the ISPR to be involved in recruiting, training and
harbouring suicide bombers provides some insight into the matter such
groups operate and why the number of suicide attacks in the country
has expanded so dramatically in recent years. The fact that the arrested man
belongs to the Jaish-i-Mohammad, an organization headed by Maulana
Masood Azhar which was banned, at least in theory, in 2001 also indicates
the danger of failing to carry through planned operations against such violent
outfits.
Suspicions still lurk of dangerous linkages between some of the
banned groups and elements within the security apparatus. These
suspicions need to be investigated, so that they can either be dispelled or
action taken against anyone guilty of protecting the forces that present such
a grave threat to the country and its people.

836

Investigators need to uncover how the men many of them

young used by extremist groups for their deadly missions are chosen,
what tactics and process of brainwashing is used to persuade them to take so
many lives and why the number of people willing to carry out such attacks
has increased. The regular incidents of suicide bombing a form of
terrorism that is exceedingly difficult to prevent suggest that a sizeable
number of people are willing to be lured into the nets set up by recruiters
such as the individuals now apprehend in various parts of the country.
The solution of the problem does not require investigation but
common sense. Indiscriminate use of force by the state has motivated
hundreds of youths to kill themselves to take revenge. The exploiters of this
enraged class of people only have to provide them with some explosive
material and guide them to a target.
To move towards any resolution of the problem, it is important to
first understand it better. If the accounts of sizeable chunks of money being
handed over as payment to the families of suicide bombers are accurate,
and then the source of such funding needs to be uncovered. And, in the
longer run, the socio-economic desperation of people, which acts to
encourage militancy of various kinds, needs to be tackled through a series of
holistic policies. The building of the unique mindset that must be a part of
the profile of the suicide bomber is too an aspect of the issue that needs
more research The discovery at Mingora of one important hub in this
setup should help unravel a part of the wicked web wound across the
country, and find the strands required to take it apart, bit by bit, and piece
by piece, as part of a broader effort to eradicate the violence that has taken
deep root within the country.
After suicide attack in Kohat, the newspaper commented: Another 12
young men, all recruits of the Pakistan Army, have been blown up in a
suicide bombing in Kohat. This time the bomber, thought to be around 16year-old and as such still a child, joined the line of men returning to their
barracks after football practice, and then detonated explosives strapped to his
body. Behind the account of yet another of the attacks that have tragically
become a routine event in the country, hides the misery of 12 families
and the grief over losing a young relative which will perhaps never go
away.
For the sake of peace and harmony within the country, for the sake of
some improvement in the law and order situation and to diminish the sense
837

of fear that exists everywhere, it is important that such attacks be stopped.

Too many lives have already been lost as a result of them, and too much
new hatred created in a society that badly needs greater harmony and
cohesion. It has been proved time and again that however tight the security
ring thrown around key spots, killers such as the one who struck in Kohat
can get through
The crimes committed by extremists need to be made more widely
known. At present, they are too often given an undeserved sheen by the halo
of religiosity donned by these men of guns and grenades who portray their
actions as being in support of ordinary people. To win the battle on terror
and to end the spate of suicide attacks seen in recent months this
perception must change, and means found to achieve this before it is too
late to rein in the zealots currently running amuck through the country.
Asad U Khwaja from Wales wrote: I have many relatives in Azad
Kashmir and friends in different parts of NWFP and I have been talking to
them recently: what they have to say differs very greatly from all the media
accounts we are getting out of Pakistan right now. It seems that along with
many refugees fleeing to escape becoming collateral targets in Swat, a large
number of militants are also being relocated, with official support or
protection This is extremely alarming.
Lest we forget, mullahs like Fazlullah and company are the
products of our official stratagems over the last 15-20 years. They were
stashed away by officials all over NWFP and the tribal areas, deliberately, as
everyone knows, after the US attacked Afghanistan and blew Osama bin
Laden and his henchmen out of their caves. I doubt that the Swat operation
will do very much to close down al-Qaeda and Taliban operations in
Pakistan. It will only make the militants go underground until some other
chance presents itself to them to resurface.
Atle Hetland urged understanding of Swat problem. There are many
questions as to why the recent conflict happened: Was it instigated from
outside? Did a local group or groups dissatisfied with developments,
cooperated with outsiders? Or was it indeed an endogenous militant group,
acting on its own and probably not realizing the consequences of what it had
sparked off? However, the end result is that hundreds of people have been
killed and many more have been displaced, either temporarily or
permanently.

838

We may never know fully the answers to them any questions we

may ask. To know all details of the incident is not generally important,
though it would be important to those directly affected. The rest of us would
like to know the broader reasons. This has made many of us, including this
scribe, to seek further knowledge about Swat, its history and current
situation.
If the militants demands were genuine, and not slogans pushed on
the locals by outsiders, it would indicate that they were dissatisfied with a
number of aspects in their society, and they wanted major changes or a
turn backwards in time to more theocratic rule. But as said above, the causes
of the recent conflict in Swat are unclear. In any case, the local, regional and
national leaders should analyze the need for correcting injustices and make
other changes as the majority of people of the Swat Valley see required, and
also take into consideration the needs of minorities.
Without a broad and open dialogue one can risk that grievances
will grow and further militant actions may flare up. I believe that Swat
has the human resources and wisdom to implement such a process in an
inclusive manner and then something positive may come out of the recent
tragedy. To sweep the problems under the carpet, or for the leaders to look
for ways to take revenge or use heavy-handed security measures, would be
the worst solution in the case of Swat, as in the aftermath of other militant
actions.
Let us repeat and underline that we believe the best weapon against
militancy and violence in general and against terrorism in particular is
greater fairness and justice, equality and participation, and development
efforts giving everybody a role and hope for the future. We know that
idleness easily can lead to mischievous behaviour. We also know that if
people are not included in development efforts or indeed if development is
only for the few in an unequal society, people may eventually revolt and
even militant actions may take place
There is little in Swats recent history that can give us any specific
lead about the reasons behind the recent militancy in the region. On the
contrary, there are many positive historical developments that would
normally work against political uprising and violent actions. Yet, we have
given many broader reasons. For example, that major inequalities do exist in
Swats class society, though probably to lesser extent than in many areas in
the rest of Pakistan.
839

If the people feel that modernization and secularism, or other changes

for that matter, go too fast and too far, that could be factors leading to
uprising. However, if that was a general feeling among the people of Swat, I
believe that the uprising would have been more widespread and not just in
one limited pocket. Therefore, it seems likely that the recent incident was
a one-time incident, possibly supported or instigated by outsiders. Let us
indeed hope that was the case and draw positive lessons from the sad
events.
My overall recommendations as for how to minimize conflicts and
violence in a society remain valid, notably to develop greater equality and
prosperity among all people in the society and allow for broad participation
in decision making. Everybody must have a fair share and a fair say in
developments and that also includes discussions about preserving or
modernizing cultural traditions, etc. this is the only way to ensure
lasting peace in Swat.
Rahimullah Yusufzai was of the view that the tide turned and now the
Pakistan Army is dictating terms However, the battle is far from over.
Despite optimistic statements by some of the military commanders,
including the chief operations commander, who briefed foreign journalists
flown to Mingora on a guided visit on December 8, the militants have
neither given up the armed campaign nor backed down from their
demand for enforcement of Shariah in Swat, Shangla and rest of Malakand
division.
It seems the military authorities under-estimated the militants
strength in Swat. There werent many militants in Shangla and, therefore,
fighters were sent from Swat to occupy the district headquarters, Alpuri.
They were flushed out after the military action. However, the militants in
Swat were numerous and were getting reinforcements from outside.
The exact number of Fazlullahs fighters is still not known. The
issue was made complex by the arrival and presence of a significant number
of Taliban, jehadi and tribal fighters from outside to reinforce Fazlullahs
men in Swat. In fact, this has been a standard practice with the local Taliban
to call for help and reinstatement from likeminded groups whenever they are
under attack by Pakistan Army.
The militants too were wrong in assuming that the military
wasnt very firm in its resolve while dealing with them in Swat. It did not
840

take the army a while to finalize plans and initiate military operations once it
became obvious that the police and parliamentary Frontier Constabulary
would not be able to defeat the militants.
The militants didnt enjoy much support in an area where all political
parties, including secular ones like the ANP and PPP, have their strongholds,
and where moderates religio-political groups such as Jamaat-e-Islami and
JUI-F maintain pockets of influence. Though not many in Swat were
generally opposed to Fazlullahs demand for Shariah and none of the
political parties dared to confront him politically, there was little support for
his decision to use force and stage an armed rebellion against the state.
The military until now has claimed to have killed 270 militants and
captured 255 suspects, including a few foreigners and some important
Fazlullahs associates. At least 30 of the suspects have been released after
being found innocent and it appears that many others too would be freed
after interrogation
The military conceded the loss of 25 Pakistan Army soldiers,
including a Major and a Captain. This figure included the soldiers killed in
suicide bombing in Matta in the initial phase of the troops deployment. The
paramilitary soldiers and cops who were killed were much high in number.
Another matter of concern was civilian casualties. Civilians were
killed in Shangla and in Allahabad near Charbagh, Kabal area,
Khwazakhela, Chaprial and in Matta when artillery shells fell on houses or
gunship helicopters bombed wrong targets. One estimate put the civilian
deaths at more than 100. The government didnt admit casualties to the
extent claimed by villagers or the militants, who maintained that scores of
innocent men, women and children were killed.
Displacement of people occurred at a large scale both in Swat
and Shangla, particularly from Swats Kabal tehsil where the military made
announcements asking the villagers to leave. The government failed to make
any arrangements for the displaced families and the camps set up for them
lacked proper facilities This certainly wasnt the way to win the hearts and
minds of the people in the battle against militancy and extremism.
Gangly Khan from Mandi Bahauddin opined: The Musharraf
Government has not learnt any lesson from history. Situation like East
Pakistan is presently being created in tribal areas. Air and artillery

841

bombardment on innocent civilians including women and children has failed

to subjugate tribes. Their houses have been demolished and they are
migrating from their homeland in droves. Musharraf needs to know that
loyalties of people are won with social justice and through grant of
opportunities of participation in social and political life. If army operation
continues, the tribal areas will not remain a part of Pakistan.
The remunerations of the mercenary, commonly called the US aid,
was used as a tool to pressurize. Spiegel observed that America wanted to
reshape the aid. With the Pakistani government in turmoil, senior Pentagon
officials are quietly moving to overhaul the system of massive US
military aid to the country by more directly tying the payments to
Islamabads success in combating Islamic militants The Pentagon is
focusing on the largest and most controversial aid program, known as
Coalition Support Funds. The proposal to link payments to specific
objectives would revamp the current practice of reimbursing Pakistan for
money it says it spent.
In more traditional military aid programs, US aid is subject to a series
of legislative controls that occasionally require presidential action for money
to be released. By contrast, the post-Sept 11 Coalition Support Funds
have few reporting requirements, beyond the claims submitted by the
Pakistanis.
The Pentagon effort to change the Washington-Islamabad
relationship comes at a particularly tricky juncture, when the US also is
trying to force Musharraf to make other changes, including the ending of the
state of emergency he imposed two weeks ago.
But Pentagon officials have been frustrated for months by their
limited knowledge of how Pakistan was spending the US aid. And theyre
being pushed by congressional criticism and revelations that Islamabad is
not using the money as the administration intended.
Proposals to cut back US assistance to Pakistan are not
universally popular in the Bush Administration, where many view
Musharraf as a valuable ally who is committing his military forces to US
objectives, often with heavy costs.
Pentagon officials emphasized that their concerns and the push to
overhaul the military aid program predated the current upheaval in Pakistan.

842

The senior military official insisted that there were no indications that
Musharraf was improperly using the money in crackdown.
Regular army troops have not been involved in breaking up street
demonstrations against Musharrafs emergency decree; that task has been
carried out by Pakistani police and paramilitary troops. The intelligence
services, however, have been involved in drawing up lists of candidates
for arrests as troublemakers, and in providing information on their
whereabouts.
A senior Defence official said efforts to gain more accountability
over Pakistans spending began in earnest last year when officials from
the Pentagons comptrollers office made three trips to Islamabad for
meetings with Pakistani finance officials. In the meetings, each of which
lasted several days, US officials tried to get Pakistan to detail how Coalition
Support Funds money had been spent. Afterwards, Pakistani officials visited
the Pentagon for similar talks.
The efforts fell short, however, as Pakistan resisted US pressure to
become more open. The Pakistanis chafed at demands to begin complying
with more stringent accounting requirements than those already in use, the
senior Defence official said. The efforts were temporarily halted after Ryan
C Crocker, who was US ambassador to Islamabad at the time, left to become
Washingtons envoy to Iraq.
Part of the difficulty in achieving greater accountability and other
reforms, Western observers say, is that the Pakistani military is hamstrung
by its highly centralized bureaucracy. One Western official military
official said it takes inordinate amounts of time to accomplish
straightforward tasks such as scheduling meetings or conducting equipment
inventories. He blamed the Pakistan militarys antiqued and top-heavy
command-and-control structure.
Exactly how the money from the Coalition Support Funds is
distributed to the Pakistani military is still largely shrouded in secrecy.
According to current and former Pentagon officials, Pakistan submits claims
to the US Embassy in Islamabad for reimbursements for military operations
against militant groups, as well as assistance to US forces in Afghanistan
and elsewhere.

843

New York Times leveled the allegation of doing too little. Gen Pervez
Musharraf has done far too little to drive al-Qaeda and the Taliban
from its Pakistani sanctuaries over the last six years, but President Bush
still insists on linking Americas interests to the Generals erratic and
authoritarian whims.
A story in Mondays Times reported on a Pentagon proposal to
sponsor and under-write alliances between Pakistani Army units and tribal
fighters near the countrys border with Afghanistan where al-Qaeda and the
Taliban are strongest. The plans also call for increasing the size and role
of American special operations forces working in those regions.
The Pentagon has had successes working with tribal groups in
northern Afghanistan against the Taliban and more recently with Sunni
sheikhs in Iraq against al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia. Unfortunately, it is far
from clear that these tribal groups want to join the fight.
Before the Pentagon goes any further, President Bush must work a lot
harder to restore democracy Before plunging American forces more
deeply into Pakistans remote borderlands, Washington needs to deal with
the critical political crisis threatening that countrys very core and
Americas strategic interests.
Arthur Keller, former CIA officer observed that our investment in
Musharraf has yielded little. In the early 1900s, a crusty British general
Andrew Skeen, wrote a guide to military operations in the Pashtun tribal
belt, in what is now Pakistans North-West Frontier Province. His first piece
of advice: When planning a military expedition into Pakistani tribal areas,
the first thing you must plan is your retreat. All expeditions into this area
sooner or later end in retreat under fire.
These same tribal areas are now focus of Pakistans struggle with the
Pakistani Taliban, particularly the North Waziristan and South Waziristan
tribal areas on the Afghan border and the Swat region further north. The
government trumpets it has more than 80,000 troops in the tribal areas,
fighting bravely to root out the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Unfortunately, these
troops supported with tens of millions of dollars in American and appear
even less able to police this wild frontier than were the canny British.
The Pakistani Taliban churn out a stream of propaganda videos and
radio broadcasts from black stations, aimed at undermining morale within

844

the army while cutting away support for the military within wider Pakistani
society. If the Pakistani Army is too weak to act effectively, what about
cooperation on the intelligence front?
The analyst shamelessly went on to demand more blood. This year
has seen a notable lack of Qaeda members killed or captured in
Pakistan. The Afghan government has turned over detailed lists of names
and addresses for Taliban members residing in Pakistan, particularly in
Quetta Pakistan has routinely continued to deny.
So what is Americas retreat strategy? We should not divert our
attention from the frontier, which is home to so much Qaeda and Taliban
activity. We should, however, stop blindly supporting President Pervez
Musharraf, his army and intelligence services. As in Iraq, we should make
financial support contingent on benchmarks. If the Pakistani Army claims it
is effectively battling militants in Waziristan and elsewhere, great but such
claims need to be verified by military observers accompanying the Pakistani
troops on offensive raids.
Likewise, the Bush Administration and Congress could demand
concrete measures of Qaeda or Taliban members killed and captured, proof
that actionable intelligence passed to the Pakistanis by American or Afghan
sources is being acted on rather than ignored.
Yes, this may well weaken President Musharraf, whom we have
given a great deal of support over the years. But our expensive investment
in him has yielded little in the way of tangible results. We need policy
based on what is actually happening along the Afghan frontier, not on
wishful thinking that someday Pakistan will become an effective partner in
the war against terrorism.
George Friedman opined: US strategy in Pakistanwas truly flawed.
First, under the best of circumstances, a completely united and motivated
Pakistani armys ability to carry out this mission effectively was doubtful.
And second, the Pakistani army was and is not completely united and
motivated. Not only was it divided, one of its major divisions lay between
Taliban supporters sympathetic to al-Qaeda and a mixed bag of factions with
other competing interests. Distinguishing between who was on which side in
a complex and shifting constellation of relationships was just about
impossible. That meant the army, the United States was relying on to support
the US mission, was, from the American viewpoint, inherently flawed.
845

It must be remembered that the mujahideens war against the Soviets

in Afghanistan shaped the current Pakistani army. Allied with the Americans
and Saudis, the Pakistani army and particularly its intelligence apparatus,
the ISI has as its mission the creation of jihadist force in Afghanistan to
fight the Soviets. The US lost interest in Afghanistan after the fall of the
Soviet Union, but the Pakistanis did not have that option
Third, Musharrafs intentions were inherently unpredictable. As a
product of the Pakistan army, Musharraf reflects all of the ambivalences and
tensions of that institution. His primary interest was in holding on to power.
To do that, he needed to avoid American military action in Pakistan while
simultaneously reassuring radical Islamists he was not a mere tool of
America. Given the complexity of his position, no one could ever be certain
of where Musharraf stood.
While he may have irritated every body, the view from all factions
inside and outside Pakistan was that, given the circumstances, Musharraf
was better than the alternative. From the US point of view, Musharraf and
the Pakistan army might have been unreliable, but any alternative
imaginable would be even worse. Even if their actions were ineffective,
some actions were taken. At the very least, they were not acting openly and
consistently against the US.
The News commented on conditions imposed on the US aid. The $
300 million Foreign Military Funding Programme has been put under
conditions which require State Department certification on three specific
counts, viz preventing al-Qaeda from operating in Pakistan, preventing
Taliban from using Pakistan territory as a sanctuary to launch attacks inside
Afghanistan and getting the democratic house in order. The last item has
four specific areas where Islamabad will have to show convincing
progress. These are the points which will irk the Pervez Musharraf regime
more than anything else, although the punishment of faltering on these
issues is more symbolic than substantial
The Pakistan specific conditions have been a matter of intense debate
on the Capitol Hill for moths, especially after the March 9 cataclysm
unleashed by the misguided presidential reference against the Supreme
Court Chief Justice. As General Musharraf progressively lost the battle on
the streets against the judiciary, boosted by a massive show of public support
and a phenomenal revival of Pakistans civil society, the mood and the tone
of the think tanks, the media and the Democrats in Congress became
846

increasingly hostile. The Republicans, specially President Bush and his State
Department never lost an opportunity to support and prop General
Musharraf but the time soon came when a major shift in US policy
became evident.
Though the latest conditions may not materially impede the flow of
US money for the larger and pre-set targets, many embarrassing
roadblocks have been erected for Pakistan. the specific wording of the
law including restoring the constitution and ensuring freedoms of
expression and assembly and other civil liberties, release of political
detainees allowing inclusive democratic elections, ending harassment and
detention of journalists, human rights defenders and government critics by
security and intelligence forces, restoring an independent judiciary and
ending interference in the judicial process appears to have been drafted not
by any US legislator but by an active member of civil society.
Much of what the US is now demanding may be achieved if
President Musharraf rises above the political fray, assumes the role of a
genuine neutral umpire and allows totally free and fair elections without
interference by any of its agencies or civilian cohorts like the local bodies
administrators, nazims and hand-picked bureaucrats. A universally accepted
election will lead to a genuinely recognized political government and
Pakistan may be spared of international embarrassment every time it seeks
and is denied a US certificate. There is still time to walk away from this
stinking pond of US arm-twisting tricks.
Adil Sultan attempted to break the myth called US aid. To understand
the true extent of US assistance to Pakistan and to clarify the $10-11 billion
question of US financial assistance, it is important to know that the figure of
$10 billion actually includes Coalition Support Funds (CSF), which is in the
range of around $5 billion for the 2002-07 period. The Coalition Support
Fund or CSF is a Department of Defence programme to reimburse war on
terror host partners (Pakistan in this case) for logistic, military and other
expenses incurred in supporting US operations in reality, this is Pakistans
own money spent on US operations by Pakistan, being reimbursed.
Lumping this amount of $5 billion as part of an assistance package is
both factually incorrect as well as intellectually dishonest.
Pakistan is not the only country being reimbursed for the expenses
incurred on the US war on terror. The CSF differs from traditional military
assistance in that it is designed only to reimburse costs and is not designed
847

to serve as a grant in the way ordinary US military training and financing

programmes like the International Military Education and Training
programme or the Foreign Military Financing programme function. While
these facts and figures are publicly available, but some scholars and
writers prefer to remain ignorant for their own vested interests.
The exact knowledge of the breakdown of funding and
reimbursements made to Pakistan under various heads also makes it easier to
understand the US reluctance to use financial assistance as a tool against
Pakistan during the recent period of domestic instability within Pakistan.
Any cut in the CSF in the form of reimbursements which amounts to
almost 50 percent of the total quoted figure of $10 billion, would in fact be
against the US own national security interests.
The campaign to malign Pakistan on every possible issue which
may be political, nuclear or economic should be a cause for concern for
our writers and intellectuals. There is therefore a need to remain proactive
by confronting baseless and ill-intended allegations against Pakistan at
every possible forum by exposing double standards of increasing number of
self-styled Pakistan specialists, especially in Washington DC.
The US prejudices against Pakistan remained in place; particularly on
Pakistans nuclear capability. On 19th November, Pakistan accepted that the
US had been helping to secure its nuclear assets. After the murder of
Benazir, the US said it had plans to capture Pakistani nukes in emergency.
A Senator opposed sale of F-16s to Pakistan. Even ElBaradei feared
Pakistans nuclear weapons could fall into the hands of extremists.
Frederick W Kagan and Michael OHanlon discussed contingency
plans for making Pakistans nukes safe. As the government of Pakistan
totters, we must face a fact: The United States simply could not stand by
as a nuclear-armed Pakistan descends into the abyss. Nor would it be
strategically prudent to withdraw our forces from an improving situation in
Iraq to cope with a deteriorating one in Pakistan.
We do not intend to be fear mongers. Pakistans officer corps and
ruling elites remain largely moderate and more interested in building a
modern state than in exporting terrorism or nuclear weapons to the highest
bidder. But then again, Americans felt similarly about the shahs regime in
Iran until it was too late. Moreover, Pakistans intelligence services contain
enough sympathizers and supporters of the Afghan Taliban, and enough
848

nationalists bent on seizing the disputed province of Kashmir from India,

that there are grounds for real worries.
The most likely possible dangers are these: a complete collapse of
Pakistani government rule that allows an extreme Islamist movement to fill
the vacuum; a total loss of federal control over outlying provinces, which
splinter among ethnic and tribal lines; or a struggle within the Pakistani
military in which the minority sympathetic to the Taliban and al-Qaeda try to
establish Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism.
All possible military initiatives to avoid those possibilities are
daunting. With 160 million people, Pakistan is more than five times the size
of Iraq. It would take long time to move large numbers of US forces halfway
across the world. And unless we had precise information about the location
of Pakistans nuclear weapons and materials, we could not rely on bombing
or using Special Forces to destroy them.
The task of stabilizing a collapsed Pakistan is beyond the means
of the United States and its allies. Estimates suggest that more than a
million troops would be required for a country of this size. Thus, if we have
any hope of success, we would have to act before a complete government
collapse, and we would need the cooperation of moderate Pakistani forces.
One possible plan would be a Special Forces operation with the
limited goal of preventing Pakistans nuclear materials and warheads from
getting into the wrong hands. Given the degree to which Pakistani
nationalists cherish these assets, it is unlikely the United States would get
permission to destroy them. Somehow, American forces would have to team
with Pakistanis to secure critical sites and possibly to move the materials to
a safer place.
For the United States, the safest bet would be shipping the material
to some place like New Mexico; but even pro-American Pakistanis would
be unlikely to cooperate. More likely, we would have to settle for
establishing a remote redoubt within Pakistan, with the nuclear technology
guarded by elite Pakistani forces backed up (and watched over) by crack
international troops. It is realistic to think that such a mission might be
undertaken within days of a decision to act.
A second, broader option would involve supporting the core of
the Pakistani armed forces as they sought to hold the country together in

849

the face of an ineffective government, seceding border regions and al-Qaeda

and Taliban assassination attempts against the leadership. This would require
a sizeable combat force not only from the United States, but ideally also
other Western powers and moderate Muslim nations.
Even if we were not so committed in Iraq and Afghanistan, Western
powers would need months to get the troops there. Fortunately, given the
long-standing effectiveness of Pakistans security forces, any process of
state decline probably would be gradual, giving us the time to act.
So, if we got a large number of troops into the country, what would
they do? The most likely directive would be to help Pakistans military
and security forces hold the countrys center primarily the region
around the capital, Islamabad, and the populous areas like Punjab Province
to its south.
We would also have to be wary of internecine warfare within the
Pakistani security forces. Pro-American moderates could well win a fight
against extremist sympathizers on their own. But they might help if splinter
forces or radical Islamists took control of parts of the country containing
crucial nuclear materials. The task of retaking any such regions and
reclaiming custody of any nuclear weapons would be a priority for our
troops. If a holding operation in the nations center was successful, we
would probably then seek to establish order in the parts of Pakistan where
extremists operate. Beyond propping up the state, this would benefit
American efforts in Afghanistan by depriving terrorists of the sanctuaries
they have long enjoyed in Pakistans tribal and frontier regions.
The great paradox of the post-Cold War world is that we are
both safer, day by day, and in greater peril than before. There was a time
when volatility in places like Pakistan was mostly a humanitarian worry;
today it is as much a threat to our basic security as Soviet tanks once were.
We must be militarily and diplomatically prepared to keep ourselves safe in
such a world. Pakistan may be the next big test.
The News feared: Whereas the Pakistan Foreign Office has firmly
refuted the assertions regarding any threat to the countrys nuclear assets,
and described the series of possibilities drawn up for an unstable Pakistan
by Fredrick Kagan In the eyes of Pakistans people, this is already
challenged by the fact that Washington is perceived as playing a key-role in

850

decision-making within Pakistan, especially in matters related to war on

terror.
While this belief may not be rooted in reality, the problem is that the
views and opinions of people often matter more than hard facts. In this
context, the latest remarks from Washington, and the suggestions that it may
become necessary to seize Pakistans nuclear assets, will obviously add to
the doubts and suspicions that exist.
Such a situation must not be permitted to linger. Pakistans leaders
need to show their people that they are in control of the nations destiny, and
not anyone sitting elsewhere in the world. To achieve this, it is necessary in
the first place to convince the people of Pakistan that the war against
terrorism is being fought on their behalf, on not to serve the interests of
any foreign power.
With elections now just over a month away, there is also a need for
the main political parties taking part in the contest to lay out their policies
regarding the US. The question of Pakistans relations with that country, tied
in with the matter of Washingtons blatantly unjust policies in the Middle
Easthave emerged as concerns for more and more among Pakistans
citizens. For this reason, all the players in Pakistans political affairs need
to spell out what their policy will be and how they intend to handle an
increasingly strident Washington. With the latest developments only
adding to the sense of threat that already exists.
Siren M Malaria talked about Ms Bhutto and Pakistans nuclear issue.
The regular periodic attacks on our nuclear assets safety should not be
treated lightly by Pakistan since we now have reports of the US military
trying to put in place plans to take out these assts. We may simply shrug off
such absurdities, but the US has a tendency of operational zing the
bizarre and absurd with no consideration for the consequences and
chaos that will follow.
Pakistans tragedy is that its own elite also use the nuclear issue
to try and prop themselves politically with foreign masters. So we have
had Ms Bhutto declaring her intent of handing over Dr Khan to the IAEA
(read the US) and most recently her dire warning that our major nuclear
facility at Kahoka could fall into extremists hands. All this of course is
being done to play to the US gallery.

851

As if to say that after 60 years of being our nation is still so fragile

that it will simply fall apart if true political change and democracy come
about! Shame on all amongst us, who propagate themselves on such wickets,
when they should know that this is a resilient and vibrant nation with a
newly-rebolstered civil society. It is also tragic to see how after decades of
struggling against all odds to acquire our nuclear capability, our elite are
ever ready to undermine our nuclear assets credibility for their own political
ends.
M Shahid Rafique from Hujra Shah Muqeem wrote: Militancy and
fundamentalism have shaken the very foundation of the society. Increasing
suicide attacks and war-like situation in the Tribal Areas and in Swat, once a
hub of tourists, are actually the outcome of anti-American sentiments and
Pakistans role in the war against terrorism.
A country should not extend support to an international cause to such
an extent that its own sovereignty is endangered. The refrain of do more
by USA will push Pakistan into precarious situation. Enough is enough.
Pakistan should now focus on putting its own house in order by establishing
its writ in the region.

EASTERN FRONT
Seeing that nothing positive was happening in the context of
composite dialogue, Musharraf regime allowed cotton import from India on
12th December. Apart from this solitary confidence building measure all that
happened in the last two month was negative to confidence building.
Serial bombings in courts in Uttar Pardesh on 23 rd November killed 16
and wounding 80 people; angry crowds shouted anti-Pakistan slogans.
On 6th December, Hindu-Muslim riots erupted on anniversary of
demolition of Babri Mosque.
Pakistan test-fired Hatf-VII cruise missile on 11th December.
Musharraf boasted that Pakistans missile plan was ahead of enemys.
Two days later, India carried out successful test of Akash Missile;
another on 14th; one more on 15th; and yet another on 19th December.

852

Perpetration of state terrorism in the occupied Kashmir continued

unchecked. Following atrocious acts by occupation forces and retaliation
from Kashmiris were reported during the period:
Two fighter and four soldiers including an officer were killed in a
clash on 9th November. Two days later, Indian troops looted valuables
and damaged houses in Pattan area.
On 13th November, 20 Kashmiris were injured when police opened
fire on protesters in Sopore.
Next day, Indian troops killed two Kashmiri youths. Residents of
Lolab area spent sleepless nights guarding their properties after
security personnel were caught setting them ablaze. APP reported that
96 industrial units were under occupation of Indian troops.
Indian troops martyred eleven Kashmiris on 16 th November. Two days
later, Indian troops killed a poor baker in Kulgam on 18 th November,
APHC demanded a probe. Geelani accused occupation forces of
massacring Kashmiris for medals.
Police arrested a commander of Hizbollah on 20 th November. Protest
rally was held in Kishtwar over beating of an Imam.
Indian troops killed a boy in custody on 27th November. Two days
later, Indian troops killed two Kashmiri youths.
Occupation forces arrested a dozen Kashmiris protesting on Human
Rights Day on 10th December.
Several people were injured on 16th December when police used force
against Kashmiris protesting killing of a youth in the town of Magam.
Hizb banned grenade attacks in IHK.
Three militants, including Mudasir Ahmed, were killed by Indian
troops on 25th December in a mosque in Kanjikula area. At least 642
Kashmiris were slain in 2007.
The analysts generally lost interest in commenting on the core issue
after having observed that Musharraf regime has voluntarily surrendered it

853

to India. They wisely avoided analyzing an issue which had reached a defacto settlement.

HOME FRONT
Insurgency in Baluchistan kept simmering. Following incidents of
insurgency and counter-insurgency were reported during the period:
Militants attacked a post of security forces near Dera Bugti on 11th
November. Next day, a policeman was injured and three vehicles
damaged in an explosion in Quetta.
Police officer was among three killed in two incidents in Quetta and
Qila Abdullah on 17th November; four others were wounded. Gas
pipeline was blown up near Sibi.
Balach Marri was killed in Afghanistan on 20th November by the
NATO forces who mistook his party as Taliban. Riots broke out in
Quetta, Khuzdar and Nauski on receipt of the news in which four
people were killed.
Five people, including two policemen, were wounded on 22nd
November in six blasts across Baluchistan in the wake of Balachs
killing. Next day, 3 policemen were shot dead and two wounded in
various incidents in Quetta.
A policeman was shot dead and two other wounded in Quetta on 24 th
November. Akbar Bugtis grandson, Brahamdagh denied any role in
Balachs killing.
One person was killed and eight wounded in rocket and hand grenade
attack in Quetta on 25th November. Two days later, blasts rocked four
cities of Baluchistan.
On 28th November, three FC men were killed and five wounded in an
ambush in Panjgur area; two miscreants were also killed.

854

 One FC man was shot dead and a constable was wounded in Quetta
on 4th December. Two days later, another FC soldier was killed and
four wounded in roadside bombing in Dera Bugti.
One person was killed in landmine blast in Dera Bugti on 10 th
December. Mastung-Kalat gas pipeline was blown up.
DSP and two policemen were killed on 12 th December in Gwadar and
Quetta respectively. Rockets were fired at check posts in Kohlu and
Kahan.
Next day, two suicide bombers attacked two check posts in Quetta
killing five soldiers and wounding 22 others. Police arrested two
suspects and seized cache of arms in Bugti tribes area.
A boy was killed and ten people were injured in bomb and mine blasts
in Quetta on 17th December. Four days later, gas pipeline was blown
up in Dera Bugti area.
At least seven people, including two women, were killed in an
operation in Lundi area of Dera Bugti on 22nd December.
On 26th December, blasts rocked Khuzdar and Mastung. Next day,
four Bugti tribesmen were killed in an ambush Sui area.
The Nation wrote after the killing of Balach Murri. The strong
reaction against Mir Balachs killing indicates that the Baloch Sardars
whom General Musharraf often blames for stoking separatist sentiments
among their people have not entirely lost their appeal. They still command
immense respect among the younger nationalist leadership.
Those in authority will have to be sensitive to the genuine demands
of the local people, rather trying to quell the insurgency merely through
force alone. It is time to give up the gung-ho approach lest the continuing
repression should persuade a predominantly pro-federation people to
support elements seeking other serious alternatives, including Baluchistans
separation.
On the ideological front, Musharraf had unleashed the wrath of
Enlightened Moderates against obscurantist forces, but the calm prevailed
during the period. However, echoes of Lal Masjid were heard. On 30 th
855

November, cases were registered against Imam of Lal Masjid and two other
Imams were registered for misuse of loudspeakers.
On 4th December, hearing of cases against Maulana Adbul Aziz was
adjourned till December 17. Two weeks later, hearing of governments plea
for bails cancellation in Lal Masjid Case was adjourned. On 5 th January,
hearing was adjourned till 28th January.

CONCLUSION
Pakistan kept sinking deeper and deeper into the quagmire of
Americas war on terror. All this happened because of the man who was
prepared to do anything for the Crusaders and in return allow him to hang
onto the power. Pakistans recovery from the turmoil cannot be possible as
long as Musharraf is at the helm of affairs and major change in the policy
after his departure.
India, however, would love to see Musharraf perpetuating his rule in
Pakistan; because the brave commando has rendered commendable services
for India in helping it in consolidating in occupation of Kashmir. Therefore,
New Delhi will go along with the strategy pursued by Washington.
At home, Musharraf has turned everything so topsy-turvy that he
himself has forgotten his own rhetoric of soft image, enlightened
moderation, and even Pakistan First. The nation might find solution to its
problems through the forthcoming elections or things might turn even worse.
30th January 2008

SHE ASKED FOR IT - II

856

Zardari and other leaders of the PPP, despite under shock and grief
after the assassination of their popular leader, did not miss the opportunity to
gain political mileage from the sympathy wave. But acts of its angry
workers cast negative effects and were, thereby, neutralizing the efforts of
their leaders.
The PML-Q, which considers itself a political force equivalent of the
PPP, tried to capitalize on Jiyalas acts of violence and rioting. In doing that,
the Chaudrys touched the wrong cords by trying to play the so-called Punjab
Card. It was because of the tendency to play this or that card that Ghulam
Mustafa Khar warned that Benazirs murder could be a threat to federation.
The observers kept stretching their imagination about the possible
killers of Benazir as more information poured in. PPP rejected Scotland Yard
probe and wanted UN commission. The US Embassy in Islamabad was
constrained to clarify that the reports connecting Washington to an
international conspiracy behind Benazirs assassination were completely
outrageous and unfounded.

EVENTS
On 2nd January, Musharraf addressed the nation on media to tell that
Scotland Yard would help in probing the murder; commission would
investigate looting; army would be deployed during polls; and last but not
the least he exclaimed Benazirs mission is my mission.
Election Commission delayed polls till February 18. Parties decided to
contest polls; PPP however, resented the postponement. US saw no need for
UN investigation. France and EU offered help in probe. Zardari insisted on
probe by UN. Lawyers protested killing of Benazir. A bench headed by the
PCO chief justice while hearing the case of suspension of administration and
police officials ordered the department concerned to settle the issue.
Agencies were not involved in BBs murder, said Musharraf on 3 rd
January. He added that he did not belong to a family that believed in killing
people. PPP rejected Scotland Yard probe and wanted UN commission.
British Envoy was not allowed to meet Aitzaz.
A video released by TV channels added new mysteries to the murder.
The film showed one of her servants on the stage indulging in strange antics
857

every now and then. After the speech he was the first to jump into her land
cruiser; usually he sat in the second vehicle. Pervaiz Elahi said Zardari
should not be allowed to leave the country till finalization of probe into
murder of his spouse.
Eight-member Scotland Yard team arrived on 4th January and met
local investigators. France told PPP that UN probe was not possible.
Reportedly, UAE had forewarned Benazir of suicide attack. Trains started
arriving Rawalpindi from Karachi after the murder of Benazir. Commission
was set up to assess damage in the wake of Benazirs killing. Bush renewed
support to Musharraf.
Scotland Yard team visited the crime scene on 5th January. Musharraf
said that UK detectives have been given free hand. He blamed Benazir for
exposing herself to danger. His spokesperson said blame game wont help
anyone. Babar Awan said tribesmen were not involved in assassination. He
termed killing a well-hatched conspiracy to pit people of settled areas
against tribesmen. Zardari wanted his spouses killers, in and outside the
government, to be held accountable.
Rehman Malik answered the questions raised about his absence. He
said he was Benazirs security adviser not CSO. Some ministers in interim
cabinet supported elections under national government. Time magazine
spoke ill of Pakistan Army and politicians. Next day, Shaukat Aziz left
Pakistan with no plans to come back.
On 7th January, Nawaz Sharif blamed Q-League for provoking Sindh
anger. Pervaiz Elahi held PPP and PML-N responsible for unrest in Sindh.
Next day, Musharraf discussed situation in Sindh with Altaf Bhai. He also
met Scotland Yard team on 8th January and vowed getting to the bottom of
Benazirs killing. He pledged to punish the killers. EU observers found the
evidence about rigging. Bilawal said Pakistans integrity hinged on fair
elections.
On 9th January, rumours were abuzz about murder of Fazlur Rahman.
PPP asked US to help ensure free polls. Rabbani feared arrest of PPP
workers to rig polls. US Senator linked Pakistans unity to fair polls. Next
day, the US Embassy in Islamabad termed the reports connecting
Washington to an international conspiracy behind Benazirs assassination
completely outrageous and unfounded amid fresh revelations that the slain
leader had established indirect contacts with Dr A Q Khan and Lt Gen
858

Hamid Gul shortly before his death. Zardari asked Musharraf regime to seek
UN probe. Musharraf pledged not to allow agitation during elections.
Presidents aide was likely to meet PML-N President on 11th January.
Musharraf said he would quit if threatened with impeachment. MI-5 and
Scotland Yard were tasked to protect Bilawal in UK. Army was sent to 35
sensitive districts.

VIEWS
The people continued paying tributes to the slain leader. Ghazala
Minallah in her letter to Benazir wrote: My dearest Bibi, you and your
family have suffered for the sake of this country more than your fair share. I
was told by someone close to you that you had spoken of a sniper and that
you knew they were out to get you one way or the other.
Yet you carried on, saying as always that you were ready to sacrifice
your life for the sake of this country. It was this very bravery which led to
your untimely death on that fateful day, when you stood up to wave to a
supporter and offered yourself as an easy target to the waiting sniper.
Amjad Khan Tanolli from Mansehra opined: Another voice that
stood for democracy and rule of law is silenced One man with ambition
to remain in power has made a mockery of the judiciary and democracy and
thrown the nation in the path of extremism and terrorism. Of course, it has
been the practice of the present ruler to blame others for every undesirable
thing, although it is the dictator who has made a mess of this unfortunate
nation.
In another letter Tanolli regretted the violence perpetrated by angry
workers of PPP. At a time when our nation is plunged into a great crisis, I
request both the electronic and the print media to ask the agitating masses
not to attack public property such as hospitals, trains, fuel stations and public
and private transport facilities. It will cost billions of rupees to compensate
for the losses.
The people should know that the public property does not belong to
those who are directly or indirectly responsible for the death of Ms Bhutto.
The murder of Ms Bhutto is aimed at destabilizing the country by creating a

859

situation in which miscreants can materialize their nefarious designs. By

committing acts of vandalism, are we strengthening those who actually
killed Ms Bhutto?
Shahida Achakzai from Islamabad commented: After her gruesome
murder, angry mobs wreaked havoc throughout the country, setting ablaze
banks, shops, railway stations and private vehicles. They damaged public
and private property all across Pakistan in a fit of anger. In the wake of this
great tragedy, political parties of all hues tried to exploit the sentiments
of the masses in their own favour.
I appeal to all Pakistanis, especially the political leaders, to exercise
restraint, calm and patience to honour the memory and legacy of the slain
Ms Bhutto whose death has created a political vacuum that couldnt be filled
for a long time. May Allah keep her in eternal peace and grant the bereaved
family the fortitude and courage to bear this tragedy.
Asad Ahmed from London opined: Benazir Bhuttos murder best
describes the state of safety and security in todays Pakistan. The Liaqat
Bagh tragedy could have been averted had the government devised a
foolproof security plan for Benazir Bhutto. Blaming others will not help
as there were many apparent flaws in the governments security plan for the
PPP rally.
After the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, violence erupted across the
country and damaged public and private property enormously. Scores of
people were killed and life in the country remained paralyzed for many days.
Law-enforcement agencies couldnt stop troublemakers when they
created a law and order situation.
The issue of succession of Benazir was also commented upon. Dr
Irfan Zafar from Islamabad wrote: With due respect, had Ms Bhutto
directed her party to democratically elect her successor in case she was
assassinated, instead of nominating her own family member as party
chairman, democratic principles would have been upheld. As for the Bhutto
name, the real heirs of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto are the children of Mir
Murtaza Bhutto. Changing ones surname from Zardari to Bhutto Zardari
will surely not change ones true identity.
Sajid M Ansari from Lahore observed: The will of the slain leader
seems to be controversial as Mr Zardari refused to make it public. Secondly,

860

the late leader struggled hard during her lifetime to bring democracy in the
country so how could she nominate her successor through her will; a
practice which is contrary to all democratic norms?
Col Riaz Jafri from Rawalpindi wrote: I have no idea whether the
PPP constitution allowed Ms Bhutto to nominate anyone to succeed her, and
then, in turn, for the successor to nominate another successor. From Bilawal
Zardari the young man promptly became Bilawal Bhutto Zardari for his
claim to the Bhutto heritage to be strengthened, lest Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Jr
the actual heir apparent to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, lays claim to the party
throne.
Ms Bhutto never tired of claiming to be the greatest champion of
democracy, as long as it didnt extend to her own party. She not only stuck
religiously to this brand of democracy to the last, but even beyond her
life. What is not clear is whether the crown has passed to the 19-year-old
Bilawal for life, or is there a remote possibility of ordinary members of the
Peoples Party ever being able to elect someone to be chairperson?
Nadir from Rawalpindi opined: The appointment of Bilawal Bhutto
Zardari as chairman of the PPP reflects the undemocratic culture of the
party. It would have been better had the PPPs top leadership appointed a
senior party member as their chairperson. It seems that the eligibility for
becoming PPP chairperson is that one should have the suffix Bhutto in
his/her name.
This indicates that its all a family affair and no matter how loyal and
dedicated one may be, he or she cannot be the head of the party. I feel sorry
for entire top leadership of the PPP who are no better than mere puppets. I
wonder what will be the fate of the country if its ruled by a party with a
co-chairman like Zardari. Previously, he was Mr 10 percent; now he will
become Mr 30 percent due to price hike.
Sajid M Ansari from Islamabad wrote: According to Asif Ali Zardari,
he was nominated as chairman of the PPP by the late Benazir Bhutto in her
will. The will of Benazir Bhutto appears to be dubious as Mr Zardari refused
to make it public in the first press conference after the murder of Benazir
Bhutto. The late PPP chairperson cried out for democracy throughout her
life. Why did she nominate her successor in the party as opposed to the
democratic norms? It shows that there was no democracy within the party.
Since the party chairmanship has been given to the family members as an
861

ancestral property, it raises doubts if the PPP is able to run the country
democratically.
The murder was also seen in its possible effects on the forthcoming
elections. Adnan Gill from USA observed: One could be critical of the way
she twice ran her governments, but her invaluable services in strengthening
democracy in Pakistan are undeniable. She proved her resolve by
courageously standing her ground during two military dictatorships. Had
she survived the attack, she would have swept the January 8 general
elections
Ayesha Haroon opined: The PPP and the PML-N have started a
discourse in the country where the status quo is being questioned. Benazirs
killing could be an attempt to frighten that questioning into silence. How
the new PPP leadership acts in the days to come, will show us which way
they want to take the discourse. Whatever the pressures of realpolitik and
ground-reality, they cannot ignore the ground swell and hope of the people
for they are many.
B A Malik from Islamabad said: The opposition should not take part
in the elections being held under Pervez Musharraf who is the de facto
patron of the Kings party. Fair elections are not possible in the presence of a
controversial president. Participation in the elections under the
presidency of Mr Musharraf is against the supreme sacrifice rendered
by the most popular leader of Pakistan. Benazir Bhutto was not just the
leader of Pakistan but also a prominent stateswoman known in the entire
democratic world. The only solution to the current crisis harnessed by the
military regime is the exit of Mr Musharraf and the armed forces from
politics.
Mubashir Jamil from Rawalpindi urged: After Benazir Bhuttos
assassination, our political leaders should adopt new and innovative
methods of running their campaigns by effectively using the electronic
and print media. They can use numerous private TV channels to convey their
points of view and plans. They could utilize the print media for the
publication of their manifestos. At the same time, they should distribute
pamphlets and flyers. Such campaigns will prove to be more comprehensive
and a larger number of people will benefit from them.
Regimes responsibilities in the context Benazirs security and after
the murder were also brought under the spotlight. Sheeba Ajmal from
862

Peshawar said: I guess the only thing the interior ministry is good at is
doing press conferences and making nonsensical cover-up stories. One
cant remember a single instance when the interior ministry had come up
with something logical in the aftermath of the assassination of Benazir
The alleged audio tape of Baitullah Mehsud released by the
interior ministry seems like a cruel joke. If the ministry was so efficient
that it caught the telephonic conversation of an absconding militant, why
hasnt it captured him despite knowing his whereabouts? As for the video
clipping shown on different TV channels of the attack and subsequent bomb
blast of Dec 27, one wonders how the two alleged attackers managed to get
so close the Ms Bhuttos vehicle.
B A Malik from Islamabad argued: President Musharraf must take
responsibility for the targeted murder of Benazir Bhutto, and resign.
Meanwhile, the PPP should call an all-parties conference to formulate a
joint strategy to save Pakistan from imminent disintegration. Benazir Bhutto
was the only leader who could hold the fragile federation together.
Dr Furqan Ahmad Khan from Rawalpindi talked of interior ministrys
intriguing claims. It goes without saying that what happened on December
27 was immensely sad. But sadder was the shameful way our interior
ministry handled this matter. In its press conferences following the tragic
murder of Benazir Bhutto it presented concocted cover-up stories to blur the
evidence behind the untimely death of the national leader
Prof Dr Musadiq Khan is a competent vascular surgeon. He initially
said the cause of her death was a bullet injury. Then, it seems, the
government or security agencies pressurized him to change his medical
report. Only God knows why the interior ministry deviously insists on the
absence of any bullet wound in the late leaders head. If facts are being
twisted to suit the government then we should stop looking forward to any
meaningful investigations into the assassination of Ms Bhutto.
Gul Zaman from Paris wrote: The misleading statements of interior
ministry spokesmanfurther complicated the situation. The retired brigadier
seems to be totally incompetent to do this job. Given that he couldnt handle
the tamed local media, he would certainly have made the mess in front of the
foreign media persons. The fact that the crime scene was washed down
within hours needs explanation. It depicts the incompetence of the regime,

863

which has become one of its distinct characteristics. It is an attempt on the

Governments part to hide the real facts.
Nasir Kamal Yousafzai from Mardan opined: What happened on
December 27 is a matter of great concern. Killing a national political leader
is equal to slaughtering the entire nation. The entire world has condemned
the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. It appears that the government has
completely failed to control the anti-state activities of the miscreants.
Nasir Hafeez from Karachi observed: Since the assassination of
Benazir Bhutto on Dec 27, the government has been creating confusion
about the real cause of her death. First it said that bullet wounds caused
her death. Then it said a piece of shrapnel killed her. Later Mr Cheema of the
interior ministry told us that Ms Bhutto hit her head on the lever of her
vehicles sunroof.
Afterwards the PPP informed the government that the sunroofs lever
had rubber around it which couldnt kill anyone. After that the regime
thought it prudent to apologize and disown Cheemas baseless claims.
Actually Cheema said what he was directed to say, as the people know
who calls the shots in the country. Had the footage of the heinous crime
not been made available, the government would never have acknowledged
the presence of the sharp-shooter at the crime scene.
Saira Bano from Peshawar wrote: The government must be
congratulated for successfully finding the cause of Benazir Bhuttos
assassination, after putting forward many theories like: a heart attack,
concussion, no firing of a bullet. Then of Thursday the President declared
that she was herself responsible for her death, because she ignored the
threat to her security.
Iftikhar from Karachi opined: The assassination of Mohtarma
Benazir Bhutto has left many unanswered questions for the government and
the people of Pakistan. The investigation team has not provided any
adequate evidence regarding the assassination so far. Sometimes it says
the real cause of her death was her striking her head against her vehicles
sunroof. But since the lever was covered with rubber, how was it possible
for it to be the cause of her death?
Dr Irfan Zafar from Islamabad observed: As if the sight of the fire
brigade trucks washing away any traces a forensic evidence were not

864

enough, Brig Javed Iqbal Cheema, the spokesman for the ministry on
interior, came up with a medical report that Ms Benazir Bhutto did not die of
bullet wounds but was hit by the lever of the sunroof of her vehicle. This is
contrary to the statements made by the doctors of the hospital. They
informed the people present on the spot that she died of bullet wounds.
According to the interior ministry spokesman, an al-Qaeda operative
belonging to Baitullah Mehsuds group was responsible for this incident
with a supporting Pashto intercept presented to the media as proof. To start
with, it is really surprising that the supposed mastermind of this attack did
not even know the names of the people who were deputed to carry out
the assassination. It is even more astonishing that if the conversation of the
al-Qaeda operatives was intercepted then, because of the technology
available these days, it was just a matter of hours for the speakers to be
located.
Hats off to al-Qaeda, they are using such detailed discussions on
normal voice lines without using coded words. Had this been the level of alQaedas means of communications, Osama bin Laden and his accomplices
would have been caught and would have been in Adiala jail or in the
Guantanamo Bay detention camp for years. At this time of mourning, the
best thing the government can do is to remain transparent in its
statements for the establishment of its credibility instead of making false
assumptions and reaching amusing conclusions.
Ilyas Mohsin from Islamabad wrote: A team from Scotland Yard has
landed in Islamabad to help dig out the truth about the assassination of Ms
Bhutto. It faces a daunting challenge as the evidence has already been
badly compromised by those in power. Even the FIR was not invited from
the aggrieved party.
Then there are reports from the doctors who handled the case that
they were under pressure from the regime. Thus the nature of the
complaint, the gross tampering with the evidence and the vicious
interference in the working of the doctors point out to the malicious intent
of the regime
Fair investigation is possible when the executive is impartial and
the judiciary functions independently and in good faith. Unfortunately,
both these factors are missing in todays Pakistan. One wishes the Scotland
Yard team good luck which it will need because of the prevailing ground
865

realities. Justice can never be done unless and until the state is on its side
and against it.
Aziz Narejo from USA talked of foreign interference. US
Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W Patterson and British High Commissioner
Robert Brinkeley were very active until a few days ago and were seen
calling on Benazir Bhutto and other Pakistani politicians frequently and
pressing them to participate in the dubious election process. Why are all of
them silent now after Ms Bhuttos martyrdom? We dont expect them to
urge Musharraf to quit and hand over power to the people of Pakistan but
they can at least ask the UN to hold an investigation into the assassination.
S A Arslan from Lahore pointed out the damage caused to the army.
The ego of one man is inflicting immense pain on the nation and causing
colossal economic damage. He is mercilessly destroying institutions and
bringing the integrity of the army into question. If it is a crime to spread
hatred against the army, then this one man has defamed the institution more
than the 160 million people of Pakistan could ever do.
Misbah Azam from USA talked of hope or despair scenario for the
PPP. With Bilawal Bhutto Zardari as its chairperson and Asif Ali Zardari as
its co-chairperson there is hope that at least in the short run the party will
stay united and the election campaign will go on amid a wave of sympathy
for the PPP. However will the party still stay intact if the PPP wins the
elections and someone outside the Bhutto family becomes prime
minister.
Farrukh Shahzad from Islamabad condemned treatment meted out to
Aitzaz. The recent maltreatment of the Supreme Court Bar Association
president Aitzaz Ahsan at the hands of the law-enforcement agencies is a
shameful and despicable act. He was arrested at gunpoint as if he were a
terrorist or absconder. He was then exposed to ice-cold winds for hours after
which he caught fever. Such things clearly indicate the mindset of the
dictatorial regime that wants to cling on to power at any cost. The regime
wants to curb the lawyers movement by using mean tactics
The use of brutal force cannot improve the situation. Rather, it
will widen the existing fissures between the masses and the state authorities.
Instead of digging ditches, we need to build bridges to better the political
situation in Pakistan. The current crisis can be overcome by ensuring
democracy, reinstatement of the sacked judges and rule of law. Without this
866

it seems impossible to bring harmony, peace and tolerance in Pakistan. Our

rulers must shun the politics of hatred to save the country from anarchy.
Political analysts and media wizards also continued paying tributes
to Benazir. Nasim Zehra termed her martyr (murder) of democracy. While
in office, operating within a context that accentuates and not rein in personal
weaknesses, Benazir Bhutto, like Nawaz Sharif, was a flawed prime
minister.
Yet, there was the novelty and charm of Benazir that withstood
the pressure of all her other weaknesses. She was intelligent, articulate
and courageous. The first ever Muslim woman prime minister, Benazir
functioned within the space that the establishment allowed her with
confidence and determination.
Pakistans historians have detailed the negative effect of battles
between the establishment and popular politics fought through Benazir and
Nawaz Sharifs periods. Benazirs second term in office too, like Nawaz
Sharifs, was a combination of some achievements, some battling and some
blunders. The shadow of establishment forever hovered over the elected
politicians with propaganda machines exaggerating their follies and
squeezing their constitutionally-granted space for action. The quality of
some cronies who hovered around her was often no different from what
generals and others in power accumulated around them.
Benazirs legacy of popular democratic politics, a counterpoint to
the establishment politics, is a national legacy and not just a party legacy.
After 70 days of her unparallel politics of courage and of conviction, leading
from the front. Saying what was right; that the military must be back in the
barracks In her last rally at Liaqat Bagh, much in her fathers mode she
had uttered: Your country and my country is at risk. This government cannot
handle this. We will defend it.
It is not for the PPP alone to appropriate Benazirs legacy. She leaves
behind a national legacy, the legacy of courageous no-holds barred struggle
for democracy. Her last 70 days in politics will go down as the golden period
of Pakistans democratic struggle.
It was the best that Pakistan had seen of genuine politics. A brave
woman undeterred by the repeated threats of death walked, without the
crutches of the establishment, of the Americans and of manipulative politics,

867

onto Pakistans deadly political stage to render the ultimate sacrifice. She
sacrificed her life for her homeland. Benazir did not shy away from what
was clearly her calling
In her death Benazir, has become many things to many people.
For millions she is the queen of hearts, Pakistans version of a Lady Diana.
For millions fighting for a democratic Pakistan she is the inspiration. For a
Pakistan starving to break away from a quasi-military vice-regal setup,
Benazir is the unrelenting fighter.
Hassan Abbas wrote: Pakistans history is full of cover-ups and
Bhuttos murder is proving to be no different. Innumerable acts of
violence creating choreographed instability in the country, abrupt dismissals
of various governments and assassinations of many political and military
leaders remain uninvestigated, or unresolved and shrouded in mystery.
Circumstantial evidence suggests that, since mid-November, some
hardliner and extremist elements within the Musharraf camp have been
saying Bhutto was pursuing an American agenda to topple Pakistans
army and get rid of the nukes a conspiracy theory. Some Pakistani
journalists and analysts closely aligned with Musharraf started
producing news analysis to this effect soon afterwards. Intriguingly, a
video clip was also telecast from some media outfits on November 29
showing that Islamabad police had confiscated a vehicle in the capital city
with around two-dozen American M 16 and Iseali Uzi guns. Clearly this was
an attempt to suggest that the US and Israel were planning to create violence
in the country
Statements made by Bhutto which were critical of the role played by
Dr A Q Khan in nuclear proliferation were also hyped by government media
managers. Despite all these manipulations and disinformation, her political
campaign continued to gain momentum. At this point (about mid-December)
Musharraf started to make statements challenging Benazirs support
base and refused to accept her demands regarding election matters and
provision of adequate security to her
The PPP has a huge task ahead under the new leadership of Benazirs
19-year-old son Bilawal and his father Asif Zardari a combination of youth
and experience guided by the Bhutto legacy. However, it is quite likely that
the party will sweep the coming elections, whether held on January 8 or
a bit later, benefiting from an additional sympathy vote all across the
868

country. Such an eventuality, if uninterrupted by the military establishment,

will give Pakistan another chance to be rescued. Musharraf on the other hand
is becoming increasingly irrelevant and there is a growing possibility that
military leadership will distance itself from him and return to its professional
job and regain peoples confidence.
M B Naqvi observed: It appears Benazir Bhutto fell to an assassins
bullets and or the bomb blast meant for her. Passing away of a charismatic
leader is always tragic and an unwelcome surprise. It always leaves behind a
trail of bitterness. Even so this was exceptionally so. What the country has
to grapple with its consequences that may become trends.
Large numbers have gone on to protest and express an anger that has
a long history. Superficially it may look like a sudden explosion of pent
up emotions. The kind of disturbances that have followed and the loss of
life and property have been involved is troubling. Certain conclusions
follow.
It is rather sudden that otherwise law-abiding people have become
rowdy in expressing their anger, vandals or even occasionally killers, shows
the feelings had been pent up for long and people needed an occasion to
explode. They want a change. Not knowing how to proceed or achieve what
they vaguely wish to achieve, on the one hand, and on the other, the
inadequacy of national leadership government, political parties and other
leaders of opinion underlines a dangerous all around confusion while too
many interests are contending the supremacy
Insistent question is what should be done in todays political crisis.
The year 2007 has seen one crisis after another. The world press informs us
that authority and power of Gen Pervez Musharraf is oozing out of him.
But the observed fact is that his hold on governance is still complete with
America, conservative Arab kings and NATO powers backing him; he
remains a force who is suppressing the civil society and sacked an assertive
judiciary, presiding over tumultuous events of the last few months with
bomb blasts and suicide bombings in political gatherings The way he acts
will make or mar the future for Pakistan.
Without much ado, it has to be asserted that after him their will be a
deluge He should transfer effective governance to a national government
formed after an All Parties Conference like the one called by Ayub Khan in
1969 Postponement of Jan 8 elections is anyhow necessary. Best
869

course is to evolve a broad consensus over initial reforms but restoration of

pre-Nov 3, 2007 situation in respect of judiciary and media is the necessary
first step the ugly ducklings left behind the emergency and PCO need to be
buried here and now.
Saad Sayeed discussed Benazirs legacy. The woman once heralded
as the saviour of Pakistan, later enshrouded in allegations of corruption, and
promoted strongly by the US had finally met her marker. It seemed that a
third term was a simple negotiation away for Benazir. When that became
doubtful, her populist rhetoric became as vociferous as ever. Her
promises to deliver a country for the people grew louder with every passing
day.
Benazirs death has sparked conversations about the
effectiveness of her successor and the partys future. The idea of Bilawal
Zardari taking over from his mother and continuing a political dynasty has
its romantic element. After all, drama and politics are the same thing in
Pakistan.
The riots that followed Benazir Bhuttos death were not simply born
of the rage that follows the assassination of a political icon. Her legacy in
politics does not go beyond the fact that she was the first and only
woman prime minister the country has had. The reaction had much to do
with the fact that Benazir represented possibilities
Benazir Bhutto leaves a mixed legacy and a party in shambles,
devoid of leadership. She will be mourned, but not by all. And the search
for a political leader who can emancipate the country will continue. One
thing is for certain: there are no heroes in Pakistan, only dreams and
delusions. Perhaps one day we will realize that the future does not lie in the
hands of individual saviours. Then again, maybe we wont.
The issue of succession of party leadership was widely discussed.
Ishtiaq Ahmed commented on Benazirs will. The news that she wrote a
will that made her husband Asif Ali Zardari her successor and thus
chairperson of the PPP induced a depression, from which I have not yet
manage to release myself. There is another version that she has named her
son Bilawal, 19, as her successor, but her husband will play that role on his
behalf until Bilawal is ready to take over. Even this makes no sense.

870

If the reports published in the newspapers are to be believed; only

portions of the will related to the PPP were read out by Zardari. The
argument given for not sharing the whole text with the PPP central
committee was that it contained personal matters, especially those relating to
the distribution of property.
Zardari, it is reported, was surprised that he and not their son
Bilawal had been nominated as her political successor. He acted wisely,
and instead declared Bilawal the successor while he will be the regent until
Bilawal is ready to take up the responsibility of lifelong chairperson of the
PPP. Bilawal will now be called Bilawal Bhutto Zardari...
One can even wonder if she did this in the best interest of her
party or to reward Zardari for something that we will never know. She
won great sympathy when her assassination took place But I also noticed
thatpeople were completely bewildered when they learnt that she had
declared the PPP an exclusive preserve of her immediate family. It should
not be surprising if a similar reaction takes place in Pakistan at some stage.
The PPP can only survive in the 21 st century as a mass party of the
poor that upholds democracy and social justice if it can provide clean and
honest leadership. In the era of globalization and information revolution
abuse of public office will no longer be possible to hide, and in Pakistan the
free press and media have proven their mettle. On the other hand, Bilawal
Bhutto-Zardari has all the right to achieve leadership on merit. For that
he does not need a testament from his mother.
The News wrote: It is sad that perhaps little will remain ordinary
about young Bilawals life from now on. Like the Kashmiri spiritual leader
Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who lost his right to childhood when his father was
killed when he was just 14, Bilawal too, following the unexpected decision
to name him chairperson of the PPP, must now face an almost constant
spotlight, that may swing away from time to time, but will always be ready
to turn once more towards him and his, till now, cloistered life amidst the
dreaming spires of Oxford. One wonders how much Bilawal has indeed been
able to dream, and to think.
Bilawals assertion that he will one day lead the PPP says a great
deal about the party. It is sad that the organization, that through the
decades gave so many such hope and inspired the kind of passion seen both
at the time of the death of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Benazir, should have
871

become little more than a piece of property, a jagir to be handed down

from father to daughter, daughter to son.
By right, the party should belong to the people and its workers
should have the power to determine its affairs and an elected leader
should take it forward One can only hope that Bilawal will heed the
advice pouring in to him, including that contained in an open letter written
by the editors of The Los Angles Times, who call on him to bring democracy
to his party and his country.
But even if this were to happen, it will take time. It will be years
before Bilawal is able to return to any role of leadership. One can only
sympathize with a young man whose every moment, every move will be
watched How he handles this role may eventually decide what kind of
leader he will prove to be when, and if, the day for him to take on the
gigantic task entrusted to him finally comes.
Ayesha Ijaz Khan opined: Her death, a shock and national loss, has
thrust her party into a leadership crisis. With elections around the corner, the
decision could not be postponed till after an appropriate grieving period.
PPP took the least internally controversial but short-term approach. By
designating Bilawal as party chairman, the idea is to cash in on the Bhutto
name and send a message that leadership shall remain within the family. The
decision is not likely to serve the PPP well in the long run.
Democracy is the best revenge, Bilawal said, but it was ironic to hear
it from his mouth, having just inherited party leadership, with referendumlike endorsement from party members but no election-style legitimacy.
Besides, is the politics of revenge what we really need? Been there, seen
that, I thought. Wasnt that what Ms Bhuttos first term as prime minister
was all about? The one that only lasted twenty-odd months and left many
disappointed. Times have changed.
The Qatil League slogan is certainly a catchy one, but it can only
win the PPP one election. Given the uncertain terms of previous civilian
governments, the party must chalk out a long-term strategy grounded in
present realities if it is to wield genuine political influence
Watching the post-assassination PPP press conference, I was left
wondering what exactly the PPP stands for now. How would it
distinguish itself from any of the other partiers on Pakistans political

872

spectrum? Bilawal is unaware. Mr Zardari and Mr Fahim are hardly the soft
face of a liberal Pakistan. The void created by Benazir is difficult to fill. But,
if the PPP is serious about carving out a sustainable future image, it would
have to rely on existing resources rather than attempt to replicate those that
are lost.
Civil liberties have been the focus of Pakistani society all through
2007. Empowerment of the masses by strengthening democratic
institutions, including political parties, is the need of the hour. The PPP
could be a formidable force not just in this election but also future elections
if it used Ms Bhuttos death as a catalyst for change, if it embraced a modern
and professional approach to democracy, if it embarrassed other political
parties by holding internal elections, instead of giving them ammunition by
appointing a child as their chairman.
This is not to say that Bilawal or Bakhtawar, or even Fatima Bhutto,
should be precluded from serving the party and the people of Pakistan in the
future, but only after they have worked their way up and brushed up on their
Urdu A sympathy vote bank on the immortalization of a martyr, but
history treats reformers for more kindly.
Post-murder violence was analyzed and condemned. Huma Yusuf
wrote: On December 27, 2007, while we were fanatically flipping between
television channels, reluctant to accept that Benazir Bhutto had in fact been
assassinated, Kenyans were informed that Mwai Kibaki had been re-elected
as president in what seems to be a shamefacedly rigged election. Since that
fateful date, swathes of Sindh have erupted into flame, stocks have
plummeted, banks have been burnt, Pakistan Railways has been derailed,
and senseless arson and violence have claimed the vehicles, and worse, lives
of many. Meanwhile, according to the Kenyan Red Cross, over 300 Kenyans
have been killed in post-election turmoil
Sadly, the similarities between Pakistan and Kenya do not end
there. In both cases, the fate of a leader has disappointed a nation. Bhuttos
passing has left Pakistan in frenzy, with little understanding of how to
decipher her death or stumble towards a democratic set-up. Kenyans, on the
other hand, have had to see Kibaki stealthe election by resorting to
rigging.
Interestingly, the violence in both countries has been tinged by
ethnic tension. It is telling that while addressing the nation after Bhuttos
873

soyem, her husband Asif Ali Zardari felt the need to remind Sindhis
mourning her death that Punjabi supporters of the PPP many of whom
were trusted bodyguards, hand picked by Zardari himself had died
alongside the Mohtarma. His words urging Sindhis not to blame Punjabis for
the tragedy that had occurred on their soil no doubt helped defuse a looming
ethnic flare-up. In Kenya, too, election violence has ignited longstanding
ethnic rivalries between the Kikuyu and Luo tribes, and many fear that the
pandemonium sparked by polling will lead to civil war.
Corruption, too, taints the worsening situation in both Pakistan
and Kenya. Closer to home, the controversy about Bhuttos cause of death,
the conspiracy theories around the identity of her assassins, and the mangled
official investigation into the incident have enraged PPP supporters and
others who believe that access to justice should not be such an impossibility.
The postponement of the elections and Musharrafs decision to deploy the
army to monitor polling has raised further concerns
The recent spate of violence in both Pakistan and Kenya has
similarly snared the attention of the global community, owing to the
respective geopolitical importance of both countries. Pakistan with its
heightened role in the war on terror, its nuclear stores, its access to the
energy reserves of Central Asia, and its growing Taliban menace, is a
country that no one in the West wants to see further destabilized. For its part,
Kenya has been the model of stability in an otherwise problematic continent,
and no one wants it to become the next African failure.
Perhaps, because of their geopolitical importance, Pakistan and
Kenya have found the West to be complicit in the crises currently
unfolding in both countries. Much has already been written about the
involvement of the US in engineering Bhuttos return; the insistence on
brokering a power-sharing agreement between Musharraf and Bhutto to
create a democratic faade, and the inability to conceive a Plan B. Similarly,
the international powers that had ample warning of Kenyas impending
breakdown
It is clear in the cases of both Pakistan and Kenya that western
powers continued to prop up sham governments because they couldnt
brave the pitfalls of genuine systemic change. They could not contemplate
severing important alliances in the ongoing war on terror, nor were they
willing to wait out the countries gradual shifts towards true democracy.
While remaining hopeful for the chances of its favourite regimes, the
874

international community stalled the democratic process in both Pakistan and

Kenya.
So what can be learnt from the uncanny similarities that have
emerged in the wake of election-related violence in Pakistan and Kenya? Are
we to hopelessly conclude that formerly colonized nations entrenched in
the politics of ethnicity and tribalism and susceptible to rampant corruption
are not suited to democracy? In both countries, most of the violence and
destruction of the past week has been perpetrated by those who have
nothing to lose; in other words, those who are disenfranchised, unemployed
and uneducated.
Nasim Zehra opined that Pakistans post-Benazir political context
continues to demand wisdom and statesmanship. Yet the Musharraf
regime and many among those vying for power remain lacking in both. Of
the multiple challenges we are confronted with, there are five that will affect
the pace of Pakistans journey towards constitutional democracy.
One, the holding of the elections. Indeed the only way forward and
out of the current crisis of confidence in the State and the regime is the
return to a democratic process. The return of a genuinely representative
parliament will initiate the much needed process of dialogue between
Pakistans many contesting groups.
Two, the fairness of the February 2008 elections is crucial. Unfair
elections will only augment the problems. The makeup of the caretaker
government and the complete failure of the Musharraf regime to emerge as a
bipartisan player raise unending questions about the fairness of the February
elections.
Three, the manner in which Islamabad and the Sindh
bureaucracy handles the fallout in Sindh. This is key to even the holding
of elections. If the regime and none other than the president himself,
continue to talk irresponsibly and unwisely on Benazirs assassination, the
causes of the assassination and are seen to be partisan towards the Kings
Party, the PML-Q, the post-election phase will be fraught with turmoil as is
the present
Four, the Musharraf regimes ability to deal with the politicosecurity situation in Swat and in the tribal areas. After four years in the
tribal areas and two months in the Swat region, Islamabads policy appears

875

to be adhoc and reactive. A multifaceted policy, and one that is consistently

followed, seems to be missing.
Five, the extent to which Washington negatively impacts both
State and politics in Pakistan. Caught in its own competitive web of
politics, the Bush Administration and the presidential candidates from the
democratic party are both threatening Pakistan. Bush Administration leaks
are related to sending of forces to the tribal areas while democratic
candidates Hillary Clinton and Obama both want to control Pakistans
nuclear program!
The Musharraf regimes biggest failure has been its inability to
emerge as a trustworthy referee helping to credibly and peacefully
negotiate between competing interest groups within society and politics.
Instead of remaining above the fray, the Musharraf regime jumped into fray
to play a partisan role. With its own survival dependant on the outcome of
ongoing political competitions, the regime could not, and indeed cannot,
remain neutral. Its handling of the Sindh crisis illustrates this.
Ultimately, it is in its role of a partisan referee within and a clumsy
negotiator externally that the Musharraf regime has most gravely
damaged Pakistans institutions and politics. Absence of a clearly
demonstrated neutrality of the regime as a referee has fuelled the reactive
and antagonistic strain already within Pakistans politics. In Pakistan the
biggest crisis is the absence of a credible authority
Despite Pakistan having been burdened with the politico-ideological
baggage of the international anti-Soviet jihad of the eighties, its
experiential wisdom has brought the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis to
the conclusion that the only way forward is rule of law; that while faith
and identity are intrinsic to ones being, the only way for the State to
conduct the affairs of society and politics is the legal and constitutional way.
What has been obvious to Pakistanis for a while is acknowledged by many
within the Washington-led global community only after surveys draw these
conclusions. As for example the latest PEW-USIP survey did when it
concluded that the majority of the Pakistanis want democracy, madrassa
reform, Islam and rule of law.
Burhanuddin Hasan wrote: Soon after Ms Bhutto fell victim to an
assassins bullet in Rawalpindi, the entire country particularly Sindh
plunged into the worst rioting, looting and burning of banks, shops, cars
876

and even trains which crippled life throughout Sindh. According to news
reports 53 people were killed, and 185 bank branches, 40 petrol pumps, 27
railway stations, 72 trains and 802 shops, and many polling offices were
burned down According to an estimate the country suffered a loss of about
1000 billion rupees.
This was the carnage of major proportions, which woefully went
unnoticed by the Sindh government. Armed gangs of ruffians were roaming
the streets of Karachi, Hyderabad and other cities, but Rangers, Police and
all other law enforcing agencies were either absent or stood as silent
spectators and did not take any effective measure to control the mobs which
were playing havoc on the streets.
President Musharraf has set up a commission to investigate and
identify those responsible for incidents of arson and looting, causing loss of
billions of rupees to banks, industry and private property. Well and good, but
one does not need a commission to find out why law enforcing agencies
did not take action as the carnage was taking place and people were
killed and their properties were burnt in front of their eyes.
The News commented on the issue of people being forced to resort to
self-policing in the aftermath of Benazirs murder. The trade and industry
associations of Karachi have proposed their own policing system to avoid
the looting and arson that was witnessed in the aftermath of the killing of
Benazir Bhutto on December 27 and the ensuing law and order situation in
the city. In a press conference held on January 4, they said that they estimate
their losses to be over Rs 20 billion in the looting and violence that was
witnessed in the final week of 2007.
What is more worrisome is that the law business associations have
said that the law enforcing agencies did nothing to protect them when
rioters attacked private businesses, warehouses and industries in different
parts of the city. In many incidents, looters burnt down business
establishments after first stripping them of their merchandize and fittings. In
one unfortunate incident, a factory was burnt down in an industrial area after
it was stripped clean and then set on fire. In this incident, many factory
workers lost their lives as the police looked on helplessly
One can only wonder what is the use of the massive law and order
machinery that is being supported by billions of rupees in taxpayers money
if it doesnt permit people of the countrys commercial and business capital.
877

This was not an isolated situation and the lack of proper police protection
to people could be seen in other cities and towns across the country,
particularly in interior Sindh
What adds insult to injury is the fact that despite acknowledging that
there was a breakdown in law and order in the province, the caretaker
government in Sindh has not held any high official accountable. There
has been no serious attempt to ascertain blame and take officials that have
been negligent to task.
This is a most unfortunate state of affairs and needs to be highlighted.
It is evident that this attitude of brushing everything under the carpet has
meant that the Sindh police and Rangers have repeatedly been underperforming as was evident on three separate days in 2007 May 12,
October 19 and December 27 when the city was surrendered to miscreants
and anti-social elements.
The attitude of regime as demonstrated before and after the murder
came under scrutiny. Dr Masooda Bano wrote: The shifting government
position over the precise cause of her death, the refusal to allow a UN
investigation, preventing foreign diplomats and visiting dignitaries to visit
her mausoleum, and more recently the move to book cases against PPP
workers for destruction caused during the post-assassination period are
desperate bids by a government, which clearly has messed up
mindset
Musharraf made a dramatic shift and claimed that yes clearly she was
killed by bullets but that she was herself responsible for it as she was
exposing herself to danger. Thus, the message is that in the state of
Pakistan, no one should come out to take part in political activity
because if they are shot or attacked it is their own fault for daring to come
out. The fact that the state has the responsibility to provide adequate
protection to ensure smooth functioning of such events enters nowhere in his
calculations.
Exactly the same psyche is reflected in the governments move to
register cases against PPP workers for the destruction caused in the postassassination period. First of all, it is not clear who actually caused the
damage to public property; the only party that has benefited from the
destruction is the PML-Q as the destruction has been used as a pretext to
delay the elections.
878

Secondly, the question is that what gives the state the right to register
cases against the PPP workers when it has itself completely failed to ensure
law and order. Where were the law enforcing agencies when the riots
were taking place or when the election commission offices were allegedly
being burnt down? It has been a complete failure of the state to ensure law
and order and it is amazing how the state feels no pressure
The government biases have also been visible in the continued
refusal to ask for UN-led investigation into her assassination. The UN
spokesperson has made it clear that they cannot send a team till an invitation
comes from the government of Pakistan. The government, however,
continues to refuse to extend that invitation. If the government has nothing
to hide then why is it reluctant to let the UN lead an independent inquiry into
the assassination? Similarly, it is again reflective of the petty mindedness of
the sitting government that the foreign dignitaries wanting to visit the Bhutto
mausoleum have been prevented from doing so on the basis of security.
What is critical is for PPP to now be clear about its future strategy,
whether it is going to continue with the policy of deal making despite the
proof that deals with military general cannot work or is actually going to sit
in the opposition. The bizarre bit is that the US is still advising PPP to carry
ahead with the deal. If there is one individual, which today is at the heart
of the cause of disability within Pakistan that is General Musharraf.
Yet, even after all that has happened the US remains keen on ensuring the
survival. The question then is simply: does the US want a stable or chaos?
Given its continued zeal to ensure General Musharrafs survival the latter
seems more of the target.
Shafqat Mahmood talked of tragic aftermath and lack of sense of
responsibility. The handling of the tragedys aftermath by the government
has also left a bitter taste. If its hands were clean, what was the need for the
rush to judgment on the cause of her death? And why was no attempt made
to secure the crime scene? Was this just incompetence, as Mr Musharraf
claims or something more? We will never know. One defining feature of a
banana republic is that there never is any accountability. That comes
with rule of law and supremacy of institutions. We have neither.
We only have a discredited regime that refuses to accept
responsibility for anything. As someone aptly remarked, Mr Musharraf
sounds like an opposition leader fulminating against the failures of some

879

mythical government far removed from him. He needs reminding that this is
your own government Sir.
And if Benazir Bhutto was killed when you were duty-bound to
provide first-rate security to her, you have to accept failure and not blame
the victim as you have been doing. It is not only insensitive, it is
dangerous. It will further inflame the sentiments of her supporters and wellwishers for whom this tragedy is still a raw wound. Why pour oil on fire Mr
President and then lament when there is a reaction.
Nawaz Sharifs visit to Naudero two days later to condole
Mohtarmas death also put some balm on raw emotions of the people of
Sindh. This helped to bridge the huge divide that had opened up between
this province and Punjab. He did what a national leader should have done.
He tried to heal the wounds and unite the people. Sadly, this is not what the
officials of the government or luminaries of the ruling party were doing.
The handling of the tragedy by both Mr Musharraf and his
henchmen, the Chaudhrys, has been nothing short of disaster. His
statements have been insensitive and theirs positively provocative. What was
the need for the official league to run ads that only appealed to baser
sentiments in Punjab? Was it deliberately trying to create a reaction so that
the elections could be postponed? If it was then it did a good job because
there was bloodshed and the election was postponed.
The mayhem wrought on the country and particularly in the
province of Sindh is unforgivable and needs outright condemnation but as
Shaheen Sehbai wrote, there are strange aspects to it. While every part of the
province was affected, the destruction was greatest in places where the PPP
has least support. Was this the handiwork of agent provocateurs or is it that
the poor just saw an opportunity to loot and plunder when the state
effectively disappeared from the scene?
While the culprits need to be identified and punished, someone
should also find out why the official machinery of the government
vanished when the troubles started. It is the usual practice with this
government no one is ready to take responsibility. The major effort is
directed towards expressing outrage and little towards admitting failure.
After eight years of Mr Musharrafs rule, we are in dire straits
but he has the desire neither to take responsibility nor to leave the scene.

880

What it will take for him to realize that he is now a problem and we will
have great difficulty moving forward as long as he is around? The need of
the hour is national reconciliationbut this is not possible as long as Mr
Musharraf is in the saddle.
The problem is that no one is ready to talk to him or sit with him and
unless there is a way to start a national dialogue, we are doomed. We
need to discuss the shortcomings in our constitution and make changes that
will ensure a stable political order. In particular, we need to devise a
mechanism for a peaceful transfer of power so that we do not repeat cycles
of a few good years leading to tempest and trouble. This happens only
because there is no legal way to get rid of entrenched regimes.
We also need to identify and build a national consensus on
problem of terrorism and extremism. If we dont, the Americans and
others will continue to breathe down our neck and start threatening overt or
covert invasions. Our nuclear program is now increasingly under the
microscope and unless we sort out our pressing domestic issues, someone
will take advantage of our discord and come in to sort out the mess. These
are not my words but of those abroad who are beginning to describe us as a
failing state.
While there is great pessimism in the country, it is not too late to take
the first steps towards rehabilitation. The road is difficult and the objective
of national revival not easy but we will not reach the end of the journey if
we do not begin. It is this that the presence of Mr Musharraf makes
impossible.
The News wrote about performance of intelligence agencies. The role
of Pakistans extensive network of intelligence agencies has come under
scrutiny once more in the aftermath of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.
Whereas President Pervez Musharraf has categorically denied any
possibility of an agency hand in the killing, fingers continued to be pointed
in their direction. One of the reasons for such suspicions, which have also
been raised repeatedly in the past in relation to various events, is the fact that
so little is known about these organizations and because they have often
been used to manipulate election results and do successive governments
dirty work.
While it is true that, particularly in a situation such as Pakistans,
where a network of terrorist outfits operates, an intelligence setup is
881

required, there can be no justification for the political role it is frequently

alleged to be playing. The lack of information about his role adds to the
apprehensions that intelligence agencies have come to comprise a kind of
a state within a state, and operate as a power in themselves, with little
control of government. That both the interior and defence ministries have in
the past told courts that the intelligence agencies do not fall under them is a
dangerous indication of the fact that these shadowy organizations function
outside the organized structure of government.
This is an alarming situation. These organizations have been
repeatedly accused of deliberately creating instability and disorder to meet
set political purposes. This, it has been reported, has been achieved at times
through the clever dissemination of the media, exploiting the fact that for
reporters access to information remains limited, making them vulnerable to
fed items of news. Even today, there have been allegations that the
agencies have been at work creating confusion about the murder
Given the controversy that exists over the countrys secret agencies,
there is a need to clarify their functions and explain who is accountable of
their actions. The best and more transparent way would be to make them
accountable and subservient to parliament, the norm is fully functional
democracies the world over that is the only way to keep a proper check on
them, just like in the case of any government department This can in a
way serve Pakistans urgent need for greater accountability, greater
transparency and greater credibility at all levels within the state.
Ikram Sehgal talked of need for learning security lessons. One must
concede that it is extremely difficult to reconcile the requirements of a
political campaign with the security protection that is a must for potential
target of assassins. Security is not an exact science; it is becoming
increasingly difficult to cope with motivated attacks. With the advent of the
suicide bomber, deterrence has become exponentially more difficult for
VIP, almost impossible in providing any protection for innocent
bystanders.
Instead of slowing down, at the gate should have been kept well
clear, the vehicle should have been accelerating to quickly clear this obvious
place for an ambush. In the video we do not see uniformed police around
the vehicle, at this constructed exit there should have been a double cordon.
Someone in the security chain is responsible for severe dereliction of duty.
The local administration, the immediate head of Ms Benazirs security detail
882

and whoever in the federal government was immediately overseeing this

responsibility are all culpable of criminal neglect.
Any VIPs life depends upon his (or her) listening without debate to
the express instructions of a professional head of the security detail,
someone with adequate training, expertise and experience. Armoured
vehicles do not have sunroofs, why did her armoured car have a sunroof?
Why did the company in Dubai entrusted with armouring the vehicle put in
the sunroof, or was this done at the express instructions of someone in
Karachi? Addressing conspiracy theories, why not question the person or
persons who insisted on the sunroof being installed?
The collection, coalition, dissemination and distribution of
information by the various intelligence agencies needs to become actionable
intelligence quickly. The excellent expertise and capability among our
intelligence community has been compromised over the years. The first
compromise is official, a lot of time and public money is wasted in
targeting of those in opposition to the government. The major compromise is
unofficial, the personal vendettas of some intelligence officials, not only on
behalf of vested interest but on personal likes and dislikes.
There have to be two benchmarks, one is to differentiate between
anti-state and anti-government activity, and the other is if these reports are
patently fake and/or motivated and/or fabricated. If an intelligence
ombudsmen checks the veracity of the reports and finds them false, these
should be taken as perjury and those making and/or initiating them or
signing off up the line must be prosecuted and sent to jail, whatever their
rank and seniority
Mr Asif Ali Zardari made a remark in passing about his selection of
guards in the inner cordon around Ms Benazir from among his former
prison-mates, this was shocking. Irrespective of the personal loyalty he built
up among his fellow prisoners and irrespective of whether the person was
innocent or guilty of the crime that put him in jail, nowhere in the world
would those having a criminal record be allowed near a security detail,
i.e. unless he or she has absolute security clearances. Any employee, what to
talk of security personnel, must be verified as to his (or her) antecedents,
how this was carried out needs also to be checked. Could the loyalties of any
of the party cadre in the inner cordon have been subverted?

883

The President has assured the Scotland Yards detectives a free hand
in examining all clues and questioning anyone ascertaining the facts as they
were, and elaborate on the glaring weaknesses in our security practices and
procedures. This must be done in letter and spirit, prosecuting those as being
part of the crime anyone who obstructs the investigation. The lessons learnt
may save the lives of others in the future; it will be well worth it. Are we
ready to heed the lessons learnt?
I A Rehman wrote: The first reason for the peoples massive
outpouring of grief is perhaps their realization that the vacuum in
leadership is now greater and more grievously damaging than before
On each of its earlier bereavements, the nation could look up to some
eminent politicians to fill the void, at least reasonably well if not adequately.
The public frustration at the absence of leaders it can trust cannot be easily
described. And this leads to two conclusions.
First, by suppressing politics the countrys successive dictators
have made the rise of trustworthy political leadership impossible. The
nurseries of political cadres, especially of the democratic variety, have been
laid waste after every 9-10 years. Had normal politics been allowed political
parties would have moved towards maturity, their bonds with the people
would have become unbreakable, and good crops of party cadres would have
thrown up leaders capable of steering the ship through unexpected storms
Secondly, public grief at Benazir Bhuttos martyrdom should remind
the powers that be political leaders, regardless of the establishments view
of their policies, are national assets and deserve to be protected and
respected as such. Something of this popular sentiment mercifully touched
quite a few of Benazir Bhuttos political opponents and they joined the
caravan to Naudero.
The lesson from mob attacks on state property railway tracks,
railway stations, election offices, etc is quite obvious. These incidents,
again unprecedented, indicate that the peoples alienation from the state is
assuming the form of hatred for it. Perhaps the common citizens view of
the state apparatus that it is an engine of oppression has hardened.
Ordinary people tend to justify their occasional (and even
frequent) thieving if they find the state given to plundering and
brigandage. This situation lends priority to the establishment of a duly
transparent and accountable regime and the establishment of institutions,
884

mechanisms, and processes that could arrest the growing impoverishment of

the masses.
The second lesson from widespread incidents of looting and arson is
the need to relieve the administration of the shackles imposed by
praetorian outfits. Such regimes completely undermine the mind and
decision-making faculties of state functionaries, particularly at the base level
where direct contact with the people is more common than at any other
level. Since everything is decided at the top of the hierarchy officials in the
field do not know whether to treat a law-breaker as a miscreant or as an
agent of peoples power. It is the height of naivet, real or assumed, to
expect the public to respect the law if all laws, and the basic law itself, can
be bent, altered, scrapped and replaced to suit the whim, caprice and vanity
of a single individual.
Probe of murder in a credible manner was obviously inescapable
necessity. Omar R Quraishi raised few interesting questions about BBs
murder. What was the great hurry in hosing down the crime scene at
Liaqat Bagh? Surely it should have been preserved. The crime scene of a
suicide attack at a check post nearby GHQ recently was not disturbed and
examined closely by military and civilian investigators in fact this has
often happened in such cases, so why wasnt this done on Dec 27.
Why is Brigadier Javed Iqbal Cheema or those briefing him, so
bent on denying the story the possibility that Ms Bhutto may have been
killed by one or more bullets? The partys information secretary and a
close aide of Ms Bhutto, Sherry Rahman, has insisted that she was at Ms
Bhuttos side and also was part of the team that carried out her last rites. She
says what she saw was clearly a bullet wound and that the governments
theory that Ms Bhutto died as a result of her head hitting the right side lever
of her jeeps sunroof was ridiculous.
However the belief that one or more bullets may have hit her is lent
credence by the footage. Brigadier Cheemas insistence that the facts
suggest that the PPP Chairperson died as a result of her head hitting the sunroof and not because of any bullet seems to suggest that the purpose may
well be to deflect concerns about the lack of security
Asif Ali Zardari said during his press conference in Naudero on Dec
30 that he refused a request by the Punjab government to conduct an autopsy
on his wifes dead body but his reason for refusal, as he said himself, has to
885

do with the widely-held belief that such things in this country are a sham and
can be manipulated and tailored by the government of the day and the
establishment for its own goals.
All the more reason for an independent probe which is impossible
unless we have objective investigators and where will we find objective
investigators? Possibly outside the country; although it shouldnt be too
much of a problem manipulating, twisting and/or concealing their findings if
need be.
Also, the government has already retracted an apology that the
caretaker prime minister made during a meeting of editors in Islamabad this
past week saying that apology was not about the probable cause of Ms
Bhuttos death but about the tone and tenor of the interior ministrys
spokesman. This is odd because no one had any issue with Brigadier
Cheemas tone and tenor but with what he was saying, specifically the
question of how he was ascribing a cause to Ms Bhuttos death a day after
her assassination As for Baitullah Mehsud, he is no angel but his
spokesman has vehemently denied that he is behind the assassination.
The alleged transcript between Baitullah and an unnamed maulvi
sahib mentioned three names including one who is called Badr wala or of
Badr. So if the government claim is to be taken at face value then who is this
Badr wala? Does this mean that al-Badr, an outfit linked to fighting in
Indian Occupied Kashmir and believed to have had close links to
intelligence agencies is involved in Ms Bhuttos assassination? Does this
not then implicate other bigger players in the gruesome act as well?
Dr Masooda Bano discussed the involvement of foreigners in the
probe of the murder. What one was trying to criticize were the flaws in her
strategy, and not to argue that she had actually sold out either to the US or
the Pakistan intelligence: the Bhutto family has sacrificed too many lives for
Benazir to have ever done that. What one was trying to point out all along
was that the shift in her mindset visible during this year where she believed
that change could come through negotiations with the military if she
convinced the US and the UK to back her was flawed. They can never be
genuine partners and her death is a proof of that.
This in turn is directly linked to the current controversy about who
should investigate her assassination. Gordon Browns offer to provide
services of the Scotland Yard need to be resisted by anyone interested in
886

an independent inquiry. Would the US dare to offer support given that all
Pakistanis know and so do the US officials that the US has zero credibility in
Pakistan? Then what gives the UK a better status: a country, which has
supported the US in each and every controversial policy of the US towards
Pakistan in the name of war on terror and is forcing this country toward the
brink of collapse.
Any remaining doubt of the UKs intentions towards Pakistan was
removed when Britain refused to support the civil societys demand to ask
for the reinstatement of the judges removed under the emergency. If a USled investigation today would have no legitimacy in the public eye, same
is the case for the UK: they are both biased parties; biased in favour of
military rulers in Pakistan, so how can we expect their state machinery to
carry out honest probe into the killing of the top democratic leader of a
country In fact, an investigation led by Scotland Yard will actually be a
big disservice to Pakistan: the outcome of such an investigation will only be
that the current regime will get a UK stamp, and greater international
legitimacy, to blame Benazirs assassination on al-Qaeda and Islamist
radicals.
An international investigation into the assassination should be
carried out only by an independent UN committee constituting
internationally credible figures. Most importantly, Asma Jahangir should be
a part of the supervisory committee of such a body The fact that such an
independent committee does not suit the UK and the US is visible from the
fact that after Zardari has asked that the investigation be led by a UN
committee and not the UK, the US has already come out to say that there is
no need for involving the UN.
The News wrote: In his speech on Wednesday night, President Pervez
Musharraf said that Scotland Yard would be called in to help in the inquiry
into Benazir Bhuttos death. It is as yet unclear how much assistance the
worlds premier criminal investigative agency can offer in this regard
There is no doubt that the Yard can do nothing to help. In fact, one
wonders if any power on earth can assist Pakistan in escaping the quagmire
of difficulties it finds itself in.
Reiterating the official version of events, Musharraf blamed Baitullah
Mehsud for Benazirs murder. He also warned that the extremist threat was
immense, and called on the media to help tackle it, by supporting
paramilitary forces battling them. Nowhere in the speech was there any
887

indication of a realization that official policies have acted to strengthen

militancy, and that a way needs to be found out of the whole vicious cycle
that has been created.
In a subsequent editorial the newspaper added: A five-member team
from Londons Scotland Yard has been meeting police and interior ministry
officials in Islamabad as it begins its high-profile probe into the murder of
Benazir Bhutto Benazirs body has been buried at the graveyard in
Naudero that has become a shrine; with it has disappeared, several meters
under the earth, the evidence of what killed her. The latest account of the
possible use of new technological weapons has only compounded the
mystery. It is highly improbable that an exhumation of the body will be
permitted by Benazirs family, for reasons that are both emotional and
traditional. The crime scene itself, from where it may have been possible to
secure crucial forensic evidence even so many days after the event, has
meanwhile been washed down with giant hoses
Left then with the vehicle, and whatever reports and forensic material
it can obtain from Pakistani authorities, Scotland Yard thus has a tough
time on its hands. There is much doubt as to how useful the film footage of
the murder will prove, and the Scotland Yard team that had been called in
just over a decade ago to inquire into the murder of another Bhutto
In these circumstances, it is uncertain how much assistance Scotland
Yard will be able to offer in the case of an assassination that has instantly
changed Pakistans political landscape. The days ahead will be closely
watched to see what the Yards team can come up with. But, on the surface,
it is feared that perhaps little will be solved. After all, in a case like this, a
detective no less than Sherlock Holmes may be needed to uncover the
many mysteries and come up with evidence where none seems any longer
to exist.
Rahimullah Yusufzai opined: It is obvious that President Musharraf,
the countrys real ruler even though we have a so-called caretaker
administration comprising powerless men and women chosen by the powers
that be, agreed to investigation by foreign experts under international
pressure. One fails to understand as to why the president takes a position
that he is unable to defend and sustain for long. There are many instances
that he buckled under foreign pressure and changed some decision that until
then had been robustly defended.

888

Seeking outside help in resolving the mystery of Benazir Bhuttos

death is a right decision even if it was taken due to intense international
pressure. Going by our poor record in identifying and punishing killers of
some of our slain leaders, it was necessary to seek the services of foreign
experts who would hopefully be neutral as well as credible. Scotland Yards
involvement in the inquiry into Benazir Bhuttos murder should lend some
credibility to the probe. However, it would not be prudent to attach many
hopes to the inquiry as finding answers to questions agitating our minds
cannot be easy.
One major issue obstructing justice in this case is the lack of
credibility of President Musharraf. By siding with the PML-Q and its
allies and on account of his political ambitions, he has become controversial
in the eyes of most Pakistanis. His unconstitutional moves to sustain himself
in power have been heavily criticized at home and abroad and deprived him
of any moral reason to continue holding his office. He failed to heed Benazir
Bhuttos call for an international probe into the suicide bombing during her
huge welcome procession in Karachi on October 19 and thus created doubts
about his intentions
The question whether President Musharraf and his handpicked
interim set-up and chief election commissioner could be trusted to hold free,
fair and transparent elections on February 18. The answer is a definite no.
If we know this before hand, then why are we wasting so much money and
putting the nation to discomfort by conducting polls that will invariably end
up in controversy. A wise course will be to set up a national government
enjoying sufficient powers and task it to hold credible elections.
The pros and cons of BBs murder on general elections were widely
commented upon. Ikram Sehgal felt that the PPP was smart in insisting on
holding of elections as scheduled. The PPP has been very brave (and
politically smart) in insisting that the elections are held as scheduled on
January 8 despite the martyrdom of Ms Benazir Bhutto. The party will
certainly benefit from the sympathy vote. So the PPP is right in trying to
maintain the momentum, moreover as the days go by there is bound to be
cracks in the partys ranks for many reasons. While one sympathizes with
them not only for the loss of a great and charismatic leader and the
opportunity they had for the January 8 elections, the stakes for the country
are too much to be risked

889

The tragedy is that the great silent majority may not remain
silent, their protest will become violent and even with the army intervening
physically, this could go out of control, far exceeding the level of anarchy
witnessed in the aftermath of The situation is therefore tailor-made for
either or both of the parties to yell rigging to high heaven; even if no
rigging takes place the protests will take to the streets. Even if delayed,
unless the general elections are held under the patronage of a genuinely
neutral caretaker cabinet and above board election commission duly reconstituted to represent a free and fair electoral process, and seen by public
perception to be such, the results will not be accepted by either the majority
of the population or the world. This is Pakistans Catch-22, damned if you
will, damned if you wont.
The News wrote on postponement of polls. As expected, and despite
strong warnings by the major mainstream political parties, the Election
Commission of Pakistan has put off the general elections for six weeks
and the new date is February 18. The indications were already there and the
justification was also ready-made. The panic in the previous ruling party was
also evident and other than PML-Q no major party was in favour of a
postponement, specially the aggrieved PPP. Even President Pervez
Musharraf had in one of his meetings promised that the PPP would be
allowed to decide the next polling date but having seen the fierce mass
reaction and the widespread wave of anger and sympathy, the caretaker
administration apparently cold feet.
The atmosphere will further deteriorate as bitterness and
campaigning picks up. The chief election commissioner was at his weakest
and the most unconvincing when he talked about the consultations the ECP
had done, informally he said, with major political parties. He could not name
any party and neither could he tell the media what these parties had told him
citing confidentiality of their talks. Since public positions of major parties
were already known it is highly unlikely that they would have said
something different in the confidential consultations. Yet the decision has
been taken and President Pervez Musharraf defended and explained it in
detail in his address to the nation, appealing to all the parties to remain calm,
carry out their campaigns and participate in the elections.
The initial reaction to the postponement has not been favourable
and the Jamaat-e-Islami and some of the APDM parties have stuck to their
decision to boycott the polls. Some street reaction in Sindh was also

890

instantly seen with people coming out on the streets in Larkana. More calls
have been given for protest rallies. But it would be unwise for any major
party to walk away from the polls on the grounds that that it has been
delayed. The PPP, in mass mourning, will find the postponement as another
hot button issue to mobilize and energize its cadres and this could add to the
extra support which the party expects as result of the Benazir Bhutto
assassination.
The delay in the polls is obviously seen as providing the PML-Q a
critical breathing space to minimize and manage the huge sympathy wave
for the PPP and President Musharraf and the caretaker governments have so
far not done much to erase this impression. This is a critical issue and if still
the polls are manipulated and engineered, as feared, the results would be
catastrophic for Pakistan. With Sindh in such fury and rage and the rest of
the country clinging on to vague hopes but filled with grave fears and
doubts, a major initiative by President Musharraf can only restore the
confidence and trust in the election process.
The mainstream political parties must take part, despite their
anger and fury, but the government has to act now to calm down nerves,
bring the political temperature down, create conditions for peaceful
campaigning and ensure that complete neutrality is demonstrated, in letter
and spirit and with proof that it is not cosmetic. Some may say, it is asking
for the moon.
The News on Sunday added: We did underestimate the danger to
Benazirs life despite the enormous damage done on Oct 18. We did not
push for it as the issue got brushed under the carpet and various questions
remained unanswered. The demands for any international inquiry
Scotland Yard, forensics, remember Benazir talking about them were
ignored because the powers that be thought that al-Qaeda was beyond the
purview of such worldly investigation and will do what it must.
We too got drowned in the election frenzy which, Dr Condoleezza
Rice was quick to remind us, would usher in a different and new day in
Pakistan. This she said in reply to a question regarding the reinstatement of
deposed judges in Pakistan. This and the issue of freedom of expression and
the curbs on media kept raising their heads as the campaign gained
momentum. Meanwhile, the media cried hoarse about Benazirs deal
with Musharraf till the day it was thrown upon our face that it was
actually a deal with death.
891

The authorities tried to convince the nation that Benazir died by

hitting her head against the lever of the sunroof of her bullet proof car, as if
by accident. The doctors at Rawalpindi General Hospital were
pressurized to remain silent, the medical record was forcibly removed,
scene of tragic accident was quickly washed.
Smart attempt but sadly the people already knew. They knew that
elections would be postponed even if all parties agreed that they be held on
Jan 8. They knew that Musharraf would not let the Supreme Court decide
against his eligibility to become the countrys president, even if it meant
imposing martial law on the country. They knew that elections would be
rigged and PPP and PML-N will not be allowed a two-thirds majority and
under any circumstances.
Therefore, we say it is time to speak up. Because there is nothing
left to lose and no scope for fears. It is time to speak the truth about the
structural imbalance were confronted with in this country, about militarys
domination over all spheres, about the political economy of a national
security state. It is time to state that the term federation means nothing for
a vast majority of the people of this country. It is time to demystify the
establishment and the role it has played in undoing this country
Lastly, it is time to sadly admit that 60 years of a minus-people
dispensation running this country has brought it to such a pass where every
single political development is tied up with the US military aid to Pakistan.
It is the Nancy Pelosis and Hillary Clintons of this world that we are forced
to look up to for what is rightfully ours.
Subsequently, the newspaper wrote about risks of rigging. The
detailed PPP dossier on alleged vote-rigging plans, which the late Benazir
Bhutto was reportedly planning to hand over to US representatives, has now
been published. The most serious of the meticulously listed accounts of poll
fixing in various districts is the accusation that US money intended to
battle terrorism was being used to instead spy on opposition politicians,
tape their phone conversations. It is as yet uncertain what documentary
evidence the PPP has to back up these charges.
But the fact remains that at least some of the allegations made by
the PPP in its lengthy document have come in from other quarters too.
These include not only other opposition parties but also analysts monitoring
the process. Apart from the issue of transfers and postings, detailed accounts
892

of how polls have been fixed in the past by adding small amounts of ballots
in select stations to raise the total for favoured candidates across a
constituency have been laid out.
One can only hope that most of these allegations will be proved
untrue. The administration of President Pervez Musharraf, and the Election
Commission, which is in charge of overseeing the process, must ensure that
the election is free, fair and transparent and has to be seen as such by all
those engaged in it. This is particularly crucial in the present time, with
Pakistan still reeling from the crisis it has been plunged into since the end of
December
With the former ruling party, the PML-Q, having apparently decided
for the present at least to focus their attention primarily on Punjab, the
province they consider their stronghold, a clear signal must be sent out to
them that no attempts to fix or manipulate the polling process will be
tolerated. It is important that the message goes out now, from the highest
authority in the country. There are fears the PML-Qs sense of panic over the
sympathy wave working in the PPPs favour may tempt it to make
underhand efforts to ensure all its electoral dreams are not shattered. The
same message too needs to be driven home in Sindh, and indeed also in
other provinces, to the PML-Q and its allies.
The parties that had, before the events of December 27, been so
confident of a triumph at the polls must now realize that national interest, the
need to hold the nation together, to prevent inter-provincial friction is now
paramount. It must be placed above the interests of any one group or any
individual. Failing to realize this now would plunge the country into an
abyss of mistrust and violence, from which it must, at all costs, be
saved.
Kamila Hyat opined: Following the PPPs brave decision to contest
polls on January 8, any decision to postpone them, whether by weeks or
months, will go only to strengthen suspicions of an element of malice
underlying the entire polling process since the date for balloting was
announced in November. This is based around the perception that the
moving forward of elections to February would be a step that would
benefit the PML-Q The fact that the PML-Q has, over the past few days,
lobbied actively for a delay adds to this suspicion of malafide intent lurking
in the murky air.

893

At least in the context of the subcontinent, there are valid reasons

for these fears. While analysis coming out of the west in the immediate
aftermath of Benazirs death predicted turmoil and certain electoral defeat
for the party, the dynamics often work quite differently in this part of the
world
But beyond the issue of elections, there are other measures that need
to be taken to ease the current tension, to ensure Pakistan is able to find
some direction home, discover some path out of a crisis that has quashed so
many hopes and created so much despair even among those who, in her
lifetime, opposed the politics and policies of Benazir Bhutto. There is also a
need for all politicians, all leaders, to act wisely perhaps most of all in
Punjab which as the countrys largest province must also take responsibility
for holding the federation strongly together.
Sadly, whereas the PML-Ns Mian Nawaz Sharif appears to have
found some new wisdom and maturity as a consequence of his long years of
exile amidst the deserts of Saudi Arabia, the same cannot be said of other
parties whose base of support lies in Punjab the threatening tone adopted
by former Punjab chief minister Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, who has said
people who destroy PML-Q property will have their hands cut off, can do
little to heal over the wounds that exist.
Chaudhry Shujaat Elahi has meanwhile accused Asif Ali Zardari of
attempting to fuel inter-provincial disharmony an entirely false charge
given the Zardari and other PPP leaders acting with considerable sagacity
have consistently condemned any effort to point fingers at Punjab for
Benazirs death.
The sense of uncertainty, of continued turbulence, has also been
created by the handling of the investigation into Benazirs death and
the absurdities churned out in this respect by interior ministrys spokesman.
New versions are being put forward every day and the interior minister
himself has asked newspaper editors to overlook the style and manner
adopted by the spokesman, whose very appearance now brings barely
muffled giggles from media persons covering his press conferences. In other
words, the whole matter has been reduced to a distasteful farce.
The fact that newspaper reports have emerged suggesting Benazir
Bhutto was about to present evidence of the misuse of US funds intended to
battle terrorism on election rigging to US lawmakers on the day that she died
894

has added to the conjecture. There had been growing allegations of

carefully orchestrated rigging in selected constituencies.
The fact that so much remains unclear; there is so much mistrust
and suspicion everywhere, does not augur well. The now growing
possibility of an agitation by the PPP and the PML-N threatens to bring yet
greater instability, greater destruction and greater angst. This is a state of
affairs an already broken nation can ill afford.
Babar Sattar discussed the issue of delayed elections in some detail.
Pakistans forbidding misfortune is this: many Pakistanis have reached the
considered conclusion that General Musharraf is part of the countrys
compounding problems and yet his unshaken belief seems to be that he
is indispensable for the existence of Pakistan. With the political process
scuttled and all legal mechanisms to remove the General from power
choked, there is no formal mechanism to resolve the impasse.
Pakistan is suffering a severe depression. Any optimism about a
cheerful future springs from those who place hope over experience. A part of
that optimism dissipates every time the General chooses to address the
nation. The speech on Wednesday was no exception. It betrayed his views on
governance and the role of state institutions that are fundamentally flawed.
First of all, the General doesnt accept the responsibility that
comes along with power. Each time he speaks to the people he sounds like
a leader of the opposition presenting a charge sheet against the ruling
regime. On Wednesday he criticized the assassination of Bhutto, the anarchy
in the country that threatened the life and liberty of ordinary citizens and
caused losses worth billions to public and private property, and the growing
extremism and violence that threatens the moderate character of this nation
all without an iota of realization that it is he who is responsible for
preventing such mayhem.
Second, his approach to utilization of the state security apparatus
is disturbingly warped. It was obvious on the eve of the Bhutto murder that
the law and order situation in the country and especially in Sindh will
swing out of control. Yet no emergency steps were taken by the Musharraf
regime to prevent the carnage Why were the security forces not mobilized
to prevent the hooligans in the first place?

895

Third, the shrewd campaign of maligning politics as a legitimate

means to promote ideas and policies in the polity and reach decisions
continues unabated. The General in his speech admonished politicians and
advised them to rise above politics for the sake of the country. Politics,
politicking and activism form the foundation of a vibrant and functional
democracy. We need more of this and no less.
And four, the General continues to misunderstand the role of the
media in a state. In his address he beseeched the media to support his
government a request that, if accepted, could cost the fourth pillar of the
state its credibility as well as its utility. The independent media in Pakistan
has recently been an object of the Generals scathing criticism for spreading
despondency. Such criticism is the product of a mistaken belief-system that
the media must endorse and propagate a certain vision of national interest
and national security.
In his speech the General also endorsed the election commissions
decision to postpone the national elections for over a month. This was
despite the fact that the Constitution of Pakistan provides an unambiguous
timeframe within which the elections must be conducted within sixty days
of the expiry of the term of the assemblies or within ninety days of the
assemblies being dissolved. Thus under Pakistans fundamental law no
individual or institution has any discretionary authority to delay
elections. Yet the elections have been delayed
The ruling regimes legal troubles are aggravated by the fact that it
has already deconstructed the independence and credibility of the two state
institutions the election commission and the judiciary that could possibly
resolve this conundrum assuming that reasons for causes for delaying the
polls are legitimate. Had the election commission not acted as an extension
of the ruling regime during the controversial presidential election of the
General and later during the scrutiny of nomination papers of electoral
candidates, the explanation for the delay provided by it might have been
considered on merit.
It is equally striking that while the decision to postpone elections
raises a serious legal and constitutional issue, none of the political actors
have even raised the possibility of seeking a clarification or remedy from the
guardian of our fundamental law the judicature. Had there been an
independent judiciary in place, it might well have concluded that the scope
of Article 254 is not just retrospective but also covers future events. Such
896

decision would have more ready acceptance, even if politically

disadvantageous for the opposition parties, for the legal and moral weight of
the jurisprudence produced by a court hinges upon its credibility,
integrity and independence. Unfortunately at this juncture not many trust
the ability of PCO-courts to mete out blind justice irrespective of its
consequences for the ruling regime.
Bhuttos assassination unhinged all previous calculations. The
PPP no longer needs to persuade its voters and supporters to come out on the
election day. And in a free and fair electoral contest, the PPP and the PML-N
together with other regional opposition parties will in all likelihood cobble a
two-thirds parliamentary majority. In the event that the PPP goes back to
taking up the cause of the non-PCO judges as well, Pakistan might finally
witness a grand political alliance against the ruling regime. Let us pray that
after postponing the polls the ruling regime only relies on divine miracles to
dilute the PPPs sympathy vote and doesnt try and engineer one.
Mir Jamilur Rahman advised politicians not make elections a matter
of life and death. The formidable champion of democracy is gone and the
mantle of PPP leadership has been taken over by her spouse Asif Ali Zardari
as willed by Shaheed Benazir Bhutto. However, Mr Zardari has transferred
the chairmanship of the PPP to their teenager son Bilawal Zardari. Surname
Bhutto has been added to Bilawals name as a reminder to the PPP voters
that he is a progeny of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
Bilawal, 19, would have to wait six years before becoming eligible
to sit in the National Assembly. Thus he could neither be a candidate in
2008 elections nor in the 2013 elections. Mr Zardari is not a candidate in the
next elections. Does this mean that there would be nobody from BhuttoZardari clan sitting in the National Assembly? Yes; but not for long.
Zardari has named Amin Fahim as Prime Minister if the PPP
won. Mr Fahim may become the prime minister but only for a short period.
The odds are that Zardari would withdraw a PPP MNA and fill his place
himself through by-election. Mr Fahim would then resign making room for
Mr Zardari to become the prime minister. That was the route Shaukat Aziz
took to become prime minister.
The PPP has a very difficult journey ahead. The sudden change of
leadership inevitably weakens the party, especially the party that draws
strength from dynastic rule. When Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was removed from
897

the scene the PPP went into turmoil. Its senior leaders, some of them cofounders of the PPP, resented the appointment of Benazir Bhutto as
chairperson of the party. They abandoned the party or were given
insignificant roles, which forced them to leave the PPP. Luminaries like
Mumtaz Bhutto, Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi, Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Dr Mubashar
Hasan, Maulana Kausar Niazi and many others either went into retirement or
formed their own parties.
President Musharraf showed concern over the reference that
Pakistani agencies could be involved in the fatal attack on Benazir Bhutto.
It is a ridiculous allegation and demonstrates the naivety of American
analysts. They seem to consider Pakistan a banana republic where every arm
of the government has its own agenda. Would any American analyst or
newsman disclose the benefits the government could have accrued from the
death of Benazir Bhutto?
The political leaders should help the government in the peaceful
conduct of elections. It did not help the cause of election peace when Mr
Asif Ali Zardari fired the salvo by denouncing the PML-Q as the killer
league. The response from the PML leaders was swift given in tit-for-tat
manner. The political leaders should not make the elections a matter of
life and death. They would serve the cause of democracy by calling a halt to
bad language.
Adnan Adil indulged in speculating election results. Contrary to
common perception, PML-Q, Musharrafs allied party could be the main
loser after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto and subsequent
postponement of the general elections. If fair and free elections are held in
February and the establishment stays neutral in this period, the PML-Q is
likely to lose its men in Punjab to the party led by Nawaz Sharif.
The party has been running its election campaign for almost one
year with public money at its disposal before the caretakers were installed
last November. The abrupt announcement of the election date was meant to
catch the other opposition parties off guard and to deny them adequate time
to carry out their campaign. The polls postponement for almost seven weeks
has provided more time to other parties such as the PPP and the PML-N to
reach out to the masses.
The horrendous murder of Benazir Bhutto has created a sympathy
wave for the PPP all over the country, and keeping in view the history, the
898

surge does not subside in a short period of time. Unless a miracle happens,
it is unlikely that a delay of 40 days would alter the public mood
significantly.
Before Bhuttos assassination, the PML-Q was running its campaign
on the slogan of development works carried out during the last five years of
its government in the centre and Punjab in particular. The support of the
caretaker administration, the police and the district governments was on its
side. There were speculations that the PML-Q would receive 90 to 100
national seats out of 148 in Punjab after Nawaz Sharifs campaign, in
Punjab the estimates were revised with a reduction of 15 to 20 national
seats for the PML-Q.
Dec 27 has changed the entire dynamics of elections in Sindh
where the PPP is most likely to have a clean sweep barring urban areas. In
Punjab, the PML-Q has changed its tactics and now using ethnic issues to
raise support If Elahi succeeds cashing in on this issue; the upcoming
election would be the first election to be fought on Punjabi ethnicity.
Unless the hidden hands of the establishment come into action, the
PML-Qs prospects of gaining any benefit from the delay in general
elections appear to be slim. Instead, the chances of it falling apart have
risen ever than before. The party which was hoping for 90-100 seats from
Punjab may now end up with 30-40 seats, that too if the present caretaker
set-up remains in place.
Ayesha Tammy Haq expressed her views on sympathy vote. When
Benazir Bhutto died there was no Bhutto who could take over the part. What
was incredulous that while everyone searched for a Bhutto to chair the
party no one said that this was a political party not a principality with a
little that could be inherited. Instead criticism came in the form that Asif
Zardari was not a Bhutto, so not acceptable; Sanam Bhutto was not inclined
towards politics; the children were too young and they too were not Bhuttos
though that was just a matter of minor detail resolved in a flash.
It may not have come as a surprise but it has certainly disturbed
many that there was no thought that this was a political party, not personal
property, that could be bequeathed. It is amazing that the party leadership
and workers thought it fine to be willed away. Did they not think to look
around the Central Executive Committee and look for someone who could

899

lead the party through a very difficult period, into a general election and into
government? It appears not.
And one may ask why not? All the PMLs have their leaders out on
the national campaign trail and with the extended date they can cover so
much more ground. As the elections draw nearer the PPP will realize that
it needs to run an issue-based national campaign and will need a
charismatic leader to lead such a campaign. Something Benazir Bhutto was
doing when she was murdered. The PPP leadership does not need to look far,
but will it remove its blinkers and enlist the help of the one person in their
party capable today of running a national campaign? Incarcerated Supreme
Court Bar Association President Aitzaz Ahsan very successfully led the
lawyers movement across the country last year, able to draw crowds be
clearly understands and knows how to devise political strategy.
Will he be viewed as an asset or a threat? An asset if egos and
insecurities can be locked away. The PPP cannot depend on a wave of
sympathy alone, while Ms Bhuttos assassination will play a big part in the
elections it cannot be the only issue. Nor can this be an election about
allegations and counter-allegations. The mudslinging is already intense, and
February 18 is six weeks away, a long time in a campaign already fraught
with difficulties.
Kamila Hyat warned PML-Q not to over-react to chances of sympathy
vote. There is belief, at least in Punjab that the wave of sympathy flowing
of the way of the PPP following Benazir Bhuttos death will soon begin
to ebb away. Much of the current campaigning by the PML-Q is pinned on
this hope, with party having opted to focus its immediate efforts on its home
province.
What the tunnel-visioned men conducting this campaign do not seem
to realize that their strategy of undermining the PPP, of using their Punjab
card against it or of trying to cripple the party through the mass arrests of its
workers will simply not work. They have not recognized that it takes more
than guns and bullets to kill a leader of the status of Benazir Bhutto.
Indeed, much like her father, a dead Benazir Bhutto will inevitably prove
more potent than a living one.
The efforts to turn Benazir into a leader of Sindhis, to project an
ugly Punjab-Sindh conflict and to exploit there sentiments to gain votes,
have been met with anger in the Punjab. The posters of Benazir and her
900

father that have suddenly cropped up, the dismay felt in areas of Lahore
and in villages across the province over the recent sequence of events, go
to prove that the Bhutto legacy is in no way limited to Sindh
The clumsy, foolish efforts by the PML-Q to give a PunjabiSindhi dimension to the sense of rage seen in many places, but most
notably in Sindh, will simply not work. The calls for Punjabis in Sindh who
have suffered due to the recent violence to approach the PML-Q in Lahore
for assistance are intended to fuel inter-provincial friction. The game is an
immensely dangerous one with potentially horrendous consequences.
Some of the reports surfacing from Sindh, recounted by those who
have suffered the situation there, make for a still more alarming scenario.
These accounts suggest that a significant proportion of the damage
inflicted on vehicles, government buildings and banks came in areas
that were not PPP strongholds. Political workers and activists on the
ground in many of Sindhs smaller towns and villages speak of pro-PPP
mourners going on the rampage, but also of still worse mayhem inflicted by
small gangs made up of persons affiliated with groups linked to the PML-Q.
What would mark true disaster at this point is any attempt to
manipulate the election, and carry through with a plan to guarantee victory
for the PML-Q. The only short-term solution now is a poll that is truly
fair, free and transparent. The gaping wounds that exist will not easily
heal. The process will take time, and involve pain. But any perception that
the verdict of people is not to be accepted in the forthcoming polls would be
a disaster and would create a crisis of overwhelming magnitude.
As such, it is crucial that President Musharraf and his team convince
their allies that any game plan that may have been worked out earlier
must now be abandoned. This is particularly important as the whispers
doing the rounds at the moment suggest official strategy revolves around
attempting to carve out a faction from within the PPP as was in fact done
in 2002 link it up with the PML-Q and attempt to clobber together enough
seats to form a majority. If this attempt fails, elections could be postponed
indefinitely.
At this point of time, it is crucial decision-makers realize that the
question of victory or loss in elections must take secondary place to the need
to hold the country together, and to give back the people their right to
determine its destiny. If this right is denied to them, through any effort to
901

decide the outcome of the polls beyond the balloting booths, this may lead to
a disaster from which no easy recovery is possible.
Zaigham Khan saw Chaudhrys playing dangerous Punjabi card.
Facing imminent fall from power, the Chaudhrys of Gujrat are toying with
the fuse that can ignite the barrel of gun-powder that is the Islamic Republic
of Pakistan. It is not for the first time that someone is trying to play the
Punjab, or Punjabi card, but it has never been done in such a desperate
manner and at such dangerous times. The Chaudhrys must be stopped just
now.
The Chaudhrys are skillful players at the game of patrons and
clients. They are useful clients to good patrons and generous patrons to
useful clients. This makes them extremely effective at district-level politics.
They are masters at the art of scheming and underhand tactics, and
manipulating unscrupulous individuals who go by the name of politicians.
Political leaders of undemocratic or semi-democratic nature essentially fall
to this level, as anything above mediocrity is considered dangerous.
The Chaudhrys do not and cannot represent Punjab, and should
not speak for it. Perhaps they do not even represent the Jats, the proud clan
in whose name they play politics. After all, Aitzaz Ahsan is also a Jat and
comes from the same district. Just think of the difference!
The Chaudhrys cannot win in Punjab, let alone in Pakistan, without
support from the huge rigging machine that is clattering so loudly. Punjabi
ethnicity may serve as a cover for electoral gains that many people will
find dubious. It can also be used to confront any countrywide backlash that
is bound to have its epicenter in Sindh.
This is a dangerous game perhaps the most dangerous since the
jihadi industry was established to cater to the needs of the USA. Punjabi
ethnicity is divisive to the core. It divides the federation without uniting
Punjab, because Punjab is multilingual and multiethnic, and this diversity
goes hand in hand with appalling discrimination in development and
opportunities
If the former chief minister of Punjab feels compassion for
Punjabis, he should be touring Sindh to thank those poor haris who
stretched their resources to take care of stranded passengers from Punjab,
while the state was nowhere in sight. He should recognize the courage of the

902

young men who kept awake for three nights to ensure the safety of their
brothers and sisters who spoke a different language. If nothing else, he
should learn something from the much maligned Asif Ali Zardari and refrain
from playing with a fire that could ravage the country we love, despite all
the pain and suffering that has been heaped on us due to the wrong policies
of his patrons.
Ayesha Haroon urged PPP to keep focused on its agenda. Apart from
the ethnic card, another fact being casually mentioned in certain drawing
rooms and political discussions is that nothing much happened and that three
days was all it took for Benazirs death to become old news. An implication
drawn from this is that if such a tragedy takes only three days to become
old news, the forces of status quo can get away with virtually anything
and all this concern about popular support and so on are just that: concerns
that do not have much substance.
The interests of those in power and those outside are too
misaligned for the lines to be drawn so starkly. The policies that we have
been pursuing in the past have evidently not been in the interest of the larger
public. There are many proponents of privatization and liberation and in
many international examples we have seen the benefits of these policies
also. In Pakistan, however, all of these policies have ended up benefiting
very limited elite and the advantage has not been shared with the people.
It is not the fault of a policy for a policy can be good or ill-judged.
It is the fault of a system that makes policies behind closed doors
sustains poor and inequitable implementation of policies, follows them with
more of the same, and rewards the rent-seekers. On a micro level we have
had three major stock market crashes without the regulator able to punish
even a single perpetrator, on a macro level, for almost the entire new
millennium so far, we have been living through a system that sidelined the
mainstream parties, encouraged unbridled and non-representative policies,
supported of course by the west, which is now upset by the level of
extremism in the country.
As Bhutto is still with us today, so will Benazir stay with her people.
And so will every leader who represents the aspirations and hopes of the
people of Pakistan. If the power brokers have not understood this thus far,
its just a matter of keeping the struggle alive for as long as it takes.

903

M B Naqvi opined that the need of the hour was: PPP and PML-N
must cooperate. The US and the UK quickly readopted her as reinforcement
for Gen Musharraf in his war effort against Islamic extremism. How will the
PPP behave if it wins the Feb 18 election? Despite Benazirs reiteration of
the roti, kapra aur makan slogan since her second arrival from exile,
Washington and Musharraf needed the PPP only to promote their
agenda.
The Bhutto legend has lived for 30 years of struggle after him. Can it
now be transferred to Asif Zardari and later to Bilawal? The time will show
whether the PPP now has what it likes to challenge the so well-entrenched
Army-led coalition of social and economic elite. Maybe the PPPs new
leadership, like Benazir herself, will happily be accepted in a junior
partnership in power with the army chief. If so, it will dissipate what
remains of the Bhutto Benazir charisma.
Nawaz Sharif has emerged as a leader of men, though mainly in
Punjab. Would he grow further, as he may if he continues to support the
lawyers demands for a democracy free from the militarys stranglehold?
Who knows how deep is his new liberalism? But the possibility is there
more so if he can work with the new leadership thrown up by the lawyers
and judges.
Unless the PML-N closely cooperates with the PPP and the two
together co-opt the leaders of legal fraternity, it will be impossible to
unhorse the military-backed politicians. That will cement the alliance of
the middle class with the common people an irresistible force if it is
aroused Would this composite leadership have the imagination to unitedly
work and take Pakistan by storm (and out of storm)?
Shareen M Mazari criticized post-murder foreign interference. While
the nation was still raw in grief over the assassination of Ms Bhutto, not only
was its sorrow aggravated, its rage and anger over this cowardly act of terror
was fuelled, and its intelligence insulted by the senseless and bizarre
pronouncements on the Interior Ministry on the cause of Ms Bhuttos death.
One does not know whether to cry out in frustration and anger or to
simply and helplessly despair at officialdoms ineptitude and
absurdities.
What possible end was expected to be achieved by denying what the
world was seeing repeatedly on television screens and hearing from first
904

hand accounts? Honestly, the ordinary and the sane human mind cannot
comprehend why the grieving Pakistani nation was subjected to such
insensitive and inane pronouncements.
That the caretaker government has now apologized for it is a
welcome change from the norm. Unfortunately, the damage has been done
in terms of any investigative credibility that the government may have
had. Worse still, it has provided an opportunity, if that was ever needed, for
external players to seek justification for intrusion into them countrys
domestic matters. Added to this has been the demand from many quarters
within Pakistan, including the slain leaders PPP and her spouse, that an
international probe be undertaken for seeking out the guilty.
Of course, there is skepticism about a credible national investigation
given the States past record on this count. That is why there is a dire need
for the government to ensure transparency and establish credibility at each
step of its inquiries and investigations. As one who always decried foreign
interference in our domestic affairs, given this particular situation with a
grieving nation and a trust deficient between civil society and officialdom as
well as the history of past investigations, some foreign help, such as the one
offered in a politic way by the British Prime Minister, would go a long way
to assuring the Pakistani nation that the government is serious about
exposing the guilty and bringing forth the truth.
Having said that, what is coming out of the US and its politicians, in
terms of pronouncements relating to Pakistan and the assassination of Ms
Bhutto, is nothing more than abusing Pakistan for American domestic
political ends in an election year. Of course tirades against the safety of
our nuclear assets are immediately brought in, no matter what the issue
relating to Pakistan
Shafqat Mahmood discussed possible American connection in
assassination of Benazir. The easiest explanation is that al-Qaeda or
Pakistani Taliban killed her and this is what the government has been
pedaling. In twenty-four hours, it not only determined the exact cause of
Benazir Bhutto death but also solved the case. Baitullah Mehsud, we were
told, is the culprit and there are tapes to prove it.
There is little doubt that Benazir Bhutto hated al-Qaeda/Taliban
and had vowed a relentless struggle against them. But, how was this any
different from what Mr Musharraf has been saying and doing. What extra
905

measures would she have undertaken that are not being used now? The only
instrument available to her for crushing the extremists was Pakistan Army
and it is already engaged in a war against them. what was the extra that Ms
Bhutto would have brought to the table that scared al-Qaeda/Taliban so
much that they were determined to eliminate her?
On December 27, the murder attempt included a suicide bomber, plus
one or more shooters. In fact, for such a serious attempt, up to a dozen
people may have been involved. Even if she had not come out of the hatch
to wave to her supporters, they would have exploded the bomb and then
attacked her while she was being shifted and transported in an unprotected
vehicle. Her coming out just made it easier for the killers and the sequence
was reversed. They were determined to get her this time.
I am not ruling out the al-Qaeda/Taliban as the suspects but the
relentless desire to kill her requires a bigger motive than the fear of a
focused drive against them. The state is already taking them on and I dont
believe holding its punches. What else could Benazir have done? It is this
that makes the easy explanation of their involvement suspect.
There is a body of opinion in this country that believes that
United States is looking for an opportunity to take out our nuclear
programme and dismantle the effective strength of our armed forces. Some
columnists keep harping on this and one Ahmed Quraishi articulated this in
an article that has been widely circulated.
His thesis is that movement against Musharraf after March 9, was
sponsored by the US and everyone was paid including lawyers, journalists,
judges etc. He further goes on to add that the real target was not Musharraf
but the Pakistan Army and by extension its nuclear arsenal.
This worldview that America is out to destabilize Pakistan and
take control of its nuclear weapons, is bolstered by the statements of US
leaders and reporting in the American media. Newsweek famously declared
Pakistan the most dangerous country in the world, and op-ed articles in The
Washington Post and The New York Times have called for US troops to go
and secure Pakistans nuclear weapons
Ms Bhutto stepped into this cauldron by saying all the things that
would make the paranoiacs mad. She said that under certain
circumstances she would allow the America forces to target terrorists in the

906

tribal areas. She said that she would make Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan available
to the IAEA for questioning. Both these statements touched very sensitive
nerves. She also spoke often to American diplomats and officials of the state
department and they in turn made no bones of the fact that she was their
favourite candidate for Prime Minister.
Her American connection thus became her bane as far as the
paranoiacs were concerned. As Benazirs political fortunes rose, they saw
her as a Trojan Horse for American interests who would allow American
forces ingress into Pakistan and expose our nuclear program. These people
saw her as a clear and present danger in the very survival of the country and
a big enough reason in their mind to eliminate her. This is why they tried
again and again until they succeeded.
The difficult part to prove is who they are. I find it hard to believe
that Mr Musharraf or our state institutions are involved in any of this.
They have had misgivings about her but that did not extend to seeing her as
traitor or someone who would compromise our national interest. In any case,
the Prime Minister would only have been one element of the tripod of power
and they could checkmate her as and when they desired.
If the state establishment is not involved then who? It has to be the
shadowy groups who have connection with the state but operate
independently. They also have soldiers in the shape of elements who
worked closely with them in the past during the Afghan and Kashmir proxy
wars. While the state has stopped sponsoring them, they have not
disappeared. It is they who I believe are prime suspects in the tragic murder
of Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto.
Many other aspects, related directly or indirectly to the assassination,
were commented upon by the analysts. Imtiaz Alam talked of PPPs
behaviour. As an intelligent politician and super tactician she came out of
the wilderness of exile by manoeuvring her way to capture the centre stage
of mainstream politics while successfully presenting herself as a genuine
liberal democratic alternative to an authoritarian and isolated Musharraf
who was losing ground for his half-measures in every sphere, including the
war on terrorism.
Her charismatic appeal across the country was at its peak and she
succeeded in pulling millions of people to her public rallies in her aggressive
election campaign. In the course of two weeks, she along with the PML-N
907

succeeded in brushing aside the big chaudhrys of so-called secure

constituencies in the Punjab and elsewhere.
The conflict between the popular aspirations of the masses and an
authoritarian establishment remains irreconcilable, so is it between the
Bhuttos and the garrison who is intolerant to anyone who challenges their
monopoly over Pakistan. there is a clear historical link between the judicial
murder of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, death and killing of Shahnawaz and Murtaza
Bhutto and now Benazir Bhutto who was the last among second generation
of Bhuttos to keep the PPPs defiance going.
She professed domestic values, abandoned anti-India chauvinism,
adopted more secular traits and married the PPPs socialism to sustainable
economic development. Unlike her father she nursed no vendetta or personal
enmity. She, rather, bridged Bhutto anti-Bhutto divide by practicing
pluralism and showing greater tolerance for the critics and adversaries.
Although Ms Bhuttos assassination has left a great void that cannot
be filled since it takes decade to build an international icon of her stature,
she in her death has galvanized the PPP beyond its traditional constituency.
Her elimination may appear to strengthen garrison or benefit
extremists, but a charged populist democratic PPP will defeat the
designs of her murderers. The PPP at the worst moment of its history has
remarkably behaved with patience and perseverance.
The News expressed its views on prevalent bitterness and the risks
involved. The bitterness that has suddenly crept into our political
discourse after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto poses many risks to
the country. This is particularly true as the death in Rawalpindi has brought
with it a threat of increased inter-provincial distrust. While the anger of the
PPP leadership and of Sindhis in general is understandable, greater
responsibility to maintain calm and national harmony rests on leaders from
Punjab who must act with wisdom and maturity. They need to understand
and accept that it is amongst their responsibilities to ensure further friction is
not caused by design or by accident.
The head of the PML-Q, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, never the most
articulate of speakers, has meanwhile continued to insinuate that the PPP is
spreading anti-Punjab sentiments. This; going by the pointed efforts made by
Asif Zardari in his press conference at Naudero to dampen any feelings
against Punjabis by pointing out THAT his late wifes bodyguards, all killed
908

in the Rawalpindi blast, were FROM that province; is both untrue and
immensely dangerous. No politician in a position of responsibility should
make such comments. Indeed, what is needed is a spirit of forgiveness, a
readiness to sacrifice personal interests and family hatreds for the sake of
national harmony.
At a time when reconciliation is badly needed, when Pakistan needs
to find ways to move forward again, there are ominous steps. They can only
add to the discord, the disarray and the lingering feelings of loss and
anger that still exist everywhere. And this, in the longer run, will do nothing
to help a country reeling after the latest blow inflicted on it, but only make it
more difficult for the nation and its people to stand up once more and
resume their quest to find the stability that is now so badly needed.
Fasi Zaka wrote few lines in praise of Musharraf, Zardari and others.
Its time for Musharraf to issue a new NROthis NRO would be his
resignation. But if the past year is anything to go by, such a gesture will not
be forthcoming. Is it too idealistic to expect something like that to happen,
that someone would overcome his own narrow interests and do something
that would put the country at ease?
Usually, the answer would be yes. But some people are exhibiting
behavior thats not true to form, and gives us some semblance of hope.
Take Zardari for example; long derided as the biggest liability of the PPP,
after his wifes death he hasnt played the role of demagogue. He called for
calm, and most crucially underplayed the provincial card in the assassination
of his wife.
Post the events of Liaqat Bagh, the will of Benazir Bhutto has been
a sad commentary on her political beliefs. She handed over the reins of
her party in a dynastic fashion, and while it shouldnt come as a surprise to
most of us after she had already declared herself Chairperson for Life, it was
still unsettling after the outpouring of grief that had temporarily suspended
judgment on her politics.
Then we have Nawaz Sharif. Long caricaturized as a leader with little
grey matter, who swayed on issues with advisers at the reign and eager to
take the easy way out, appears a changed man. Unlike Benazir, he didnt
play the game of cat and mouse with Musharraf in landing a deal.

909

With these two figures, Zardari and Nawaz not acting according to
the fashion they have been typecast, maybe it wouldnt be too much to
expect Musharraf to do the same for a change. After September 2001
Musharraf had become a unifying force in the country in the wake of an
administration hell bent of vengeance that has coupled hysteria in the
western world. Only now, Musharraf has changed into a divisive figure
that embodies the ills the country was able to assail into a coma for half a
decade.
Most of our problems in the past year can be directly traced to
Musharrafs actions that were aimed at keeping his tenuous hold on power
If only Musharrafs party of orphans and nightmare legal teams would
recognize what is needed and finally give him some sound advice that
everyone on the street seems to know but is not filtering upwards. Musharraf
needs to do it for the country; it will be symbolic of a new start without him.
But as someone said to me recently, its a slippery slope that wont allow this
turn of events to happen. We are becoming a banana republic, and our
problems are coming in bunches.
Farah Zahra while blaming Americas war on terror for BBs murder
expressed some thoughts on counter assassination. Analyzing the
assassination is important so that it may lead us to the killer. However, it is
clear that it was a terrorist whose allegiance and identity may or may not
be verified and this will not be the first case of its kind where the real story
never makes its official appearance. But let us assume that this was to
happen, can the assassins possibly be brought to justice? Justice
unfortunately would indeed still be missing. What therefore needs to be
counter assassinated is the idea and indeed the reality that extremists can
continue to exist and operate in this country with such persistent boldness
Benazir had claimed to espouse two prime goals of achieving
democracy and eradicating extremism. Simply the fact that she like her
father was so very much popular with the masses of the country goes to
prove that the increasing fanatical image of Pakistan is somehow at odds
with the reality. Pakistan is essentially a forward-looking country that is
largely different from the claustrophobic image that is perpetrated by such
equally claustrophobic events.
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto, which is undoubtedly one of
the most horrendous crimes in the history of this nation, like so many similar
ones of lesser stature and same genre, has been labeled an act of
910

terrorism. Calling such incidents of barbaric act of a terrorist is almost

like a water hose that moistens the ground and prevents any unbecoming
cracks on the parched earth from becoming too painfully obvious. More or
less to be accepted as an explanation within itself this phrase an act of
terrorism shuts out the burden of responsibility.
This particular incident of Benazir Bhuttos assassination prima facie
reveals that the US needs to re-think its mode and level of involvement in
this region, vis--vis terrorists. Secondly, there are many cracks now visible
in the Musharraf-led governments persistent statements on its allegiance
and abilities to fight the militants as the boundaries between the fighters and
the fought are becoming yet more blurred.
Pakistan needs to plan a counter assassination and a strategy for
its sincere execution for battling not individuals and groups but illiteracy,
extremism and finally a complete defacing of its own image In planning
such a counter assassination it is essential to begin by knowing the mind of
that which is to be assassinated.
Al-Qaeda and other religious extremist groups operate on reaction
and protest against the west and that is their fuel. Assassination of
individuals and groups of people is far easier to plot and execute than
that of ideas, claustrophobic thinking and warped value-systems
especially if that is where all energies are being diverted. And if that is
indeed the case then this war has no end it merely has intermissions long
or short depending on when the other side feels prepared to take its turn in
terms of violence and bloodshed. It is too early to be hopeful of the
rudiments becoming slightly visible of plotting this more meaningful
assassination by the agonized people of Pakistan who do not want to leave
the whole task for the state alone become strong enough to execute this
counter assassination.
Ansar Abbasi dug out some information about joint business ventures
of BB-Rehman Malik. For many in Pakistan Peoples Party Benazir
Bhuttos extraordinary faith on Rehman Malik stemmed from their
mutual business interests, however, the latter claimed that they had tried
their luck in just one joint venture that did not click, and thus had to be
ultimately wrapped up.
Wagging tongues in the PPP whisper that the slain PPP chairperson
shared extensive business interests with this man, who has not been really
911

popular amongst the top leaders of the party for making swift inroads to
become the top aide of Benazir Bhutto.
Malik simply denies this but others dont believe him. Some PPP
sources say that Benazir Bhutto had made investments in different business
ventures with Rehman Malik. It is said that Asif Ali Zardari perhaps did not
know about his spouses growing business interests with the former
additional director general FIA, who is usually referred to as ex-DG FIA, the
post he had never occupied.
The BB-Malik only joint venture was a company called Petroline, he
said, which was established in Sharjah with a third partner Ali Jaffery, a
cousin of Ms Bhutto. Its the same company, Malik confirmed, which
became infamous in connection with an international corruption case
concerning UNs oil-for-food programme.
Malik confirmed that the Madrid Court, which probed this case, had
cleared both the company and its three partners more than a month back and
ruled that no corruption had been proven against the accused. The
exoneration as claimed by Malik had come following the NAB lost
interest in the overseas corruption cases against the slain chairperson of the
PPP after Ms Bhuttos deal-dialogue with President Musharraf.
Although Rehman Malik had mentioned Petroline as the only joint
venture between him and BB, a NAB source dealing with the cases claimed
that another company, Global Tempo, was also jointly owned by Ms
Bhutto and Malik. It was also reported in the media that under the UNs
oil-for-food programme Petroline and Global Tempo were accused of
paying US $2.5m to former President Iraq Saddam Hussain and in return got
oil worth US $150m from the ex-Iraqi leader.
The United Nations had also held an inquiry into the matter in which
former Indian minister Natwar Singhs name emerged as one of those who
had bribed Saddam Hussein. Former UN Secretary General Kofi Anans son
was also alleged to have his share in this oil-for-food programme scam.
Ayaz Amir was of the view that now it all depends on one man. The
killing of Benazir Bhutto puts our national failures under a spotlight. We
know we are in trouble. We know that if we stick to the path we are on it
will lead to disaster. The perils of one-man rule are known to us. We
know that tricks played to perpetuate the present order, now in the last throes

912

of bankruptcy, will lead to more upheaval. We know that national unity is at

stake and that our salvation lies in democracy. Yet we continue to march
towards the brink.
Like it or not, Pervez Musharraf cant be wished away. For better or
worse, he is the man on the spot on whose shoulders lies the responsibility
of taking key decisions. If lucky, we can move to some sort of a democratic
transition once elections take place on February 18 but again he will be the
man presiding over this transition. Whether this transition is smooth,
whether it is a transition at all and takes us out of the woods and gives us
stable government, depends to a large extent on him reinventing himself
and turning his back on his eight years as Pakistans supreme ruler.
We now enter unchartered waters and what role Musharraf
plays will determine whether he is remembered for good or ill in the
history of Pakistan. if he still wants to manipulate things in the Q Leagues
favour, then we are doomed and instead of a smooth transition we can brace
ourselves for more disorder and mayhem. But if he can rise above his self
and hold elections that everyone perceives as fair he may yet do Pakistan a
bigger favour than has fallen to its lot in the last 30 years.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal opined that Pakistan never had democracy so; the
question of its murder could not arise. The death of democracy in
Pakistan is beyond the ritual period of mourning; it happened so long ago
that no one even remembers the anniversary. It died before its birth. It never
saw the light of day. Those who killed it before its birth have made sure that
no one even talks about it, for all the talk since its death has been about its
fake double known as our special kind of democracy in this part of the
world.
It is the death of this fake double that is often the subject of
articles in newspapers and on talk shows. This fake democracy has never
really died but rather has always lived in an intensive care unit. In the
hallways of this intensive care unit are spoken the unforgettable words of
one who now rests next to the recently dug grave of his daughter: My Lord,
this is not the trial of a murder, it is murder of a trial.
The murder of democracy before its birth is a thing of the past.
What we see now is a protean creature its fake double which sometimes
rises from its deathbed in the intensive care unit and walks the streets in
broad daylight to confuse people. People, poor, disempowered,
913

disenfranchised men and women shout with joy, they gain a little ray of
hope, there it is, just around the corner, democracy, it is walking now, it is
walking and we are just about to see the grand reversal the one for which
we have been hoping all our lives. We are going to see it happen, with our
own eyes.
But before anything happens, the deathbed is reoccupied with the
sticky double fake; blood spreads over lands and hills, and the business of
normalcy calls back those who had hopes and desires and aspirations. No
one remembers hundreds of unnamed and unnamable men, women, and
children who die in the carnage; unlike the unknown soldier, whose grave is
visited every year, there is no grave of the unknown civilian anywhere in the
world.
Our Amnesia is incurable. We have so quickly forgotten everything
of the recent past that we can only keep our heads low and keep silent about
the democracy within any of our several political parties, including the socalled religious parties. What hope can there be for anything but a sticky
double fake of democracy in a country where political parties have
monarchies and where leadership is inherited just like cows and sheep and
houses and palaces?
What future for a country where nothing remains but the sickly
double democracy with its shameful acts of emerging once in a while to
give people dim hopes only to immediately disappear? What hope for the
beloved land where one cannot even walk out on the streets with any degree
of certainty that one will return home that evening? What hope for a polity
where there is not even a single political party that operates on recognized
political principles?
The murder of democracy in Pakistan is a thing of the past,
forgotten by all, but its fake double is yet to leave us alone. Its apparition
is going to be taken out, one more time. On February 18 it will walk around
in sticky attire, only to return to the dark corridors of the intensive care unit
and leave us to gasp for air.
Kamal Siddiqi found some time for a prisoner of conscience. Part of
the house, where Aitzaz resides, has been declared a sub-jail and this is
where Aitzaz Ahsan has been housed for some months now. Policemen and
men in civilian clothing belonging to our numerous agencies stand guard
and watch each person coming in or leaving the office. No one can meet
914

Aitzaz Ahsan. Those who visit the office are also regarded with
suspicion.
Last week his detention was extended further under government
orders. Orders we cannot question or challenge. Attempts by foreign
diplomats to meet Ahsan have failed. Local mortals cannot even dream to
meet one of the countrys most respected politicians. The consequences may
be dire. Constituents and political workers stand outside and plead. But there
is no compromise on this. It seems that Aitzaz Ahsan has committed some
grave error. But one can only wonder what really the crime of this respected
lawyer and politician is?
The restrictions on Aitzaz Ahsan and his family members
increased further after the killing of Benazir Bhutto, Ahsan told an
interviewer on a national TV channel that he feared for the future of
Pakistan. Ahsan said that confidence-building measures needed to be taken
by the centre and by Punjab to allay the fears and misgivings of the Sindhis.
Since then, Ahsan has been disallowed to even come out on his houses
balcony for a bit of sun
To be fair, Aitzaz Ahsan chose his own path. His fellow party men
are free to move around the country. Most of them have assembled at
Naudero where they went ahead and chose a new leader for the party. In all
this Aitzaz Ahsan has been out in the cold. People speculated that Aitzazs
future in the PPP had come to an end following his decision to go along with
the lawyers. But this was not actually the case. Contrary to public
perception, Aitzaz Ahsan remains an integral part of the PPP.
It is the second hat of Aitzaz Ahsan that is causing him more
trouble. It is ironic that the three reasons that Aitzaz Ahsan argued on in the
Supreme Court were the three points specifically addressed in the PCO
when emergency was declared. Aitzaz was also targeted specifically by
goons when lawyers came out to protest the filing of nomination papers by
the president. This frail man was roughed up for all to see. But the country
remained silent.
This is not the first time Aitzaz Ahsan has fallen out of good
books of the establishment. In his first stint in government, allegations
were cast that he gave valuable information to the Indians when he was
interior minister It is amazing how allegations stick in Pakistan while
truth fades away. No one seems to have forgotten that Aitzaz was accused of
915

handing over valuable information but few can remember who made that
allegation and what the follow up to it was. Nothing was proven. In fact,
when Aitzaz sued a parliamentarian for making this allegation, he ended up
being rewarded damages. But this fact has not deterred rumour mongers.
Despite all odds, Aitzaz Ahsan has stood by his principles and
what he believes to be right for Pakistan. Why are we forgetting this man
and several like him from the legal fraternity who has made sacrifices in the
greater interests of Pakistan? Why have we forgotten our men and women of
principle? Why is it that as a nation we are still unsure of who our heroes
are? Why is it that we end up with people of questionable credentials to lead
us through?

REVIEW
The rioters targeted government property in vengeance. This was
understandable and so was targeting the private property of people linked to
the regime. But it was quite intriguing that the MQM leader sitting in
London asked his followers to show restraint when property of some of them
was targeted by the rioters.
This was against the psyche of leader and his party which have clear
terrorist inclination. It indicated that the man was aware of the fact that if
there was any party that can match MQM in militancy that was (and is) the
PPP, perhaps it could even out-match MQM because of its sheer number.
The experienced terrorist had rightly appreciated that it would be
foolish to confront the jiyalas when they had been highly agitated. His
dovish attitude should also be seen in context of the larger game of national
reconciliation of which MQM and PPP have been the main beneficiaries.
The man in London was under obligation to say what he said.
The PML-Q panicked when it saw the voters being swayed towards
the PPP by the sympathy wave. Chaudhrys from Gujrat, intentionally or
inadvertently, said something for which they were accused of playing
Punjab card. If they had really intended to play card game; they faltered in
choosing the wrong time and the play too was clumsy.
Their act deserved to be condemned, but their critics also need
exercising restraint. If the holders of Sindhi and other cards continue
916

threatening the use of their cards, someone at some stage would play Punjabi
card and that could mean the end of the game.
The analysts have started suspecting American connection with the
murder of Benazir, but so for it has been in the form of rumours. If that be
true, then it could not be done without the help of some insiders. The
demand of Zardari-led PPP for UN probe has to be seen in this context. The
real culprits can best be covered through a probe conducted by foreigners
using their high-tech expertise.
2nd February 2008

917

SHE ASKED FOR IT - III

General Aslam Beg said Benazir became victim of an international
plot authored by the Americans; US diplomat termed it outrageous and
unfounded. On 15th January, Zardari apprised the UK investigators of facts
about murder of his spouse. He also formally wrote to the UN for probe into
Benazirs murder.
During third week of January, Musharraf proceeded to Europe to
campaign for winning support from that part of the world. At the very first
stop at Brussels, he informed Pakistanis that the deposed chief justice had
tried to destabilize the country.
On 21st January, Musharraf also told EU that fight against al-Qaeda is
very, very tough and Pakistan needed time to match Europe in democracy.
EU said elections would decide future cooperation. Zardari told Rice that
Musharraf cannot protect Pakistan. More about the visit will be discussed in
a subsequent article.

EVENTS
Shahbaz called on Brig Niaz in Islamabad on 12 th January. Fatima
Bhutto raised questions on Benazirs will. Zardari advocated national
government. Musharraf saw no need for UN probe and blamed Benazir for
ignoring his advice. Justice Bhagwandas asked lawyers to forge unity.
On 13th January, Zardari said decision to work with Musharraf would
be taken after polls. Musharraf wanted Benazirs body exhumed. General
Kayani asked army officers to keep off politicians. Next day, PBC gave in
ground on PCO judges issue and resolved to observe boycott of courts on
Thursdays only.
Next day, Musharraf ruled out national government and ordered to
shoot agitators on sight. Six Scotland Yard detectives left Pakistan. Foreign
Minister of Norway was assured that Benazirs killers would be punished.
Flour shortage brought candidates of Kings Party under pressure. JUI-F
announced unconditional support to PML-N in NWFP. EC received 1,074
complaints; most of them were about misuse of state machinery.

918

After series of crises of power, gas and flour, PML-Q started

distancing itself from the caretakers. Karachi lawyers boycotted courts to
protest illegal detention of Justice Bhagwandas. PBC declaration was
unacceptable to lawyers of NWFP.
Next day, Nawaz sought fresh poll schedule and wanted Bhagwandas
as new CEC. Rauf Klasra reported that the recent visits of certain people to
London could result in thaw between warring Musharraf and Nawaz camps.
On 17th January, Shahbaz admitted political dialogue with Brig Niaz. Asma
lamented water supply cut to deposed CJPs house.
Next day, Pervaiz Elahi accused Aziz government of flour and power
crises. Musharraf ruled out removal of CEC and meeting with Shahbaz. New
York Bar wanted revival of pre-November 3 judiciary. Khalid Ranjha said
Iftikhar was still the Chief Justice on Pakistan.
On 19th January, Dera Ismail Khan Police claimed arresting a 15-year
old boy of Mansehra for his involvement in the plan to murder Benazir. UK
rejected report on alleged non-cooperation by Pakistani authorities with the
team of Scotland Yard; in fact the team had written a letter of appreciation
for the help provided.
President ordered Geo TV channels back on the air with immediate
effect. Musharraf is trying to sabotage polls, alleged Nawaz Sharif. PPP
worked for global backing for UN probe. Government official denied issuing
eviction notice to ex-CJP.
On 21st January, ex-spy chief asked Musharraf to step down as there
could be no better time to do so with dignity and respect. A journalist moved
Peshawar High Court against appointment of Senate Chairman as Prime
Minister. Geo TV telecast was allowed in Pakistan. Musharraf went to
Brussels to inform Pakistanis that ex-CJP tried to destabilize the country.
The Supreme Court sought details from State Bank of writing off of Rupees
53.5 billion loans. Deposed judges and detained lawyers posed a new
challenge to government, reported Ansar Abbasi.

VIEWS
People kept expressing their views on the murder of Benazir and the
events that followed. Abid Mahmud Ansari from Islamabad commented on

919

the successors of Benazir. It will not make any difference whether Asif Ali
Zardari heads the PPP or his son Bilawal.
Both Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto claimed to be the
champions of democracy during their times despite the fact they were feudal
to the core. The masses should now realize that the PPP is basically a
feudal party. Like every other party of the country, its politics revolves
around a particular family.
Sarfraz Khalil from Peshawar wrote: The way the government
reacted to the murder of Benazir Bhutto was appalling. The irresponsible
statements issued by Brig Javed Iqbal Cheema about the reason of
Ms Bhuttos death could not convince anyone. I request the interior
secretary not to let his department become a party in the Dec 27 plot to
derail the democratic process in Pakistan.
Khwaja Abdul Samad from Karachi had few words of praise for
Musharraf. Scotland Yard team has since arrived in Islamabad, got down to
the task and exchanged notes with the local investigators. In order to silence
all critics, President Pervez Musharraf has given the British crime experts
a free hand to investigate the murder of Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto in
depth so that the killers are identified and punished. it is sincerely hoped
that their findings would be accepted by all stakeholders in particularly the
PPP leadership.
Jawaid Raja from Rawalpindi had views to the contrary. Musharraf
reiterated the other day that Pakistan was not a banana republic, something
he has said many times. The General is wrong. Pakistan is a banana
republic, and for the following reasons: One, a chief of the army staff was
removed from his position by a prime minister in accordance with his
constitutional powers. A new army chief was appointed and he took oath
under the Constitution. But the prime minister was toppled and arrested by
the army chief whom he had removed.
Two, the army chief who first became chief executive and then
president, held a referendum which had no place in the Constitution. Three,
turncoats and opportunists were brought together and a so-called Kings
party was established. This was done essentially by using the agencies and

920

accountability bureau to threaten these people to toe the official line or else
face many years in jail.
Four, the sitting Chief Justice of Pakistan was told to pack up and go
home. When he refused legal proceedings were initiated against him. The
chief justice, along with a number of other members of the superior
judiciary, was placed under house arrest. Five, lawyers and members of civil
society were beaten up like animals. Six, the Constitution was mutilated and
tampered with.
Seven, the outgoing national and provincial assemblies were used to
elect a president for a five-year term. Eight, the media was gagged. Nine, the
tenure of the army chief is said to be three years but some army chiefs have
stayed in their posts for as much as nine years. What else is required to
qualify us for being a banana republic? We are in fact a super banana
republic.
Farrukh Shahzad from Islamabad took on the Q-Leaguers. The recent
ad campaign launched by the PML-Q is despicable. Its attempt to cash in on
the Rawalpindi tragedy is a disgraceful act. While the entire nation was in a
state of shock, the Q-Leaguers were busy playing their dirty politics.
They should know that their foul play can destabilize the country and fan
ethnic prejudices. They should have demonstrated maturity in this hour of
grief.
These PML-Q ads have marred not only the reputation of the QLeague but that of the Election Commissioner and President Pervez
Musharraf as well. The Election Commissioner did not take notice of the
biased advertisements, which were in clear violation of the ECP code of
conduct. President Musharraf, who says Pakistan comes first to him, also
remained silent on the issue.
The office of president is said to be a symbol of the federation, but he
refrained from taking action against the people who openly tried to harm the
federation. The president should rein in the people whose dirty propaganda
is proving harmful for the country. We should have shared the grief of the
Rawalpindi tragedy collectively, as it was a national loss.
Fazal Raheem from Lahore expressed his views about the COAS.
General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani has directed all army officers to refrain
from meeting politicians. In a letter addressed to the officers he has

921

stressed that they should devote all energies to their professional

responsibilities and avoid any kind of political activities.
One hopes that the directive will also be applicable to the
militarys intelligence agencies because in the past all governments have
misused them to achieve certain objectives only a few months ago a senior
intelligence agency official was also involved in conducting political
negotiations with the Pakistan Peoples Party.
M Q Khan from New York selected one of the bad statements of
Musharraf for comments. Just as people begin to forget one more
controversial statement by the president, he comes out with a new one. In an
interview to a US-based weekly magazine, he said that Benazir Bhutto was
very unpopular with the military. The fact of the matter is that this can be
construed as being as controversial as the statement made by Chaudhry
Pervaiz Elahi in the aftermath of Benazirs assassination which were aimed
at fanning ethnic fires.

Benazirs murder and related events remained a fovourite topic of

media and analysts. Raza Rumi paid tributes to the departed soul. In
Benazirs case, the battle lines were clearer. A patently violent brand of
political Islam masking itself as anti-imperial and aided by powerful
elements within the Pakistani establishment is hell-bent on destroying
Pakistans political and social fabric. Contrary to what many believe, this
embedded dysfunction is above all a threat to Pakistan and its burgeoning
population. The region and the world come next
Bhuttos mass appeal remained a formidable challenge to the
Pakistani establishment that failed to undo the legacy of people-centered
politics for three decades. The Bhutto brand of politics came about without
the manipulations of the bureaucratic steel-frame that shaped Pakistani
politics, often in tandem with foreign interests.
Benazirs return in October showed that her popular support was
intact despite the corruption charges, trials real and media-led and
continued impression of incompetence and opportunism in a culture of
misogyny and violence against women. Her worst opponents could not deny
her dazzling articulation and grasp of global politics. And, now like her
father she also demonstrated an uncanny sense of history, of seizing the
moment and dying for the cause of political process in the militarized
Pakistan.
922

Babar Ayaz talked about political dynasties. There are also some
Benazir Bhutto admirers who doubt that she had written a will
nominating her husband Asif Zardari as the next party chairman. He
was gracious and bestowed it on his son. The party leaders accepted it as feit
accompli. This is not the occasion to squabble over leadership, if they have
to ride the sympathy tide and win the elections.
The question is why the leadership has to be kept in the Bhuttos
family? Why we have to follow dynasties? Look around first in the
country: Democrat Bacha Khan was followed by his son Wali Khan and now
by grandson Asfandyar Wali. Chaudhry Zahoor Elahis political heritage was
passed on to Chaudhry Shujaat and his cousin Pervez Elahi. Even Moonis
Elahi is in the queue. Mufti Mehmoods legacy has gone to Fazlur Rehman.
Nawaz Sharif had passed on his position in Punjab to his brother Shahbaz.
Even PPP senior vice chairman Makhdom Amin Fahim, owes his position to
inheritance of his ancestral spiritual gadhi. The list is long. What Bhutto
family has done is thus not peculiar, but it is typical of political families.
Jamaat-e-Islami and left wing political parties are exceptions.
Now lets get the international perspective. The Bandaranaike family
in Sri Lanka, the Nehru-Gandhi family in India; Mujeebs daughter and
Ziaur Rehmans wife in Bangladesh, and Bush, Kennedy and Roosevelt
dynasties in the US.
Pakistan is one of the most imperfect states, and has remained under
military rule for almost half of its life. The struggle for democracy has been
bloody. Democracy is only skin deep in our culture. It is a mean to get the
power as there is no other way to rule the country. The alternate is worst it
is the military and civil bureaucracy dictatorship. The political parties, at
least, have to go to the people for vote and get a mandate
We have to admit, its not normal times for PPP. The establishment
would love to see it wither into various factions. It is get BB to get back on
PPP. Whether Zardari and Bilawal would be able to keep the party intact,
barring some small splits remains to be seen. Much will depend on the
ability of Asif Zardari to carry the senior leaders along. So far he has faired
well and sensibly One thing is certain; weakening of PPP at this
juncture would damage the democratic struggle, however imperfect it
may be.

923

Babar Sattar termed PPPs succession flawed. Bilawal conducted his

maiden press conference this past week after assuming the role of PPPs
chair and he did an impressive job especially as a 19 year old who just lost
a parent. But the succession debate is not really about Bilawal. It is about
Benazir Bhutto, the state of democracy within all our political parties, and
our social value system that enables political elite to perpetuate itself in
power and prevent challengers from entering the political fray.
Benazir Bhutto headed the party for over two and a half decades,
accepted and justified the title of chairperson-for-life and did not allow
leaders to evolve from within who could possibly replace her or even
question her word. Her not-so-secret disaffection for Aitzaz Ahsan since
he rose to greater national prominence as a leader of the lawyers movement
fighting to uphold rule of law and justice underscores the deliberateness of
such policy.
It is amazing that the prophets of democracy heading Pakistans
political parties never utter a word about internal party democracy and
consequently (i) politics in Pakistan remains personality-driven as opposed
to issue-based and (ii) the distinction between democracy and dictatorship
become fudged as the style of governance under both remains autocratic
The process of balloting doesnt automatically result into a representative
democracy if people have little control over which names get on to the
ballot.
The nature of a democracy is affected by specific institutional
structures and legal rules, because popular will translates into electoral
mandate through the medium of these structures and rules. The
entrenched ground rules of political competition in Pakistan are such that
they squeeze out challengers and thus the forces of change. There seems to
be a covenant among our political elites that they will work together to
prevent easy penetration by outsiders. The fourteenth amendment to the
Constitution of Pakistan that gave party heads excessive control over the
freedom of speech, legislative choice and association of their elected party
representatives was a manifestation of such covenant.
In Pakistan the barriers to entry into the political arena are skyhigh. There is simply no institutional mechanism to groom leaders and it is
either the incidence of birth or historical events that account for the
emergence of a leader. But due to the lack of a process for finding and
cultivating political talent and fresh ideas, we are stuck with the recycled
924

ones we have. A popular bumper sticker these days reads, Join Pakistan
Army, Become President. This is as much a satire on the militarys
intervention in politics as it is on the failure of political parties to function as
democratic institutions. For another one saying Join PPP, Become Prime
Minister would be equally hysterical.
How do you become a meaningful part of the political process if you
dont belong to a political family and dont have excessive wealth to
gatecrash a party? Can you become a party worker and expect to rise to the
top by virtue of your talent? Yet there are no signs of any plans or even a
desire being harbored by our existing political parties to reform themselves
along democratic lines. The only way to force reform upon existing parties is
by establishing competing political structures that are democratic
Pakistan could use enhanced competitiveness within the political
arena and one way to accomplish that is for hope-inspiring politicians
such as Aitzaz Ahsan, Imran Khan and their like to create a political
party that disallows individuals from holding either political party office or
public office for more than two terms. We need a new political force that
encourages equality, integrity and competence to flourish and also provide
room for internal change as opposed to chasing out the dissenting voices.
The debate regarding the succession of leadership within PPP is
likely to prove largely irrelevant for the future of politics in Pakistan.
Benazir Bhutto inherited the PPP mantle in a different era and toward the
beginning of the reign of a dictator. As political processes remained
suspended in the country for a while her age and physical absence from
Pakistan didnt matter all that much. In contrast by the time Bilawal
finishes his studies and comes of age, much water would have flowed
under the bridge. While he will have an edge over the next twenty five year
old political enthusiast, he will need to prove his mettle and create room for
himself to lead the party and play a meaningful role in the politics of
Pakistan.
Waqar Mehdi, information secretary of the PPP, Sindh justified
Zardari as legitimate successor. The ruling party is now picking on the new
co-chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party, Asif Ali Zardari. He has been the
target of rumours and accusations since the time he married Mohtarma
Benazir Bhutto. Interestingly, none of the accusations and rumours has ever
been empirically proved, despite an immense effort both by the state
agencies and rival political parties. In contrast, a larger number of
925

Pakistanis have shown their trust in him by sending him twice to

parliament, although he was in prison.
The argument that the final will of Ms Bhutto should have been
shown to the media and the public is fallacious and a creation of
malignant minds. Yes, she was a public leader revered by a large majority of
the people of Pakistan, and it will be the people of Pakistan who will judge
whether her decision to leave the party to her husband and subsequently to
her son was right or wrong. The people of Pakistan had an opportunity to do
that on Jan 8, 2008, but they were denied that
Some people had to raise the parochial and ethnic slogans to ensure
that they continue to deprive people of flour, sugar and electricity. Such is
the caliber of this so-called leadership that the prime ministerial candidate of
the party PML-Q has not held one public meeting so far outside the
province of Punjab, because he is sure that outside Punjab his political
worth is nothing to write home about.
The people of Pakistan and the PPP voters and workers have seen
this game before and they are ready to counter these moves. Whatever the
hatemongers may say, the truth is the PPP inherits a very politically
conscious worker and voter and he does not fall for falsehood that
continues to be spread under the tutelage of state minions.
The News commented on the action taken against rioters. The powers
that be have decided to replace the Sindh home secretary and the provincial
police officer. This has been done ostensibly in response to rising public
criticism over the manner in which the provincial government and the newenforcement agencies handled the riots and looting that took place in parts of
the province following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on December 27.
In most instances, policemen and Rangers personnel stood by and
watched as rioters looted and plundered shops, offices, factories and
homes and destroyed property worth billions of rupees.
What is unforgivable is that this scene was repeated on three
occasions in the past year but the government does not seem to have learnt
any lessons. On May 12, the citys law-enforcers strategically withdrew
from their duties as armed men and hoodlums took over the streets and
fought gun battles while frightened citizens watched. Events were repeated
to a lesser scale after the suicide attack on October 18 when people came out

926

on the streets to vent their anger and burnt and looted in parts of the city.
Again the law-enforcers looked the other way
For one, why is the Sindh government spending billions of rupees on
its police and on the para-military Ranger force when their presence seems
largely symbolic? People have little or no faith in the present set-ups
ability to control crime or check violence. There is also little confidence in
the manner the money is spent as much of this is seen to be used to pamper
higher officials through bigger vehicles and larger houses while the common
policeman remains underpaid and under-equipped.
There are also questions about the role of the Rangers who seem
to have a hand in many pies including the distribution of water through
tankers in the city. Again, their presence has not helped much and the
province is poorer by billions paid dutifully for their upkeep. It is time the
government looked at ways not only to reform the law-enforcement
administration but also to bring some sense with regards to the role of the
different entities. All these forces are accountable to unelected
representatives. This needs to change.
As a priority, the police force needs to be restructured from the
bottom up. Policemen should be selected on merit and given professional
training. Most of the deadwood that has accumulated in the ranks should be
eased out. The police force should emerge as a professionally competent and
responsive organization. For this, it has to be run without interference from
both civil and military bureaucrats as well as politicians.
Mushtaq Yusufzai analyzed the blaming of Baitullah Mehsud. The
government, very quickly after Benazir Bhuttos tragic assassination
and a subsequent suicide blast that left 30 other people dead on Dec 27,
blamed Baitullah Mehsud for both. Baitullahs spokesman Maulvi Omar
called this correspondent from an undisclosed location and said: We are
equally grieved by the tragic death of Benazir Bhutto and extend our
sympathies to her family as well as the Pakistan Peoples Party workers.
Maulvi Omar said that Baitullah Mehsud, after learning about the
allegations against him and sensing gravity of those charges, convened an
emergency meeting of TTPs Shura (council) comprising senior militant
commanders at a secret location somewhere between the South and North
Waziristan tribal region.

927

Why would we kill her? We had no enmity with her and more
importantly she had done nothing wrong to us, said Maulvi Omar quoting
Baitullah Mehsud as telling the Shura meeting. Omar said that harming a
woman was against the teachings of Islamic Shariah as well as the centuries
old rich traditions of Pakhtun tribal people.
Baitullahs spokesman said by blaming them for the murder of a
senior political leader like Benazir Bhutto, the Musharraf government was in
fact misguiding the world. He alleged that the government was attempting
to portray tribal areas as centers of terrorists, to earn the support of
their Western masters.
Ali Abbas Rizvi pointed out failings of PPP brass in Benazirs
security. Following the tragic assassination of the PPP chairperson, one has
read all sorts of allegations from the party, which blamed the
government of failing to provide adequate security to its head. On the other
hand, the government claims that it did whatever it could but the final
responsibility for the security lay with the party itself. It is impossible to
ascertain the facts in the acrimonious blame game, while the only truth on
which everybody agrees is that a fearless woman who gambled with her life
on the streets of Pakistan is no more.
Admittedly, the government in most cases is considered incompetent
by the people. But then it always was. The fantastic conduct of the
Interior Ministry following the death of Benazir Bhutto raised
suspicions where there would have been none. But what about the PPP top
brass? Can it be criticized over its glaring failures to protect its leader?
From the security point of view, the following factors should be
carefully reviewed by all those who wish to objectively look into the true
causes of the death of Benazir Bhutto. What did the party top brass do
before Benazirs arrival when it was aware that its chiefs life was in mortal
danger? In such cases, what should have been done was to consult and hire
experienced security experts, specializing in VIP protection
The party claimed that the government did not allow foreign
experts to guard her. The problem here is that normally it is expected of
protective officers or bodyguards that they would be comfortable with the
environment that they would be operating in; know the language, culture and
customs besides the location of emergency facilities. As such, while foreign

928

guards could have provided invaluable help, their presence on the ground
could have created complex issues.
Second, it is apparent that those who were managing Benazirs
security never put into place a proper security plan. Perhaps, they left it
only to the government. What the security advisers, whoever they were,
should have done was to prepare an exhaustive threat and risk assessment
and detail the steps to be taken to counter and neutralize all possible threats
to her. Was it ever done? Did they ever employ advance teams to check the
venues where she was to speak and visit? It seems not.
Third, the attack on Benazir Bhutto on October 18, 2007 on her
return, which killed around 150 people, in all respects was a turning point. It
should have been an eye opener for the partys top brass that the threats
were not imaginary while the security steps that they had taken were futile.
This was the time when they should have been convinced that whatever
security steps they had in mind were ineffective and a waste of time. Experts
should have now been approached and a new plan put into place.
Fourth, while those close to Benazir may now claim that she
overrode them on security concerns or it was impossible for a public leader
like her to attend to the demands of security, one should ask them if they
did ever convey their apprehensions to their colleagues or the media. It
is interesting to know why they ignored the warnings about the presence of
suicide bombers in Rawalpindi, who are striking at army installations and
personnel of intelligence agencies? One does not recall anybody doing so.
Fifth, one wonders if the PPP top brass was aware of some
common security measures that are adopted in case of VVIPs. These
include, among others, sudden change in programme, abrupt change in
routes, avoiding movement in darkness, on the spot change of vehicles,
posting spotters with binoculars at the place of event, maintaining distance
from public, wearing protective gear, taking extra care where sniper shooting
is possible. Were any of these measures ever taken, especially after visit to
Peshawar where a young man was caught with explosive during Benazirs
public meeting?
One also wonders why party leaders suddenly came out with
bizarre theories about the assassination. Was it to cover their
incompetence? There is no chance that a laser weapon may have been used
to kill Benazir Bhutto as claimed by PPP leaders. There is no handy laser
929

weapon available in the world that could kill people, as there are serious
problems with storing, conducting, transforming, and directing energy at
miniscule levels
Finally, as a nation, we do not have a habit of admitting our
mistakes. In case of a disaster, the easiest way is always to blame somebody
else. This is precisely what has happened in this case. Has any party leader
stood up and admitted that more could have been done to save the life of
Benazir? Or there was no effective plan even after the October 18 tragedy?
Or those in the vehicle with Benazir should have had the sense to stop her
from opening its sunroof? Or has anybody heard the party is holding an
internal inquiry over the death?
At the same time, one fails to understand why the interior
ministry wanted to blame for Benazirs death to fall on the government
by issuing ludicrous statements. Were the statements only an honest mistake
or there was more to it. It should also be looked into.
Saad Sayeed searched for truth behind the conspiracy. Pakistanis
have developed an affinity for conspiracy theories over the years. Since
the assassination of the countrys first prime minister in 1951, political
turmoil and unexplained events have become almost commonplace. The
murder of Benazir Bhutto, is only one in a long line of political
assassinations, and like the rest, conspiracy theories abound. From the
ludicrous to the believable, there is no dearth of speculation surrounding the
death of Benazir Bhutto.
These theories often have little foundation in reality, although
there is the odd one that makes sense on first hearing. Here is an example: It
was the army, says an expert layman. What would they gain, is the
customary response. With Benazir out of the way, America has to back
Musharraf 100 per cent because they now have no other option. This is
what those in the business call a plausible conspiracy theory. It cannot be
proven or refuted. Could well be true, is what some might end up
thinking.
Now for a ridiculous theory: The United States was responsible, is
the vehement claim. Why? Because Benazirs mother was Persian and they
dont want an Irani influence taking over the Pakistan government. Just
because youre paranoid

930

Despite the fact that the United States was backing Benazir for the
post of prime minister in a desperate attempt to install a seemingly
legitimate head of state in Pakistan, an alarming amount of people feel
that Washington orchestrated the assassination. They argue that the
American governments support for President Pervez Musharraf, now a
civilian dictator, will be justified in the eyes of the international community.
The killing of Benazir has solidified Pakistans position as a land of
extremists and a sanctuary for al-Qaeda, and Musharraf will finally be
perceived as a moderate voice even by his skeptics. A case of American
propaganda is what it was, or so goes the argument.
The United States is reportedly considering covert operations in
Pakistan and many believe that American planes have already attacked
targets on the wrong side of the Afghan border. The perceptions of the
Pakistani populace about the United States in particular and the west in
general are based on their historical encounter with American policy and
action. The rumours surrounding Benazir Bhuttos death may be
conspiracy theories but there is value to what people think and historical
reasons for their perceptions of reality.
The Benazir assassination has gone a long way in revealing what the
average Pakistani, with no political allegiances, actually thinks when it
comes to global politics. They believe the US, along with the Pakistan
Army, is involved in all the major socio-political debacles the country is
facing. Ask why and things become a lot clearer. US intervention has been a
regular part of Pakistans internal affairs, where military regimes have
received generous funding from Washington, while democratically elected
governments have been traditionally sanctioned or ignored
The News commented on probe by the UN. Despite the continuing
Scotland Yard investigation into the death of Benazir Bhutto, the PPP and
Asif Ali Zardari have pressed on with their demand for the setting up of
a UN inquiry team to probe the murder Official sources have said any
decision would be taken after consultation with constitutional experts and
the foreign office. There is also some suggestion that the UN can be called in
only when another country is, in some way, involved in the incident.
With the PPP now calling for public pressure to be exerted to demand
a UN-style probe, it should be noted that a key priority of decision-makers
should be to satisfy the supporters of the late Benazir that a full-fledged
and fair effort has been made to uncover the truth behind her killing. The
931

fact is that, at present, a great many doubts continue to lurk and these have
played a part in giving rise to a plethora of conspiracy theories. The Scotland
Yard effort, hindered, it is said by the lack of a postmortem and the hasty
washing away of forensic evidence from the scene of the crime, may be
unable to produce a conclusive result.
This having been said, it is uncertain if the UN, even if it is found to
have the authority to intervene in the present case, will be able to achieve
much. It must be noted that more than two years after it was set up, the
Hariri Commission has come up with at least seven reports, but has not been
able to reach any conclusion. It is also blamed within Lebanon for creating a
great deal of confusion, which kept the wounds open rather than helping to
heal them.
The damage inflicted by the multiple accounts of assassination
provided in the immediate aftermath of the incident by official
spokespersons must somehow be undone. This is not an easy task, but all
those in any way involved in the investigation must keep in mind that
failing to arrive at answers will leave behind a tremendous amount of
doubt and suspicion and this in the longer run could greatly harm the
interests of a country badly in need of greater internal cohesion.
A few days later the newspaper wrote on the progress made by the
local investigators. The arrest of a teenaged boy in Dera Ismail Khan, who
has apparently confessed to having been a back-up bomber in the murder
of Benazir Bhutto, opens up a possible window of light in the entire
investigation. The youth has corroborated previous evidence gathered by the
interior ministry regarding the involvement of South Waziristan tribal leader
Baitullah Mehsud, and repeated the names of those mentioned in an
intercepted conversation between Mehsud and an aide as being the actual
suicide bombers. Ordinarily, this should have been an extraordinary
breakthrough in what is the most important political murder in the history
of the nation.
The whole thing seems rather too convenient, in fact tailor-made
for the investigators. The arrested youth has said exactly the kind of things
authorities would like to hear, backing up conclusions that seem to have
been reached within hours of the killing. But, let us assume, at least for a
change, that the whole thing is true, that there is no element of fabrication
and the version provided by the young man is accurate.

932

The fact that so few are willing to believe this, or indeed any,
sequence of events officially provided, means that conjectures and
conspiracy theories will continue to linger. A look back into the past, and
to the deaths of Liaqat Ali Khan, about which so many doubts still exist,
proves this point. The naming by the PPP and Benazirs widower Asif Ali
Zardari of their own suspects makes it all the more inevitable conjectures
will continue
It is important that an answer to the murder be found. To have
any weight, this answer must bear the stamp of neutrality, otherwise the
clouds of doubt that hover over it in the minds of people will render it
largely meaningless, acting to fuel conspiracy theories rather than putting
them at rest.
Forth-coming elections started receiving extra attention of the
analysts. Adeel Pathan saw the postponement of elections as a calculated
move. On Jan 2, addressing a packed news conference, the Chief Election
Commissioner, Justice Qazi Muhammad Farooq, announced the
postponement of general elections that were to be held on Jan 8 to Feb 18.
The main reason given by the Election Commission was the state
of lawlessness prevailing in some parts of the country, especially in Sindh
after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. It claimed that violent protestors
had damaged and burnt down eleven of Election Commissions district
offices in Sindh But the actual situation is contrary to what Election
Commission officials claimed as the offices in Larkana, Sukkur, Thatta and
Khairpur were neither burnt nor attacked.
Former judge Justice Wajihuddin Ahmed, while talking to the
participants of civil society forum in Hyderabad last week, said he foresees
another tragic incident to further delay the polls. But he hoped that the
civil society would come forward to save the country and take it out of the
crisis.
The News wrote on international observers monitoring the polls. The
Pakistan government has declared the way for around 200 international
observers to monitor polls in Pakistan, while rejecting a request from the
Commonwealth to send a team for this purpose At any rate it is
impossible for a couple of hundred observers to cover thousands of
polling stations scattered across the country. A normal practice is that these
observers travel in pairs, so at best only a hundred places could be visited. It
933

is also true that, in the past, when foreign observers have raised doubts about
the process.
And it is also true that, with or without foreign observers, means
can be found to make the polling process more foolproof, and thus
remove what the former ruling party describes as opposition excuses
provided a genuine will to do so can be found. Such measures would include
the establishment of an autonomous election commission, a ban on all
transfers ahead of polls, strict implementation of rules on expenditures and
possibly the use of tools such as the sturdy machines used in India, which he
said to have made tampering extremely difficult.
The fact that such steps have not been taken is of course ominous,
and may mean that, as has happened before, despite the presence of
election observers, doubts will once more be raised about the polling
process that stands at the centre of any system of democracy.
In another editorial, after a reported meeting of Musharrafs aide and
Shahbaz Sharif, the newspaper wrote: The meeting held between a close
aide of President Pervez Musharraf and PML-N president Shahbaz
Sharif is being seen as one of potentially great significance as far as the
countrys future political scenario is concerned. This is all the more so as on
the same trip to Islamabad, Shahbaz also met with the Saudi ambassador to
Pakistan.
It is thought that, at present, the party may be more acceptable to the
president and his team than a belligerent and openly hostile PPP as the
prospect of a PPP-PML-N nexus in the next assembly is causing a growing
concern. This is especially true as there appear to be continuing doubts over
whether the PML-Q will be able to collect the comfortable majority it had
hoped for
There are even suggestions that the PML-N leadership may be
asked to consider joining ranks with its rival Q faction, on the basis that
the two groups share ideological similarity, and indeed are essentially two
parts of the same party. For this purpose, it is being speculated that the
president may even be ready to dump Chaudhry Shujaat and Chaudhry
Pervaiz Elahi, who some aides have warned are turning into a liability. The
accounts of significant rifts within the PML-Q, with leaders lining up in an
anti-Chaudhry stance, lend some credence to this suggestion

934

For Sharif brothers, this raises new challenges. Their surge in

popularity has been based largely around the tough anti-Musharraf stance
that they have adopted, as well as their opposition to pro-US policies. Any
suggestion now of a willingness to cut a deal or of reaching an agreement
to tone down their attacks on policies under Musharraf could result in a
loss of support
The dilemma for the PML-N could thus prove a considerable one yet
not insurmountable as Nawaz Sharif appears to have matured into a
seasoned politician in his own right. The party has already shown that it
possesses resilience, enabling it to make a comeback even after eight years
in the wilderness, and today take a role once more as a force that could
determine a great deal within the future national assembly.
In yet another editorial the news paper added: The aggrieved PPP is
sensibly treading a very balanced and non-aggressive path and has kept its
focus on demanding a UN probe for Ms Bhuttos death. Mian Nawaz Sharif
has taken a firm position that a national government, minus President
Musharraf, is a pre-requisite for a free and fair poll under an independent
election commission
The road ahead, however, is not so smooth. Many of our leaders,
decision-makers and would-be aspirants will have to show vision, grace
and patience. While extremists are threatening the entire nation, its peace
and security, political extremism is also being abundantly practiced.
Musharraf has turned into a civilian but he has yet to prove that he
derives his strength from civilian political institutions and not from his old
constituency. The army is trying to maintain a distance but the psychological
umbilical chord has not yet been broken and so a great part of the so-called
establishment still thinks that Mr Musharraf and the army are acting in
cohesion for the same goal prolongation of his rule. Repeated statements
of Mr Musharraf that he would quit if he becomes unpopular have not erased
this impression yet.
While Mian Nawaz Sharif may be persuaded in the final analysis to
accept an election under Mr Musharraf, major decisions have to be taken to
revive confidence in the electoral and political process. As a starter the chief
election commissioner and other members of the ECP must be replaced
with credible people and the nazims suspended.

935

The army must make a clear statement that it will not tolerate
any fooling around with the election process. Finally some, if not all, of
the deposed Supreme Court judges must be restored and given key positions,
so that confidence in the judiciary is back. If all this is done, may be Mr
Musharraf could preside over a clean and transparent process. The
alternative is grim and dark.
Rahimullah Yusufzai talked about the bitterness in election campaign.
Asif Ali Zardari, the new co-chairperson of the PPP, could be blamed for
triggering the ongoing war of words between his party and the former
ruling party, PML-Q, by dubbing it as the Qatil League, or the Killer
League. The implication was that the politicians allied to President General
Pervez Musharraf, were behind the assassination of the PPP chairperson
Benazir Bhutto.
Zardari made the remark in a fit of anger after the gruesome
murder of his wife, who was the mother of their three young children. It is
difficult to control emotions at times of such tragedies. In fact, he made
amends in the same press conference at Naudero where he described the
PML-Q as Qatil League by reposing his faith in the federation of Pakistan
and praising Benazir Bhuttos Punjabi bodyguards for sacrificing their lives
for her. It was a statesman-like approach from a man, who felt he and his
family had been wronged by certain politicians and civil and military
officials hailing from Punjab. Another emotional sentence or a slip of tongue
could have further inflamed the anger of Sindhis in the volatile situation
prevailing at that time and given vent to worrisome slogans such as
Pakistan Na Khapay being raised all over Sindh.
However, the Chaudhrys of Gujrat are not in the habit of taking
things lying down. It seems they needed an opportunity to pounce upon and
snatch the initiative after having been pushed into the defensive due to
Benazir Bhuttos assassination in Rawalpindi, the garrison city sited in
Punjab.
The PML-Q president, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, not the most
articulate person, found words to condemn Zardari for insulting Quaid-iAzam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. His argument was that PML-Q stood for
Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid-i-Azam and dubbing it as Qatil League
amounted to insulting Pakistans revered founder. The argument wasnt
convincing

936

Once the first salvo was fired by the two sides, there was going to
be no end to the verbal sparring. The PML-Qs Punjab-based leadership
also seized upon another opportunity to pin down the PPP and harm its
electoral prospects in Punjab.
The riots in Sindh, following Benazir Bhuttos assassination and the
looting and the burning of public and private property by mobs in rural parts
of the province prompted the PML-Q leaders to publish large
advertisements in newspapers asking the affectees to approach the party
for listing their losses and seeking compensation.
Provocatively and unwisely, the list of affectees in the advertisements
carried the names of all ethnic groups affected by the violence except the
Sindhis. The implication was that the Sindhis werent affected but had rather
caused the violence and harmed other peoples property. The PML-Q
announcement to set up a refugees camp for the affectees from Sindh in
Lahore also raised eyebrows.
The said advertisement had talked about large scale migration of
people from Sindh. All this was clearly aimed at winning the sympathies of
Punjabis and others affected by the violence in Sindh. It also meant that
the PML-Q had given up on the Sindhis, as they were now effectively in
the PPP camp and seeking their votes in the post-December 27 tragedy
wasnt going to yield anything.
As if all this wasnt enough, former Punjab chief minister and PMLQs candidate for prime minister, Chaudhry Pervez Elahi, started issuing
hard-hitting statements against not only Zardari but also the Sharif
brothers. His aggressive tone at his public meetings, which were
increasingly becoming lackluster with shrinking number of participants,
could be part of game plan to provoke PPP and PML-N to retaliate and in
the process shift the focus from the grave issues confronting the country as a
result of misrule by President Musharraf and his political allies
Wild accusations and unbelievable promises are invariably made
during election campaign in Pakistan but these are difficult times for the
country due to the new challenges facing the unity of the federation and care
ought to be taken not to further antagonize the already disaffected ethnic
groups belonging to smaller provinces such as Sindh.

937

Advertisements befitting political opponents seem to have become

the choicest method in election campaign. Nawaz Sharifs past statements
criticizing the PPP and the Bhuttos were dug out and his fluctuating
posture regarding boycotting the coming elections or deciding to contest
were highlighted in paid advertisements published in the name of PML-Q
office-bearers to ridicule his indecisive politics. And, in a manner
reminiscent of the past when Benazir Bhutto and Imran Khans Western lifestyle was publicized, pictures of the 19-year old Bilawal Bhutto Zardari,
frolicking with girls in the United Kingdom, were emailed by unknown
senders to journalists and other recipients
On his part, Nawaz Sharif has done his bit to placate the Sindhis
and other PPP supporters by publicly mourning Benazir Bhuttos loss and
visiting Naudero at the head of a large delegation of opposition politicians to
offer condolences to Zardari. As an important political leader from Punjab,
his efforts mean a lot in reassuring the Sindhis that the other federating units
care for them and want them to remain a part of the federation of Pakistan.
Sadly, the same cannot be said about certain other Punjabi politicians who
deliberately or unwisely are further alienating the distraught Sindhis.
The political temperature would certainly heat up with coming of
new slogans derisive of opponents. The spineless Election Commission of
Pakistan, which isnt trusted by the opposition political parties, has been a
mere onlooker. It could end up earning even more criticism in case the polls
are rigged. In any case, the elections under the present dispensation
monopolized by the partisan president havent generated much hope
and the costly exercise could end up creating a bigger mess than the one
presently haunting Pakistan.
Kamal Siddiqi opined that there is nothing free, especially not in
elections. The issue of free and fair holding of elections seems to be the
most important matter for us all. By pushing forward the elections to Feb
18, we have come closer to the earlier date announced by President
Musharraf of Feb 15. This date is post-Muharram and hopefully sectarian
tempers would have cooled down. But all indications suggest that that the
elections would be anything but free and fair. The transfers and postings that
have been done by the caretaker government and the manner in which
certain politicians are calling the shots despite being out of office indicate
that this is the case.

938

Predictably, the government and the Election Commission have

looked the other way. The PML-Q has resumed its dirty tricks campaign.
The manner in which it has tried to extract the Punjabi vote by highlighting
supposed injustices committed on Punjabi settlers can be seen as a cheap
attempt at trying to win votes. Advertisements were placed in which
compensation was promised for the Punjabi victims despite the fact that the
violence in Sindh did not as such target on ethnic grounds.
Ethnic tempers are also being stoked in urban Sindh, where there
are allegations that women were criminally assaulted by people from Goths
in Karachi and other Sindh cities in the post-27 disturbances. But there is as
such no proof of how widespread this was or whether it was committed by
the people who are being accused of this. There is no denying that women
were attacked and harassed in the post-Dec 27 disturbances. But one needs
to know who was behind this
We are still counting the cost of the violence. Insurance surveyors
have put the cost at over Rs100 billion. Thousands have lost their jobs as
factories and offices were burned. Thousands will not be able to get their
pensions as post offices and bank branches were burned down. The people
are jittery, especially in Karachi, which saw the worst of the post-Dec 27
violence. Almost every other day a rumour starts making the rounds causing
people to rush to their homes in panic
If the popular parties are allowed to be elected to power, this may
cause a situation where our president may be seeing impeachment
proceedings starting against him. There are many imponderables in between.
But as things stand, the political scenario in the country will remain
unsettled for some time to come. This is not something we look forward to
but a cost we have to pay. In all this, our caretaker prime minister has urged
the nation to curb the use of vehicles and save energy one needs to point
out that the prime ministers motorcade has at least 22 vehicles while those
of the caretaker chief minister boast at least 10.
As a final thought, one should think about the flour and power crisis
in the country. The present set of leaders have been in office for the past
eight years and yet nothing was done to put into place a plan to ensure
enhanced power generation capacity in the country. The only talk we had
was on the Kalabagh Dam which was more rhetoric than reality. It is the
same administration that allowed wheat to be exported last year and
now we are importing the commodity at higher prices. People have to
939

pay three times what they paid for flour last year. The government seems
helpless in all this. Billions have been made in between. There is no one to
ask or hold accountable. Such is our fate.
Ikram Sehgal emphasized on the need for credible elections. With
their political life at stake there is a desperate need for Pervaiz Elahi and
party to win come what may. The local civil administration will hardly
listen to (and implement) instructions for free and fair polls contrary to the
wishes of their immediate political patrons. Accountability for the wrongs
committed and the amassing of the wealth for years makes it a matter of
survival for them. Moreover, rigging will not be the exclusive privilege of
the ruling elite; local opposition influential will ensure their own seat or one
for their favourites A child can predict crisis is looming us in the face,
why is everyone who is anyone not listening? With the ugly head of
secession rearing its head, can we afford gambling the nations existence?
While Pervez Musharraf is on record ruling out national
government, for him it is not an option anymore, it is a dire necessity.
Instead of an intelligence agencies-sponsored caretaker government and/or
composed of politicians, the president should propose 5-6 non-controversial
men and women of stature and known political neutrality to be the PM and
CMs. They in turn should choose their cabinet colleagues, forming a
National Consensus Government at the federal level as well as provincial
governments.
To ensure the credibility of the electoral process, the EC should
be reconstituted. With respect to the superior judiciary, immediately after
the elections or after the new government is formed, the 6 heroes in the
superior judiciary who did not take PCO-1 on Jan 31, 2000 should be
restored for a limited time period as a Supreme Court Bench with one
mandate alone, to reconstitute new non-political non-controversial Supreme
Court and Provincial High Courts. And this should be done independent of
popular feeling, only and only on merit.
It is in the presidents supreme interest to stay clear of the
electoral exercise. The Feb 18 election date (or if at all a short
postponement for 15-20 days) should be the responsibility of the National
Consensus Government, and their alone. The constitution does not allow
more than 120 days between the assemblies being dissolved and the new
ones being called into Session. The EC was in violation of constitution when
it did not seek dispensation from the Supreme Court for changing Jan 8 to
940

18, if necessary a one-time permission can be sought with consensus of

political parties
Imtiaz Alam opined: What should not be forgotten is that the
establishment is keeping the whole electoral exercise under the dark
clouds of uncertainty. No one is sure of elections on the promised date
since everybody believes that the General will not let a losing battle take
place, given the worst rating of PML-Q and a massive upswing in favour of
the PPP. Keeping uncertainty suits the ruling party which lacks a mass
appeal. It neutralizes the oppositions capacity to mobilize.
Despite postponement of elections for 40 days, the Benazir gloom
continues to dominate the whole national scene. The people at large are still
shocked over this national tragedy and feel more passionately about her
absence. Never has in history been such a gloomy election campaign as of
now. Ms Bhuttos national mourning has deprived the election campaign of
all its beats and colours. The greatest challenge before the PPP is that how to
recharge its activists and the electorates out of their somber mood and
galvanize them into action on the D Day. The days of dictatorship are
numbered. This is now either him or democracy.
Nadeem Iqbal observed elections suffered from credibility crisis.
Many believe that the elections are delayed to give PML-Q more time to
subside the effects of Benazirs murder. President Musharraf is also
contributing to that perception. No wonder Pakistan Institute of Legislative
Development and Transparency (PILDAT) has urged President Pervez
Musharraf not to support any political party or group in his public meetings,
statements and speeches.
Interestingly, PML-Q has found itself pitched against all other
major political parties PPP, PML-N and ANP. ANP has also accused the
party of igniting ethnicity during the election campaign. PML-Qs task
seems to be difficult as it has to target PML-N and PPP while Musharraf can
only support it implicitly
The lopsided report, among other things, states that in case an
opposition candidate is strong the administration would engineer a
dispute at the polling station, getting the process stopped for two-three
hours while only thirty minutes will be given for the lost time; similarly,
they could break into a polling station and break down the ballot boxes
while bogus votes would be stuffed during the aftermath recounting.
941

The report also alleged that 90 percent of the equipment that the USA
gave the government of Pakistan to fight terrorism is being used to monitor
and keep check on their political opponents especially the PPP. Similarly, the
report accused the regime of having asked government sponsored candidates
to give names of their security guards and local thugs to enroll into the
police for three days on election duty. These also include ex-Army
personnel. They will be used to fire at polling stations and drive voters
away so that ballots can be stuffed.
Much of the doubts about the fairness and transparency of the
elections emanates from the fact that many see President Musharraf in a
precarious situation if the polls are fair. The doubts are not only internal
but also external the international community led by the US and UK has
also raised its stakes in these elections.
Mir Jamilur Rahman indulged in figure-work related to possible
election results. PPP has claimed that together with its informal ally PML-N
it expects to score 60 percent seats. If its expectations were to fall below this
percentage, then ipso facto the elections would be considered rigged. It is
warped logic, which is entirely based on politically motivated speculations.
Sixty percent would be bench mark. If the PPP and PML-N together were
to muster 60 percent seats the elections would be certified as fair. If the
percentage was lower than 60 percent then elections would be declared as
rigged.
The elections would be monitored by the international observers. The
foreign and local media would be doing their own monitoring. Every polling
station would have as many polling agents as the number of candidates.
These agents would be watching the proceedings with a hawks eye. The
election commission has taken various steps to ensure free, fair and
transparent elections
A caretaker minister supporting a candidate falls under preelection rigging. So does the Nazim. If the government were to accept the
demands of the opposition in this respect, then we would have to import
caretaker federal and provincial ministers from abroad. Such ministers
would have no local affiliations and so they would not be supporting one
candidate against the other. Similarly, to prove the independence of election
commission, let us import the election commissioner from abroad,
preferably from India because opinion-makers have often expressed
fondness of independence of Indian Election Commission.
942

It is deeply regrettable that we would not trust our own

government and its official to perform their duties honestly. We do not trust
our police although they give their lives protecting us. We do not believe our
government when it says that our soldiers in Waziristan are laying down
their lives to protect us from al-Qaeda and Taliban. Instead, we insist that
our government is working on the American agenda and not in the national
interests. We do not believe when President Musharraf
Mian Nawaz Sharif has come out with a solution to ensure fair and
free elections. He wants a national government before the elections. Would
he tell us under which article of the constitution a national government could
be formed? It would be more prudent for Nawaz Sharif to concentrate
on the coming elections rather than raising demands that are impossible.
Analysts kept commenting on other aspects of the political crisis in
Pakistan. I M Mohsin wrote: The International Crisis Group operating from
Brussels and Washington DC, both established seats of democratic
government, sees Pakistan as one of the major crisis areas in the world
today The report underlines our turbulence by highlighting that in
Pakistan, the 27 December assassination of former prime minister and
opposition leader Benazir Bhutto threw the country deeper into political
turmoil. Ensuing street violence killed some 50.
Since Ms Bhutto was the leader of the largest party, the storm of
protest by her supporters over her tragic demise was phenomenal. The
assassin proved that the balderdash spread by her enemies regarding a deal
was mere concoction. She came back to fight for saving the country from
another 1971 In causing 1971, her father played major role and she came
back after digesting billions and with intent to plunder more.
Prima facie, the current setup is seen, generally, as his masters
voice wherein the master gets involved in micro-management of all
affairs. The result is the absence of any deliberation at the various tiers. No
wonder the civilian bureaucracy has been destroyed by the prevailing
garrison mentality. Even now there are many officers in the DGM/PSP
cadres, etc, who are, per se, aboveboard, but they have to survive by heeding
the orders from the Big Brother sitting on top. That is creating the prevailing
mess
The regime neither provided her requisite security in these
dangerous times nor allowed her to hire a foreign agency despite the
943

deal. One can find a replay of Macbeth after he gets Banquo killed through
hired assassins in that great Shakespearian tragedy in most of the things
done by the regime immediately after she was pronounced dead. All
statements, etc., lacked the dignity that is expected of those who are in
power in a free country, but then we do not seem to qualify for such a status.
Mr Musharraf himself told foreign correspondents in a press conference not
to treat Pakistan or Pakistanis as such. While he survives in power, his word
is law; that is why we have judges confined to their houses and Ms Bhutto
was responsible for her own demise
Hoping against hope and learning from the martyrdom of Benazir
Bhutto one day people will rise to the occasion to hold accountable those
who have mauled this country. Then accountability will be the watchword
for the future state apparatus because if people are free, the government has
to submit to the will of the people like it happens in genuine democracies.
Kamila Hyat talked of the collapse of trust in politics. It is still
uncertain what the final outcome of the carefully planned murder of Benazir
Bhutto is to be, or what effects will be on polls, if indeed they are held on
the date of February 18 now set for them. The reports of attempts to open up
a process of negotiation with the PML-N through Shahbaz Sharif
consistently regarded as an establishment man betrays a growing degree
of panic regarding the composition of a future parliament. There are
apprehensions that one dominated by a hostile PPP would not serve the
interests of the President.
What is visible everywhere is a total breakdown of trust. A recent
poll conducted by Gallup shows less than half the countrys people believe
the version of events regarding the assassination of Benazir Bhutto put
out by the government, with almost 50 percent convinced agencies or progovernment politicians were involved The result is that now, even if, by
some miracle, the truth were to be discovered few would be willing to
believe it
But some undisputed truths exist. These are that the country today
faces a bigger crisis than it has at any time in its past. By resorting to an
undemocratic, dynastic succession, the PPP has put into question the matter
of whether it, as its name implies, is really any longer a party of the people.
If not now the impact of this decision of this will be felt in the coming years,
as the emotion that followed Benazirs murder begins to fade away

944

At the centre of this whirling storm, President Pervez Musharraf

retains a remarkable sense of calm. Rather like the aloof passenger of a
cruise liner, watching tiny fishing boats being buffeted by fierce waves, he
maintains a certain detachment from the sorry state of affairs he presides
away, while insisting that he alone, can rescue the nation from the grasp of
these difficulties.
The collapse of trust, the animosity and acrimony that dominates
political life aggravates the problems. This is particularly so as there is an
urgent need for reconciliation, for a coming together of all political forces so
that they can collectively draw up a map that may guide the country out of
its current journey to self-destruction. In the absence of a common strategy
that unites mainstream partiers against militants and extremists, the violence
that has destroyed so many aspects of life will only engulf what remains.
This re-building of shattered faith and of a spirit of cooperation
can begin now only in the absence of President Musharraf. He himself
has become a source of so much hatred, so much controversy, so much
distrust that there can be little hope of solution while he continues to
occupy the central seat of power. In the interests of the country and its
people, he must give up this seat and by doing so allow the process of
healing and recovery essential to the future to begin. This would be his
greatest service to the nation and to its future.
Shafqat Mahmood observed despondency about the future. Those
seeking to destabilize the country are succeeding because I have never
seen so much despondency about the future as I see today. Normally placid
people, who are generally unruffled, anxiously ask whether the country will
survive. This partly due to increasing acts of terrorism, but also because no
one expects the political and security problems that confront us to end soon.
The insurgency in Waziristan has been going on for some time, but it
is now spreading to other agencies of the tribal areas The death and
destruction in Sindh, and particularly in Karachi, after the assassination of
Benazir Bhutto not only brought home the fragile nature of links that
bind us
The political crisis also has no quick end in sight. The credibility
of Mr Musharraf and his government is less than zero. No one believes
anything that he and his subordinates say. His promise that elections are
going to be free and fair is not only disbelieved, very few even accept that
945

they even take place. I personally believe that elections will be held because
the international pressure is huge, but in the air of uncertainty that pervades
the country no one is ready to buy it.
Everyone is convinced that the Q League is down in the dumps
after Ms Bhuttos assassination, and since it is considered to be Mr
Musharrafs party, no one thinks that he will stand by and let it go down
meekly. People in the government are still talking about a hung parliament.
This means that they believe Q League will get a fair number of seats. It is
hard to believe that it can without rigging
The problem again boils down to credibility of the election
process. Since people already believe it will be rigged, any result that gives
forty or more seats to the Q party will confirm them in this belief. So, it is a
damned if you do and damned if you dont situation for Mr Musharraf and
his caretaker government. Any which way you look at it, there is trouble
ahead for them.
If some excuse is found to postpone elections, it will have
domestic and international repercussions. There is bound to be trouble,
particularly in Sindh, and we have already seen the devastating effect this
can have. If the elections are held and rigged, or presumed to be rigged,
there will be trouble.
In case by some miracle we do have a fair polling day, the parties
that are likely to emerge with the largest number of seats are the PPP
and the PML-N. If they join hands to form a government, and are supported
by regional parties such as the ANP, it will present Mr Musharraf with an
untenable situation. He will then have no choice but to quit. It is foreseeing
this that has made him say that he will leave if the people dont want him.
There is only one post-election possibility that could rescue him. If
the PPP accepts the election results even if the Q League has done well, and
then agrees to sit with it in a coalition, Mr Musharraf can ride out the storm.
In politics, nothing can be ruled out, but given the exchange of rhetoric
between the two parties, it seems like remote possibility.
As a nation, we are thus stuck in a logjam. There is no end in sight
to the political problems and the security situation is getting worse by the
day. The economy is in deep trouble, and by taking a political decision not to

946

increase oil prices, Mr Musharraf is determined to bring it down further. No

wonder, despondency is on the increase.
Dr Masooda Bano opined: The sense of fear being encouraged by the
government also has negative impact on the lawyers movement and the
working of the civil society groups fighting for the reinstatement of the
judges. The higher the level of insecurity on the streets, the fewer will be the
people who are likely to come out on the streets to protest. In a context,
where the lawyers and judges are still struggling for the reinstatement of the
deposed judges, where the media is still frustrated with the checks imposed
on its liberties, and where in the post-Benazir assassination period, the
political workers are charged up against the government, the coming
months promised tough public resistance to the government.
The fear of insecurity has reached its peak at this period and the
government seems happy to encourage this fear rather than putting in
place measures that facilitate public engagement. This thus leaves the public
very suspicious of the government intentions especially when on one hand
the state completely fails to monitor the so-called Islamic radicals yet when
it wants it can produce transcripts of their conversations so easily.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is being served all kind of notices to
vacate his residence. Other deposed judges are reportedly being pestered
with obnoxiously high gas and electricity bills. Justice Bhagwandas was also
put under house arrest this week for making encouraging statements in
favour of the deposed judges and the lawyers movement. The attempt is to
kill any spirit for change within the society. No one should talk of reform,
no one should try to mobilize other people to demand a better future from
the state, and no one should dare think that the public could hold the
executive accountable.
The saddest part is that for the time being that state has actually
succeeded in advancing the above objectives. After the high hopes of
reform built through the lawyers movement last summer, what Pakistanis
face today is a dismal future with little sense of direction or hope under the
current leadership. The lawyers themselves are finding it difficult to sustain
the momentum and that is fully understandable. There is a limit to which we
can expect the judges and the lawyers to sacrifice in the name of change
when other sections of the society are not pulling their weight.

947

There is bound to be, however, one final push for the lawyers
struggle after the elections as currently people are waiting for the elections
to see how the political parties will proceed on this issue once in the
assembly. It is important for the elections to be held on time and not delayed
further as only after the elections will all groups be able to design their
future strategy. Any delays in the elections will only benefit the
government; PML-N should thus refrain from making pleas for delays. It is
best to be over and done with them sooner rather than later so that some
clarity emerges from the present mess.
Babar Sattar discussed threats and conspiracies. The US efforts to
control the distribution of political and state power within Pakistan are
motivated by its desire to ensure continuity of the countrys existing
definition of national interest that are allied with the US strategy toward
the war on terror by General Pervez Musharraf in the immediate aftermath
of 9/11. However, direct interference in Pakistans politics is intensifying
existing fault-lines especially the prevailing civil-military imbalance
within the state and the society and thereby fuelling instability, insecurity
and violence in the country. The US finally seems to be recognizing this
contradiction. The US Congress passed its first legislation of 2008
condemning the murder of Benazir Bhutto and its sponsor Congressman
Gary Ackerman emphasized, that before Pakistan devolves any further in
chaos and violence, US policy has to change.
The threats confronting the country and the nation at the
moment are multi-dimensional. The War on Terror has resulted in at least
three types of external security threats for Pakistan. One, there is the threat
of al-Qaeda and the Taliban attacking Pakistani security forces from across
the border and within the tribal areas. Two, the threat of direct US military
strikes against suspected terrorist hideouts within Pakistan thus challenging
the countrys sovereignty in the event that the effort or efficacy of its
security forces in the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban is considered
lax, And three, the threat of US-led military strikes aimed at securing or
destroying Pakistans nuclear weapons if the fear of extremist elements
gaining control of Pakistans strategic assets becomes more plausible.
The second dimension of the security threats is internal. And it is the
mismanagement of these threats that could actually function as trigger
for the external ones. As a consequence of the war on terror and the
resultant insurgency in NWFP violence across the country has spiraled out

948

of control. The internal dimension of the security threat undermines the writ
and credibility of the state on the one hand, and the security of life and
property of the citizens on the other. Exclusive reliance on the use of force
by a Punjab-dominated military to fight insurgents in the provinces
bordering Afghanistan strokes fires of hatred and separatist tendencies
within these minority provinces, and in turn threatens the integrity of the
federation.
And the perception of Pakistan Army abandoning the jihadist allies of
the 1990s to fight a proxy war on the behest of the US that is largely
perceived as a global crusade against Muslims together with retaliatory
suicide attacks primarily aimed at security forces across Pakistan (for which
the public largely blames flawed state policy) strengthen the cause of the
extremists within the country, and threatens the life and liberty of Pakistans
moderate majority.
Such external and internal security threats have enfeebled the
state, which devoid of popular support, relies exclusively on the use of force
to fight all political and security challenges thereby exhausting any
remaining legitimacy. Due to lack of legitimacy, dysfunctional state
institutions and being consumed by external and internal security challenges,
administrative machinery of the state has begun to falter in the provision of
fundamental citizen services.
While manifestations are diverse, the fundamental issue that
plagues Pakistan is the lack of legitimate constitutional rule. This is
discernable across the three fault lines holding the future of the country
hostage: the civil-military divide; the centre-province divide; and the
extremist-moderate divide. Conversely it can also be argued that it is
actually the entrenched civil-military imbalance that accounts for lack of
rule of law within the country, which in turn explains the tussle between the
centre and the provinces within the federation and between the moderates
and the extremists within the society.
Whether we choose to exist as a failed state amid persisting anarchy
or address the structural flaws in our system of governance to realize our
true potential as a nation is up to us. We must realize that our frail health
as a nation is a consequence of our own recklessness. Of course, all
interested parties will come to fish in troubled waters. But to state the
obvious, we are primarily responsible for brewing the trouble.

949

To put our house in order, we must understand and address the

causes for (i) repeated distortion of constitutional rule, (ii) deconstruction of
state institutions, (iii) creation of a disconnect between the priorities of the
state and the interests of the citizen, and (iv) the pursuit of a security and
foreign policy that is contested by a majority in the country and has
undermined the personal security of its citizens. And again, to state the
obvious, General Musharraf is certainly not up to the task.
Rahimullah Yusufzai talked of impeachment. Those harbouring
hopes that they would get rid of him through impeachment should curb their
enthusiasm because this may never happen in Pakistan. Impeaching a
former military ruler even if he has violated the Constitution is next to
impossible in a country that has been ruled directly for more than half of
its life by army generals and indirectly for the rest.
In fact, another recent statement by the president should be enough
to make us realize that he has his own peculiar way of looking at things
and reaching conclusions. Claiming that he wasnt unpopular and still
enjoyed support from the masses, the elite and the army, he remarked: They
day I think that I am genuinely unpopular, I will be the first to resign. He
did concede though that his popularity has dropped.
Honestly, one doesnt know as to when a credible mechanism was
put in place to find out General Musharrafs popularity. And how do you
judge that a leader is popular or unpopular? It has to be through a
referendum, an election or any other democratic process. The method to
judge the persons popularity must be free, fair and transparent. None of this
can be imagined in President Musharrafs rule
If General Musharraf really believes that he is still popular, why
doesnt he follow the rules and seek election as president under the process
defined by the constitution from the new and properly elected assemblies.
Why should he sack judges of superior courts who insist on the rule of law?
Why does he have to order arrest of thousands Only dictators far
removed from reality resort to such extreme measures in a bid to
maintain their grip on power.
The president made a similar claim about his popularity in a recent
sitting with foreign journalists. Unlike their Pakistani counterparts, foreign
journalists dont have to fear victimization at the hands of the government
and are, therefore, blunt and critical while interacting with our rulers.
950

Predictably, there were questions to the effect that the president had
blood on his hands due to Benazir Bhuttos assassination during his rule.
He was also reminded about his unpopularity.
The president dismissed the first question by reminding the
questioner that he wasnt a feudal or tribal to think of murdering someone.
Feudal or tribal, many of whom are honourable people with values worth
emulating, would surely be unhappy with that comment. Even otherwise,
making such a sweeping statement condemning a whole group or
community is wrong.
A more interesting part of the presidents reply to the question was
that foreign journalists dont go out into rural Pakistan where he enjoyed
popularity. A reporter from the New York Times did travel to rural areas and
found out reactions contrary to what the president believed. Other foreign
reporters also know through their local contacts that the presidents
popularity has gone down and it is increasingly reflected in their writings.
The sooner the president realized that he is unpopular the better it
would be for him and the country.
Returning to the issue of President Musharrafs impeachment,
none of the opposition parties appear serious about it due to a host of
factors. First, it has never happened in Pakistan and cannot be carried out in
the prevailing situation when the just-out-of-uniform president still seems to
enjoy the militarys backing. Second, mustering two-thirds majority in
parliament for undertaking impeachment proceedings against the president
would be an uphill task.
Third, such a move would destabilize the political system and even
render the electoral exercise redundant. Most of our politicians are status
quo-oriented and would like to work within the system instead of
pulling it down. Some of them are publicly saying that the president should
be facilitated to wriggle out of the tight situation in which he finds himself
and offered an honourable exit.
Obviously, the president and his allies would consider all this wishful
thinking and impractical. Still any threat or even a hint of impeachment
could strengthen the Presidents resolve to stay in power. There would also
be the temptation to rig the elections and prevent the opposition from
gaining two-thirds majority in parliament to nip in the bud any attempt to
impeach the president. Rather than frightening the president into taking
951

measures that could further destabilize the country, every effort ought to be
made to facilitate a smooth transfer of power in keeping with the
popular will as reflected in the coming elections.
After COAS directive, Mir Jamilur Rahman felt that the army on the
right track. The COAS has sent his directive in the form of a letter
addressed to the officers, including commanding officers Its observance
would open up a new political path Above all it will help reinstating the
armys image, which has taken quite a pounding for interfering in politics. It
is true that army is warmly greeted whenever it pushes out the
politicians and takes over the country. But that jubilation lasts for only a
short period.
Gen Kayanis directive could not have come at a more opportune
time. The elections are only a month away. Already some parties are crying
hoarse that elections would be rigged. Such allegations are exaggerated.
However, Gen Kayanis directive would ensure that at least the army
agencies would not interfere in the election process.
General Kayanis directive has not been issued in isolation. Since
assuming his appointment, barely a few weeks ago, he has been striving to
give a new look to the army and its philosophy. Addressing his first Corps
Commanders meeting, he said the only way our country can thwart and
defeat all kinds of threats is through a comprehensive national effort, where
all segments of the society play their rightful role
It is a very thoughtful statement covering such important subjects as
national harmony, national effort and peoples will. The COAS has conceded
open heartedly that it is the peoples will that ultimately counts and is the
final arbiter. It could be surmised from his statement that military alone is
not enough to save us from external and internal security threats.
Ayaz Amir wrote: There is plenty of time to kill in the power
corridors of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. A new chief sits in General
Headquarters and as far as the caretaker cabinet is concerned it seems to
have left things on auto-pilot. No one seems to have a hand on the wheel or
the tiller, giving rise, to no ones surprise, to a huge sense of drift in our
national affairs.
But mark the silver lining in these clouds. That despite the
pervading darkness things are changing, is suggested, among other

952

things, by the new army chiefs warning to his officers to keep their distance
from politics and politicians. This is as it should be although in the current
circumstances, and especially considering the uses to which the army was
put during the last eight years, it is no less than a thunderbolt for those
wielding absolute power during this period.
Word is also out that army officers seconded for civilian duties are
being recalled to the army. Although not as quickly as might have been
expected because on checking with WAPDA headquarters, Lahore, I was
informed that those army officers serving in WAPDA, and consequently
helping to make a mess of the power situation, are still at their posts
When the change comes to Pakistan, two things will have to be
done immediately by any incoming government with the slightest concern
with the nations plight: finish, at a stroke, the district nazimate system and
abolish, at a stroke, the Police Order 2002. I never thought I would have a
kind word to say about the post of commissioner but compared to the
pestilence of the district Nazim it was a godsend.
The point of all this exegesis, however, is that the old order the
one with us for the last eight years just cannot go on in the way its
advocates are fondly hoping. If anyone in the inner sanctums of power
thinks that the Q League stunt can be repeated and another Shaukat Aziz
installed in office to sing the praises of the current dispensations and be a
willing rubber-stamp, he lives in a world of his own
Many pundits are of the opinion that the coming polls, whenever
held, will be heavily rigged. And that rigging plans are already in place.
However, one crucial factor has changed. The army was fully behind the
kind of electoral shenanigans the nation witnessed in 2002, winners in many
constituencies turning into losers overnight. But with the change in the army
command this kind of benign interference should no longer be possible.
So let us not despair. Things are bad. Of this there can be no two
opinions. But the good thing is that the very bleakness of this situation
holds the promise of change. Only when things break down, as they are
threatening to do with us, are men and women moved to thought and action.
So let us pray the same be true of us.
Asad Jamal discussed the judges case: Musharraf has said he will
bow out if the next parliament decides to impeach him only to assert a day

953

later that the next government will not be allowed to change the policy
course adopted by him. He also had the audacity to assert that he did the
right thing by sending the judges home and will do that again if need be.
Musharraf did not take the extraordinary illegal steps on Nov 3, 2007
only to allow an easy reversal to status quo ante. Events of past few months,
Benazir Bhuttos assassination being the most tragic of them all, have
thrown this country back in time by decades. It is not known how long it
will take to repair the damage done to the body politic of Pakistan. What is
clear is that it Will be a long haul
A departure from the earlier tradition has been observed since
then. Though the courts kept applying the ambiguous principle of let the
good of the people be the supreme law to allow dubious legal basis to the
military rule, a look at the uttering emanating from the army house in past
years and months will reveal the intruding institution has gradually found it
unnecessary to make the worsening law and order or breakdown of
constitutional machinery as the main grounds of their actions
Never before had the judiciary figured on a martial law
proclamation, let alone so prominently. The judiciary could always be
managed with the help of the inside collaborators who acted on the pretext
of saving the judiciary. Nine out of the thirteen grounds cited the
transgression of limits by the judicial organ as the reason for taking the
extra-constitutional steps.
When the Generals desire to stay as President for another five years
was challenged second time in the same year before the Supreme Court, the
judiciary had become more unreliable. Many say it was only a possibility;
dont forget he was allowed to contest elections during the same
proceedings. The challenge had come from the legal profession and was
entertained by a judiciary trying to assert its constitutional domain; and
was enough to hurt the pride.
Gradually, it became obvious from the proceedings of the apex
court that finding collaborators had become a next-to-impossible task
for those whose pride was at stake. Contrary to the Attorney Generals
claims the post-Nov 3 scenario proved that finding more than a handful of
collaborators among the ranks of judiciary was indeed impossible, and so
was finding even a handful of collaborators among the ranks of judiciary
was indeed impossible, and so was finding even a handful of competent
954

legal minds to fill in the vacancies, despite a lowering of age criteria through
unconstitutional changes made to the constitution.
Though, unlike Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, the accused judges
have been spared from being tried for the alleged transgression, at least
for the time being, they are not allowed to enjoy certain freedoms. They
remain under strict monitoring and are allowed movement only to the extent
where it does not hurt the pride of the indispensable
As always the state knows best. None of the judges is allowed to
address bar associations because their lives are under threat. At least
this is the stated reason for the informal detention of Justice Rana
Bhagwandas (who retired on Dec 13 after attaining superannuation) after he
told lawyers of Karachi Bar Association last week that the restoration of
judiciary was a matter of weeks only.
Hundreds of lawyers were booked under the anti-terrorism law
and remain under strict surveillance. Leading lights of the movement for
the restoration of Chief Justice after March 9, Aitzaz Ahsan, Ali Ahmed
Kurd and Tariq Mehmood, remain under formal house arrest while Muneer
A Malik has been rendered inactive due to the treatment meted out to him
while he was in jail after the proclamation on Nov 3.
The message is clear: Dont assert your constitutional rights if you
want to survive. The Chief Justice and his fellow judges remain defiant and
are resisting all such attempts aimed at discouraging them. the pride of the
nation will remain in abeyance for the time being, but only for the time
being.

REVIEW
The language used by Zardari while referring to Musharraf since the
death of his wife must have brought the brave commando to the level or the
stature where he rightfully belongs to. It once again confirmed that dignity
has never been the priority for the brave commando. Lust for power can
push one to such lows that Musharraf owned the mission of the once most
corrupt leader Benazir and used word Inshallah for the arrival of Scotland
Yard team.
Despite occasional showering the pearls of wisdom, the people of
955

Pakistan would soon find General Kayani looking towards Washington, like
his predecessor, for directives and implementation of those in letter and
spirit. Americans must have confirmed his reliability before employing him
as new mercenary.
5th February 2008

TO BEAUTY PARLOR

956

Since the start of the war on terror Musharraf has been stressing upon
the need to acquire soft image for Pakistan and to this end he preached
pracricing enlightened moderation. Somehow he faltered about a year back
and spent most part of the year 2007 in tarnishing the image of Pakistan.
As if unhappy about his effort of tarnishing, he completely obliterated
Pakistans image on November 3. Having done that and achieving his other
immediate objectives he found time to ponder about. It did not take him long
to realize that while causing damage to Pakistans image his own image had
suffered quite seriously.
He urgently needed the face-lifting. While the politicians had been
busy in tarnishing each-others image in the name electioneering, Musharraf
decided to visit beauty parlor of Europe. He sought extensive, in some
instances intensive, treatment from the team of beauticians. The outcome of
his endeavour will be seen little later.

EVENTS
On 22nd January, APDM asked people to boycott polls. Musharraf
during his visit to Europe kept trying to convince his masters that he was
still the best mercenary available in Pakistan. Gordon Brown while in New
Delhi offered help to India for permanent seat in UNSC and wanted free and
fair polls in Pakistan.
Next day, ex-generals asked Musharraf to step down. Imran met Harry
Reid, who urged Bush to link aid to Pakistan with fair polls. Nawaz was
again stopped from meeting the deposed CJP. He vowed to continue struggle
for restoration of deposed judges and said Musharraf has to quit before
impeachment.
Musharraf advised Europe to change the yardstick of human rights in
the context of Pakistan. Europe should see the number of persons, terrorists
or otherwise, killed captured and handed over to the Crusaders. Rice met
Musharraf and stood by him, but wanted fair polls. PPP accused presence of
Indian fugitives in Gujrat; PML-Q scorned the allegation. CEC had no
option but to stop the acting president, Amir Hussain, from electioneering.
Next day, Musharraf spurned wests biased view of Pakistan. He
angrily reacted to the statement of ex-generals saying that they are
957

insignificant personalities, who are good for nothing. Amir Hussain defied
orders of CEC and continued his election-related activities.
Lawyers held countrywide protest rallies on 24th January. In
Islamabad, police used force against lawyers as they tried to reach judges
colony. Three judges, including the CJP, were served with formal notices to
vacate the official accommodation. Nawaz addressed lawyers in Peshawar
and lauded their movement. The Supreme Court dismissed a petition on
price hike saying that it is not the duty of the Apex Court to fix prices of
daily use commodities.
On 4th January, Musharraf gave expatriates his word on fair polls.
Acting UK High Commissioner was summoned to Foreign Office over
grilling of chaudhrys from Gujrat. Musharraf warned that Europe would
suffer if Pakistans war on terror failed. He indirectly urged support him
because he believed that he was the only one who could win this war. US
Ambassador met PPP and MQM leaders.
Next day, Musharraf met the Big Brother Altaf Bhai. Having stopped
officers of the army from interaction with politicians, General Kayani started
meeting media persons. Pending cases in PHC jumped from 13,195 to
14,606 due to boycott of PCO judges since November 3.
On 27th January, Wajihuddin asked Musharraf to resign in national
interest. Poll rigging would lead to turmoil, warned Shahbaz. Prime Minister
termed rigging charges premature. British media was baffled by
Musharrafs remarks about journalist M Ziauddin for asking a question.
Next day, Musharraf assured Brown to win terror war over time and
pledged free and fair polls. Brown reciprocated by remaining silent on
Kashmir and reiterating support to India for permanent seat in UNSC.
Pakistanis held rallies outside 10 Downing Street for and against Musharraf.
Musharrafs chance meeting with Israel Foreign Minister in Paris
was first denied and then accepted by Foreign Office. Two leaders discussed
matters of mutual interest for one hour. Imran Khan alleged that the US and
UK did not want democracy in Pakistan.
On 29th January, Interior Ministrys spokesman claimed that killer of
Benazir who belonged to Waziristan was identified. Detectives left for
Waziristan to trace out the family of Benazirs killer. The British media told

958

Musharraf that if he is serious about giving Pakistan a real transition to

democracy, then he should heed the timely advice of 100 retired military
officers, who now want him to resign, as many of them once trained the
future president.
The deposed CJP wrote a letter to US Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice and top European leaders including British Prime Minister explaining
that the charges against him and other deposed judges, leveled by President
Musharraf during his visit to Europe were malicious and based on lies.
Next day, the high-profile retired generals, air marshals and admirals,
who asked Musharraf to resign, announced to seek unqualified apology from
the nation for collaborating in the hideous crimes of imposing martial laws,
abrogating the Constitution several times and not letting democracy flourish
in the past 60 years.
Supreme Court was moved against CEC and for disqualification of
NA Speaker from contesting polls. The regime planned to free Aitzaz and
Kurd and then re-arrest them on completion of 90-day detention on February
1. Rauf Klasra noted that Musharraf told the West that deposed chief justice
was corrupt. Rashid Qureshi rejected charges of deposed CJP.
On 31st January, Senate refused to accept PPPs demand for UN probe
into Benazirs murder. Ex-generals wanted Musharraf to hand over power to
Justice Iftikhar and quit. Grand Mufti of Pakistan, Usmani, also urged
Musharraf to resign.
Lawyers observed Iftikhar Day. As was anticipated Punjab
government extended detention of Aitzaz beyond 90 days against the laws in
vogue. On second thought at midnight, the detention orders were withdrawn.
Nawaz Sharif said if his party returns to power his first order would be to
restore the judges and return an independent judiciary to the country.
Ansar Abbasi reported that support for deposed judges was growing in
the Establishment. The letter distributed by Musharraf against the CJP was
ignored by western media terming it bizarre at least by the Guardian. The
letter by CJP was published as breaking news in some cases. Next day,
Kurd and Tariq Mahmood were also freed. Aitzaz vowed to push lawyers
movement. Sindh High Court acquitted Arbab Rahim of contempt charges.

959

Aitzaz and Tariq Mahmood were detained for 30 days on 2nd February.
Caretaker Information Minister urged ex-Generals and the media to behave
and called the deposed CJP a security risk. Nawaz Sharif alleged that Chief
Justice Iftikhar was removed over taking up missing persons case. Shujaat
apologized for party mistakes and assured Baluchistan, Lal Masjid and
judiciary wont be repeated. He had turned down Shaukats dinner offer
during his trip to London.
Suspected suicide bomber who was likely to target Fazlur Rehman
was arrested on 3rd February. Two blasts damaged the house of PPP-Ss
house in Swat. After the arrest of senior lawyer, it was apprehended that
political leaders boycotting polls might also be arrested. APDM leaders
vowed reinvigorate the movement for deposed judges after polls.

VIEWS
Musharrafs visit to Europe had to be hot topic for the analysts
during the period. Nasim Zehra observed: The president believes his
presence is crucial for Pakistans well-being. This, according to the former
general, includes Pakistans economic well-being, its ability to effectively
fight back extremism at home, participate in the war on terrorism and to
ensure Pakistans transition towards genuine democracy.
On the conduct of the elections the president is also clear. In a
reflection of where real power actually lay, the president and not the CEC,
continuously reiterates that the elections will be free and fair Musharraf
has also assured everyone that the elections will be held in a peaceful
environment and he will ensure security at all costs, allowing no one to
disrupt peace.
Also on numerous occasions the president had given his personal
guarantee that the elections will be free and fair. While addressing the
media in Brussels on Jan 21 the president said that there is no possibility of
it (the election) being rigged. In Pakistan, meanwhile, the PPP has told
foreign diplomats that Pakistans agencies have an elaborate plan to rig the
elections. According to a PPP leader the party has let it be known that
the agencies are facilitating the rigging of elections in the provinces.

960

Meanwhile, to testify his democratic credentials the president again

repeated in Brussels that I have introduced the essence of democracy.
Reiterating his old position that on democracy Pakistan cannot be as
forward-looking as you (in the West), Musharraf appealed to the media
to allow us some time to reach that state (of democracy).
The more the president speaks, the more the public realizes that
it is essentially more of the same. There is nothing new, despite the
presidents growing political unpopularity that is emanating from the
presidents camp. Interestingly, the presidents tendency to over-speak does
momentarily convey that he can control at least the national political
context-ranging from the levers of state power to political dynamics and
from important political alignments to finally the election outcome and no
less life after the elections.
Musharraf, who as head of the army, was until recently leading
Pakistans traditionally powerful Establishment, has left no doubts about
how he sees the situation. On the role of the state, including the Election
Commission, the presidents office, the caretaker government, the existing
district nazims, the PCO judiciary and provincial bureaucracies, the status
quo will be maintained...
Despite their political meanderings all major opposition parties
will contest the Feb 18 elections, with both the president and the CEC in
place and with no pre-election covert deal with the presidential camp. One
significant impact of the 2007 movement for constitutional rule has been the
renewed recognition among the politicians and the voters that for the
progress and prosperity of the Pakistani nation the vice-regal institutions i.e.,
the military and civilian bureaucracies must function within constitutional
parameters. Only a constitutionally responsible and competent political class
can ensure that the outcome of Election 2008 will ensure the supremacy of
the Constitution. Pakistans opposition appears mindful of this crucial fact.
Dr Masooda Bano wrote: General Musharrafs ongoing tour of the
European states and the UK simply offers more of the same. A strategy,
deliberately chosen and skillfully crafted, since 2001 is in full action again,
i.e. the countrys president is out on a tour to safeguard his own position at
the cost of the country itself. Thus, in the meetings held with the EU in
Brussels, Musharraf has made the Europeans fearful of growing
Talibanization in Pakistan to further argue how he is needed to check that
trend. He has also insisted that democracy and human rights are not for us:
961

we have a feudal tribal environment in some of our provinces, therefore in

accordance with our environment we have to adapt democracy, human rights
and civil liberties, he maintained. So much for giving your own country
bad publicity.
How is prolonging the tenure of the current regime a solution to
Talibanization problem in Pakistan? The reality is that if the western
governments choose to fall for this line then it is due to deliberate design and
not because they dont realize the failure of the present government to check
militancy in the country. Thankfully, the EU has not bought this line and has
exerted pressure on Musharraf for free and fair elections, restoring the
independence of the judiciary, and removal of all the restrictions on the
political parties and the media, and for the moving towards development
rather than military operations alone to check growing extremism in
Pakistan. These are the critical measures if stability is to return to Pakistan.
It has to be recorded that the EUs line towards Pakistan has all
along been more progressive and closer to the wishes of the Pakistani
people. Unlike the US and the UK, the EU has all along taken more
principled position vis--vis Pakistan. Whereas for the former two countries,
the agenda seems simply to keep General Musharraf in power, for the EU
the real concern seems to be restore stability in Pakistan and the measures it
is proposing are refreshing.
The question worth posing the British and the American officials is:
how do they justify pushing the sitting regime as a solution for
democracy in Pakistan when they know full well the complete lack of
support it has within the country in question? The UK would do us a big
favour if it moves its position closer to the EU rather than Washington.
However, Pakistanis arent likely to get that lucky in the near future. As for
now, we will again see British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Foreign
Secretary David Miliband cheer Musharraf up during his time in the UK.
But, let them try, after all for how long can they prolong a regime that is so
unpopular?
In Davos he told that the European countries to see him and his
country through his eyes. The News commented: At his address at the
World Economic Forum at Davos in Switzerland, President Pervez
Musharraf warned the international community against judging democracy
in Pakistan by western standards, and called on it to look at the country
through Pakistani eyes. He also indicated that misconceived views from
962

the west regarding human rights were not valid in the context of Pakistan,
while suggesting that his governments performance for the welfare of
people and economic progress deserved more attention.
The presidential call for Pakistan to be looked at through
Pakistani eyes is rather ironical. At the present time, these rather haunted
eyes belonging to people now driven to near despair by the power and gas
crisis The multiple crises that have arisen, quite obviously as a
consequence of mismanagement over the past few years, have only added to
the suffering of tens of thousands of people and made it difficult even to
present the staple of roti on the plates held out by hungry children.
As for human rights and democracy, on principle, the people of
Pakistan deserve to be treated at par with the citizens of other nations.
The right to elect leaders, the right not to be bludgeoned and beaten by
police thugs and the right to freedom of expression should be universally
available to people everywhere in the world. The treatment on Thursday of
protesting lawyers in Islamabad, who were attacked by police when they
attempted to enter the Judges Colony to meet the deposed chief justice of
Pakistan, underscores the fact that these rights are still not available to the
people in the country, even after the lifting of emergency rule last month
On a somewhat more positive note, Musharraf, on every leg of his
European tour, has emphasized the polls scheduled in the country will be fair
and free, and will go ahead as planned. He gave the same assurance to the
US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, during their meeting in Davos
Looking at the issue, as the president has advised, through Pakistani eyes, it
seems obvious that any possible solution to the countrys problems,
including the terrorist threat, can come only through a democratic
dispensation.
Mir Jamilur Rahman wrote: President Musharraf has concluded his
visit to European Union. He also participated in Davos World Economic
Forum which is a grand annual gathering of top political and business
leaders and journalists. His purpose of the visit, as he said, was to mend
the torn image of Pakistan.
Essentially a developing country to have an untarnished image, a
good image attracts foreign investment and a bad image discourages the
entrepreneur. Sometimes, the image is distorted by the country itself. But
often it is the foreign media which contributes to the distortion of the image.
963

Some American congressmen, senators and aspirant of White

House have also joined the malign Pakistan chorus. The same media
and congressional leaders, who never got tired of admiring Musharrafs
policies, have suddenly discovered that he has made Pakistan the most
dangerous country in the world.
The latest harangue against Pakistan and President Musharraf
has come from eight US senators who signed a joint letter to President
Bush asking him to ensure that Pakistan moves in the right direction. The
honourable senators, seven of them democrats, have not indicated which the
tight direction is.
Their other demands make it abundantly clear that they have no idea
what is happening in Pakistan. Nor do they seem to have any clue what
Pakistan is going through attempting to protect itself and the world from the
menace of terrorism. Just have a look at the charter of demands submitted
by these eight American senators and you would discover that they take
Pakistan as an American fief.
Elements in our society and the foreign media have alleged
Musharraf of the horrific crime of Benazirs murder. This is the most
ridiculous allegation. The world is replete with incidents when even the best
security had failed to protect the victim of assassination
Omar A Quraishi observed: Speaking before an audience of
journalists, the president promised to hold free and fair elections. This
obviously must have found not too many takers. For starters, the journalists
who made up the audience in Brussels, apart from the PTV reporter or the
APP correspondent wouldnt be accustomed to sitting and listening to
things that they know are quite plainly not true or through a whole load
of official propaganda. They are accustomed to asking questions and can be
expected to ask hard questions which is apparently what happened.
After this, according to one editorial in an English-language
newspaper, the president sort of lost his cool and went on an apparent
diatribe against what he called the western worlds obsession with
democracy. Before one gets into debating what he said, first his words: You
(as in the west) have taken centuries in reaching wherever you have come.
Allow us time for going for the values that you have established for
yourselves. We have a feudal tribal government in some of our provinces,

964

therefore in accordance with our environment we have to adapt democracy,

human rights, and civil liberties.
So, if one were to consider this argument, then democracy can
wait in a country like Pakistan because its people adhere to feudal values
and hence not only democracy but even human rights and civil liberties must
be adapted to suit Pakistanis. However, here one would like to ask a simple
why. Why should a Pakistani have to wait for democracy? Why should he
or she have to live in a country with a concept of human rights and civil
liberties that apparently differ from that of the west? Isnt Pakistan a
signatory to various human rights treaties? Isnt it a member of the United
Nations, something that it often likes to proclaim, especially with regard to
the world bodys peace-keeping operations?
Given that a majority of Pakistanis are poor, disenfranchised and live
a hard life, isnt completely understandable, in fact inevitable and only to be
expected, that they would like to have a government that a) treats them as
proper citizens; b) considers their views and interests when formulating and
implementing decisions that affect general public; c) uses the wishes of the
general public as the guiding principle for formulating and implementation
of public policy and d) generally does things that make life easier for the
common/average Pakistani.
After all this is what western governments do i.e. they make life
easy for their citizens (not complicated and difficult to live like in Pakistan)
by ensuring that the law is uniformly implemented and that violators are
prosecuted, by ensuring safety of their person and private property and by
providing amenities that are a fair compensation of the taxes levied from
citizens.
None of that happens in Pakistan and we have the president saying
that the country doesnt need western-style democracy but rather one that
takes into considerations our feudal environment. The obvious question
would then be that what kind of democracy is this? And the only answer that
one can come up with is that its one where senior judges of the land can be
kept confined to their homes without any written orders, where an iron fist
greets civil society trying to stand up and ask for its fundamental rights,
where ordinary citizens are mysteriously picked up and detained
incommunicado and where the press and media are muzzled and ordered to
do the governments bidding.

965

It is also where ordinary citizens are defenseless and where the

degree of protection and security accorded by the state often depends on
ones social and/or financial standing. And lest one forget, it is also a state
where the price of flour has doubled in a matter of weeks Surely the
government and officialdom dont think that people are so dumb that they
dont know who eventually pays for their wheat import.
The president, in Brussels, spoke like the true dictator that he is. One
wouldnt even want to get into the free and fair elections bit but perhaps a
joke currently doing heavy circulation on SMSs and emails is worth
reproducing here: A fisherman catches a fish and takes it home. His wife
looks at her husbands catch but instead of being happy the family has
been hungry for two days now she tells her husband that there is no point
to brining the fish home. He asks why. She says that there is no atta, so no
roti can be cooked to eat along with the fish. She also says that there is no
gas in the stove because of the gas shortage and that even if she did not cook
the fish it would rot because there is no bijli. Hence, she tells her husband,
he might as well throw the fish back from where he caught it. The poor man
trudges back to the river and throws the fish back. And as the fish enters the
water it is miraculously alive it screams: Long Live Musharraf.
Ghazi Salahuddin was of the view that even before he left for
Europe, his spin doctors had set the ball rolling with a chain of
interviews with the foreign media. And Musharrafs pronouncements have
made some interesting headlines. Let us begin with what he said in his
Newsweek interview. He said that Benazir Bhutto was unpopular with the
army. It is not easy to understand why he had to express this opinion in a
formal discourse, particular after the assassination of the charismatic leader
of the largest political party in the country
So much more can be read in this opinion, with specific reference to
attempts in the past by the army and its agencies to subvert the political
process in the country and create hurdles in the way of Pakistan Peoples
Partys electoral claim to govern this country. Besides, if this is what he
thinks, why did he have to fly to Abu Dhabi to meet Benazir and make a
deal with her?
We do have a very large army and it is not rational to believe that
its officers and men would not reflect the dominant trends and choices
that exist in our society We know that Pakistan Ex-servicemen Society, in

966

a meeting held in Rawalpindi on Tuesday, asked Musharraf to resign in the

larger interest of the country.
It is also significant that this meeting of the society was held at a time
when the president was in Europe, struggling to defend his recent moves
against the judiciary and the media. Naturally, this figured in one of the
questions put to him Musharraf hit out at the retired generals who said
that they no longer had confidence in him.
This has been quoted from his interview with The Financial Times:
They are insignificant personalities Most of them are ones who served
under me and I kicked them out. They are insignificant. I am not even
bothered by them. Kicked them out?
The Washington Post has a report about Pakistan on Wednesday with
this headline: Supports at home and abroad backing away from Musharraf.
One question from this report: The army would be very happy to get rid
of him, said one political analyst, Talat Masood, a retired Pakistani
general.
While in Brussels, Musharraf was perhaps speaking his mind when,
in answer to a question, he made these remarks about the western
governments: They must understand Pakistans difficult political
environment and stop their obsession with democracy and human
rights. This indicates that democracy and human rights are the not goals for
him to pursue
Obviously, the president was questioned again and again about the
imposition of the state of emergency on November 3 and how this enabled
him to remove judges and impose new restrictions on the media. He insisted
that judges were sacked for corruption and nepotism. He named Justice
Iftikhar Chaudhry a number of times. Another subject that figured in all his
encounters with the media relates to the apprehension that the forthcoming
elections are not likely to be free and fair. Every time, he asserted that they
would be free and fair and I have added a new word peaceful.
Normally, we have the regular commentators in the media, the usual
suspects, who deliberate on national issues. I was shaken by the assessment
of a psychiatrist that I read in a daily on Wednesday. Dr Murad Moosa Khan,
who is professor of psychiatry at the Aga Khan University, said that the

967

present crisis is taking a heavy toll on the mental health of the people of
Pakistan, adding that
Let me conclude with one brief excerpt: Since the political crisis that
started in March last year, there has been a strong sense of insecurity and
uncertainty amongst the people who appear to be living on the edge
perpetually, the subsequent events of May 12, Oct 18, Nov 3 and Dec 27
have further frayed their nerves. There is a sense hopelessness and
helplessness (bezaari and bebassi).
Ayesha T Haq observed: The objective, no doubt, being to dazzle
Europe with his humour, wit and unbridled commitment to stamp out
extremism and deliver in the ongoing fight against terror. President
Musharraf is on the record saying that the trip was to improve Pakistans
image abroad. Only a brave, or completely misguided, man would
undertake such a journey. You cant possibly imagine that a personal visit
and making personal assurances will change the reality of Pakistan.
So lets take a look at the image problem. What is it that plagues
us? A lot but lets not look at ancient history, lets look at more recent events
starting with the stick wielding, video shop burning, Chinese abductors from
Jamia Hafsa and Lal Masjid. Extreme religious fundamentalism in the
capital sent shivers down the liberal spine. From here move on to the 9
March. The image is that of a chief justice of the countrys Supreme Court
being dismissed by the chief of the army staff. Not a pretty picture for a
country that claims to be on the road to democracy.
The image was followed by peacefully protesting lawyers being
baton-charged; tear gassed and beaten up, armoured personnel carriers
entering the Lahore High Court and bloody and broken heads of members of
the legal fraternity. The image was further sullied by the police manhandling
the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the security forces smashing up the offices
of a private television channel. And just when you thought it couldnt get
worse Lal Masjid was bombed
All the while suicide bombings were on the rise and Benazir Bhuttos
homecoming procession was attacked. The imposition of an emergency, the
suspension of fundamental rights, the sacking and detention of the entire
superior judiciary and the arrest of over 5,000 lawyers followed this; and
then the assassination of former Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto. Through
this period militants fought the Pakistan Army in Waziristan.
968

But reality bites at home and not in Europe. If you ask anyone in
Pakistan they are of the opinion that the repair job needs to be done at home
and not in Europe. But to fix the image you need to first acknowledge that
there is a problem, deal with the problem and preferably with intent to
resolve it so as not to go in with both guns blazing. We have a myriad of
problems in Pakistan
We have spent the last eight years under a dictator who has made
excuses for our non-democratic status, saying that while it has taken the
West centuries to evolve to democracy Pakistan has only had part of its 60
years to make that evolution. So we must, according to those who run this
country, wait patiently, very patiently, for the benefits of the gains made in
the financial and service sectors to trickle down to the ordinary Pakistani.
Lets not forget that it was not a sardar or a malik who has been
at the helm of government for the past eight years where we have seen
the rise of extremism and militancy. No sardar or malik dismissed the
judiciary, one of the pillars of a functioning democracy. Nor was it a sardar
or malik who clamped down on a secular middle class civil society
movement led by professionals. Rather it was a military dictator who in
transiting himself democracy has exposed the transition as a sham and
shown us that the mindset has remained cast in military stone and there are
no signs of democratic civilian thought, ideals or principles.
The president is in Davos holding forth about free and fair elections
assuring the world that all the bugs have been removed. Truth be told Mr
President, the bugs i.e. an independent judiciary, a free media, civil society
groups, have been quashed under your military boot. So far as your
European sojourn is concerned its all offensive and no charm and the
emperor needs to realize that despite the symbolic wardrobe change he
has no clothes.
The News commented on Aitzazs detention. The gathering of several
hundred people outside the home of SCBA President Aitzaz Ahsan in Lahore
on Sunday came as a reminder that nearly three months after he was
detained on November 3, 2007, the activist and the PPP leader has yet to
regain his freedom Aitzazs continued detention is particularly
unfortunate in the context of the countrys present political realities.
His status as a person who has refused to cave in to pressure and his
stand for the protection of basic rights of all citizens also mean he could act
969

as an important bridge between the people of Punjab and Sindh, as well

as those of other provinces.
The continued detention of Aitzaz Ahsan, and other political
prisoners including lawyer Ali Ahmad Kurd and Justice Tariq Mahmood
has now been brought up around the world. Questions regarding the
reason behind the action were repeatedly put to President Pervez
Musharraf during his recent European tour, and met with no satisfactory
answers
Anjum Niaz wondered: Did Pervez Musharraf really think hell
conquer European hearts and minds with his aggressive defence of
indefensible? Yet, at the same time he played the victim. He talked of his
opponents whenever he got a chance, accusing evil doers like the sacked
Supreme Court judges down to atta hoarders and smugglers eviscerating his
writ. Presenting himself as a modern day messiah, Musharraf opened up the
wounds of his crucifixion to earn sympathy. Sadly he did not earn much.
Since he is a commando he will not throw in the towel and call it
a day. Of late we have heard him say he will resign if hes unwanted.
Obviously mercury in the thermometer kept at the Presidency has not shot to
danger levels necessitating his emergency exit while everywhere else the
barometers are turning red. He still has his followers who go with him to
chant slogans wherever they can. Musharrafs party would have been made
more the merrier by the addition of another six lackeys flown to London to
shout their throats out for him. Unlucky for them, they got nabbed by the
airport police under anti-terrorist act and locked up for almost 24 hours and
were finally packed off to Pakistan
At Londonhe singled out a senior Pakistani journalist who
asked him about Rashid Rauf, the suspected terrorist who escaped from a
Pakistani jail recently. Musharraf didnt like his question, accusing the
journalist of casting aspersions and undermining our forces and our own
country. He questioned the journalists patriotism and professionalism
saying that no western media person had asked him this question throughout
his tour. Whats bugging this guy (the Pakistani journalist) to ask such
question, Musharraf impunged, whats his problem?
His behaviour further fueled media tut-tutting. He treats his fellow
Pakistanis with contempt while oozing charm for the benefit of
foreigners wrote David Blair, diplomatic editor of Daily Telegraph. But a
970

possible embarrassment awaits Musharraf when he wakes up from his VVIP

dream-bed at Dorchester this morning. At 11.30 am before 10 Downing
Street will stand Asma Jehangir, Imran Khan, Jemima Khan, and activists of
political parties. They will shout Go Musharraf Go. It is not Islamabad
where Musharraf would have had the three lathi-charged, manhandled and
tear gassed. This is London; you cannot use the stick here.
Interestingly Musharraf has become controversial. While the
governments of Britain, US and Saudi Arabia support him and
encourage him to continue throttling peoples freedoms as long as he
promises to contain suicide bombers killing Pakistanis and not any
foreigners, the western media is no longer in love with him. Musharraf in
turn hates the Pakistani media because he thinks it is the source of his
malignancy spreading cancer against him abroad. In this zero sum game,
bigger issues often get blotted out.
Whats this talk about Pakistan being the most dangerous
country? The British Interior Minister Jacqui Smith according to an AFP
report confessed that she is scared walking the streets of London at night.
Even posh districts like Kensington and Chelsea are not safe at night, she
conceded. Why did the world media not pick up this lead and flash it around
the world saying that if the interior minister feels unsafe at night what does it
signify? But no one paid much attention because the world media remains
Pakistan-centric and loves to dig out all the dirt it can about it from
whosoever is willing to snitch.
Recently two retired intelligence bigwigs told the New York Times
the intelligence agency had lost control of some of the networks of
Pakistani militants it has nurtured since the 1980s, and is now suffering the
violent blowback of that policy. Who are these two men and why are we
keeping quiet? Musharrafs criticism, I guess, is selective and he likes
hitting out at those who cannot hit back, like the Pakistani journalist in
London.
Farahatullah Babar gave PPPs viewpoint on the visit. During his
visit to Europe, President Pervez Musharraf tried to convince his hosts
that the February 18 elections would be free and fair, that far from being a
political prisoner the chief justice was actually an irresponsible political
agitator and an illegal squatter, that there was no need for a UN
investigation into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, and that he would
abdicate the moment he felt the people did not believe him, he also gave a
971

hollow warning: aprs moi le deluge; there will be impact on the region and
around the world maybe on the streets of Europe.
As he goes around meeting other world leaders, including British
Prime Minister Gordon Brown, it is important to set the record straight. The
chief justice was fired not because he was a maverick political agitator or
the government wanted to retake the judges official residence, but because
the Supreme Court under him was about to pronounce the verdict on
the legality of a maverick innovation of a uniformed military officer also
contesting the election as president of the country.
The elections will never be fair and free because of the rigging
structures and bugs already installed in the system. He claimed that the
details of the polling stations and electoral rolls would be published on the
internet and asked, What else can I do?, knowing full well that even as
polling schemes were published the agencies stopped opposition candidates
from filing their nomination papers even tearing the court orders allowing
them do so. He claimed, Weve removed the bugs, but actually installed
several bugs to ensure that his loyalists won enough majority to indemnify
unconstitutional acts.
At one point when asked if he could guarantee a free and fair poll, he
said: If you give me a certificate, Ill sign. This is exactly what he had said
not long after he had taken over as chief executive in 1999. When a
correspondent asked when he would enter the presidency, Musharraf
snubbed him saying, give me a paper and I will give you in writing that I
will never become president, or words to this effect.
The need for a UN investigation into Ms Bhuttos assassination is
more, and not less, because she had named the suspects, but the regime
refuses the Yard investigators to question them and has hosed down traces of
evidence from the crime scene. Strange are the illusions by which he
sustains himself in claiming that the people still want him.
Let no one mistake that there will be deluge after him. Indeed public
anger and resentment will lessen if he steps down. National reconciliation
is impossible as Musharraf insists on keeping power at all costs,
destroying democratic institutions. Far from being a factor for stability,
Musharraf is an unmitigated disaster for national reconciliation.

972

Abu Abdul Moez from Islamabad wrote: Musharraf is currently on a

nine-day visit to four European countries. He was abroad to present a soft
image of Pakistan to the European nations. However, during all the
important briefings and interviews, he struggled hard to justify the
imposition of emergency and the sacking of the superior judiciary. During
the whole visit, he kept reminding his hosts that Pakistan was not fit for
democracy yet and that the pre-PCO judiciary was corrupt. I wonder if he
undertook the foreign visit to promote the cause of Pakistan or to
defend his own actions against his real or perceived opponents.
Burhanuddin Hasan observed: The more President Musharraf
emphasizes his oft repeated phase of free, fair and transparent elections,
the less people of Pakistan and in the Western world believe him. He
obviously has credibility deficit on several counts. All political parties
except his own PML-Q are convinced that election will be rigged because no
country can have fair and transparent elections in the absence of an
independent judiciary, free media, an impartial Election Commission and an
unbiased caretaker government. All these basic ingredients do not exist in
Pakistan at present.
Meanwhile a group of prominent citizens working under the auspices
of PILDAT for the past six months has said the following in a report: A
careful assessment of one year period (Dec 2006 to Dec 2007) of the prepoll election process leaves no doubt that the process had been highly unfair.
The prospects for the fairness of remaining phases of the electoral
process appear to be very slim. In fact, after such a thoroughly unfair prepoll process the need for any manipulation on the polling day and postelections process should be drastically reduced.
The report warns that in case the popularity of the former ruling party
takes a hit in the remaining days, as apparently is the case due to the
assessment of Benazir Bhutto, the worst wheat crisis and electricity
outrages, the compulsions for manipulation and rigging of the remaining
phases of election will increase and one may witness desperate acts to get
the desired election results. The group believes that even at this stage, the
only way for holding free, fair and credible election is the reconstitution
of the caretaker government and the EC through consensus of political
parties and civil society.
The second most important subject on the presidents agenda was to
convince Europe that religious radicalism and terrorism is being
973

effectively controlled and that al-Qaeda was on the run. Obviously Europe
can hardly believe this claim in the face of Pakistan Armys ongoing pitched
battles with religious militants in Swat and Waziristan which have claimed
hundreds of lives and a recent indication by the head of the CIA that alQaeda may have been involved in Benazirs assassination
Musharrafs many statements in Europe about democracy, human
rights, fair elections, fight against terrorism and al-Qaedas particularly his
belief that he is still very popular in his country, no matter what national and
international media says, got an apt response from a BBC interviewer who
asked, how do you know? The president was taken aback and had no
appropriate answer except that he knew in his heart that people like him. The
fact is that the president seems to be in a mode where he believes that
only he is right and the rest of the world is wrong.
The News also wrote on Musharrafs statement about the deposed
CJP. The battle between Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, who maintains he
is still the Chief Justice of Pakistan and President Pervez Musharraf, which
had in March 2007 triggered the crisis that the country today faces, is
continuing. Indeed, the whole matter carries with it an air of personal
vendetta and a spirit of revenge, by distributing a 15-page letter containing
allegations of corruption and involvement in politics against the deposed CJ
to western journalists who were invited to meet him in London on the last
leg of the European tour, Musharraf has helped bring alive the issue once
again and draw attention to the conflict that stands at the heart of the
problems Pakistan confronts today.
The deposed CJ has answered back swiftly with a letter of his
own, addressed to European leaders, which firmly refutes the allegations.
Justice Chaudhry has also narrated the grim conditions of detention imposed
on him and his family since emergency was declared on November 3, 2007,
including the periodic suspension of the supply of water to his home. There
has, despite the passage of almost three months, been no softening on either
side, no evidence of any move towards solution.
The fact that President Musharrafs obsession with the deposed CJ
and his deeds continues unchecked is evident. It is uncertain whether the
letter he circulated in London has done much good to his government. But
for Pakistan, the issue goes beyond a tussle between two men and their
exchange of allegations and counter allegations. The matter of the deposed

974

judges and perceptions regarding an independent judiciary continues to

figure prominently in debate concerning the situation in Pakistan.
In one way or the other, Pakistan needs to move beyond its current
crisis. This can happen only if President Musharraf and his team show a
more reconciliatory approach, a readiness to put the past behind and perhaps
to negotiate possible solutions with senior lawyers. The solution must
involve the principle of judicial independence, for without this many
matters, including doubts concerning the impartiality of elections, will linger
on. But at the same time finding some way out of the current crisis
Mohammad Ali from Sahiwal opined: Musharrafs statements during
his recent visit to a number of European countries did immense harm to
the countrys reputation. He undertook the foreign visit at a time when
millions of Pakistanis are deprived of basic necessities like flour, electricity,
gas, oil, water etc.
He blatantly maligned the deposed chief justice abroad which was
unbecoming of his office. He also met the Israeli defence minister for one
hour by chance. The president should know that under the constitution he
is not authorized to take policy decisions independently. It is up to the prime
minister, his cabinet and parliament to take such important decisions.
I urge all the retired and sacked judges and members of different bar
associations, especially eminent advocate Aitzaz Ahsan, to hold an all
Pakistan lawyers convention to condemn and bury forever the doctrine
of necessity. It is equally important for our political parties to learn from
their past blunders. They should also vow not to support any military coup in
the future, which contribute only to the further disintegration of Pakistani
society.
Tariq Khursheed from Lahore wrote: I would like to mention two
humorous allegations leveled by the president against the sacked
judges: One, the judges were illegally stopping him from becoming
president. Isnt it ironic that the man who took over the country by removing
an elected prime minister illegally is now accusing the respected judges of
an unlawful thing?
Two, the Supreme Court judges humiliated the senior officers of the
executive, especially those of the law-enforcing departments, by summoning
them to the court and holding them guilty of their wrongdoings. I ask the

975

president what job is a court supposed to do any way, if these actions

were unbecoming of the Supreme Court.
Dr Masooda Bano took on his other statements. Not that protests
from the Pakistani politicians or judges have managed to change the policies
of the western policy makers, especially the American and the British,
towards Pakistan, but it is always important to put things in writing and set
the record straight. The letter written by the deposed chief justice, Iftikhar
Chaudhry, to western leaders condemning General Musharrafs bid to
slander him and other senior judges as corrupt and inept during his European
tour is thus very important. It counters Musharrafs attempt to justify the
purging of over 60 judges, as being in the best interest of the country a
claim, which is farcical by all standards; it also highlights the desperation of
the current regime, which is painting Pakistan black and its judges corrupt in
order to hold on to power.
Should it not make the sitting government recoil with embarrassment
to see that when presenting himself to the western leaders, the head of the
state has to use all the negative images of the country in order to justify that
he is slightly better. Rather than going abroad and selling a positive
image of Pakistan as a progressive country with much potential for
economic and cultural exchange, the president of the country presents
threats of growing militancy, circulates brochures containing alleged
corruption charges against the deposed chief justice and other judges, and
tells the western leaders that democracy is a western construct not fit for us.
It is no surprise then that despite the fact that Pakistanis are by no
means a militant nation, there are very few voices in the west, which are
willing to give Pakistanis the right to elect their own leaders.
Increasingly, even well-meaning westerners argue that may be democracy is
not fit for Pakistan; after all, they argue, the western institutions should not
be transplanted to the other countries. This argument is extremely
problematic as it is another way of supporting military governments
Clearly it is not about the people of Pakistan not wanting democracy,
the problem has been with the weak political leadership and a strong
military backed by the western governments due to their geo-political
designs for this region. Anyone, who makes the argument that democracy is
a western construct and should not be imposed on other countries, must
remember that no one wants to be dictated by force. No nation can want

976

leaders, who impose themselves on the public without its consent, as it is

basic human nature to want to have the right to choose.
For a state to function effectively people have to feel that their
interests are represented by the government and there is no other system
better for it than democracy. One can give it different names, but the issue of
representation is critical to any legitimate government and military backed
regimes simply dont have that legitimacy. Thus, the argument that
democracy is not for us must be condemned at all levels
Basically, the US administration is happy to back the one individual
responsible for removing sixty percent of the top judiciary rather than
backing the judges themselves. Yet, at the same time it is the Pakistani
public that has been steadily asking for the reinstatement of the judges.
Thus, clearly, it is not that the Pakistanis themselves dont want democracy
and independence of judiciary rather it is the other way around: it is the
external forces that are somehow not very keen on letting them exercise
these rights. To them blame Pakistanis for not being fit to deserve
democracy is thus doubly unfair.
Shakir Husain commented: With the president back in the country
after his European tour he has claimed that the tour was a resounding
success and he has now improved the image of Pakistan yet again. This
couldnt be farther from the truth.
The Mughal Empror Akbar is by far my favourite Mughal for a
number of reasons, but mainly because he was smart enough to surround
himself with advisors who gave him the real picture and gave him good
advice. One of the nau ratans or nine gems was Birbal who was known for
his brilliant brain and cunning plans. Birbal would dress as a commoner and
go out into the cities of the land and come back and report to Akbar and
make suggestions as to how to keep the people of the land happy Alas,
the president has chosen not to have even one Birbal at hand who can
keep it real for him. Instead President Musharraf chooses to live in a fantasyland where he thinks that the silent majority is with him.
While President Musharraf claims that he can and has lifted
Pakistans image, he has never understood that his honeymoon with the
media was over the day his government went head to head with Pakistans
media. It was totally over when his government decided to take on the
Judiciary and tear it apart. The west which he wooed successfully in the past
977

was a different place during this visit due to his own mishandling of several
avoidable situations. While he lectured everyone on how western democracy
isnt the only model for countries like Pakistan, they might have politely
nodded for but nobody bought this story
President Musharrafs mantra that without him the war on
terror will be derailed in Pakistan is also a story which has been
debunked by most audiences internationally except the Bush Administration
which is on its way out. The writing on the wall for President Musharraf
especially in Washington is not a happy ending at all. The Democrats have
distanced themselves from him and continue to question his effectiveness
The honourable thing for President Musharraf to do at this stage is to
resign as President because he is part of the problem and not the solution to
anything. In the divisive politics of Pakistan he is the most divisive figure
there with no one accepting or supporting him as an honest and impartial
figure If the performance of the past nine years is anything to go on,
were all better off if President Musharraf takes up playing golf, bridge,
and pursuing his love for music full time and leave the intricate business
of statesmanship to someone else.
M Maqsood Khattak from Karak wrote: During his recent visit to
European countries President Musharraf stated several times that whatever
the Pakistani nation rejected his role and policies, he would resign
immediately. First, the lawyers turned against his illegal policies and If
representatives of several sections of Pakistani society have said they want
him to go, what else does President Musharraf meant by the nation or
people? President Musharrafs resignation is now a crying need.
Ghazi Salahuddin opined: What he had said about the deposed chief
justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry to justify his firing of the higher
judiciary has validated a strong response from Justice Chaudhry. In his open
letter to world leaders that has been widely covered in the international
media, the deposed chief justice has joined issue with Musharraf to put
the record straight. Interestingly, some leading newspapers of the world
devoted more space to his open letter than did most of the Pakistani
newspapers.
One hopes that Musharrafs media handlers now realize the mistake
of that almost obsessed focus on the deposed chief justice and an attempt to
paint him as a villain. So much so they distributed a 15-page letter,
978

containing allegations of corruption and involvement in politics against

Justice Chaudhry, among western journalists when Musharraf held a press
conference in London. It had to be counter-productive. The issue of he
sacking of the judiciary has become more flaming an issue now.
On Friday, The New York Times, in an editorial titled Pakistan PR,
said: With all the problems that Pakistani president faces at home, he
still found time to spend eight days in Europe last week, assuring world
leaders everything is fine in his nuclear-armed state. But everything is not
fine, and the cracks in his sunny public-relations faade were not hard to
see. The message, of course, is that the visit was ill-advised. Leaders of
countries like Pakistan go on foreign tours to perk their image at home. In
this case, the remittances from this tour have been quite embarrassing.
Remark by the president in Brussels that the west should not have an
obsession with democracy and human rights also created its long distance
backlash. Here was a hint about how he feels about democracy and
human rights while promising, at the same time, a successful transition to
democracy.
Though it came almost at the end of Musharrafs trip but his
encounter with senior journalist M Ziauddin in London stands out as an
example of a leaders tactlessness in public. First he lost his cool when the
journalist, respected for his integrity and professionalism, asked a difficult
question. Then, speaking to a gathering of Pakistanis, he suggested that
people should take care of such individuals. That a serving president should
endorse a not-so-veiled threat of violence against a journalist that too in
London is truly disturbing.
At the end of his trip to Europe, he addressed a press conference in
London in which only Pakistani journalists were invited. This was the right
occasion to offer some explanation for his angry response to a question that
could be an embarrassment for the government in a foreign country. His
argument in this regard, often invoked by the official functionaries, was: We
must learn from Indians who despite many bad things happening in
their own countrywere still claiming to shine.
Very interesting. But why should only the newsmen be advised to
learn from the Indians? Why cant our military rulers learn from Indian
democracy? Why cant Musharraf himself learn from the Indian

979

example of an independent and constitutionally upright election

commission?
A report published on Thursday revealed that while in Davos,
Musharraf had met Aitzaz Ahsans daughter Saman to persuade her father to
give up opposition to his regime. Saman reportedly told her friends after the
meeting that the president had asked her to convince her father not to
come in my way. This, then, has been the great refrain: dont come in my
way. Surely this was the message given to Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry
on March 9 and, in a manner of saying, the serving generals present in that
meeting may have served as arguments in defence of Musharrafs case.
Will the earlier arguments remain valid now that the president has removed
his uniform?
Meanwhile, the elections are drawing closer and the world is
watching with apprehensions to see if the exercise can be credible when the
judiciary has been sacked and the media faces many restrictions. Even the
Bush Administration, still supporting Musharraf against the rising tide of
censure from the American Congress and the media, had to admit that
Pakistan should fix serious distortions ahead of the February 18
elections. What would you suggest is the most serious distortion in this
situation?
Mir Jamilur Rahman opined: The second dismissal of Chief Justice
Iftikhar Chaudhry and removal of nearly 60 superior judges under the selfmade authority of freshly promulgated PCO did not ease the judicial crisis.
Instead, the crisis got compounded when the administration placed all the
dismissed and removed judges under arrest. It was the largest ever mass
destruction of judiciary ever committed by any government any where in
the world, and at any period of the history.
The advisors of the President had miscalculated the repercussions
that were bound to follow with the whole sale dismissal of the judges. They
thought if the politicians with big following and of the rank of prime
minister could be dismissed and hailed, then how could the judges, who
have no public following dare offer resistance. Presidents men again acted
wrongly when they circulated an anti-Iftikhar Chaudhry pamphlet
among the London newsmen.
The deposed chief justice came out with a strong rebuttal which he
sent to various heads of government. The president would do well to resolve
980

the judicial crisis before it does more harm to the combatants and the image
of the country. President Musharraf has the political shrewdness to change
his policies in midstream if he thought such a change would eliminate
confusion and mistrust and create harmony. He has followed this policy with
politicians. He should try this policy of tolerance with judiciary as well.
It would certainly elicit a positive response from the judiciary and lawyers.
It is essential that the judicial crisis is resolved before the elections
otherwise it would create an uncontrollable storm. Slowly but perceptibly
the anti-Musharraf forces are gathering pace The luck may be running
out for President Musharraf but he himself is not helping his case.
Sardar Ali Aman from Chitral opined: During his four-nation foreign
tour, President Pervez Musharraf constantly told the skeptical western
leaders and the media about the extra-ordinary achievements of his
government and his successes in the war against terrorism. Alas his
explanations failed to allay the western paranoia. The western media did not
hesitate in criticizing him for his perpetual manoeuvring to stay on in power.
Instead of offering meaningless explanations to the west, the president
should have taken his own people into confidence and openly tendered an
apology for the economic failures which have left the masses in a state of
utter frustration and helplessness.
Analysts also commented on other aspects of the lingering crisis.
M B Naqvi wrote: There is some controversy over relations with America.
The Americans are not behaving like mere friends; their actions are more
like a masters. They are demanding something that is utter foolishness:
ruthlessly to fight the Taliban with mainly military means. In Pakistan that
means a civil war.
Islamic extremism can only be fought by political means, if at all.
No victory is assured for liberals but the only way forward is through
simple, unadulterated democracy (without adjectives). This formula is the
solution that will over time hopefully resolve the issue of intolerant
extremism. If the people finally insist upon imposing Islam of obscurant
kind, they should be free to suffer it and that is no business of America or
Pakistan Army to prevent.
The News commented on Benazirs book which was written to attract
attention of the West. The extracts from a new book by Benazir Bhutto,
which have appeared in a leading British newspaper, suggest she will
981

remain a force in national politics even after her death She states in the
book that she had been provided information by President Musharraf and a
Muslim government that four groups of extremist assassins, including
those sent out by Osama bin Ladens 16-year-old son, Hamza, Baitullah
Mehsud, the Lal Masjid clerics and Karachi-based extremist groups were out
to kill her.
While Benazirs reference to the teenaged Hamza has
immediately created a stir in the west, and spurred conjecture that he is
being trained as his fathers successor, the late PPP chairpersons mention of
a meeting in Lahore at which a rival political party allegedly hired three
killers, may have more significance in the contest of Pakistans electoral
politics
The fact that, according to Benazir, four apparently separate outfits
of Islamic zealots may have been out to kill her, shows the extent to
which Pakistan has become the platform for the operations conducted by
these forces. So far they appear, over the past years, to have been able to
build their strength with impunity. Indeed, the fact that her country is now
the epicenter of the debate between Islamists and those seeking democracy,
as well as for a dangerous clash between Islam and the west, has been
discussed by Benazir
Beyond the issue of the immediate political realities in Pakistan, the
book points to some of the dangers that Pakistan faces today. The extremist
menace stands at the forefront of these threats. The words of warning from a
woman who obviously cared deeply for her country and indeed gave up her
life in the quest to participate in the struggle for a return to democracy
within it, must not be ignored. A priority for the next government, no
matter who leads it, must be the task of tackling the militant menace
and preventing it from taking the lives of other leaders who stand for
progressive values...
Earlier the newspaper had written on the possibility of Musharrafs
resignation. The demand that President Pervez Musharraf should resign,
now being made in a rising tempo by a cross section of the society is to
some extent misplaced. This is so for the simple reason that simply
resigning would be the easier way out and would mean that a lot of what
needs to be undone by the president would remain as it is. Some well
known religious scholars are the latest public figures to join the resignation

982

bandwagon following a similar demand made by retired military officers,

some of them till recently close associates of the president.
The resignation demand is misplaced because Mr Musharraf still
has a small window of opportunity to correct the course of many things
while he stays as the head of state. It is no overstatement that for most of the
severe crises the country is facing: the judiciary crisis, power shortages,
wheat and atta scandals, gas, CNG, suicide bombings, law and order, media
curbs etc, he is seen as the man responsible although whenever he talks
about these issues he puts the blame on someone else, never admitting his
own role.
The biggest crisis he faces is the credibility gap and the deeprooted perception that whatever he does is to perpetuate his own rule. Last
years March 9 blunder, all subsequent actions to maul and clobber the
constitution, assault on the media, detention of superior court judges and
their families, were all seen as acts of self-preservation. Let Mr Musharraf
begin by removing this perception. He should announce that as soon as the
newly elected parliament can elect a new president, he will quit.
But before that he should also undo all the constitutional abuses,
restore the free judiciary and the judges, change the partisan caretaker set up
in the centre and the provinces, appoint a credible and genuine election
commissioner, suspend all the nefarious administrative influences like
nazims and blue-eyed officers who can subvert a free and fair election He
should think of Pakistan first, as he so often says.
But, ex-servicemen were criticized over demanding resignation from
Musharraf. M Zohaib Qureshi from Lahore wrote: A society of former
servicemen has recently been in the news of late for its demand that
President Pervez Musharraf step down from his job. The society has been
formed by retired senior officers of the army, navy and air force. The
demands made by these people, who do not represent anybody but
themselves, make quite interesting reading
The fact of the matter is that all those now demanding that the
president step aside have held senior positions in the armed forces. Also,
they should know that the president was duly elected to his current post
by the Electoral College as outlined under the constitution. Secondly, if at all
the president has to resign he should decide this course for himself or he
should be impeached by parliament.
983

Zulfikar Saeed from Islamabad observed: Retired senior officers of

the armed forces have asked President Musharraf to resign. The call is being
echoed from notables like Lt-Gen Hamid Gul, Air Marshal Asghar Khan and
other retired generals like Faiz Ali Chishti and former army chief Mirza
Aslam Beg. The fact is that many of these people were part of previous
martial law regimes so what moral standing do they have to now demand
that another military dictator step down.
Also, since they were part of previous military regimes, it would be
fair to assume that they enjoyed the many fruits of this association and
authority. So, one can only wonder why now act like saints. Also, a look at
their track record will show that none of these retired officers have
shown any remorse for their past conduct. An example of this was that
when Air Marshal Asghar Khan was asked questions about his own past he
refused to take such questions.
Air Cdre Jameel Kayani from Rawalpindi was of the view that exservicemen are surely showing the signs of fatigue and old age. They seem
to have joined Mr Nawaz Sharif because they have started harping on his
tune and are demanding the impossible If Musharraf is so corrupt that
he will rig the elections in his favour, then how can you expect him to
leave the presidential chair just because he has been asked to?
I am convinced that no one, Zardari, Nawaz, even Musharraf
himself, is sincere to the people of Pakistan. Our electoral system and
process are so rigged that whatever we may do we will only get waderas,
jagirdars, chaudhrys or industrialists as our elected leaders. What can we
expect from leaders who have never experienced poverty?
It has become fashionable to condemn everything in this country,
including the president. As Justice M R Kayani wrote in his book, Not the
Whole Truth, when the horses were being nailed the frogs also raised their
feet. The only thing I can say to these new critics is: Baba maaf karo!
Ikram Sehgal tried to defend his friend Musharraf. A recent meeting
with the President during this hour of crisis only highlighted the countrys
catch 22 situation. The meaning of dictator does describe Musharraf in
the technical sense, and yet does not do justice to him. Fully aware of the
impending law and order, economic and political problems, he willingly
entered into a responsive exchange without shooting the messenger bringing
bad news. Very few people wielding absolute power will enter a debate on
984

issues that would certainly not be palatable. If he felt irritation or impatience

he did not show it.
He did show his exasperation that every attempt at compromise he
has made has been rebuffed, taken as a sign of weakness rather than a
genuine attempt to resolve issues. He maintains his willingness to
reconcile provided the opposition showed some reciprocity. One is
hoping that he has something up his sleeve, that something may be cooking
backchannels, a desperate (and perhaps forlorn) wish that the country may
be spared the catastrophe looming before us.
Even with all the charisma Ms Benazir could bring to bear on the
Pakistani electorate, the PPP as the single largest party would not get a
simple majority in the present and foreseeable future. After her tragic
demise, Asif Zardari has moved with great dexterity to shore up both the
party and the family fortunes (pun intended). His own person being
controversial among the party faithful who blame him mostly for the
corruption stigma that smeared the Bhutto name, naming Bilawal as cochairman was a master stroke to preserve the party unity in the short term
Mian Nawaz Sharif showed great presence of mind and political
astuteness by heading straight for the Rawalpindi hospital where Ms Benazir
was taken gravely wounded. Not only good for national amity, it was
necessary to buff over the ethnic edges arising out of the assassination. Mian
Sahib has recently been something of a surprise, along with getting a crop of
a hair he seems to have also increased political grey matter. The demise of
Ms Benazir has made him the most popular politician in the country by
default. Yet his popularity in the Punjab does not translate into seats in other
provinces
Whether elections are held early or later, the vote bank of MQM,
ANP, Balochistan national parties, independents, etc will remain intact. Qazi
Hussain Ahmed and Imran Khan must be brought back into the
electoral process. They will have more than limited nuisance value if they
are kept out in the cold. Knowing their performance will not match their
rhetoric, staying out may well be their tactical preference.
There are unmistakable signs that the Pakistan Army wants out
of the political process. This process is already on in a measured way, the
most significant being the recall of all serving officers from civilian posts. If
the armys hierarchy can distinguish between anti-state and anti government,
985

and get over its Afghanistan-fixation, it will avoid quite a number of

unnecessary controversies. When the military sets out to do something it is
not equipped for, it is a recipe for disaster
The final onus of responsibility still lies with Pervez Musharraf
as the incumbent ruler. While his prime mission is to get the nation united
in the war against terrorism, he has to prepare the masses to cope with
economic recession, oil and food shortages. His suggestion of a nonpolitical, non-controversial PM may be summarily rejected by the
opposition, why not test their credibility before the masses by asking them to
name a few persons from whom he can choose? Our rulers owe this country
a concerted effort to turn a situation tailor-made for confrontation and
disaster into an opportunity for lasting prosperity. This is only possible
through national compromise.
Masoomi Ali from Sahiwal expressed on the Scotland Yard
investigation. CIA Director General Michael Hayden should provide
concrete evidence regarding his claim that Baitullah Mehsud was involved
in the murder of Benazir Bhutto. The statements of President Musharraf and
the stance of the CIA Director on the Benazir Bhutto assassination are
tantamount to influence the Scotland Yard investigation.
Adnan Rehmat expressed his views on democracy of transition.
When General Pervez Musharraf passed the symbolic baton of the army to
General Pervaiz Kayani in December 2007, after a nine-year stint in double
skin, it was more than a mere change of command within the army; it
was the baton passing from another (failed) period of direct military rule to
another (hopeful) direct civilian dispensation
Where the third transition to democracy is different from its two
predecessors is that while Ayub, Yahya and Zia simply bowed out of politics
after their political or physical death, Musharraf is not only cry much alive
but simply refuses to fade away elegantly. Unlike his military ruler
predecessors, he insists on serving the nation for at least five more years
(nine years at the helm are obviously not enough for this endeavour even
though democrats can be faulted with failure in less than 20 months,
despite a five-year constitutional mandate), this time as a civilian.
For one, he is obviously not planning a presence in the post-army
retirement Aiwan-e-Sadr as benign as President Fazal Elahi or Rafiq
Tarar. Musharraf wants the foreign, interior and economic policies of the
986

past eight years, which he crafted and implemented, to remain unchanged

and to be in direct charge of them. This, of course, is based on his
assumptions that these policies have been successful and not in need of a
review.
This also implies that the new parliamentary system would have to
really be the old presidential system in practice and that the whole
business of the upcoming elections is not about a new mandate, a new
beginning and a new leadership. Thats quite an obnoxious assumption since
it is premised on a cosmetic outcome rather than a majority-backed peoples
mandate.
The latest transition to democracy is also different from the
previous two in one major aspect, one which is key to Musharrafs political
fate, and by that extension, to Pakistans he is a ruler who has retired only
from the army, not from politics He plans to stay centre stage without
creating the political space necessary for the transition for one key national
actor: the army chief. And thats General Kayani
Musharraf is anything but simple. The fact that he stays firmly
ensconced in the Army House rather than Aiwan-e-Sadr despite shedding a
skin is designed to mean only one thing: that he never really left the army
(the army has shed Musharraf, Musharraf has not shed the army). Or that he
intends to be an aggressive president. This complicates things for Kayani
What Kayani does next, and how Musharraf responds, will determine
the face of Pakistans latest attempt at a transition to democracy. Pakistans
history shows that it is the army chief that decides the future direction of the
army, not a former army chief, however powerful he may have been.
Musharraf is attempting what is unprecedented a system in which the
army has two active chiefs, a formal and another informal. It wont
work. But if it does, there will not be a transition to democracy. It will be
something dangerous.
Nasim Zehra saw the army marching on the path of constitutional
mend. After long stints of military rule the armys prestige and
popularity will always take a dip. For example the generals attempt to
resurrect the armys image is no different from General Aslam Begs 1988
attempt to clear the armys image in the immediate aftermath of Pakistans
longest serving and most destructive military dictator, General Ziaul Haq.

987

Twenty years later in 2008, in a different political and security context the
armys image has taken a greater pounding.
The armys public image suffered because of many reasons: one,
the high-profile and direct involvement of uniformed individuals in politics;
two, the institutional power struggle involving for example the judiciary
versus the presidency and the military agencies; three, the induction of
uniformed individuals in civilian institutions, including highly politicized
institutions like the NAB; four, the sudden surge of lucrative defence
housing schemes with the allegation of uniformed individuals privately
involved in land scams.
Also the fact that the current crisis emanating from extreme violence
in politics is generally viewed, among other reasons, as a result of
militaristic foreign policy options pursued by the military rulers.
Specifically, this includes Pakistans Afghan policy of the eighties and its
current policy on the war on terrorism. While in both cases Pakistans
involvement was necessary, the criticism is on the extent and the manner in
which Pakistan chose to partner with the US on the Afghanistan issue and
the war on terror. Interestingly the additional dimension to the criticism of
Pakistans post-9/11 policy is that while it should have greatly banked on
peoples support, the public bitterly criticize the policy
For Kayani the healthy recovery of his institution must trump all
other considerations. That is his constitutional mandate. The steps that he
will be required to take include the withdrawal of the army from civilian
institutions. The army has already announced internal reform, including the
extension of benefits to the jawans and their families, housing and
educational schemes. Therefore, 2008 has been declared as the year of the
jawan.
All the institution-specific steps notwithstanding, the army cannot
manage a healthy recovery without extricating itself from politics. One,
the army and Musharraf should not be seen as twins. Two, it should distance
itself from the coming election and clarify what role it will be playing in the
elections, part of which has been done by the ISPR. Three, the new chief
should be able to make the changes he wants in the army. Four, the new
chief should pullout army officers from civilian institutions. Five, the
serving officers in ISI must not be allowed to dabble in politics. Technically,
the ISIs internal security wing is bound to guard internal security. The army

988

must be advised to return to what is institutional role essentially with regard

to politics
That the president is a key cause of current political
unpredictability is only too obvious but as far as the army figures in the
issue of Musharrafs political future it is relevant only insofar it is seen as
supporting Musharraf. The general perception is that the unconstitutional
and controversial statements and actions Musharraf takes is because he is
seen to be supported by the army, hence the need for the army to change this
perception.
Without the military overtly pulling away from politics there can be
no possibility of fair and free elections. The army must distance itself and
return to playing its institutional role. Beyond this the army has no
constitutional mandate in playing a direct and overt role in the current
contest between the president and the opposition The army must remain
neutral in this power play and overtly partisan to the constitution of
Pakistan.
Babar Sattar felt the need and observed signs of army going back to
the barracks. Gen Ashfaq Kayani made three significant announcements
recently that have slightly dampened the public ire against the military
provoked by Gen Musharrafs hugely unpopular, yet continuing, rule. One,
General Kayani has affirmed that top military commanders will neither
engage in politics, nor mingled with politicians. Two, he has instructed that
all serving military officers holding civilian positions be recalled to the army
within six months and that they refrain from flashing their military identities
within civilian setups during this transition period. And, three, by stating that
the militarys mandate during the upcoming polls shall be limited to
performance of security functions, he has dispelled the impression that the
army is supervising the entire electoral process and is consequently
responsible for ensuring its credibility and fairness.
Our new army chief deserves accolades for doing the right thing. His
emphasis on overt disengagement from politics is essentially a
reiteration and reminder of the oft-forgotten oath taken by members of
the armed forces pursuant to Article 244 of the Constitution where each one
of them swears that I will not engage myself in any political activities
It is arguable that as important as doing the right thing for the
military is doing the smart thing from an institutional perspective. Lets
989

face it. General Musharraf now almost is a political and institutional liability.
His stock had been in a nosedive since the sacking of Chief Justice Iftikhar
Chaudhry in March and finally crashed on the eve of his second coup. And
the armys popularity has followed a similar course
The military as an institution with interests that transcend those of
individuals thus needs to undertake some urgent damage control
measures. The army needs to disassociate itself from the general in a
manner that the public begins to distinguish between the two and not hold
the army responsible for the follies of the general. This would reduce
collateral damage to the army as the Musharraf regime begins to sink.
On the other hand, despite his unpopularity and growing obduracy,
the military would not like to be seen as actively rocking the generals
boat though looking the other way if this boat capsizes due to a storm of
its captains making would be acceptable.
But in striking such a balance, the military must walk a fine line. As
the general refuses to acknowledge lengthening shadows as an ominous sign
of the impending sunset, his parent organization might need to borrow from
the wisdom he preached to justify both his coups: in dire circumstances
one needs to sever a limb to save the body.
The Ex-Servicemens Society comprising prominent generals of the
armed forces has also chimed in and called upon Gen Musharraf to resign in
supreme national interest. Musharraf rejected the statement in a
loathsome manner, claiming that this was merely a call from disenchanted
generals who had been kicked out by him
Equally significant is the Gen Musharrafs seething response to this
call for resignation. Not because his claim of kicking out the insignificant
chattering types is untrue. But because such indignant outbursts that are now
becoming the generals preferred response to discomforting ideas and
questions could be a reflection of his heightened sense of insecurity
The initiatives being taken by General Kayani to disengage the
military from politics and civilian executive positions are praiseworthy and
necessary, but not sufficient. They might be able to salvage the militarys
public ratings in the immediate term, but much more needs to be done to
reassemble sustainable institutional structures in Pakistan that function
within the four corners of the Constitution

990

The process of the militarys disengagement from the politics of

Pakistan can only be incremental, and not revolutionary. The real
challenge is that over the last 60 years, the military has steadily encroached
upon the jurisdiction of vital state institutions and voluntary retrieval would
be hoping for too much. Gen Kayani might wish to initiate a process of
disengagement from politics. But how do we ensure that the saviours
instinct of another general down the line will not suddenly come alive?
It is only uninterrupted continuation of the political process and
gradual evolution of norms and conventions of functional civilian
institutions that enable them to seek their rightful place in the polity and
create stability in the country. But the military must not view this
readjustment as a zero-sum game. Our civil-military imbalance needs an
urgent fix. A myopic approach to national security and corporate
institutional interests will most certainly jeopardize the security and future of
this nation.
Shahzada Irfan Ahmed wrote on the recent decision by Pakistan Bar
Council. A recent decision by Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) to relax
boycott of superior courts and the judges who have taken oath under PCO
has created furore among the lawyers community. It has decided in a
unanimously passed resolution that the lawyers fraternity would observe a
complete strike of superior and subordinate judiciary on every Thursday
while on other working days only a token strike shall be observed.
The decision, according to PBC members, has been taken on
humanitarian grounds as many litigants have suffered due to endless
boycotts and lawyers are unable to earn their livelihood. But soon after the
announcement, it became clear that there was little support for the decision
from the lawyers community. The provincial and district bar associations
reacted strongly to the declaration, terming calling off of the boycott of PCO
judges tantamount to accepting the3m as legal judges.
The PBC is a 22-member statutory body which has representation
from all the four provinces. It comprises 11 members from Punjab, 6 from
Sindh, 4 from the NWFP and one from Balochistan. There was no
representation from Balochistan in the meeting as Ali Ahmad Kurd who
hails from the province is under detention since November 3, 2007
Hamid Khan is one of the PBC members who voted against
showing leniency towards the PCO judges. Being a major player in
991

judicial movement, Hamid wields great influence over the lawyers, a

manifestation of which was seen in the Lahore District Bar elections that
took place on January 12, 2008. Professional Group that is supported by
Hamid made a clean sweep LHCBA has also rejected the PBC members
to review the decision.
Sardar Latif Khan Khosa, a PBC member from Punjab who voted
in favour of the decision, tells TNS that the council had simply asked for a
change in the mode of protest and not harmed the struggle of the lawyers at
all Khosa believes that arranging seminars, boycotting superior courts for
limited periods and holding token hunger strikes can bear fruit. How long
will the lawyers suffer alone. Now the 160 million people should also play
their role, he says.
The issue of restoration of the deposed judges remained alive. The
News commented on continued detention of Aitzaz Ahsan. After several
hours of high drama in Lahore Thursday night, SCBA President Aitzaz
Ahsan has, quite literally, been able to fight his way to freedom after
completing 90 days of detention. For how long it lasts, with rumours floating
on Friday of a possible re-arrest of the bespectacled barrister who seems to
have been labeled by the state as its enemy numbers one. Aitzazs release
could hold considerable significance.
As legal confusion engulfed government circles, a panic-stricken
Punjab government issued new detention orders. However, these were
withdrawn within hours, as the Attorney General of Pakistan issued a
statement saying detention beyond 90 days was illegal unless approved by a
review board of high court judges. Aitzaz himself too handed back the new
detention orders with comments regarding their illegality and his refusal to
accept them. For the moment then, right has triumphed. Aitzaz Ahsan is
finally free.
But what role he can finally play in the future will depend largely on
President Pervez Musharraf. So far, the president seems set on continuing
what has become a highly personalized animosity against Aitzaz, with some
strongly worded comments regarding the veteran leader also made during
Musharrafs meeting with Aitzazs daughter in Davos. This one can only
say, is not only in poor taste but demonstrates the depth of Musharrafs
feelings against Aitzaz.

992

The fact is that Aitzaz, both as a highly respected leader of lawyers

and a politician, could play a vital role in helping Pakistan emerge from
its current state of crisis. He could, crucially, also play a bridging role
between the people of the different provinces, given his status as a figure of
national standing. It can only be hoped that he is permitted to play this part.
Beyond even these issues, the fact is that Aitzaz Ahsan has committed no
crime; as such, the basic requisites of human rights and democracy demand
he be permitted the freedom to express opinions, and, by doing so, in fact
give voice to a sizeable percentage of citizens.
Babar Sattar opined: Aitzaz Ahsan was taken into custody on the eve
of General Musharrafs second coup and continues to be incarcerated almost
three months later. Punjab government has reportedly placed him under
preventive detention in exercise of the ridiculously wide discretionary
authority vested in by our well-preserved and oft-abused law: the
Maintenance of Public Order Act (PMO).
Barrister Aitzaz Ahsans detention cannot simply be analyzed through
formal legalistic analysis because his agitation against the desecration of
rule of law in Pakistan has caused the general personal affront. In stating that
his regime didnt wish to keep Aitzaz locked-up but was forced to do so as
the Barrister would not give up his agitation (read commitment to the
lawyers movement), the general only reflected our martial states
obsession with maintaining order at the cost of the law.
While a comparison and contrast of his confinement with that of our
honorable ousted judges highlights the hole in our constitution and our
justice system, it is also reflective of our depraved state power structures
wherein the whims of the to-dog trump the law and state functionaries
give effect to such whims in defiance to legal requirements or pangs of
integrity and conscience.
Article 10 of our constitution provides safeguards against arbitrary
arrest and detention Unfortunately, our constitution makes the
enjoyment of almost all our fundamental rights subject to reasonable
restrictions imposed by law. And this allows the state and the ruling regime
to rely on subordinate legislations such as the MPO to rubbish guarantees of
fundamental rights.
The right of any citizen to life or liberty thus hinges upon the
judgment of some Grade 17 state functionary of whether or not the
993

individual poses a risk to the security of Pakistan, public order or even

maintenance of services. The manner in which such risks are cooked-up
and the discretion vested in the government through MPO-style laws abused
by state functionaries at the behest of the ruling regime not only makes the
shared understanding of public order, national interest or national
security impossible, but also exposes a bureaucracy completely bereft of
independence, accountability and professionalism.
It is not that bureaucrats have lost the ability to make reasonable
judgments or that the line distinguishing right from wrong has become
murky beyond recognition. It is just that as individuals we seem to be
willing to compromise out judgment and integrity for pittance and
function as yes-men/women to anyone ahead of us in the food chain.
And as a society we allocate no premium to encourage those
doing the right thing or cost for those not doing it. How else do we explain
the forced detention of Aitzaz Ahsan or Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry,
Bhagwandas, Ramday and the 40 other superior court judges who have
elected to do the right thing at the cost of personal freedom and professional
advancement?
After all it is not the general alone who is responsible for keeping
the judges and the leaders of lawyers movement locked up, but an entire
executive branch in the state structure being run by individuals who are
prepared to abuse discretion to give effect to the generals whims or avoid
his ire, and an entire judicial branch that simply refuses to hold those
abusing discretion accountable for similar reasons This calibrated
approach has craftily replaced the rule of law by rule of men in Pakistan.
The generals continuing ability to stifle dissent (or agitation)
emanates not from the express words of the Constitution or any other
subordinate legislation, but from the carefully weaved network of loyalists
holding crucial positions within the polity and the abundance of realists
eager to acquiesce in ground realities. It must be appreciated that even
during emergency rule the general never exercised any draconian powers he
had awarded himself. Why? Because he simply didnt need to.
Unfortunately our state institutions have just become accustomed to
function on oral hints and orders. Holding over 50 superior court judges
as prisoners within the country is an epochal event by all counts. Yet a
formal written order mandating their detention has never been passed

994

Pakistan is functioning way out of the realm of law at the

moment. The first step would be to get back into the twilight zone where we
actually follow due process and create the perception of legality at least i.e.
by holding people in detention only in due exercise of legal authority. We
then need to ensure that discretion legally vested in state functionaries is not
abused on enticement or coercion The next step then would be to fix the
holes in the substance of our constitution and legal codes so that state power
is widely distributed and discretion cannot be abused to deny citizens their
fundamental rights. Let us start with the release of judges and Aitzaz.
General Asad Durrani in an interview to Farah Zia and Nadeem Iqbal
saw no military intervention again if judiciary is independent. The problem
is when you are in power as the army chief, you do get stuck. Initially
you manipulate judiciary to get this unconstitutional takeover legitimized or
at least legalized. Then youre looking for a political faade and you find
politicians who do not have much credibility. Once there, you also want to
fulfill a particular agenda, for example in this case it was to turn the
economy around. And then you start believing that no one else would do it.
You are faced with political turmoil because the public is turning
against you, the time which judiciary gave to legitimize you is running out,
so you again arm-twist the judiciary. This is what happened last year a
couple of times and this is how you get stuck. Some people say it is like
riding a tiger. A more apt description would be that you are digging
yourself deeper into the hole, getting out is now becoming more difficult.
Indeed a bold decision could always take you out, but that does not
happen with ordinary mortals. In this particular case, the gentleman got
stuck because of a threat to his life. After supporting the so-called war on
terror, the security that Musharraf needs for his survival could only be
available to him within the army house. So that is where he still stays even
after taking his uniform off.
Durrani was asked: Why do we remain under constant threat of
martial law? We have Article 6 as part of the constitution, we have High
Treason Act, and we have the army chief take this oath that he would not
indulge in politics. What more needs to be done? Durrani replied: If we see
history, the military would not take over if the judiciary did not approve of it
and, more than that, if the public at large would not welcome the military. If
the military knew there would be resentment, not only among the politicians
on all sides of the divide but also by the civil society, it would not take over.
995

The reasons why believe that the lawyers movement of last year is
so important is because it has been waged for the restitution of the
constitutional rule, rule of law and military out of politics. And the support it
got is indicative of the awareness that has come about. Therefore, supposing
that in this particular scenario, if that movement were to continue, I cant
imagine the military asserting that influence ever again.
But there are no signs of the military heeding the strength of that
movement; Durranis attention was drawn. He replied: Military may not be
in the habit of going on the rooftop and saying what it wants. In the last nine
years we only heard certain opinions expressed by the army chief who was
also the president. And he did consider the movement to be against his rule.
But Im talking about institutions and the things you may have heard in the
last couple of weeks (the COAS letter) is a proof that military as an
institution is not averse to going in that direction.
So is judiciary the most important institution when we talk of
military moving away from politics; his comments were sought. Durrani
added: It is the most important institution. No one in this country, the
civilian or the military leadership, has wanted judiciary to be independent
because the politicians also like to ride roughshod over the judiciary.
Last year no one thought that judiciary was moving towards that
independence especially with two-thirds of the judges not taking oath after
Nov 3, 2007. So if that was the type of independence that judiciary was
acquiring, and if the pre-Nov 3 judiciary gets restored, we can obviously
sure that it would provide the backdrop in which all other institutions start
working.
Dr Tariq Hassan discussed various aspects of restoration, particularly
the legal issues involved. At the outset, we should seek to clarify the first
question of what we mean by the restoration of judges. Do we mean their
legal restoration or physical restoration? This distinction is not immediately
apparent from the demand of the legal community, civil society or political
parties.
In my view, this distinction is important because it is the nature of the
demand that would influence the nature and timing of the outcome. Legal
restoration would require greater effort and have lesser chance of success.
Physical restoration would be an easier target to achieve. A purely legal
analysis of the present situation suggests that this matter should be

996

approached with a demand for the physical restoration of judges,

because the deposed judges do not need to be restored legally.
In fact, the incumbent judges need to be removed. The deposed
judges remain de jure judges in contrast to the de facto judges installed
by President Pervez Musharraf through extra-constitutional legal
manipulation. This position is important to understand and maintain in order
to seek the removal of the de facto judges and physical restoration of de jure
judges
The judges whose restoration we seek have not been removed on
the grounds or in accordance with the procedures prescribed in the
constitution. They have been ousted in pursuance of the proclamation of
emergency, which is itself of dubious legality, firstly because President
Musharraf issued it in his capacity of the Chief of Army Staff and secondly
because the primary reason given by him for the proclamation was that some
members of the judiciary are working at cross purposes with the executive
and legislature in the fight against terrorism.
By virtue of Article 232 of the Constitution only the president and not
the Chief of Army Staff may declare an emergency and suspend the
Constitution and that too only if the security of Pakistan is threatened. This
article also requires the proclamation of emergency to be ratified by the
parliament. The proclamation under question fails each of these
constitutional tests
If the proclamation, the PCO and the Oath of Office Order are
unconstitutional, illegal and void ab initio then the judges who were ousted
in pursuance of this proclamation remain the de jure judges whereas the
present incumbents are only the de facto occupants of the judicial seat. The
de jure judges are merely being physically restrained from the performance
of their duties. If these judges were allowed into the courtrooms today or
even to present themselves in public, lawyers and supplicants would
welcome them alike. All that stands between the de jure judges and the
exercise of their constitutional role is the proclamation and the orders
made in pursuance thereof.
It is, therefore, imperative to achieve the objective of the physical
restoration of the de jure judges that the orders made in pursuance thereof be
revised. In theory, this may be done by the proverbial flick of the
administrative wrist in exercise of its powers under Section 24-A of the
997

President Clauses Act, which states inter alia that the authority that passes an
order, has the power to amend or even rescind that order.
Legal restoration of ousted judges, even though unnecessary, may
have been possible if the incumbent judiciary had struck down the
proclamation of emergency, the PCO and the Oath of Office (Judges) Order
as illegal and void ab initio. Instead, the incumbent judges of the Supreme
Court have upheld the proclamation of emergency and the PCO in their 23
November 2007 judgments in the petitions filed by Barrister Zafarullah and
Tikka Iqbal Khan. This is not surprising since President Musharraf
handpicked the incumbent judges to serve his needs. The fact is that these
judges are bound by oath to abide by the proclamation of emergency and the
PCO and owed their continued existence as judges to these instruments.
Since the incumbent judges have turned their backs to their ousted
colleagues; restoration of these judges by President Musharraf would remain
an elusive dream. Can one even imagine the possibility of President
Musharraf passing an ordinance restoring the ousted judges! Yes, I suppose
one can. Given his propensity to make deals for his political survival, one
can imagine him doing so if the ousted judges agree to endorse his
presidency. This would, however, not only compromise the integrity and
independence of the judges which this struggle is after all about but
would also be a heavy price to pay for the undesirable outcome.
The final option for legal restoration may be through legislative
action by the new parliament. With the strong-arm tactics of the present
government and the rumours of pre-poll rigging already doing the rounds,
the next parliament is likely to be either grievously fractious or as docile as
its predecessor. Expecting a unified principled stance from such a parliament
is wishful thinking.
The second question we must address is why we think that the
restoration of judges is important for democracy. Is an independent
judiciary necessary for democracy or is the legal community fighting a
battle of its bruised ego? For the answer to this question we can examine
democratic norms anywhere in the world. It is an established principle of
any democratic dispensation, whether practiced as far away as in the United
States or as close to home as in India, that three organs of state, the
executive, the legislature and the judiciary must work independently of each
other and in fact exercise checks and balances

998

An independent judiciary is not only a pillar of democracy, but is

also a pre-condition for the existence of democracy. The election process
has to be umpired by an independent judiciary. In the absence of an
independent judiciary, candidates do not have effective recourse to the courts
or any hope of a just remedy. In the present scenario, if candidates were to
challenge the decisions of the Election Commission they would be required
to submit to the present judges who have been handicapped by the president
especially for their loyalty. If the elections do take place and there are
allegations of rigging, the aggrieved parties do not have any recourse other
than these courts. The only result that can be expected from them is a
validation of the acts of the government as has already been done in the past.
Without an independent judiciary, elections can take place in name but they
cannot ensure democracy
If an independent judiciary is a pre-condition to democracy in
Pakistan, which the government assures us that it will establish, then the
judges must be restored immediately and certainly before the election.
However, this does not mean that if restoration does not take place now, the
struggle should be abandoned
For when to become a reality, it is important that political parties
appreciate the subtleties of the problem and take a unified stance. Any
divergence in their views at this time will only strengthen the hand of the
government. Although individual persons may benefit in the short run by
bargaining with the government on this issue, the political parties as a whole
will be worse off. Not only will they have no recourse to an independent
judiciary in the aftermath of what are certainly to be rigged elections but
they would also be mere tools in the hands of the government in any future
instances that may require judicial intervention.
The question as to who we are asking to restore the judges is
important to assess the ability and willingness of that person to do the
needful. The demand is manifestly directed towards General Musharraf the
puppeteer who has stage-managed this whole show. As an architect of the
emergency, he appears so far to have emerged as the winner in his second
coup as well. He had already enjoyed the backing of the army and the
control of the executive.
The legislature too was filled with his men. In the aftermath of the
emergency, he has also acquired control of the judiciary that has taken an
oath to protect his actions. With all organs of state firmly under control,
999

why would and how could he be persuaded to reverse his orders? On the
other hand, should the legal community be negotiating with General
Musharraf at all since he is solely responsible for the ouster and
incarceration of the judges? Would this not pose a moral dilemma of
negotiating with a hostage-taker with the incarcerated judges as hostages
and General Musharraf as the hostage-taker?
Should General Musharraf be ignored and an appeal made to
this caretaker government? This may have been an option had the
caretaker government been neutral. However, this is not the case. The
government, like judiciary, has been handpicked for its like-mindedness with
the regime and cannot be expected to take any independent stand
principled or otherwise.
The judiciary has already been dismissed as an option. Not only
because it will not and indeed cannot provide independent decisions but also
because the legal community does not recognize its legality and by and large
does not submit to its jurisdiction. Should the matter be deferred until the
next parliament? As has been stated earlier, in the present set-up the next
parliament is expected to be as docile as its predecessor and even if not
docile is likely to have sufficient issues of survival to concern itself with the
issue of the judiciary.
So how this problem should be approached? In a scenario as
seemingly bleak as this, the players have no choice but to change the
rules of the game. It is incumbent upon the legal community to step forward
at this juncture and provide the intellectual fodder. It is further incumbent
upon it to assess its strengths and to fall back on its creativity and ingenuity
for improving its bargaining position with the powers-that-be.
The single biggest strength of the legal community is the
legitimacy of its demand for the restoration of the judges, which is couched
in a pure legal interpretation of the constitution. The legitimacy may have
been damaged by Justice Irshad Hasan Khans judgment in the case of Zafar
Ali Shah case and
It had justified the oath under the PCO on the ground that it was
necessary to protect the state and to continue to provide justice to its
citizens. It had, in fact, gone to the extent of stating that it had saved the
independence of the judiciary as well as the system of administration of
justice by taking an oath under the PCO.
1000

The Supreme Court has merely employed the rhetoric of the

independence of judiciary. In tampering with the security of the judiciary
and in casually ousting judges whose decisions General Musharraf has
reason to fear, he has fundamentally undermined the independence of the
judiciary. By adopting and advocating political realism, the Irshad Hasan
Khan and Shaikh Riaz Ahmed courts have destroyed the legal foundations of
civil society in Pakistan.
The constitution has now been so abused and the jurisprudence in
this area has become so tainted with political expediency that it can now be
set aside, altered and revived with the bare minimum of legal cover. This
tendency of judicial adherence to political realism needs to be rejected
and recourse needs to be made to legal purism to re-establish constitutional
supremacy, rule of law and genuine democratic governance in the country.
The other strength of the legal community is the availability and
support of the ousted judges. As has been stated earlier, these judges have
not been legally removed; only physically restrained from attending to their
duties. If they were to appear in public even once, as Justice Rana
Bhagwandas did to address the Karachi Bar Association, the lawyers and the
supplicants would welcome their continued services. It is, in fact, the duty of
theses judges to be available to the public and to perform their constitutional
role. This is not a call for anarchy or subversion of the constitution. It is a
call to recognize that the recent amendments to the constitution are an
aberration and to denounce them by all means available.
In addition to the continued boycott of the courts, the legal
community may consider interim measures of providing relief to its
clients. In this context, the legal community may consider the formation of
civilian courts This proposal aims at providing relief to the public,
business to lawyers and an opportunity to legitimate judges to perform their
duties in accordance with the constitution.
The legal community and the civil society must also address the
needs of the lawyers hit hardest by the continuing boycott. In the
immediate aftermath of the declaration of emergency, the legal community
had stepped forward to form a trust to help lawyers who had been arrested or
who found themselves out of work. This trust must be immediately revived
and reinforced with the objective of providing sustenance to those who have
been hit hardest by the continued boycott.

1001

By adopting these or similar measures, the legal community with the

continued support of the civil society and the political parties, will succeed
in improving its bargaining position. Once the government whether it
comes in the form of General Musharraf, the caretaker government or the
next elected government realizes the extent of the tenacity and
resourcefulness of the lawyers it will be forced to negotiate with it. The
tables would then be turned because the government will be the one
seeking the negotiation not the lawyers. It will then be for the legal
community to determine the terms on which this negotiation may take place
and with whom it may take place.
Achieving this objective may only be possible with patience and
infinite courage. The legal community and the civil society must be
prepared to draw on their reserves if they are truly to serve the interests of
the public and to uphold the rule of law in the country. The battle for the
restoration of the rightful Chief Justice of Pakistan last year was fought in
the court. The weapons were the constitution and erudite legal argument. In
this round., the legal community does not have the option to appear before
the courts because it does not recognize their legitimacy and does not submit
to their jurisdiction. Most importantly, it is even more certain than ever
before, that the opinion of the PCO judges will bend to the will of the
government
The struggle however does not end with the restoration of judges.
Once the judges have been restored, the legal community and the civil
society must turn its energies to eliminate the doctrine of necessity from
Pakistans jurisprudence, if it is to prevent future violations of the sanctity of
the judiciary and to ensure true democracy in Pakistan. the rightful
incumbents of the judiciary, particularly those of the Supreme Court, must
then be urged to exercise their inherent jurisdiction and to review all such
judgments of the Supreme Court which have in the past validated extraconstitutional deviations
Justice and democracy are the constitutional rights of the citizens of
Pakistan, not mere privileges that the powers-that-be can bestow as and
when they wish. The Objectives Resolution, which is an integral part of the
constitution, recognizes the independence of the judiciary as a necessary precondition for justice and therefore for democracy The objective, therefore,
is not merely to restore the ousted judges for the sake of ushering in
genuine democracy but also to provide long-term security to the required

1002

and necessary independence of the judiciary to sustain such democracy. This

leaves no room for compromise with the present unconstitutional regime if
this objective is to be effectively achieved.

REVIEW
Musharraf was shrewd enough to see an opportunity in tragedy of
Benazirs murder that provided him a chance to remain in power. He only
had to reassure the West that he was still the best option for them in their war
on terror, as he could deliver in fight against Islamic Fascism. It was to this
end that his planned an extended visit to European countries.
As usual the visit coincided with the largest-ever military operation in
Waziristan in which thousands of troops participated. This operation also
facilitated the killing of Libi. The operation was deliberately kept secret
from local media, because it was exclusively meant for the pleasure of the
West.
During the visit he tried every trick to impress the European media
and leaders. Sometimes he went so low that he passed derogatory remarks
about the deposed CJP and made an effort to intimidate young daughter of
Aitzaz Ahsan. Despite all these monkey-acrobats, he was informed that
some aspects of his image had been permanently damaged.
Back home the people strongly criticized his acts and utterances
during the visit. The voices for his resignation were raised. But at this stage,
Musharrafs resignation wouldnt solve any of the Pakistans problems; it
could have helped if he had resigned about a year ago.
General Kayani has been trying to salvage the image of the army he
commands. He has initiated few actions and issued various statements
advising military officers to refrain from indulging in politics. Some analysts
have welcomed this change without evaluating the effect likely to be
created by such steps.
What difference does it make if a captain or a major meets a
politician? Does Kayani include himself in addressees of his statements? If
so, why has he realized so late? Only a couple of months ago he was a front
man in most immoral political bargaining in history of the country and
which ended up in promulgation of NRO and subsequently, the imposition
1003

of martial law in the form of Emergency Plus and dismantling of the system
of justice. Restoration of an image that has been damaged over decades
cannot be repaired by few actions; it would require sustained effort.
Before talking about restoration of judges there is need to say a few
words about Aitzaz Ahsan. Attorney General termed the act of Punjab
government as illegal; and this interim government is headed by an ex-chief
justice, Ijaz Nisar. No doubt, judges like him are liked by the dictators for
their dedication and loyalty to the boss. Attorney General too belongs to this
category, but in this instance he took stand against an illegal act to create
false impression that all the acts taken prior to November 3 were legal.
Prospects of restoration of judiciary primarily hinge on results of
February 18 polls. PML-N is the only pro-restoration political party
contesting polls; other parties in the race like MQM, PML-Q and PPP would
surely oppose restoration; whereas JUI-F and ANP remain unpredictable.
The emerging situation is not promising for the deposed judges.
8th February 2008

FATIGUED FRONTLINER

1004

When Pakistan Army was carrying out a massive operation in

Waziristan, missiles launched by the US killed 15 people, including al-Libi
near Mir Ali killed on 29th January. The army had been pushing the militants
to create conditions for such a strike by the US. When asked about the attack
the regime pretended ignorance; Janey na janey gul he na janey, bagh tu
sara janey hai.
The US Homeland Security came down with contempt on Abdul
Sattar Edhi. He was detained at the airport for eight hours and his Green
Card retained by the US authorities. Musharraf regime was reported to have
reacted angrily over the treatment meted out to the world renowned social
worker. During the period the West again suffered from fits about
Pakistans nuclear programme.
India showcased military might on Republic Day and French
President attended parade as guest of honour, while Kashmiris observed
Black Day. Pakistan observed Kashmir Solidarity Day; Musharraf said
Pakistan was firm on Kashmir and Soomro urged flexibility. Shahbaz
accused Musharraf of harming Kashmir cause.

WESTERN FRONT
Foreign Office asked ElBaradei on 9th January to weigh his words:
Pehley tolo pher bolo. Foreign Office spokesman forgot that ElBaradei too is
on pay-roll of the Crusaders like the brave rulers of Pakistan. Afghans
wanted US to strike in Pakistan.
Jetfighters were used to pound suspected targets in South Waziristan
on 10 January. Six people were wounded in an attack on barbershop in
Quetta. At least 23 people including 20 policemen were killed and 73
wounded in a suicide attack in Lahore. President and Prime Minister vowed
to hunt down terrorists. Aitzaz sought permission to visit blast victims. US
condemned bombing but warned against polls delay.
th

On 11th January, Army repulsed an attack by militants in Wana.

Security forces claimed capturing a key militant commander in Swat. Four
people were hurt in exchange of fire between security forces and militants in
Bajaur Agency. Mohmand Rifles camp was fired at. CD shops were burnt in

1005

D I Khan and Tank. US expressed concerns over al-Qaeda operations in

Pakistan. Islamabad showed its satisfaction over ElBaradeis clarification.
Security forces launched massive crackdown against Mehsuds and by
12 January more that 50 militants were killed in two days and several
were held. In Swat, security forces carried out house to house search;
helicopters pounded suspected locations and over one hundred people were
arrested.
th

On 13th January, three Uzbeks and a tribal fighter were killed in a

clash in South Waziristan. A child was killed in fire by security forces. Army
kept pounding militants positions in Swat. Next day, seven soldiers were
killed in an ambush in Mohmand Agency and 22 militants were killed in
retaliation. Ten people were killed in bicycle bomb in Karachi.
FC killed three suicide bombers in Mohmand Agency on 15th
January. Three civilians were killed in South Waziristan in shelling by
security forces. Interior Minister announced arrest of eight terrorists. Next
day, militants stormed FC fort in Srarogha; seven soldiers and 40 militants
were killed and 20 soldiers were missing. General Kidwai informed the
envoys in Islamabad that Pakistans nuclear weapons were in safe hands. He
did not dwell on colour and creed of the hands.
On 17th January, Taliban claimed capture of another fort, army denied.
Militants held 60 more FC men as hostages in South Waziristan, who did not
resist. Four rockets were fired at Kamra. Next day, Army claimed killing 90
militants in clashes in South Waziristan. Pakistan and UK agreed to boost
anti-terror ties.
Militants suffered huge losses as security forces used gunship
helicopters, fighter planes and artillery to pound their positions in South
Waziristan on 19th January; fifty suspects were also arrested. Afghan artillery
shelled North Waziristan and US planes violated Pakistans airspace. Four
kidnapped employees of Gomal Zam Dam were freed by captors. Ten
militants were arrested in Swat. Mortar shells landed near Mohmand Rifles
camp in Ghalanai.
Two people were killed and two wounded as Hangu remained under
curfew on 21st January. Rockets were fired at army camp in Razmak. Grand
Mehsud Jirga demanded halt to military operation. In Ghalanai, the
kidnappers freed six officials. Four persons, including two lecturers, were

1006

kidnapped in Lakki Marwat. Al-Qaeda is a threat to Pakistans stability, said

US commander.
Baitullah Mehsud-led militants attacked historic Ladha Fort and killed
five FC soldiers on 22nd January; army retaliated by using jet-fighters and
gunship helicopters killing 37 people. Militants blew up three Khasadar
posts in Mohmand Agency. Two people were hurt in bomb explosion in
Swat. Bush Administration was unhappy with the quality of intelligence
provided by Pakistan about terrorist groups. Commander CENTCOM and
General Kayani discussed military cooperation.
Heavy fighting continued in South Waziristan on 23 rd January as death
toll of militants rose to 40 and dozens were arrested. One soldier was killed
in attack on a camp in North Waziristan. Eight suspected militants were
arrested in Swat. General Kayani visited Swat and credited people for the
success. Three people were injured in bomb blast in Karak. Two persons
were killed in blast in Jamrud. NWFP health minister escaped attack near
Mardan. Investigation teams arrested six terrorists in Rawalpindi. The US
said that Taliban and al-Qaeda have shifted focus to Pakistan. Karzai said
terrorism was spreading in the region.
Army used tanks, guns and gunship helicopters in a major operation in
South Waziristan in which the death toll reached 40 militants and 10 soldiers
killed by 24th January. The regime was poised for military operation against
local Taliban in Darra Adamkhel. Two persons were wounded in grenade
explosion in Ghalanai. The US was ready with plans to send troops inside
Pakistan in the garb of training Pakistani troops against insurgency.
British police arrested brother and son of Ch Shujaat Hussain at
London on the tip-off from Spanish police. They were suspected as
accomplices of the Pakistanis arrested by Spanish police. They were grilled
for 24 hours before release and British authorities regretted the
inconvenience.
Security forces retaliated to snatching of ammunition-loaded trucks;
used tanks and gunship helicopters to kill 37 local Taliban in Darra
Adamkhel area on 25th January. Four people were killed in separate incidents
in Bajaur Agency. Three persons, including two policemen, were injured in
two incidents of firing by unknown gunmen in D I Khan.

1007

Fierce battle raged around Kohat Tunnel on 26 th January; 37 militants

were reported killed. Military convoy escaped roadside bomb attack in
outskirts of Peshawar. Three security men were killed in rocket attack in Dir.
A Taliban leader wanted by the US, Darim Sedgai, died of injuries received
in an ambush in South Waziristan.
Army claimed major gains in South Waziristan. Interior Minister
vowed to establish writ in all tribal areas and declared that strategy of peace
treaties has failed. ANP demanded end to military operations. ISAF deputy
commander visited corps headquarters in Peshawar. Troops ready to enter
Pakistan, said US; Musharraf asked them to wait.
Musharraf informed the West that all nine police officers and men
involved in Rashid Raufs murder were to be court martialled. Gen Kidwai
said safety of nuclear weapons against extremists has been further boosted;
but he did not elaborate how safe these weapons are from the Crusaders.
Security forces conquered Kohat Tunnel killing 24 and capturing 15
militants on 27th January. Three Levies men were killed by militants in
Orakzai Agency. In Waziristan, forces pounded militants hideouts. Militants
beheaded a local that spied for the government. In Peshawar, three CD shops
were damaged in two bomb blasts.
On 28th January, 12 people were killed in Waziristan clashes. Troops
took full control of Darra. Protest rallies against Darra operation were held.
Policeman was beheaded by suspected militants in Swat. Militants and
criminals, who were on the run took control of a school in Karak and held
250 students as hostage. Jirga secured release of students after culprits were
given safe passage.
Musharraf was satisfied with his visit as the West was apprised
Pakistans view on democracy, nuclear assets and terrorism. Rashid Raufs
lawyer claimed that his client was being held by the government secretly. US
diplomat was found shot dead at his residence in Islamabad.
Missile strike from an unknown source killed 15 people Mirali on
29 January. When Brig Cheema said he has no information about the strike.
Fourteen people, including three soldiers were killed in clashes in South
Waziristan. Police killed four militants of Jandolla Group in an encounter in
Karachi; two police officers were also killed.
th

1008

Three rockets fired at Peshawar Airport and PAF base missed the
targets. In Swat, 24 militants surrendered through efforts of jirga. Three
people, including a woman, were killed in Mingora. Draft of Shariah
Regulation in Malakand was sent to President.
Dead bodies of 13 soldiers kidnapped from Darra Adamkhel area were
found on 30th January. Two soldiers were killed in attack on Razmak camp.
Three suspected militants were killed in blast in Peshawar. Drone attack near
Mirali was to hit Masri and Libi. Mehsud tribes jirga met Fazlur Rahman
who failed to soothe their grievances. US planned to spend $2b to befriend
Pakistani tribesmen.
On 31st January, top al-Qaeda leader Abu Laith Libi was reported
killed in Afghanistan; US media reported that he was killed in Pakistan.
Suspected locations of militants in Swat were pounded as four more
Fazlullahs men surrendered. Rocket was fired at police patrol near Bannu.
Six more Jandollah men were arrested in police raids.
On 1st February, a suicide bomber rammed his vehicle into Khajuri
check post, killing six soldiers and wounding 15 others. The post was only a
couple of miles away from the village attacked by the US Predator aircraft
couple of days ago. Jirga wanted end to military operation in Waziristan.
Security forces arrested eight suspects in Swat.
Libis death was confirmed by intelligence agencies but the regime
kept showing ignorance about an event which has been termed as a victory
for the US. Shujaat gave horrific details of torture of his kins at the hands
of British police which also asked questions about the murder of Benazir.
Two policemen were among five killed in an encounter with militants
in Mardan on 2nd February. Six suspected militants were arrested in Swat.
Death toll in suicide attack on Khajuri post rose to ten. Next day, four people
were wounded in roadside bombing near Sadda.
A suicide bomber targeted AMC bus in R A Bazar Rawalpindi on 4 th
February; killing 11 and wounding 45 others; one AMC officer was among
dead and seven among the wounded. Army and police raided a funeral to
arrest a Taliban commander in Tank. Rockets were fired at Bannu Cantt.
Two vehicles were set ablaze by miscreants in Swat. Office of Rural Support
Programme was damaged in Dargai. Three suspected suicide attackers were
arrested in Jhang.

1009

Troops released about a dozen tribesmen on 5 th February; these men

were arrested by FC troops from Nadra office in Ladha which included the
staff of Nadra. A vehicle was partially damaged in roadside blast near Khar.
Fourteen more militants surrendered in Swat. Owais advised militants to
shift battlefield outside Pakistan. Senior researchers at IISS warned that
Taliban could soon become a global menace. Pakistans nuclear weapons are
still vulnerable, claimed US intelligence.
General Officer Commanding was among eight officers killed in
helicopter crash in South Waziristan on 6 th February. Mehsud announced
ceasefire. Interior Minister said dialogue with Mehsud was possible; he had
recently said that strategy of peace treaties has been discarded. A jirga of
Afghan Taliban started mediation between two groups of Taliban who fought
against each other in Wana recently. Police arrested more than 100
suspected Afghan militants in house-to-house search in Rawalpindi and
surrounding area. The US was helping Pakistan to double the SSG force.
On 7th February, security forces blew up an explosive-laden jeep in
Swat. A Q Khans daughter challenged Gen Kidwais claim that her father
was free to meet anyone. Next day, two PAF jet fighters bombed positions
on militants in South Waziristan. US official suspected Mulla Omars
presence in Quetta; Pakistan rejected. Admiral Mullen, Chairman of Joint
Chiefs of Staff arrived at Chaklala Airport on three-day visit.
Three more militants surrendered in Swat. On 9 th February, ISPR and
PAF denied bombing South Waziristan. Militants attack near Kohat Tunnel
was repulsed. No loss was reported in three blasts in Peshawar. Admiral
Mullen met Musharraf and declared Pakistans nuclear weapons safe and
ruled out US troops intrusion into Pakistan.
Pakistans nuclear assets remained one of the targets. Sheikh Abdul
Haq from Lahore wrote: Hillary Clinton came out with a suggestion that the
US and Pakistan should have joint control over Islamabads nuclear
installations to ensure that these do not fall into the hands of extremist and
militant elements. It seems that the US presidential elections are being
contested on the point of pressuring Islamabad in order to get US access to
Pakistans nuclear installations.
The foreign media while expressing concerns about Pakistans
nuclear installations overlooks the fact that the western countries did not
extend cooperation and assistance to Islamabad in its bid to become a
1010

nuclear power. All efforts to make the nukes were purely indigenous. How
can they even think that they will give Pakistan a suggestion which is
detrimental to its supreme interests and it will happily oblige? Security and
safety of the nuclear installations is a matter of national concern. The
whole Pakistani nation is committed to preserving and safeguarding the
national security-related establishments and nuclear installations.
If our nuclear scientists could make Pakistan the first Muslim nuclear
state, they can also safeguard the atomic arsenal responsibly. No foreign
power should bother about Pakistans nuclear assets which have been
developed as the minimum defence deterrent and for peaceful purposes, and
not for aggressive use against anyone. The self-appointed advisers to the
Pakistani leaders should refrain from giving us unsolicited advice, otherwise
the people of Pakistan will be right in assuming that the US, Britain and
other western countries do not want to see an Islamic country as a
nuclear power.
Fardad Ali Shah from Chitral said: It is really painful to hear
President Musharraf making frequent remarks like Pakistan is not a failed
state, extremists cannot take over our nuclear assets and terrorists cannot
beat the Pakistan Army. Such utterances are an expression of his failure as a
ruler and a leader. Is this the Pakistan he had promised us when he took
over in 1999? At that time there were no such horrific problems as we see to
day, nor were there suicide bombings or attacks on military convoys. What
is all this? Where have we reached during these eight years?
Ashley J Tellis opined: As for the countrys nuclear arsenal, it is my
judgment that Pakistans strategic assets to include its nuclear devices, the
delivery systems, and its stockpile of fissile materials are fundamentally
safe today. The director general of the Strategic Plans Division (SPD)
deserves singular credit for remedying the security vulnerabilities that
traditionally plagued the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.
However, the following exceptions apply to this general conclusion.
The most potent threat to the security of Pakistans nuclear estate currently
arises primarily from contingencies involving a fissure in the Pakistani
military and breakdown in the system of authority and command. I do not
believe this to be a realistic threat in the present circumstances. Even if
some Islamist parties were to come to power through the ballot in Pakistan,
they would enjoy no operational control over its nuclear assets. Unless one
posits, therefore, a truly extreme scenario where the chief of army staff
1011

himself turns out to be secretly a political extremist, the security of

Islamabads nuclear capabilities ought not to become a matter of more than
prudential concern.
The real threats to the security of Pakistans nuclear arsenal are
likely to arise mostly over the longer term: if the rising tide of
Islamization in Pakistani society seeps into its armed forces or into its
scientific establishments as many fear it already has, especially in the lower
ranks of the SPDs internal security mechanisms fail to detect the threat
either because they are themselves compromised or because of oversight
errors and deficiencies, the security of Pakistans nuclear weapons and
materials may once again be at risk. Obviously, this is a contingency that the
current military leadership in Pakistan is especially sensitive to, but it
remains a good reason for the United States to stay engaged with the
Pakistani military to help mitigate this threat should it arise.
Nasim Zehra observed: The latest addition has been Hillary
Clintons statement regarding the need to have the US and the UK jointly
control Pakistans nuclear programme. Earlier, Barack Obama proposed
sending US troops inside Pakistan to tackle the extremist threat. The IAEA
chief ElBaradeis also feared extremists controlling Pakistans nuclear
arsenal if there was chaos within Pakistan.
The spokesman Foreign Office rejected these statements, saying that
given Pakistans effective Command and Control structure the fears about
our nuclear arsenal are misplaced. So far so good; but Pakistans response
does not stop within the relevant institutional parameters. Instead it
spills over within the broader public space. There are other compulsive
speakers. Instead of referring the local and foreign media to the spokesmans
statement when questions regarding these absurd US statements are asked,
the president downwards are keen to engage with these statements.
The media too has repeatedly focused on the story of these
American statements. For example, in one day four different Pakistani
channels wanted comments on what should do now that the international
community led by the US is threatening to attack us and to control our
nuclear programme.
This is misplaced fluster. The reason is that given the multiple strands
of tension that Pakistans internal and external context generates any new

1012

statement coming at us, especially in these times of internal turmoil, make us

over-react. Within these multiple strands six factors are noteworthy.
First the American factor in Pakistans power construct The
second factor is America in Pakistans discourse. The chaos and
turbulence generated by Pakistans incompetent statecraft have contributed
to our own chaotic and reactive thought process. For example, the American
factor writ so large in our psyche makes many of us equate antiAmericanism with patriotism.
The third factor is Pakistans induction as a point-scoring factor in
the US policy and political fame. While the blundering Bush
Administration seeks to minimize the political damage caused by its foreign
policy of letting its policy institutions talk tough to Pakistan, the US
hopefuls want to gain from Bushs blunders by declaring how much tougher
they intend to be vis--vis Pakistan. By whipping the extremist fear and the
nuclear fear, these hopefuls feel they can make the voters vote against the
Republicans.
The fourth factor in Pakistans nuclear programme and the
international community in opposition to it almost in perpetuity.
Subsequently, the negative baggage acquired by us after the discovery of the
AQ Khan network will not go away easily.
Nasim Zehra, like most analysts in Islamic World, has inadvertently
used terms preferred by the West. It is not correct to say internal
community because Muslim countries and China support Pakistans nuclear
programme and most of African or even Latin American are not pushed
about it. Secondly, there is nothing as A Q Khan network, even if there was
any; it wasnt Khans monopoly.
The fifth factor is the international communitys fear of the
damage that armed militancy using the name of Islam and often having
links with Pakistan-based groups. Clearly, these groups have strengthened,
not weakened, over time.
The sixth and an important factor is Pakistans internal turmoil
ranging from suicide bombings to the tribal areas, assassinations and
depleting credibility and legitimacy of the current regime. This is all too
obvious and affects Pakistans State institutions, politics and society. This

1013

turmoil deeply worries Pakistanis and also is of concern to the international

community.
Given the six factors are at work simultaneously, what is then to be
done? That we primarily remain mindful of these facts when absurd
statements come at us. We must learn to respond selectively and calmly.
We have no magic wand to fix all of this immediately. None of this lends
itself to immediate fixing. All these factors are best addressed by sensible
policies and viable processes. On the internal front the answers are obvious.
As for external threats, we need to keep them in perspective. On some fronts
we are less vulnerable than others.
For example, Pakistans strategic assets are well guarded and well
managed. Yet our politics remains in turmoil and our power construct
continues to function outside of the constitutional parameters. While some
of pressures we must learn to live with, given the international
communitys obviously prejudicial attitude towards our nuclear programme.
Yet for the world to feel more confident about Pakistan we need to have our
elements of national power in place: politics, economy, development,
defence and governance.
Zaigham Khan wrote: As election after election and poll after poll
have shown, Pakistani people are not extremists. Given a chance, the vote
for the mainstream political parties, which are well integrated into the world
political system. The religious parties, which are not the same as extremists
because they vow to play by constitution, win a mere fraction of votes.
Since neither politicians nor military could deliver the bomb to
extremists, it is the bungling scenario that is giving sleepless nights to
the world and should scare us even more. but we are many miles behind the
red zone and rather than screaming about the bomb, the world should help
improve the shape of things in this country. The noise about Pakistans
nuclear programme is an utter nonsense that makes us all angry and react in
strange ways.
Some important government officials, for example, have stated that
Pakistan is being singled out because it is in the only Muslim country to
have the nuclear bomb. Since we have not turned Muslims recently under
the pious leadership of Pervez Musharraf, we will have to come up with
more credible theories so that we can save our skin and our nuclear
programme as well.
1014

The recent Western fears about our nuclear programme are in

fact a logical consequence of a game called after me mullahs. Pakistani
version of the game goes like this. You splinter the mainstream political
parties; send their leaders into exile, hunt their workers like foxes and
disallow them from participating in political activities. At the same time, you
let the religious parties play to the content of their heart and even encourage
them to form an alliance. After holding elections, you again reach for your
gun and go after your favourite prey. Mainstream parties are found lying on
the ground, having lost their limbs. Maulanas are allowed to rule in peace to
two provinces while secular parties are not even allowed to play opposition.
One fine morning, for example, opposition is informed that a particular
Maulana, termed by a leading columnist as your deadliest secret weapon,
has been appointed their leader in the august house. They protest and scream
but unity of command demands that the higher ups decide who should be
their leader.
Now you turn to the West and inform them it is either you or the
mullahs. You tell the terrified Western audience that you are governing a
nation of madmen and the gates to hell will open after you go. The game has
worked for Brother Hosni Mubarak and it is working for you. The West
declares you the indispensable one and says you are their only hope in this
lunatic asylum of a country. You laugh in your sleeves and enjoy the great
ride.
But then things start going wrong. Pakistanis are somewhat different
from their Arab brothers. They are a thankless, riotous lot. Sixty years of
thrashing has not dented their resolve to be ruled by constitution and law.
They claim that they won this country through a constitutional struggle,
under the leadership of a legendary lawyer and would like to be governed by
constitution and not by whims of an individual. This shakes the throne and
the earth beneath it. The Westerners are jittery and worried. Not about
Pakistan or Pakistanis of course, but about the bomb that could fall into
wrong hands and endanger the security of their citizens. By now they fully
believe in what you have told them after me mullahs.
Ali Abbas Rizvi opined: The other scenario that is being presented is
that instability would grow in Pakistan, providing a chance to the
extremists to move towards the storages where the nuclear weapons are
stored. These terrorists or extremists, once getting the bombs or stocks of
nuclear explosive material, would use them as they like, perhaps against the

1015

American and NATO forces fighting in Afghanistan. With regard to these

reports, there are several significant points that should be taken note of.
First, the talk about the unwanted elements taking over Pakistans
fissile material and nuclear assets emerged soon after 9/11. Among the
proponents of the theory was the Institute for Science and International
Security, whose president, David Albright, declared that fighting the war of
terror starts with ensuring the stability of a nuclear-armed Pakistan,
otherwise the terrorist threat will take on a new frightening dimension. The
experts divided the security threat to Pakistans nuclear weapons
arsenal in five categories: outsider threat; insider threat; insider/outsider
threat; leakage of sensitive information; and the loss of central control of
storage facilities.
They advocated that the Pakistani nuclear weapons should not be
put at one place, they should be disassembled and the components scattered
far away from the Afghan border where al-Qaeda was operating. Also, such
procedures should be devised that no one man could have access to the
sensitive material or the assembled devices. Also, strong physical security
should be put in place around the storages and nuclear installations.
While the media kept away from the topic the US nevertheless,
covertly started providing technical aid to Pakistan to safeguard its
nuclear facilities. Reports say the Americans provided nuclear detection
units, helicopters and night-vision goggles to Pakistan besides other
equipment so that the storages of nuclear warheads and laboratories
remained safe. At the same time, they made sure that the equipment that they
provided did not enhance Pakistans nuclear capabilities
Second, it was Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan and his network that
instead became the focus of American efforts and the media, which
accused him of spreading the nuclear know-how and technology among
countries like Iran Libya and North Korea, considered pariah by the United
States. The reports about Dr Qadeer Khan and his alleged network of
international smugglers continued to appear regularly in the western
newspapers
Third, from the advent of the year 2007 what we see is that there
is has been a gradual shift in the western media from the above three
countries and the A Q Khan network. Their focus as we see now is on the
possibilities of the taking over of Pakistans nuclear assets by the extremists
1016

and doomsday scenarios. One report after another is appearing in American

newspapers and some British publications, claiming that extremists are
about to capture the Pakistani nuclear weapons. The reports, which are also
coming out in the electronic media, are trying to convince the world that the
Pakistani military has no safe control over its nuclear assets.
Fourth, a significant development has been the involvement of US
presidential hopefuls in the subject Fifth, it is visible that to a great
extent the western media, especially the Americans, continue to ignore the
clarifications issued by the Pakistani government and the military top brass,
including General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and General Tariq Majeed, to the
effect. In every interview, President Musharraf, besides the Foreign Office in
its briefings, is found defending the countrys stance on the control of
nuclear weapons...
What is clear, however, is the reports in the foreign media are
getting a boost from the increasing number of suicide attacks in the
country and the ongoing military operations in the North and South
Waziristan agencies and Swat. The three-day anarchy following the death of
Benazir Bhutto and the governments inability to stop the criminal elements
in their tracks has provided fodder to the elements that are out to portray the
Pakistan nuclear programme and its control in the bleakest terms.
At the same time, suspicions are rising among the Pakistani public
that the United States is working on an agenda to locate and disable
Pakistani nuclear weapons to take them its control. In fact, some quarters
have started putting up extremely grave scenarios. These include the US
taking the Pakistani nuclear weapons out of the country, intensive bombing
of the nuclear sites that could release vast amounts of radioactivity that
could kill thousands of people and so on and so forth. Such talk is awfully
foolish.
It is time for the Pakistan government to realize that the longer it is
perceived to be losing control over law and order and ignoring the rogue
elements, whether terrorists or common criminals, the stronger the media
campaign will become against the countrys nuclear assets. Also, poor
tackling of national crises like the unavailability of flour and liquefied
petroleum gas, among others, in any way will not help the countrys nuclear
cause.

1017

Shireen M Mazari observed: MP Keith Simpson summed up the new

neo-colonial attitude prevailing in the British government towards Pakistan
when he declared imperiously that Britain must persuade the Pakistanis to
do things that are not only in their national interest too. Now what happens
if we in Pakistan do not see a coincidence of interests between Pakistan and
Britain, eh?
British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has continued with this theme
on his visit to India where he has declared that failed or failing states can
harbour terrorists. Ironically, in India he should surely have also recalled
state terrorism such as the one inflicted on the Muslims in Gujrat or the
Kashmiris in Occupied Kashmir. And of course like all white Brits he
refuses to see the rise of terrorism from amongst the marginalized
minority populations of Empire.
What was more laughable was Browns assertion that Britain would
use its expertise to establish requirements for the verifiable elimination of
nuclear warheads. If Britain is serious it should lead by example and
eliminate its own little nuclear arsenal. This would have won over his
Indian hosts on nuclear disarmament since they have always demanded the
five de jure nuclear states move first towards nuclear disarmament. As for
the issue of verification, it needs to persuade its ally Bush on this count since
the US is not prepared to have verification even in a Fissile Material Cut-off
Treaty! In fact, verification seems to have become a dirty word for the Bush
Administration in the context of arms control and disarmament.
The lack of credibility that the present holders of power present was
most glaringly reflected in the US violations of Pakistani airspace yet again
last week, according to press reports that have not been denied by Pakistani
officialdom, and its bombing in our tribal belt. Added to this violation of our
sovereignty were the Afghan troops firing across the international border
into Pakistan. So what happened to the challenge thrown to those who chose
to violate our sovereignty? Where was our response?
This bizarre acceptance of external factors violating our sovereignty
with impunity undoubtedly led an Indian minister to simply walk or as the
reports put it, stroll across the international Pakistan-India border unchecked
and unstopped; why? Have we lost all dignity and self-respect in terms of
our sovereignty? I dare any Pakistani minister to walk across into Indian
Territory in the same fashion! The Indians will not stand for it. One just has

1018

to look at the way they treat visa applicants including those invited by
Indian official bodies to see the difference in approaches
Clearly, our internal turmoil has highlighted the costs of decades
spent in the destruction of institutions and systems, and exposed our
ruling elite as never before not only in terms of their commitment to the
Pakistani nation, but also in terms of their commitment to the state of
Pakistan.
Some other events pertaining to war on terror were subjected to
scrutiny. The News wrote about establishment of Qazi courts in Swat. The
draft proposal by the NWFP government for a regulation under which Qazi
courts would be set up in Swat, Dir and Chitral appears to be the outcome of
some particularly poor thinking.
Rather than taking the people of these areas towards life in a modern
age and providing them with access to justice and the basic rights that they
deserve as citizens, the move seems to be designed to push them still
deeper into an age of medieval darkness.
Much like the almost identical Nizam-e-Adl regulations introduced in
Malakand in 1999, as part of a truce reached with TNSM chief Sufi
Muhammad, the latest plan is ostensibly to appease militant sentiments
in these areas Just as the accord with Sufi Muhammad failed, this move
too seems destined to meet identical fate.
The many flaws in the basic structure of the courts, including the
question of the ability of those to be entrusted with the task to dispense
justice according to laid-down norms, suggest they will do nothing to
improve the plight of the people. The dubious concept of collective
responsibility, included in the regulation, which allows a DCO to act against
a person, a group, a community or a locality to establish peace, carries with
it ugly echoes of the draconian FCR law, struck down in PATA by superior
courts nearly a decade ago.
Setting up different systems of justice in various parts of the
country carries with it many dangers. There is a need to introduce greater
cohesion in national life, by granting people similar rights and ending the
immense differences in this respect that exists between the provinces and the
regions within them, rather than widening this gap through the establishment
of parallel justice systems.

1019

What decision-makers must realize is that the key to tackling the

tightening militant hold on northern parts of the country lies not in making
dodgy deals with them, or attempting to placate them, but by pushing
through policies that can bring development and change in these areas. This
means focusing on the issues of education, healthcare, employment and
welfare that could do a great deal to improve the lives of people.
Bill Roggio argued against peace deal with militants. The Pakistani
government and military hope to regain control of Swat by continuing
military operations, establishing local security forces, providing services,
and strengthening the justice system, according to the interior ministry
report. But while Pakistani security forces focused on Swat during the past
two months, some adjacent districts and tribal agencies in the north remain
under the sway of the Taliban. The Taliban remain strong in the districts
of Dir, Chitral, Kohistan, Malakand and Buner.
The Pakistani military has so far not been able to capture the leader
of the Swat insurgency, TNSM leader Maulana Fazlullah. While many of
Fazlullahs aides have been captured, eight of his lieutenants, according to a
newspaper report, have already been released on bail, and this may indicate
that the government may now be looking for a political settlement
Without a comprehensive plan to address the rise of the Taliban and
extremism, the recent military gains in Swat may be short-lived. As repeated
peace agreements in North and South Waziristan, Swat, Bajaur and
Mohmand demonstrate, cutting deals with the Taliban only gives them the
time and space to consolidate their control and expand outward.
The News expressed views in the context of Waziristan. Settlements
with hardened criminals simply do not work. This is why deals are not
made with the killers and rapists who fill Pakistans jails. Whereas the
situation may be more complex in Waziristan, there is no reason why the
same principle should not hold true in dealing with militant leaders here and
in other tribal areas, who are after all, criminals and not men of honour, as is
implied by the official attitude towards them.
Mushtaq Yusufzai described the fall of Srarogha Fort. Analysts
closely monitoring the situation in the tribal areas observed that the fall of
the military base to militants was the second most significant event in the
region after the kidnapping of 300 Pakistan army soldiers by local
Taliban without firing even a single shot on Aug 30.
1020

Senior officials of the political administration, who had now been

pushed to the wall by military authorities since their arrival to hunt down alQaeda operatives and their tribal local supporters in the FATA, said the
militants are extremely daring, as the day they planned for the attack on the
fort, they were seen gathering in Srarogha town in the afternoon.
Before their attack, militants reportedly informed the soldiers that
Mujahideen had cordoned off the fort from all sides; therefore, it would be
better for them to lay down their arms and surrender before them. The
militants also promised the soldiers amnesty if they peacefully vacated
the fort and handed over to them.
On their refusal to lay down arms, the militants started firing on the
military base from all directions The troops initially gave a tough time to
the tribal assailants but later they were overpowered when militants entered
the fort after breaking one of its walls through explosives.
The very next night, the militants stormed another fort Military
officials said they never expected such an action from militants against
paramilitary force as the force was considered an integral part of tribal
society Like the Lal Masjid, the government gave enough time to
Baitullah and his militants to get stronger and challenge writ of the
government.
The News commented on fighting in Darra Adamkhel. Yet another
tract of NWFP has descended into the chaos of armed conflict, with fire
from gunship helicopters and tanks directed towards settlements harbouring
militants in Darra Adamkhel. The military operation in the tribal area,
located just a short drive away from Peshawar, broke out after militants who
had seized army trucks and taken five Frontier Constabulary personnel
hostage refused to release them, even after repeated attempts at intervention
by jirgas set up with the assistance of the local political administration.
This defiance says a great deal about the confidence of militants,
who in a particularly belligerent move, on Friday also seized the Kohat FC
Fort, a bastion of military strength which has been used to watch over the
area since British times. This series of severe setbacks left the military with
little choice but to fight back. Fierce battles were seen through Friday, as
tanks pounded militant strongholds. The ISPR has reported 20 to 25 militant
deaths in the operation and two paramilitary casualties. It also says

1021

important forts have been re-taken from the militant armies and advances
repelled.
The civilian population of the area has of course suffered as a
consequence of the fierce fighting. Thousands have been forced to abandon
their homes, and head for Peshawar to other safe locations. Others are said to
be in the crossfire. It is unknown if any official effort has been made to assist
these innocent sufferers of the conflict, who include many women and
children, but certainly, in the past, offering such help has not been an
official priority. This is a mistake.
It is also not clear what longer-term plan the authorities have in mind
the longer-term future of the expanding areas of NWFP that have been run
over by militant forces. Whereas the Pakistan Army now seems determined
to deal with this situation with greater determination and consistency than
has been exhibited in the past, there is also a need to put in place a plan
that goes beyond this. This must include development, an involvement of
local people
But for the present, the task of defeating the militants, who have
amassed alarming strength over the past few decades, must take priority.
General Ashfaq Kayanis recent morale-boosting visit to troops in Swatit
is necessary also to protect innocent people, who have suffered so much due
to the rise in militancy, and make sure in the final outcome they see the
forces of State as heroes rather than as the villains that militant leaders
have attempted to portray them as.
Ahmed Quraishi talked of US-Pakistan trust deficit as allies in
war on terror. Ms Patterson had this to say to her colleagues about her host
nation: Terrorist groups based in Pakistan continue to threaten the United
States, if it were launched from Pakistani soil, would be catastrophic for USPakistan relations. An attack on the US from Pakistani soil; it doesnt get
any more dramatic than this.
Now military planners in Washington are bullying Pakistan into
inviting US boots inside Pakistan. The most interesting aspect of this
pressure is that US officials are giving the Pakistanis two options: Either
pretend that you have invited us in, or simply, let us in anyway.
Any new administration in Islamabad resulting from next months
election will be failing the Pakistani people if it does not renegotiate the

1022

terms and conditions of our role in Washingtons war on terror. The way the
Americans have conducted this war, especially in Pakistan, has seriously
compromised Pakistans strategic, security and economic interests in the
region, probably for the long term. A review and possible changes have
become necessary to out policy considering the mess in Afghanistan and the
US role in it.
Forces that see Pakistan as the enemy gradually increased their
influence in Afghanistan over the past six years, under Washingtons
watchful eyes. Today, insurgents fighting the Pakistani state along the border
region enjoy an endless stream of money and weapons coming from
generous supporters sheltered in a US-controlled Afghanistan. Some
Pakistanis believe if Americans are not directly involved, then certainly they
are turning a blind eye. Pakistanis have caught many terrorists infiltrating
from Afghan soil to terrorize the Pakistani people.
Should the US go for unilateral punitive action against Pakistan,
Islamabad must be ready, among other responses, to withdraw from
Washingtons war on terror and leave Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton to
clean up the mess in Afghanistan. We can restrict ourselves to cleaning up
our own mess in the tribal region without any commitment to what happens
in Afghanistan.
Moreover, while Islamabad should clearly continue its current
policy of non-interference in Afghanistans domestic politics, Pakistanis
should have no problem in establishing open communication lines with the
Taliban in Afghanistan. In addition to being an important player in that
country, Afghanistans Taliban are inclined to be Pakistan-friendly and their
help can be sought to tame our own wayward Taliban-Wannabes.
In short, Pakistan should take a page from Turkeys book of
managing relations with the US. Ankara refused to allow a US-controlled
Iraq to become a territory hostile to Turkish interests under any pretext. In
Pakistan, we have paid double the price for half the respect the Turks
engender. Thats a bad deal. We need a better one.
Shireen M Mazari criticized the role in war on terror. With the army
busy fighting bush fires that are sapping away its capacity in terms of
sheer manpower as it moves into Swat and into Darra Adamkhel and into
Kohat as well as re-seeking control of the ring of forts in Waziristan, clearly
even though it is managing to gain or regain control of the salient, its
1023

successes are at a tactical level. These tactical military encounters are being
conducted within an adverse strategic environment which in turn limits
success and also threatens to suck the army into a widespread arena of bush
fires where just as one is put out, another flares up
There is an extremely hostile one as well as a growing internally
hostile environment for the state. Before identifying these in detail, it needs
to be stated that a nuclear Pakistan located in its critical geostrategic position
will by definition be a relevant strategic player both to states within the
region as well as extra regional powers regardless of status its relations
with them. In fact it is the relevancy that is seen as an issue by extra regional
powers like US and what we need to ensure against is their effort to reduce
its relevancy by getting us bogged down in our internal crises and
external absurdities.
The externally hostile environment is largely the making of the
US and its post-9/11 military-centric war on terror. Just as the chaos in
Iraq and the weakening of the Arab polities has been part of the US agenda,
with 9/11 providing the pretext, so the war in Afghanistan has provided the
US an opportunity to weaken, perhaps Balkanize and attempt to take out
Pakistans nuclear assets
As for the reference to Gwadar giving Pakistan, and my inference
China, control of the worlds energy jugular, the Indian naval chief has
conveniently forgotten that it is India and the US who are seeking this
control in their agreement to jointly patrol the Indian Ocean from the Red
Sea to the Malacca Straits; and Indias establishment of the Far East
Command on the Andaman and Nicobar Island, thereby giving itself the
ability to choke the flow of energy through the crucial Malacca Straits.
Perhaps the most threatening aspect of the Indian naval chiefs statement is
within the context of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) another
venture of the coalition of the willing in which India was invited to join
by the US
That is why it is imperative to reassess the cooperation with the
US and to evolve a counter-terror strategy premised on indigenous
assumptions and ground realities. To counter the developments in FATA as
well as in the settled areas of the NWFP, the Pakistan military cannot fight
without the support of the nation as a whole, as well as political and
economic inputs from the state. Otherwise the army will expend all its force
fighting bush fires, no matter how successfully
1024

However, at the domestic strategic level a more favourable

environment has to be created politically across the country. We are in the
throes of electioneering as civil society awaits a return to full-fledged
democracy. But have any of our political leaders focused on the issue of
the war on terror. Has any party given any detailed intent of how it expects
to fight the menace of terrorism?
Worse still, our government is increasingly making us a laughing
stock thanks to emotive outbursts and contradictory statements, along
with efforts to maintain secrecy over events which by definition cannot be
kept under wraps. Systems and due process have been all but destroyed so
that personalized governance is increasingly the order of the day. It is almost
as if the government is becoming irrelevant to the ground realities of
Pakistan and its people, thereby fostering a hostile domestic environment in
which a strategic war on terror cannot be conducted successfully. Till we
realize that the state has to make itself relevant and credible to its own
people first, there will continue to be a disconnect between the nation at
large and the state, and we will not be able to move beyond efforts to douse
the terrorists bush fires.
Kamal Siddiqi observed that western perceptions were unrealistic. As
fighting raged between government forces and militants in different parts of
the NWFP, President Musharraf was in Davos last week with an
impressive team for ministers, bureaucrats, media persons and other
characters all flown at tax payers expense, to tell the world a number of
things. Some of the gems he shared include his view on what he called
idealistic and unrealistic western perceptions of democracy.
President Musharraf also rejected suggestions from western
analysts that Pakistani intelligence agencies were losing their grip on
information relating to the War on Terror. The president claimed that the
intelligence agencies were doing a good job and that the recent spate of
suicide bombings was an irritant. One can only hope that all Pakistanis can
be so optimistic about the manner the country has been shaken by terror
groups while the law enforcers looked on helplessly.
Rahimullah Yusufzai tried to find consequences of US air strikes. The
US military carried out a missile strike in Pakistani territory at a time when
Washington was putting pressure on Islamabad to allow its troops to operate
in Pakistan for hunting down al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters hiding in
Waziristan and other areas of FATA. This wasnt the first time and it
1025

wont be the last for the Americans to launch an attack on Pakistans

soil.
Until now, there has been no chain of responsibility for the January
28 night-time attack on a house of a tribesman, known for his links to
militants, in Khushali Torikhel Wazir village near Mir Ali town in North
Waziristan Such strikes are carried out secretly and rarely acknowledged,
though sometimes the Pentagon and other arms of the US government leak
information to the American media to claim credit for the more successful
air strikes and for the ones that dont cause many civilian deaths. In the
latest case, there is growing evidence that a CIA-operated, pilot-less
Predator aircraft fired the missile that struck the tribal village and caused
those deaths.
There was obvious glee among US officials following reports that a
senior al-Qaeda operative Abu Laith al-Libi was among those killed in the
air strike. One of them while requesting anonymity said taking down guys
like al-Libi could have both an operational and symbolic impact. Still he
wasnt confirming the report of his death and was content to say that there
were strong indications that al-Libi had been killed
The subsequent revelation by two Islamic websites, as-Sahab and alEkhlass, which are normally used by al-Qaeda and similar groups to provide
news and views, that al-Libi had indeed been killed was surprising. These
websites, or the pro-al-Qaeda elements operating them, dont reveal the loss
or attest of their senior operatives and instead strive to keep their enemies
guessing. Therefore, it is understandable that their admission of al-Libis
death is generating controversy.
Either it was no longer possible to keep his death secret or
someone has manipulated their websites to pass on information that would
demoralize the al-Qaeda rank and file. Still the statement posted on the
Ekhlasscould be taken as admission by elements close to al-Qaeda that alLibi is no more.
This opens a window of opportunity for the US to put further
pressure on Pakistan to allow its troops based in Afghanistan to cross the
border and deploy in places like North Waziristan and South Waziristan. It
could argue that wanted al-Qaeda operatives such as al-Libi were hiding in
Pakistan and the job of tracking them could be done more effectively if the
US and Pakistani troops carried out joint operations
1026

Musharraf did well to warn the US of undertaking any such

adventure by reminding it of the risks involved in deploying American
troops in Waziristan. He even equated any incursion by foreign troops into
Pakistan as an invasion. Coming from a man who is accused of being a US
puppet should be enough to remind the Americans that there are limits to
interfering in the affairs of a sovereign country and forcing its ruler to
accept its self-serving demands
As for the Americans, their policy of hitting targets in Pakistan has
by now become the norm than exception. They have done this several times
in the last few years and have every intention of operating it without
caring for Pakistani sensibilities. Only once Pakistan government protested
the US aggression and that was way back in January 2006 when a US drone
attacked Damadola
In a way, the latest missile attack by the US military in North
Waziristan has rendered meaningless the need for permission to the
Americans to hit targets in Pakistan. Their troops may not enter Pakistan
but they can always use their superior air technology to attack positions and
suspected hideouts of the militants in our tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.
The US would continue to strike Pakistani territory as long as its troops are
based in Afghanistan and the Taliban and their al-Qaeda allies arent
defeated. That is unlikely to happen. That means we have to face a long
period of instability and violence in our border areas which in turn would
adversely affect the situation in the rest of Pakistan.
Ali Abbas Rizvi saw American connection to the Waziristan problem.
If we scrutinize the situation, what emerges is a sequence of failures not
only on this side of the border but also across the Atlantic that has led to the
emergence of the Waziristan problem. Following is a brief list of the
contributions the Americans seem to have made to our Waziristan
problem.
First, the American forces, following their victory over the Taliban,
failed to mop up the remnants of the madressah force. The Talibs went
home to fight for another day while the Americans probably thought that
they had disappeared for good after their defeat.
Second, the Americans did little when the Taliban were slowly but
steadily getting ready to challenge them. After it became clear that the
Americans were not coming after them the Taliban became emboldened and
1027

started their recruitment drive in the Pakhtoon areas of Afghanistan and

across the border.
Third, the Americans put up NATOs (ISAF) to fight the Taliban and
al-Qaeda. The problem here is what the NATO forces do not have the
commitment and dedication with which an ordinary American soldier
would fight the extremists and terrorists in Afghanistan who had attacked his
country. For the NATO forces, the fighting in Afghanistan, more than
anything else, is a learning experience and one cannot expect the same
results from them as from the Americans. The fight against al-Qaeda and the
Taliban in Afghanistan had popular support in the US but not the
misadventure in Iraq. The simple reason was that al-Qaeda, based in
Afghanistan, had attacked the American homeland while the Iraqis had
nothing to do with it.
Fourth, the Americans, who started the post 9/11 era by capturing
Afghanistan, decided that oil-rich Iraq provided a better fortune for them
than the barren mountains of Afghanistan. This resulted in massive diversion
of resources from Afghanistan to Iraq, with intelligence, military equipment
and other resources being taken away from the fight against the Taliban.
Fifth, the resistance that al-Qaeda and its supporters, besides proSaddam elements, have put up in Iraq has greatly encouraged the
Taliban. It has shown to them that if the Iraqis and scores of foreigners can
effectively bleed the US troops in Iraq, so could they, with their rich
experience in fighting with the Soviets and then following their departure,
with each other
Finally, the intelligence provided by the Americans to Pakistan
regarding the whereabouts of Baitullah Mehsud, his fighters and the Uzbeks
based in the region, besides the purported presence of the al-Qaeda
leadership., is apparently far from accurate. While Pakistan lacks the
sophisticated intelligence-gathering machine of the United States, the fact is
that the machine is either ineffective or the intelligenceis not being made
available to Pakistan.
For efforts to eliminate terrorism in Afghanistan, it would be good if
the Americans examined their own policies in the war-ravaged country and
appreciate Pakistans endeavors in dealing with this deep-rooted problem to
which they have certainly contributed. On the other hand, Pakistan has to

1028

learn from the American adventures in Afghanistan and plan effective

strategies to deal with the Waziristan problem, once and for all.
The News condemned the treatment meted out to Mr Edhi. Mr Edhi
operates worldwide and anywhere and everywhere there is a natural
calamity or a man-made catastrophe, including the US. He does not need a
US green card or US citizenship but he has explained that he obtained one
because otherwise the US system would not let him operate his emergency
and social welfare organizations inside America. But while he has a huge
setup within the US and is an internationally known figure, the treatment he
gets at US airports reflects a disturbing anti-Muslim bias.
Keeping super fast computers at airports and boasting about tight
security do not give anyone the right to insult people. If the US immigration
officials do not begin to show respect for genuine and respectable
Pakistani visitors, perhaps Pakistan should reciprocate. In any case, at
the very least America must apologize to Mr Edhi and Pakistan.
Analysts also expressed their views on general aspects of ongoing
war on terror. Ayaz Amir wrote: General Ashfaq Kayani, the new army
chief, visits forward positions in Swat, which is as it should be Swat has
been in the frontline of fighting for quite some time now. Did Generalissimo
Pervez Musharraf ever find time to visit troops in the scenic, now embattled,
valley? Memory fails.
The Pakhtoon has a psyche of his own. He can be loyal and
devoted, sometimes excessively so, to a master or a cause. But he doesnt
take kindly to threats or bluster. And the spirit of vengeance runs deep in
him. The unthinking exercise of arms and not all from our side because the
Americans have often been too ready to launch missile strikes from their
Predator drones has led to a great deal of destruction and the loss on
innocent lives. This has been one factor in bringing recruits to the Taliban
cause and also in stoking tribal anger.
Never reinforce failure, is a dictum that even otherwise not very
literate army officers know by heart. We should be rethinking our
approach in the tribal belt instead of doing more of what we have already
been doing there for the last three or four years. No doubt the more we get
involved the more we prove to our American friends (now also our military
tutors) that we are indeed doing more, as they are constantly asking us to do.
But is this in our best interest? Can we afford for our army to be bogged
1029

down in that inhospitable terrain amidst a population once friendly now

tragically hostile?
Yes terrorism is a dirty world and we should be all about for
eliminating it. But not by pursuing policies that end up producing more Nek
Muhammads, more Baitullah Mehsuds and more suicide bombers. The
mention of tanks and heavy artillery makes one shudder. Unless I am grossly
mistaken, that is not tank territory. In the face of overwhelming odds, the
guerrillas will just melt away or take to the hills and hit at targets of
opportunity at a time and place of their choosing. No one needs to give
elementary lessons in guerrilla warfare. These are known things. But why do
we seem so resolute in closing our eyes to the obvious?
Shafqat Mahmood talked of security challenge that emerged due to
war on terror. The tragic assassination of Benazir Bhutto and the subsequent
bomb blasts in Lahore and Karachi are a nasty reminder of how serious a
security challenge the country faces. Those who thought we are being
forced to fight someone elses war in the tribal areas need to think again.
The United States is indeed an interested party but it would be a serious
mistake to suppose that we do not have an indigenous problem.
The Bush Administration, indeed the entire American establishment,
provokes this kind of thinking by using rhetoric that treats us as proxies for
its war on terror. The constant harping on the ten billion dollars given to
Pakistan since 9/11 makes us look like mercenaries being paid for
services rendered. Our front man, Mr Musharraf also adds to this impression
by claiming, in an answer to loaded questions, that he is the best person to
be Americas partner in this war
It is clear now that al-Qaeda, pushed out of Afghanistan after the
American invasion, has decided to establish an alternate base in our tribal
areas. In this mission, it has been helped by its close association with Afghan
Taliban, who using Pakhtun kinship ties, assisted in integrating its fighters
into tribal society. Large amounts of money distributed judiciously also
helped. Al-Qaedas slogan of fighting for Islam became another rallying
cry
There is a history that al-Qaeda and its allies see Pakistan as a
possible target for takeover because it is, in their perception, a failing state
with unsettled political problems and weak structures of governance. By
launching bomb attacks in major cities, it tries to further destabilize the
1030

country. The actual damage inflicted may not be great, although every life
lost is tragic and one too many, but the psychological impact that terror
creates is immense.
Taking on the security challenge that al-Qaeda and its allies pose
requires a multi-pronged and culturally nuanced approach but first we have
to put our house in order. This is only possible if we first sort out our
political crisis. We must have a government that is recognized to be
legitimate and has support of the people With a representative government
in the saddle, the military will also have the requisite support of the people
without which, as General Kayani has correctly observed it cannot carry out
its mission.
The new government will face immense difficulties and will have to
take hard decisions that these caretakers are deliberately avoiding. But, if it
emerges through a genuinely free and fair election, it will have the support
of the people and the ability to take them into confidence about the sacrifices
that have to be made. It is only through collective will that we can survive
the multiple challenges that lie ahead.
Dr Nasreen Javed from Gujar Khan opined that militancy has spread
due to faulty strategy. The war on terror has entered its seventh year and it
is four years since the military operations in the tribal areas started. Is this
period not long enough to establish the success or failure of a strategy? If
military force was the solution then should the militants not have been
eliminated by now? However, we find that as a consequence of the war on
terror and the resultant insurgency in NWFP, violence across the country in
the form of bomb blasts and suicide bombings has spiraled out of control,
undermining the writ and credibility of the state and threatening peoples
lives and property.
The fact is that while the use of force is producing some casualties
among the militants, it is also enhancing the ability of these groups to
mobilize and recruit volunteers to join the movement. The military
operations cause hatred due to collateral damage. Consequently, the country
is witnessing an increase in militancy. It is, therefore, quite evident that the
rulers have presided over the proliferation of extremism in the country
and are authors of a failed strategy to check militancy.
Razeshta Sethna stressed upon the need to win hearts and minds.
Today, the no-win situation in Afghanistan and Pakistans tribal areas are
1031

linked and a military solution may be viable, if implemented carefully but

winning hearts and minds is equally essential, especially in Pakistans
northern belt.
Poverty and under-development permeating this region, say analysts
has led to escalating violence as young men engage in fighting what they
term the enemies of Islam. US funding which runs into billions of dollars
for counter-terrorism measures against pro-Taliban forces is primarily
money spent by the military, on security forces, sidelining projects geared
toward education, employment and economic empowerment
But recent claims from western sources state that this money has not
even reached frontline units engaged in the fighting in Pakistans tribal
belt. Interestingly, international observers claim that upon visiting the region
they have seen the Frontier Corps wearing sandals in the snow, using barely
functional Kalashnikov rifles with just 10 rounds of ammunition apiece. This
is when Pakistanis said to be receiving funds to be receiving funds to fight
al-Qaeda as well as approximately $300 million per year to equip and train
its forces.

EASTERN FRONT
There was all quiet on eastern front, but the quietness did not mean
that all was Okay. On 19th January, Foreign Office sought report on Indian
Commerce Minister walking into Pakistan territory along with Indian
officials. Eleven day later, Pakistan sought inspection of Baglihar project.
On 4th February, India and Pakistan signed an agreement to exchange
security information.
Rest all was negative. On 25th January, Pakistan tested Shaheen-I
Missile. A top commander of Harkat was killed by Indian troops. A week
later, Pakistan tested intermediate-range nuclear-capable Ghauri missile.
Hizb commander, Ruhul Bhat was martyred by Indian troops.
Shireen M Mazari observed: On almost every issue, clear cut state
policies seem to be either non-existent or contradictory when
operationalized The most glaring example of confusion over trade and
investment is reflected in our dealings on the issue with India. At the
declaratory level we have officially stated that MFN status for India, access

1032

to India across the Wagah land route and investment agreements are all
linked to seeing some progress towards conflict resolution on some of the
outstanding political disputes.
In India, the aim is to push for trade access first. Even within
Pakistan there are lobbies that fall in line with the Indian approach but
some of us do feel that the declaratory policy has much merit in it. The
problem though is that on the ground the government has moved away from
this policy in a freewheeling fashion, which is giving Indian business and
investors unprecedented access to opportunities in Pakistan, while Pakistanis
are being denied the same in India.
How have we come to this one-way benefit for Indian business?
To begin withIndians are purchasing property in Lahore and its environs
as well as business through front men and business registered in Dubai,
Singapore or Britain. Though this clearly visible indirect route, and also
through a more direct route at times, Indian nationals and business are
openly involved in investment projects in Pakistan. I recently met a most
affable Indian who visited Islamabad every two months since he is building
the Intercontinental Hotel in Islamabad. Similarly, Mahinder Tractors is
selling to Pakistan through Millat Tractors via Singapore.
Even more interesting, a Dubai-based company, Astra Netcom has
been given a project to build a communication tower in Karachi and the
businessman in charge is an Indian citizen, Rakesh Gupta, who travels
frequently to Pakistan on a SAARC visa. More disturbing in security terms
is the fact that his company has also been given the project to upgrade
the PAF computer system. Needless to say, Mr Gupta is extremely well
connected in Pakistan. in Karachi, one sign of direct Indian investment is the
opening of the Indian coffee chain Cafe Coffee Day and this is just the tip of
the iceberg.
Whatever our policy, let us at least enforce it across the board so that
it is not undercut through devious backdoor machinations and individual
exceptions which seems to be the norm in Pakistan much to our national
detriment. If we have decided to abandon our linkage of trade issues with
India to political dispute resolution, then let us move formally on this
count. The point is that if Indian business is getting this access, then why we
are holding on to a farcical position at declaratory level

1033

We seem to lack total institutional cooperation within the various

bureaucracies. External policies relating to trade and investment seem to
have no foreign office inputs or at least this is the prevailing impression
since contradictions around between declaratory policy and what is actually
happening on the ground. Nor is it just trade. There is disconnect
everywhere leading to disarray and disquiet.
The bureaucratic approach of trying to fool all the people all the
time remains the dormant trait, which has now resulted in a major trust
deficit between civil society and officialdom. In these trying times, when
trust is so critical for success in the fight against terrorists and other
detractors of Pakistan, we are found wanting. What could be a greater
national tragedy?
In another article she added: Now we are seeing another CNS
actually taking the Indian naval chiefs totally out-of-order outburst
regarding Gwadar, seriously and actually offering dialogue to address Indian
concerns. How absurd can we get! Have the Indians offered to dialogue on
their agreement with the US to patrol the entire Indian Ocean region, thereby
controlling all the choke points from the Red Sea to the Straits of Malacca?
Have we dared to raise strategic concerns over the Indian navys rapid
expansion or its acquisition of nuclear subs? Has the Indian government or
its military ever offered dialogue to allay our fears regarding their activities
in Afghanistan or Iran? So why should we feel the compulsion to explain
the development of Gwadar some thing which is our right as a sovereign
state?
The problem is that we have discarded the valuable principle of
reciprocity in our dealings with major players in the region, including India.
In an earlier column I had already mentioned the disconnect between our
declaratory policy on trade with India, and our shenanigans on the
ground which were in total opposition to this policy. The result has been a
one way financial and trade access to Indian business while our businessmen
continue to suffer the consequences of the declaratory posturing
I am all for improving relations and greater interaction with our
Indian counterparts, but there has to be reciprocal base for such interaction.
What is happening now is that, thanks to our officialdoms lackadaisical
attitude, we are being short-shifted by our Indian friends. Nor is it just
the Indians. We have always been treated equally poorly by our so-called
western allies.
1034

Look at the way in which the US and UK deal with Pakistani visitors.
Be it Edhi or Pakistani politicians, they are all fair game for abuse by
American and British immigration and security personnel. As for any
admission of error or apology what a laugh! But if we were to mete out
similar treatment to a few Brits and Yanks at our airports, that is, if we could
force ourselves into adopting the principle of reciprocity, we may alter some
abusive behaviour patterns on the part of our neo-imperialist allies.

HOME FRONT
Low key insurgency continued in Balochistan. Following incidents
were reported during the period:
Jail superintendent of Khuzdar was gunned down by unknown
assailants on 18th January.
A Frontier Corps soldier was injured in landmine blast in Dera Bugti
area on 24th January.
A boy was killed in landmine blast near Kohlu on 29 th January. Two
days later, three persons were wounded in a blast in a court in Quetta.
Two blasts rocked Quetta on 2nd February. Two days later, one person
was killed in landmine blast near Sui.
On 5th February, one person was killed in a blast in Quetta. Two days
later, three persons were killed and 11 wounded in a blast in Dera
Murad Jamali.
Gas pipeline was damaged in a blast near Kashmor on 8 th February.
Next day, one person was killed and four wounded in a blast in
Naushki and gas pipeline was blown up in Sui area.
Ideological front also remained active. On 15th January, three persons
got 35-year jail for bid to kill Musharraf. Two days later, a suicide bomber
blew himself up in an Imambargah in Peshawar killing 12 and injuring 20
others. Police claimed foiling a large-scale terrorism bid after arresting eight
suspects along with recovering huge quantity of explosives and 500 grams
of cyanide in Karachi on 19th January.

1035

On 28th January, Chief Commissioner Islamabad ordered ATC to

conduct Maulana Azizs trial in jail. Police raided a Chinese massage center
in Islamabad on 5th February and held 19 people. This wasnt a raid by
Islamic fascists; it was meant for assessing the contribution made by the
centre in spreading the enlightenment.
Kamila Hyat wrote: There is mounting evidence to suggest that at
least some of those carrying out terrorist attacks are themselves victims
of militancy and extremism. The reports that the suicide bomber who killed
at least ten people at an Imambargah in Peshawar last week may have been
no older than 15 or 16 years are deeply saddening. Just a day before that
bombing, a boy aged between 12 to 14 years old had blown himself up at the
town of Ghalanai in the Mohmand Agency, during what appeared to be an
attempt to stage a suicide attack at a military check post other bombers
too have turned out to be mere children.
Move a few steps backwards along the trail and it seem obvious these
young men have been nurtured and trained at seminary schools. The boy
held in Dera Ismail Khan, who has apparently stated he was the back-up
bomber in the Benazir assassination, has maintained he was recruited by a
cleric in Karachi and then sent to South Waziristan for training
In a situation where unemployment is soaring, the extremist
groups also make the only recruitment offers. People, who frequent
mosques in Lahore, or even more so towns such as Gujranwala, say that
persons who seem to specialize in picking out the most vulnerable often see
to hone in on young men who may take their bait. It is obvious that the sense
of desperation faced by these men, many jobless for years, is one factor in
the decisions some of them make to link up with militant outfits.
Extremism then, to a significant extent, is a by-product of the
times in which we live. The rage beneath the surface threatens much of life.
The mobs that burned cars or buildings in the violent aftermath of Benazir
Bhuttos murder appeared to be expressing hidden feelings that went beyond
the assassination itself. Like the earlier itself. Like the earlier riots, triggered
by the appearance in a Danish newspaper of blasphemous cartoons, that
broke out in Lahore in February 2006 it seems any event can act as a catalyst
for unleashing barely buried feelings
A way out can be found only by addressing the socio-economic
causes that lie at the heart of extremism. Pakistans decision makers must
1036

ask how much it has in the past done to rescue people from the situation in
which they live, and why so many are so acutely deprived. The links
between such hardship and the embracing of extremist causes need to be
studied and understood, so that the problem can be effectively tackled and
this is an issue towards which both the countrys rulers and their allies in the
West must direct urgent attention.

CONCLUSION
Fatigue has started telling on leaders of the Front-line state in war
against terrorism. It has started accepting the violations of its territorial
sovereignty without a word of protest or condemnation of the transgressors.
Instead, Governor Owais Ghani requested militants to shift battlefield
outside Pakistan without proposing any.
Battlefields are chosen by the belligerent parties in accordance with
their strategy to achieve pre-determined aims and objectives. The party,
which has no aim, or happens to be there in a place that has been chosen as
battlefield by someone else, or simply because its services have been hired,
has to do what it is told to do.
The same mindset of Pakistani leadership is reflected in its policy
towards its neigbour on the eastern border. It has surrendered to the US
dictates of settling its disputes through bilateral dialogue or in other words,
accept status quo or if there has to be any change it has to be on Indian
terms.
11th February 2008

1037

UNENDING WAR
Afghanistan remained in the grip of low key insurgency mainly
sustained by Pashtuns. Their resistance lacked the spark because of the
absence of any outside support, except from their Pashtun brethrens living in
Pakistan. Another reason was indiscriminate use of force by the occupation
forces in their pre-emptive strikes.
The terrain and sparse population allowed the occupation forces
extensive and excessive use of airpower invariably resulting in civilian
casualties. They did not have to fear any criticism of the collateral damage
so caused, because the hostile terrain remained inaccessible to the outside
world.
The prevalent environment permitted the occupation forces to plan
long-term stay. British Defence Secretary said the UK might be in
Afghanistan for decades. This could be done with minimum of troops and by
exerting constant pressure on Pakistan to do more; though the most
analysts saw the occupation forces facing difficulties.

OCCUPATION
Pashtun resistance against occupation of their homeland continued.
The US-led forces killed five Afghans during an operation in Paktia on 16 th
October. Occupation forces burnt a copy of Quraan and Karzai vowed to
take action on the act of desecration. Two days later, six Afghan security
personnel were killed in two blasts in Khost and Kunar. Nine coalition
soldiers were wounded in an ambush in Kandhar province.
NATO forces killed 12 Afghans, including a baby girl, in Helmand on
20 October. Three days later, at least 13 Afghans, including 11 of a family,
were killed in an air strike near Kabul. Governor Khost escaped attempt on
his life on 24th October; two civilians and three bodyguards were wounded.
th

On 25th October, 25 people were killed in incidents of violence.

Afghan campaign is vital, said Brown. Two days later, five people, including
three Afghan soldiers, were killed in a suicide attack on a military base in
Paktika. US air strikes in Helmand on 28th October left 80 Pashtuns dead.

1038

One US soldier was killed on 30th October and undisclosed number

of Afghans were killed in air strike. Next day, NATO forces killed 50 Taliban
in an operation in Herat province. ISAF investigation into killing of civilians
in Wardak found that the allegation were completely without merit.
Taliban captured Bakawa district of Farah province on 2 nd November.
Three policemen were killed and three wounded in roadside bombing in
Kunar province. Fighting erupted in Argandab area. Kabul regime claimed
that 16 Taliban surrendered in Badghis province.
NATO forces killed fifty suspected Taliban in an operation in
Argandab area of Kandahar province on 3 rd November. A coalition and an
Afghan soldier were killed in Uruzgan province. Dead bodies of two
Afghans were found in Ghazni province. A Taliban commander was killed in
an ambush in eastern Afghanistan. Merkel arrived in Kabul.
At least 25 Taliban were killed by occupation forces on 4th November.
Two days later, at least 40 people, including six MPs were killed in a suicide
attack in the town of Pul-i-Khumri 150km north of Kabul. The suicide
bomber struck when the guests were being received for participation in a
function in a sugar mill. NATO forces killed 20 Taliban in air strike.
Taliban captured Kajran district on 7th November. Death toll in sugarmill blast was revised to 64. Six Afghan elders and a foreign soldier were
killed in separate incidents on 11th November. Next day, two NATO soldiers
were among 25 people killed in various attacks, mostly in Ghazni area.
US-led forces arrested six suspects in Wardak province on 13 th
November. Amnesty International warned ISAF over torture reports. Three
days, 18 security personnel and 44 suspected Taliban were killed mostly in
Uruzgan, Kandahar and Herat provinces.
Coalition troops killed several suspected militants in Uruzgan on 18 th
November and then accused that Taliban shot dead a woman for not
cooperating with them. Next day, seven people, including governors son,
were killed when attempt was made to kill governor of Nimroz.
Occupation forces killed 14 suspected Taliban in Uruzgan province on
20 November. Next day, at least fifty suspected Taliban were killed by
NATO forces in Charchino district of Uruzgan province. Next day EU
pledged 170m euros to Afghanistan.
th

1039

An Australian soldier was among seven people killed on 23 rd

November. Next day, six people were killed in a suicide attack in Kabul.
Occupation forces killed at least 80 Pashtuns in Khost on 25th November; 65
of them were killed in a single air strike. Next day, at least six people were
killed in Kabul. Two people were killed when a suicide car bomber attacked
a US convoy in Kabul on 27 th November. Karzai flayed killing of ten people
and wounding 15 in suicide attack in Paghman.
Coalition forces killed 14 laborers in an air strike in Nooristan on 28 th
November; 12 Taliban were killed in separate incidents across the country.
Ten senior police officials were detained over involvement in drug
trafficking. Next day, UK claimed that Taliban were no more a threat. At
least 40 Taliban were killed in various clashes across Afghanistan on 2 nd
December.
Taliban killed four policemen in an ambush in Ghazni province on 4 th
December. Next day, a suicide car bomber attacked security forces bus in
Kabul; killing at least 13 soldiers. At least 17 Taliban were killed in an air
strike in Farah province on 6th December. A German vehicle was damaged in
remote-controlled blast in outskirts of Kabul.
Nine policemen were killed in an ambush in Herat province on 7th
December. Coalition forces killed 100 sheep in target practice near
Asadabad. NATO forces carried out air strikes as fresh offensive was
launched in Helmand province.
One NATO soldier was killed in roadside bombing on 8 th December.
Two children were killed as occupation forces converged on to Musa Qala.
Next day, at least 30 Taliban were killed as NATO forces closed in on to
Musa Qala on third day of their operation.
On 10th December, NATO forces recaptured the town of Musa Qala.
Gordon Brown ended his visit claiming that capture of Musa Qala would
mark the beginning of a new series of victories. A US engineer and two
Afghans were killed in road accident in Paktia.
At least 15 people were killed in an ambush of a convoy and a bomb
blast in southern Afghanistan on 11th December; Afghan security force
claimed killing eight Taliban. Next day, more than fifty Taliban were killed
in two-day fighting in Musa Qala. Two NATO troops were killed in roadside
bombing in eastern part of Afghanistan.

1040

On 14th December, US-led coalition claimed killing Mulla Sangeen in

Paktika province; Taliban denied. Two bombs went off outside Indian
Consulate in Jalalabad. Two civilians were killed in roadside bombing in
Khost on 16th December.
On 17th December, NATO forces killed 20 Taliban and arrested nine
others in Zhari district of Kandahar. A family of five perished in bomb attack
in Uruzgan province. Next day, Mulla Omar urged withdrawal of foreign
forces.
At least 24 people were killed in various incidents of violence across
the country on 23rd December. Next day, at least four people were killed in
bomb blast in Kandahar Suspected Anthrax killed eight Afghans. On 27 th
December, talks with Taliban without al-Qaeda were possible, said the US.
Britains spy agency was reported to be in secret talks with Taliban.
On 29th December, Mulla Omar expelled Dadullah for acting against
Taliban policies. Next day, two civilians were among ten killed in violence.
NATO soldier was killed and four wounded in roadside bombing. The USled forces killed at least 16 suspected militants in Herat area on 1 st January,
2008. Next day, at least 21 people were killed in incidents of violence across
the country. Seven people were killed in roadside bombing in Nimroz
province on 4th January.
Two persons, including a child, were killed in a clash between
occupation forces and insurgents in Uruzgan on 6th January. Two days later,
two Coalition soldiers were killed in roadside bombing in southern
Afghanistan and another bomb blast left nine dead. Two Dutch soldiers were
killed on 12th January in a clash near Deh Rawod. Ten policemen were killed
by Taliban in Maiwand District of Kandahar. Next day, eight people were
killed in an attack on a hotel in Kabul.
Seven Canadian soldiers were wounded in roadside bombing in
southern Afghanistan on 17th January. Germany agreed to send 250 more
troops to Afghanistan. Next day, more than 20 Taliban were killed in US-led
operation in Kunar province. One person was killed and three injured in
militants attack in Farah province on 22 nd January. Hekmatyars men
claimed downing a Chinook helicopter in Sarobi area. Four people were
killed in southern Afghanistan.

1041

Three people were injured in suicide attack in Khost on 23 rd January.

Blasphemous journalist was awarded death sentence in Mazar. Next day,
US-led forces killed nine Afghan policemen and two civilians in Ghazni.
One Coalition soldier was killed and three wounded in a clash in Kunar
province on 25th January. Next day, American women aid workers were
kidnapped in southern Afghanistan. Three civilians were killed in violence
on 30th January.
Next day, six people including a governor were killed in suicide
bombing in Lashkar Gah. Ten civilians and nine militants were killed in
various incidents of violence on 4th February. Next day, seven people were
killed in roadside bombing in Helmand province.
On 6th February, one Coalition soldier was killed and two wounded in
roadside blast in Helmand province. Next day, three NATO soldiers were
wounded in roadside bombing in Khost area. Rice and Miliband paid
unscheduled visit to Kabul on 7th February.
NATO forces claimed killing three Pakistanis and four Arabs in an
operation opposite Naushki on 8th February. One soldier and a child were
killed in suicide attack in Ghazni province. Next day, two soldiers were
killed in a blast in Helmand province on 9 th February. Sergeant Wallace
Nelson embraced Islam in Kunar after interaction with his interpreters. He
said Islam is pretty much the only religion that makes sense to me.
On 10th February, Robert Gates, during his visit to Germany, warned
Europe of thriving extremism if Afghan mission failed. He also declared that
al-Qaeda and Taliban were threat to Pakistan government. Karzai was
reported to be in constant contact with Mulla Omar; next day the latter said
Taliban were no threat to the US and Europe.
Taliban kidnapped about 20 Afghans and Arabs in Farah province on
12 February. All the 11 people killed by occupation forces in the province
recently were civilians. Next day, three soldiers and four guards were killed
in roadside bombings in Musa Qala and Khost province. Four Taliban were
killed in air strike in Uruzgan on 14 th February. Next day, four policemen
were killed in an ambush laid by Taliban in Nimroz province; two more
were kidnapped.
th

COMMENTS

1042

Rahimullah Yusufzai observed: Since January this year, more than

5,000 people have been killed in fighting, aerial strikes and suicide
bombings and the death toll is rising. Though the US-led coalition forces are
claiming that most of those killed were Taliban and other rebels, there is
growing evidence that there were unusually high number of civilian
casualties due to the bombing by jet-fighters and gunship helicopters
flying at high altitude. The so-called collateral damage is turning the
Afghan people against the foreign forces and the government of embattled
President Hamid Karzai.
The Taliban are exploiting this situation in their favour. They
have adapted their tactics to the changing situation by offering security to
the people who are experiencing the highest level of insecurity and
supporting poppy-cultivation after having banned it by terming it un-Islamic
during their rule in 2000. Taliban propaganda tactics have also become better
organized and refined. It is a big change considering Taliban policies when
they were in power and had imposed curbs on the media and banned taking
of pictures of human-being by declaring it un-Islamic.
Taliban military tactics have also undergone changes in keeping
with the times. Now they make frequent use of suicide bombers to breach
the tougher security measures adopted by the US-led coalition forces. The
improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that they use have become more lethal
and sophisticated following the moves by US and NATO militaries to
upgrade and fortify their vehicles to withstand such roadside bomb
explosions.
Taliban command structure is intact even though they lost top
military commanders such as Mulla Dadullah and Akhtar Mohammad
Usmani. Taliban movement founder Mulla Mohammad Omar is alive and
has been sending instructions to his field commanders from his hideouts
through audio-tapes, letters and verbal messages. Talibans communication
system is poor and prone to obstructions and bugging by the US and its
allies and this has prompted their leadership to decentralize their command
and give autonomy to field commanders to take decisions at the district and
provincial level.
There is growing concern among the 37 NATO-member countries
with troops in Afghanistan as part of the NATO force about the resurgence
of the Taliban. The human losses suffered by these mostly western
nations are not very high except those sustained by the UK, Canada and
1043

the Netherlands, which have sent troops to the dangerous, Taliban-infested

Helmand, Kandahar and Uruzgan provinces. However, the reluctance of the
NATO-member states to send more troops to Afghanistan to meet the
minimum requirements highlighted by the US and NATO military
commanders and the refusal of some countries such as France, Germany,
Italy and Spain to deploy their soldiers in the volatile southern provinces
betray their anxiety over the unpopularity of any move that would put their
soldiers at risk.
The Taliban-led insurgency was initially confined to southwestern
Afghanistan where Taliban had their traditional strongholds in Kandahar,
Helmand, Uruzgan, Zabul and Nimroz. The insurgency later spread to the
southern provinces of Khost, Paktia and Paktika. It then engulfed Kunar,
Laghman and Nangarhar. Soon afterwards, Ghazni and Farah were affected.
Now western Afghanistans Herat, Badghis and Ghor provinces have seen an
upsurge of attacks by Taliban fighters and the fighting has reached Wardak
and Kapisa, which are close to Kabul. The Taliban have intermittently also
launched attacks in Faryab, Balkh, Baghlan, Kunduz and Takhar, which are
in northern Afghanistan.
The intensity of insurgent attacks could be assessed from the fact that
such assaults are at least 20 percent higher this year, with an average of
548 incidents per month compared with 425 in 2006. This was the finding of
a UN report published in September 2007. The report showed that most of
the victims were ordinary Afghans. Adoption of these so-called asymmetric
tactics has caused acute concern because these are much harder to prevent
and have proved effective in undermining public confidence.
The Americans as well as Afghan government officials have not
made secret their desire to hold talks with only those Taliban who dont
oppose the presence of foreign forces in Afghanistan and accept Karzai as
president. The strategy is to create splits in the Taliban ranks and lure the
so-called moderate elements in the Taliban movement to join the political
mainstream. This tactic didnt work in the past and is unlikely to succeed in
future.
Some positive things have indeed happened in Afghanistan in the
post-Taliban period However, the failures outdid the successes and that is
why sections of the western media are now saying that the US and its allies
are facing defeat in Afghanistan. The fact remains that the Taliban have
become stronger after being defeated in December 2001 and that al-Qaeda
1044

has regrouped instead of being destroyed. By surviving the US-led attacks,

both the Taliban and al-Qaeda have proved their strength and are now in a
position to pose a bigger challenge to the western powers and the Afghan
government. The failure of the US-led coalition to kill or capture bin Laden,
his deputy Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri and Taliban leader Mulla Omar has been a
cause of embarrassment. In contrast, this has motivated the Taliban and alQaeda and they see the survival of their top leaders as a sign of divine
support by God.
Ken Gude found problem with Americas foreign policy. Its
tempting for some Europeans to see the United States simply as a
superpower that uses its dominance for its own ends. Two terms of the Bush
presidency certainly emphasized this idea, but to critics the past eight years
are not anomalous. Bill Clinton and other presidents offered much the same
vision, even if they dressed it up in a slightly more acceptable package.
Now, even those who hope that new American leadership will restore the
strength and relevance of the transatlantic alliance have grown cautious
and skeptical about what will happen when a new president takes office on
January 20, 2009.
Although change seems to be the flavor of the month, the choice
presented to voters this fall is really between a major strategic shift in
American policy on one side, and essentially more of the same with some
minor adjustments on the other. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama
build their visions of American foreign policy around a commitment to
regain the moral authority necessary to re-engage and lead the international
community to address a broad set of existing and emerging challenges.
More divergence appears when delving deeper into the candidates
foreign policies. Both Obama and Clinton would invest new attention
and energy in the forgotten frontlines against terrorism in Afghanistan,
while McCains myopic obsession with Iraq would necessarily sideline any
other significant commitment of forces or resources, whether military or
diplomatic.
The two Democrats are serious about the need to revitalize the
alliance structure that has served American and European interests so well
and to improve the multilateral institutions that support that system.
McCain, on the other hand, appears to have foresworn any renewal and
is pushing for a major expansion of NATO beyond the borders of Europe
at the expense of much needed reform in other multilateral institutions
1045

The United States has come to a fork in the road. In 2008, the
American people will choose between two divergent visions of foreign
policy. The differences are clear, and given the stark nature of the choice, it
is likely that Americas role in the world, and European perceptions of it,
may be shaped for a generation by the outcome of this years campaign.
Najmuddin A Shaikh talked of the impact of Afghan internal security
situation on Pakistan. It is becoming evident that the Taliban in
Afghanistan do not now have the same monolithic structure that they
will in 2001. Rather, there are fighters under their flag who are protecting
their tribal rights or even more often are tier-two fighters who are being paid
from the coffers of the Taliban coalition and Afghan forces.
This assessment by a senior former diplomat of Taliban is based on
the information fed by the western media. It degrades the cause of Pashtuns
to liberate their occupied homeland to mere perpetration of terror
through paid fighters.
He added: It is safe to suggest that given the prevailing level of
unemployment and the absence of development work caused in part by the
security situation the number of tier-two fighters will keep increasing and
the Taliban will be able to generate the required funds both from their share
of the opium trade and from their foreign beneficiaries.
There is little chance that the Karzai administration will be able
to correct this situation. The coalition forces can claim with justice that the
much heralded Taliban offensive did not materialize this year. But insecurity
prevails There has been Taliban activity in the hitherto peaceful provinces
in the west and north. Northern warlords in these areas are beginning to
rebuild their militias on the ground that the Taliban are coming.
This may, of course, be no more than a pretext for the warlords of the
area to recreate the force needed to maintain their fiefdoms. The net effect,
however, may well be accentuation of the north-south divide in
Afghanistan.
The picture is grim and there is no discernable light at the end of
this tunnel. What should Pakistan do about Afghanistan while facing its
own troubles in the tribal areas and now in Swat where the benign or
deliberate neglect has made Swat into what appears, deceptively, to be an
extremist stronghold?

1046

For the moment, it is enough to say that along with clearing out the
Maulvi Radio nonsense in Swat we must recognize that our open borders
with Afghanistan and the continued presence of Afghan refugees in
uncontrolled and uncontrollable refugee camps will only accentuate such
internal problems for us and add to the problems of Afghanistan.
The postponement of the closure of the refugee camps must be
reconsidered. We cannot continue to be concerned about the difficulties this
would cause the refugees and these admittedly will be considerable when
our own security is at stake. The biometric system to monitor the human and
goods traffic across our border with Afghanistan must be strictly enforced.
Rahimullah Yusufzai was of the view that US plan of mini surge
wont work. Almost every winter for the last few years, there is talk of a
spring or summer offensive by the Taliban in Afghanistan but somehow it
has never materialized. Usually the US and NATO military commanders and
the Western media highlight the threat of new and bigger attacks on their
forces in the southern, southwestern and central Afghan provinces. And it so
happens that the US-led coalition during this period launches its own
anti-Taliban military operations or sends additional troops to the warravaged country.
This winter the US has decided to send 3,200 more troops to
Afghanistan for the specific purpose of tackling any new Taliban spring or
summer offensive and meeting the shortfall that NATO forces face in
dangerous places such as Helmand province. Some 2,200 American soldiers
from the Marine Expeditionary Force would operate for seven months in
Helmand to reinforce British troops deployed there under NATO command.
The remaining 1,000 marines would deploy in the eastern Afghan provinces
bordering Pakistan and become part of the 12,000 American troops engaged
in the Operation Enduring Freedom independently of the NATO-led ISAF.
The fresh deployment of US troops in Afghanistan has been
described as President George W Bushs mini-surge as it is a smallscale version of the Iraq surge that he ordered in early 2007. Though the
number of troops being sent to Afghanistan is small, it looks significant if
viewed in context of the buildup of American and NATO forces since
October 2001 when the US military invaded and occupied the country
toppled the Taliban regime.

1047

With the arrival of the additional 3,200 American soldiers, the US

troops level would rise to more than 27,000. This is more than six times
the number of American soldiers who were in Afghanistan at the time of
the battle for Tora Bora in December 2001. The NATO-commanded ISAF
has also registered an increase in the number of troops it has deployed in
Afghanistan over the years. They now total more than 40,000 and are drawn
from 38 countries, including 13 non-NATO and 25 members of NATO.
Our major reason for the US to send additional troops to Afghanistan
is the refusal of NATO members to meet the shortage of about 8,000 soldiers
to secure some of the more dangerous areas in the Taliban strongholds of
Kandahar, Helmand and Uruzgan. NATO military commanders have been
making requests for the additional troops for months now without getting
a positive response
The Afghan National Army is now 60,000-strong and growing but
inadequate training, less attractive salaries and heightened risks have been
causing demoralization and desertions in its ranks. Due to the shortage of
ground forces, the US and NATO forces rely heavily on long-range
artillery shelling and bombing by jet-fighters and gunship helicopters on
Taliban positions. This invariably results in civilian casualties and
displacement and makes it even tougher for the coalition forces to try and
win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. The collateral damage
resulting from such arbitrary military operations has political fallout that is
distributing to the unpopularity of embattled Afghan President
It is fairly obvious that the US governments mini-surge in
Afghanistan with the deployment of 3,200 troops at the advent of spring
would largely be a stop-gap measure aimed at reducing the impact of a
possible increase in Taliban attacks. It isnt meant and it cannot achieve
military defeat of Taliban. In fact, eliminating the Taliban now appears
difficult. A better option, which some Western government officials and
analysts are gradually advocating, would be to co-opt the Taliban and bring
them into the political mainstream. This would have to be a long-term
project but it cannot be launched until the military option is discarded.
Amin Suleman from Rawalpindi commented on Karzais accusation
against Pakistan. Afghan President Hamid Karzai in his speech in Davos
said: Terrorism is a venomous snake that some amongst us tried to
nurture and befriend at the expense of others which, I hope we realize
now, was a mistake.
1048

This seems to be blatant verbal attack on Pakistan. Mr Karzai

should put his own house in order before making such scathing remarks. He
has already proved his inability to curb terrorism in his country during the
last many years. While Pakistan under the Musharraf government has shown
a strong resolve to fight terrorism, it is terrorists from Afghanistan who
always seek sanctuary here to wreak havoc on Pakistani lands. After all
which country gave sanctuary to Mr Karzai during the Afghan War? His
statement shows how ungrateful he is to his benefactors.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal discussed emergence of extremism in the region.
Until the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, it was a country where most
citizens could leave their homes unlocked and go to sleep without any
thought of sudden and violent death. Before the US invasion of Iraq, it was
in the grip of Baathist terror for decades, but in spite of the despotic rule of
Saddam Hussein and his state terror, ordinary citizens were not being
butchered like they are now. Pakistan was never the scene of senseless
violence and mass murders until recently.
The emergence of extremism in this region is directly linked to
the US policies in the region. The rapid spread of violence in this middle
belt since September 2001 can be shown to have its roots in the invasion of
Afghanistan and Iraq. These two invasions have brought disruption in the
normal life of this region. Whereas the impact of the Soviet invasion and
occupation was somewhat localized, the American invasion of Afghanistan
and Iraq have considerably enlarged the region of conflict. The breakdown
of state structures in these two countries created a void which was quickly
filled by groups and individuals who took it upon themselves to continue the
lost battle. The subsequent emergence of puppet regimes completed the
equation by creating an internal conflict in addition to the one against the
invading army.
In this scenario, the case of Pakistan is rather odd. It has not been
directly invaded by the Soviet Union or the United States, yet it has quickly
become a battlefield of sorts because of the unholy alliance its military rulers
made with the United States. It is a great irony of history that at the time of
the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan as well as present crypto USoccupation of that strange and lonely country, Pakistan had no representative
government, but was being ruled by the will and personal interests, vision,
and agenda of one man. In both cases, the man in charge of making
momentous decisions had overturned elected governments and needed a

1049

mechanism to legitimize and prolong his rule. This strange historical

coincidence foreclosed any public debate on joining or not joining the socalled coalition of the willing and hence one mans decision brought the
entire country to a violent and catastrophic state. In a similar situation,
Turkey was able to save itself by taking the matter to the parliament, which
rejected the US pressure to join the coalition forces.
Extremism comes in several hues and in various covert and overt
forms, espousing a wide range of ideologies and beliefs, but in the final
analysis, all extremists are human beings who have strayed away from the
Middle Path of Divine guidance. They become dangerous when the group
together or when they achieve control of states, either through mid-night
coups, as is the case in countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and several
other countries around the world, or through elections in which their real
ideological extremism remains hidden from general populace, as happened
in the case of George W Bush and Tony Blair.
Bush-Blair type extremists are neither interested in the suffering of
millions of human beings living on the other side of the world, nor in the
legality or morality of their actions as far as other nations and groups are
concerned; they are driven by an overriding extremism which does not let
them see other human beings as human beings; through their lenses,
everything is black or white; there are only good guys, that is those who are
on their side, and bad guys, who are to be taken out.
These extremists have the entire state machinery behind them.
They speak the language of power and authority: we will kill them, we
will crush them, and we will destroy them. For instance, the most important
moral imperative for the President of the United States of America on the
day after September 11, 2001 was to speak of justice, of bringing the culprits
to an internationally recognized judiciary process could have been followed,
leading to true justice. But all that the world heard from the mouths of Bush
and other extremists was war, destruction and bombing them back to Stone
Age
Past cannot be undone, but can a future government change the
course? It seems impossible for several resons: the chances of a
representative government in Pakistan are almost non-existent; George Bush
will make sure that his chum stays in the drivers seat, no matter how. In
this scenario, the future seems bleak for Pakistan, at least until the end of
2008 when Bush will be history.
1050

Babar Sattar wrote about Afghanistan war, its fallout on Pakistan and
the way out. The tribes inhabiting Afghanistan and Pakistans tribal
areas are fiercely protective of their autonomy. Their violent response to
foreign invasion be it Punjabi or American cannot be subdued by greater
violence. The US strategy vis--vis the war in Afghanistan and Pakistans
tribal areas is as blemished as the one in Iraq. No amount of spin or PR can
change the underlying reality that western forces continue to be viewed as
occupation forces in Afghanistan. The claim that foreign forces are actually
welcomed by the tortured and suffering local populations is predicated on
the argument that peace is all that people of a war-ravaged country want.
This belief is mistaken as most people do wish for peace and economic
prosperity, but not at the cost of dignity. And it is dignity and national pride
that continues to evade a nation under the siege of a foreign army,
irrespective of how noble the intentions of such peacekeeping force.
A popular argument in support of the US-led forces in Afghanistan
and Iraq is the welcome role American military played in Germany in the
aftermath of World War II. The argument is disingenuous for it overlooks
two significant distinguishing factors. One, US forces stationed in
Germany were protecting against what was perceived by the German nation
as the foremost threat to their country: the Soviet forces
And more importantly, the relationship between the western forces
and Afghan nationals is not based on equality. Securing the ill-defined
military goals on the war on terror remains the prominent concern of western
forces. The loss of civilian lives that the pursuit of such goal causes is
shamelessly explained away as collateral damage. It is evident to rational
observers that the US has lost the war in Iraq, with the life, security and
economic wellbeing of the Iraqi citizens being the biggest casualty. But
despite a failing war in Iraq and the lack of an exit strategy, it is astounding
to hear talk of putting more US boots in Pakistans tribal areas. Can US
military strategists not fathom the simple fact that although superior military
force might be able to exterminate an entire nation it cannot physically
control a hostile population? And why is the same lesson lost on policymakers in Pakistan? Why is there no realization that Musharraf regimes
unequivocal commitment to support the US war on terror has in fact
undermined the security of our state, the security of its citizens and the
cohesion of our national fabric?

1051

The menace of violence and extremism is eating up our nation

and state and has to be fought with unflinching resolve. But we must begin
to distinguish between the US-led war on terror in Afghanistan and
Pakistans own war against extremism. The US war on terror and the manner
in which it is being carried out is actually undermining Pakistans
indigenous fight against extremism. Unless we are able to de-link the two
and focus on the latter, we will fail to abate our growing instability.
Our drift into extremism has been compounded and hastened by
the war on terror but not caused by it. This overwhelmingly unpopular
war officially supported by the Pakistani state has equipped the extremists
with an anti-US rhetoric that resonates with the people of Pakistan, and
functions as a clarion call for action especially in the tribal areas bordering
Afghanistan. Like most ethnic groups, the Pashtuns have multiple competing
identities. Wali Khans oft-quoted description of these identities was that the
Pashtuns have been Pakistanis for a few decades, Muslims for some fourteen
hundred years, and Pashtuns forever. And that their loyalty to these identities
followed suit. The war on terror in Afghanistan has provided a backdrop
wherein the Muslim identity of the Pashtuns has begun to trump their ethnic
identity.
Opening up of new recruitment areas is a contribution of the war
on terror, but the manner in which this Muslim identity manifests itself
through violence and suicide bombs within Pakistan is our own contrivance.
Further, the oppressive ritualistic expression of the extremist mind-set that
locks women up, forces men to grow beards and abhors art, music, creativity
and entertainment finds accommodation in our harsh tribal culture where it
doesnt disturb the political economy of the tribal society where women
arent allowed to function as productive members of the society in any
event. For the prevailing cultural norms in the tribal areas arent
diametrically opposed to the social order being preached by extremists. But
the attempt to transport such lifestyle and tradition to Punjab and Sindh is
another story
The threat presently confronting Pakistan is not that
Talibanization will convert over the moderate majority of this country to
its retrogressive ideology and program, but that will strengthen its
stronghold over the tribal areas in NWFP and Balochistan and continue to
export violence and anarchy to the rest of Pakistan. But if we continue to
view the problem of extremism through the prism of the war on terror, our

1052

understanding of the causes of violence will remain partial and our quest for
solutions will prove evasive. So far the policy and mechanics employed by
Pakistan to confront the roots of violence are failing, and the blinkered
approach of our decision-makers to this multi-dimensional problem is
preventing a rethink of our flawed anti-extremism policy.
The debate on Pakistans security policy that lists the countrys
available options as refusing to function as Americas foot soldier in the war
on terror versus willingly fighting Americas war in our tribal areas is
simplistic and misleading. There is no gainsaying that Pakistan needs to
fight its own fight against extremism. But that must be distinguished
from the US war on terror in Afghanistan, the paramount objective of
which is to attack and de-capacitate al-Qaeda and Taliban in a manner that
they are unable to execute attack on western soil. And if the war strategy
results in destabilizing Pakistan or delaying the possibility of peace and
reconciliation in Afghanistan that could be acceptable damage for the United
States. Pakistans war on extremism, on the contrary, needs to focus on
curbing the drift of portions of its own population to extremist ideologies
that manifest themselves in the form of indiscriminate violence, undermine
the life and liberties of moderate citizens and threaten the writ of the state.
The Bush Administrations war strategy in Afghanistan and
Pakistans tribal areas is not working. The Musharraf regime has been a
loyal ally to the Bush Administration, but the alliance has had a deleterious
impact on Pakistans internal security situation. The actions of the
militants against the state and the citizens of Pakistan are immoral and
completely unjustifiable. But in allying itself closely with the US, the
Pakistani state and the armed forces have come to be seen as stooges of the
west, which have cost them their credibility and moral authority as agents
and representatives of the people of Pakistan. Pakistan must realize that its
slavish pursuit of the US diktat vis--vis the war on terror has become an
obstacle in the way of waging an effective war against extremism within
Pakistan.
As a matter of foreign policy, Pakistan needs to distance itself from
the US war on terror. So long as the Pakistani state, its armed forces and law
enforcing agencies are fighting what is largely perceived as an alien war,
there will be no popular support for such an effort. But redefining the
foreign policy will have to be accompanied with (i) de-legitimization of
the role played by jihadi outfits in our security policy and military strategy,

1053

(ii) reform of the decision-making mechanisms that produce such policies,

(iii) overhaul of the state political structure that supports vital policies that
have no popular mandate and denies minority groups a stake in the system,
and (iv) addressing the brand of thinking and ideology that justifies violence
and suicide attacks against fellow Muslims in the name of Islam
Fearful of Washingtons disfavour, Musharraf has attacked alQaeda resolutely, if not always effectively. Although Pakistani Taliban did
not exist as realistic threats in 2001, Musharraf has also combated them
vigorously and as best as he can. Musharraf has approached original Taliban
in a manner more akin to the Kashmiri terrorists and has avoided targeting
them comprehensively; he has especially overlooked their leadership now
resident in an around Quetta.
If this information and analysis is accurate, it identifies a crucial flaw
in our security policy continue to that militant groups can be recruited and
relied upon to realize the states strategic goals and further that they can be
clustered in neat compartments and accorded disparate treatment. There are
at least three fatal flaws in this mode of thinking. One experience,
suggests that the jihadi project was misconceived since its inception: nonstate actors harnessed in the name of religion might function as effective
tools for a while, but they eventually acquire a mind of their own and cannot
be decommissioned or reprogrammed when the goals or the strategy of the
state change.
Two, in the contemporary world there is zero tolerance for non-state
actors. Thus in theory it might make sense to keep the possibility of our
erstwhile foreign policy vis--vis Kashmir and Afghanistan (with a role of
mujahideen) alive, nurturing or tolerating any dormant jihadi cells can only
have disastrous consequences for the country.
Three, the possibilities of connections between various militant
groups cannot be ruled out even when they are pursuing different goals. For
the underlying narrow-minded religious ideology used to induct and
brainwash these zealots, that preaches violence and relies on hate
mongering, is a shared heritage of all such groups.
While Pakistan has been the frontline state in the war on terror, there
is not one popular political entity in the country that backs this war, not
even the kings league. We have had a parliament for the past five years,
that has no role in devising Pakistans policy vis--vis the biggest strategic
1054

and internal security challenge facing the country in 2006 the whole world
was debating whether reconciliation and peace deals with the local tribes
was a good idea, except Pakistans sovereign parliament There is no
political party that has had to publicly defend this war and thus there is not
even an informed debate in the country regarding its pros and cons and the
alternatives that Pakistan could pursue.
Winning the war against extremism is not going to be easy. Once
we begin to think about problem of extremism in isolation from the war on
terror, there are some tough decisions we must make: we must abandon our
jihadi enterprise; we must undertake madressah reform boldly and
deliberately; and we must provide security, freedom and public space to the
intellectuals and scholars who are capable of challenging bigoted ideologies
pandered in the name of religion and confront the ideological roots of
violence. But none of this can happen as long as our security policy
continues to be made by a handful of individuals who are neither
representative of the popular will nor accountable to it. We thus need to start
by ensuring that the country pursues a security and foreign policy that is
backed by popular mandate. And to that end we need to make our parliament
relevant once again.

CONCLUSION
Since Iraq adventure the United States has been pressing its NATO
allies to send more troops to Afghanistan. Despite repeated coaxing the
European countries did not come up to the expectations of the US.
Resultantly, Washington had to muster more troops, but this mini surge
wont be able to eliminate the low key insurgency.
That would leave the US-led occupation forces with only and obvious
option of asking Pakistan to do more. This never-ending parrot-like rattling
of do more would ultimately push Pakistan to a tight corner wherein its
armed forces would be more and more involved in killing its own people.
This is the American way of passing the buck.
16th February 2008

1055

CONSOLIDATION AND MORE

It seemed that the surge of troops combined with purchase of
loyalties of Sunni tribal elders started paying dividends in terms of

1056

consolidation of occupation of Iraq. The United States also asked Iraqi

government to speed up political reconciliation.
After seeing the success of its strategy Bush Administration started
contemplating its moves beyond Iraq. On 5 th January, Bush embarked on
Middle East trip with peace plan, Iran and terrorism on his agenda. A week
later, he arrived in Bahrain.
Bush and King of Bahrain danced with swords in their hands. The
swords had been carefully chosen; the one held by Bush was the type of
those used by Muslims during Crusades and the other held by the King was
the kind of one used by Europeans. This unique show off was meant for
the attention of Muslim masses.
On 13th January, Bush visited 5th Fleet in Bahrain and asked Arabs to
confront Tehran which was sponsoring terrorism. Tehran accused the US of
spreading anti-Iranian sentiments. Next day, he arrived in Saudi Arabia to
deliver a major arms package.
Annapolis meet was projected as a milestone in Bushs peace process.
The day it started, thousands of Palestinians demonstrated in Gaza against it.
Observers termed the Annapolis meet a failure. Three days later, Olmert
ruled out deadline for treaty with Palestinians. The meet failed in bringing
any respite for Palestinians to the extent that even Musharraf regime had to
condemn Israeli aggression.

IRAQ
Resistance against occupation continued with constant decrease in its
intensity. On 13th November, at least 13 people were killed in violence. Next
day, US-led forces using fighter jets in an operation killed 25 militants in an
operation carried out near Baghdad and 21 suspects were arrested.
At least 30 people, including three US soldiers, were killed in various
incidents on 18th November; 63 people were arrested and 13 dead bodies
were recovered. Next day, ten people were killed in violence. On 22 nd
November, 44 people were killed in various incidents and 30 were arrested.
Next day, at least 38 people were killed and 80 wounded in various incidents
of violence. On 27th November, nine people including two US soldiers were
killed in various incidents. Iraq and US agreed to keep troops beyond 2008.
1057

At least seven soldiers were killed when a suicide woman bomber

blew herself up on 28th November. Monthly death toll of US soldiers fell to
37 in November, almost a Yankee a day. One US soldier was killed in
roadside bombing in Baghdad on 2nd December. Six soldiers and policemen
and a civilian were also killed across the country.
A US soldier was among nine people killed in various incidents on 4 th
December. Next day, at least 25 people, including three US soldiers, were
killed in various incidents across the country. On 6 th December, at least 15
Iraqis, including nine security personnel were killed in various incidents.
At least 28 people were killed in two suicide attacks on 7 th December,
out of which one was carried out by a woman and 8 more were killed in
other incidents. The occupation forces arrested more than sixty suspected
militants in two raids. Next day, a suicide truck bomber killed seven people
in Baiji; elsewhere 12 suspected militants were killed and 13 were arrested.
Provincial chief, a Major General, was killed in Hilla on 9 th December
along with two guards. Three soldiers were killed in another attack. Next
day, at least seven people were killed in incidents of violence. At least 41
people were killed and more than 150 wounded in triple bombing on 12 th
December.
Two US soldiers were killed in separate incidents on 14 th December.
Zawahiri called Middle East peace meeting treachery. Two days later,
British Army handed over Basra to Iraqi forces. On 17 th December, at least
fifteen people were killed in different attacks. Two days later, at least 22
people were killed in various acts of violence across the country. Two people
were killed in bomb blast on 24th December.
At least 29 people were killed in suicide bombing attack and other
acts of violence on 25th December. Two days later, at least Sunni and Shiite
Iraqis were killed in an operation carried out by occupation forces. On 28 th
December, 14 people perished in car bomb blast.
At least 12 people were killed in suicide attack in Baghdad on 31st
December. Five policemen were wounded in another suicide attack by a
female. In yet another suicide attack three persons went missing. Militants
have been focusing on the so-called Awakening Councils, called Concerned
Local Citizens by the US. Sunni leaders condemned Osama.

1058

On 1st January, 2008, at least 32 people were killed in various

incidents of violence. Next day, a female suicide bomber attacked a check
point in Diyala province and killed five people. Nine Palestinians were
killed in Israeli raids on 3rd January.
On 5th January, six people were killed in a blast in outskirts of
Baghdad. Two US soldiers were killed by Iraqi troops during a joint patrol.
Next day, at least 14 Iraqis were killed in three bomb blasts. On 7 th January,
14 people were killed in various incidents of violence, including two suicide
attacks.
Three US soldiers were killed in clashes on 9th January in Salahuddin
province. US troops launched nationwide Operation Phantom Phoenix
against al-Qaeda with special focus on Diyala province south of Baghdad.
On 10th January US Air Force dropped 40,000 pounds of bombs on a
suspected target in southern outskirts of Baghdad; 23 people were arrested.
On 11th January, 21 people were killed as massive US air operation
continued. Three days later, US troops claimed killing 60 Iraqi militants.
Six people were killed in a booby-trap incident. Rice paid surprise visit to
Baghdad on 15th January. Next day, a female suicide bomber killed eight
people in Diyala province.
At least eight people were killed in a bomb attack near a Shiite
mosque in Baquba on 17th January. Next day, dozens of people were killed in
deadly clashes between Shiites and security forces. At least 17 people were
killed when a suicide bomber blew himself up at a funeral on 21st January.
Next day, a suicide bomber blew himself up in front of a high school in
Baghdad killing one and wounding 21 others. At least 27 people were killed
in violence on 23rd January.
Police chief of Mosul was killed in suicide bombing on 24 th January;
18 more people were killed in another attack. Al-Qaeda threatened suicide
attacks on Brown and Blair. Next day, Robert Gates denied any plan to
change US commander in Iraq. Three days later, five US soldiers were killed
in roadside bombing in Mosul and sixty people were killed in a bomb blast.
Five people were killed in bomb blast in Baghdad on 31 st January.
British organization claimed that over a million Iraqis have been killed since
occupation of their country. Next day, two female suicide bombers killed 73

1059

people and wounded more than one hundred in Baghdad. One US soldier
was killed and another wounded in mortar fire.
On 3rd February, the US-led troops killed 11 militants. Next day, the
US troops mistakenly killed nine Iraqis south of Baghdad. On 5 th February,
three Iraqis were killed by US troops. On 8 th February, eight Iraqis suspected
of being militants were killed by US forces and a Shiite leader and 22 others
were detained.
Next day, five US soldiers were killed in roadside bombing and 22
people were held in raids against Shiite militants. At least 49 people were
killed in various incidents of violence on 10th February. Five days later, at
least eleven people were killed in various incidents of violence.
The News commented: Bushs visit to the Middle East is being
closely watched around the world The fact that the US president will be
spending eight days in the region indicates the significance the White House
attaches to the task of finding a way to bring peace to one of the worlds
most turbulent regions. By predicting that a peace treaty would be reached
this year, Bush has struck a note of unexpected optimism, but of course it
is to be seen how far he can deliver what he has promised.
There are certain factors that make his task a difficult one. The
foremost among these is the lack of trust for the US in Palestine, and indeed
in most Arab countries. The history of injustice in the region by Washington,
and its key ally, Israel, of course makes this lack of faith inevitable.
The arrival of Bush in the Middle East has indeed been greeted by a
series of hostile columns in the Palestinian press, and by cartoons that
highlight the hatred felt for the US and its leaders who have, over the
decades, contributed so greatly to the plight of the Palestinian people.
While Bush has struck a cardinal note in his meetings both with
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Jerusalem and Palestinian President
Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah, he spoke in tough terms when calling on
both sides to get down to business right away. As commentators in the
Arab media have noted, the fact that the leaders of both states are relatively
weak, and face strong internal opposition, many make it easier to push them
towards initiating such a dialogue

1060

No simple solutions exist. The difficulties are many, and complex.

But a start to solving them must lie in developing a relationship of greater
trust with the wronged people of Palestine, who continue to suffer immense
brutality on a day to day basis. Setting up an international commission to
help in the process of dialogue and negotiation essential to arrive at peace
may be one step in this direction.
But the fact is that, no matter how immense the difficulties, they
must, in one way or the other be overcome. This is crucial to peace in the
world, and to the end of the scourge of terrorism. As a central player in the
Middle East, and an ally of Israel, the US role in this process will be vital.
As such, it is hoped President Bushs visit marks a first step in this process,
enabling the hurdles that still lie ahead to be overcome, one at a time, over
the months ahead.
Jawaid Raja from Rawalpindi wrote about decoration of Bush by
Saudi king. Congratulations to George W Bush for receiving the highest
award of Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Order of Merit, from King Abdullah.
President Bush deserves this award because of his great services
towards the well being of Muslim Ummah. We pray for him and wish him
many more successes in his future ventures for the welfare of the Muslim
World.
M Hamid Ansari was of the view that US policies have given an
impetus to terrorism. Any discussion of contemporary West Asia must
begin with three questions. What is happening in the region? Why is it
happening? What is the way out?
The answer to the first question is obvious. It focuses on a set of
well-known situations:
A Middle East Peace Process that is lingering on promissory notes
whose encashment has been deferred repeatedly;
A quagmire in Iraq that has dented the prestige and power of the
United States;
A failure to abandon the doctrine of Pre-emptive Strikes and of
Regime Change despite the experience of recent years and sharply
declining public support for it in the United States;

1061

 Israels failure to destroy the Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in

Gaza;
Americas standoff with Iran, and the threat to regional and world
peace emanating from it;
Enhanced external pressure on Iran to terminate its nuclear
programme;
Demographic pressures and a developing gap between commitment
and expectation in West Asian societies;
Failure of the Middle East Initiative and of the attempt to
democratize West Asian societies. Also, the impact of this on
indigenous reform movements; and
The little mentioned problem of water.
There is no simple answer to the second question. West Asia has
been and continues to be a pivotal factor in global geopolitics. These have
been aggravated in recent years by a set of new considerations:
Crisis of the Old Order and end of bipolarity;
The attempt to impose a New Order;
Failure to develop a security paradigm in the region and particularly
in the Persian Gulf; and
Ideological dimensions and their implications defeat of Arabism and
Arab nationalism, failure of the Left and the re-emergence of religious
radicalism
A beginning may be made with self-perceptions. The region,
President Bush said in his State of the Union message earlier this year, is the
venue of the decisive ideological struggle of our time. As Undersecretary
of State Nicholas Burns put it, it is the epicenter of American foreign
policy.
Israel, a mid-twentieth century factor in the region, has not been able
to translate its military superiority into a total, definitive, victory. Its

1062

invincibility was dented in the war with Hezbollah. This is not reflected in
political perceptions where right wing political parties and a small but
effective settler lobby has defied moves towards a meaningful peace process.
The lack of a serious US interest in the peace process has helped sustain it.
The policies of unilateralism, creative destruction and preemption have faltered. The US has been mauled by non-state actors in Iraq;
its policies have given an impetus to terrorism; it has lost domestic support
for its Iraq policy; its popularity levels are alarmingly high in Arab and
Muslim countries and its intentions are suspected. The dissent in the national
security establishment of the United States has become public.
The imperatives in the Iran policy of the United States have to be
viewed in this context. Suggestions about military action have emanated
from time to time; doubts about its efficacy and wider implications have also
been raised. The absence of decisive evidence of Iranian culpability has
been a restraining factor.
The end of European colonialism in West Asia had unleashed
three sets of forces whose complex interplay sets the background for all
subsequent developments in the policy and society of Arab states:
The first is Arab nationalism; the concept that all Arabs are one
nation Today, the concept remains a significant cultural matrix but
its impact on the Arab polity has diminished.
The second is the creation of nation-states in the areas vacated by the
erstwhile colonial powers Ruling regimes found it convenient to
obtain allegiance by emphasizing the interests of their nation-states
over that of the Arab nation.
The third is Islam. In the initial stages, religious revival was sought to
be fused with anti-imperialism and modern grass-roots political
activism Islamism retains significant political space in West Asia
co-opted in some regimes and hounded in other.
Political evolution, propelled by these three factors, was aided by
vast changes taking place in Arab societies. Rapid urbanization set the scene
for mass indoctrination; Arab nationalism filled the lacunae until its
demise in the wake of the 1967 War. Islamism rapidly provided a
substitute

1063

To these various factors must be added the security threats,

including terrorism, emanating from non-state actors in West Asia a
direct product of the political impasse mentioned above. A simplistic
analysis of these is rarely rewarding. Domestic, regional, external and
ideological factors combine to produce chemical reactions of varying
intensity
Social systems also produce their anti-bodies. The youth who spent
time in Afghanistan returned home Islamized and radicalized. They sought
correctives from local rulers and their external friends. They found solace in
traditional, religious idiom.
Iraq added its share in ample measure. Islamism is an ideology of
protest, and of change. Apart from slogans, it has little by way of a
programme of social reconstruction. Suppression without other correctives,
however, gives it a lease of life.
James Denselow opined the US was fighting the wrong battle. AlQaedas presence in an around the Sunni Triangle has been increasingly
marginalized as Iraqis reject their nihilistic vision that offers little but
massive US retaliation. Such a vision contrasts sharply with those militias
operating on a welfare-based model. The Mehdi Army, for instance
The captured diary of an al-Qaeda chief recently revealed these
strains of split with the main body of the insurgency, and the twin car bombs
that targeted US-allied tribal leaders this Monday showed how bloody this
conflict between past allies is. Yet the security vacuum in Iraq still allows
for such groups to continue operating and they are now reverting to new
levels of brutality against softer and softer targets in order to carry on their
fight
Petraeus persona is that of a hero, soldier, scholar and saviour, all in
one. Gone is the belligerent Donald Rumsfeld and in has come the softly
spoken Robert Gates. Gone are the hopes for a democratic beacon of
freedom and in has come the pragmatic acceptance of a fragmented
reality with a drastic lowering of the bar for expectations of the countrys
future.
While scenes of car bombings are still frequent, we now find media
stories of Petraeus playing virtual golf and the US military rescuing puppies.
However, the new PR-friendly US presence in Iraq hides critical,

1064

contentious issues that remain to be addressed. The status of future US

bases; the implications of the new oil law that will allow for foreign
exploitation; the fault from the Kirkuk referendum; future debates on the
future of Iraqi federalism and schemes of national reconciliation and future
US policy towards Iran and Syria. The issues ignored at the expense of
focusing energies on fighting al-Qaeda, whose apparent descent into new
levels of abhorrence makes for an easy target.

PALESTINE
Annapolis meet was hyped is a major breakthrough in Middle East
process. But, on 25th November, Hamas leader refused to accept any
outcome of the conference which would be against the interest of the
Palestinians. Ahmedinejad asked Saudi Arabia not to participate as such
conferences in the past have been held to promote interests of Israel.
On the eve of the conference US hoped to revive Middle East peace
process. Iran rebuked Saudi Arabia over attending the conference, but Syria
too agreed to attend under no illusions. On 27 th November, Bush
inaugurated the peace conference in Annapolis, Maryland. He read out the
contents of a joint document agreed upon by Israelis and Palestinians
pledging to pursue peace deal by the end of 2008.
Another event was Bushs visit to the Middle East, later part of which
has been mentioned in the introduction. On 9th January 2008, Bush received
red carpet reception in Israel. Two days later, he ended his visit with promise
of peace; to this end the US agreed to supply smarter bombs to Israel. Bush
had also assured Israel that no peace treaty would be implemented till
resistance from Hamas was completely crushed.
Israeli forces continued perpetrating state terrorism
Palestinians. Following incidents were reported during the period:

upon

Israeli troops killed two and wounded three Palestinians on 15 th

November. Eleven days later, five more Palestinians were killed.
Israeli troops killed two Palestinians on 28 th November and wounded
six others. Next day, four more Palestinians were killed in Gaza.

1065

 On 3rd December, Israeli troops killed three Hamas-linked Palestinians

and released 429 Fatah-linked men. Next day, two more Palestinians
were killed.
Eight Palestinians were killed as Israeli tanks and bulldozers entered
Gaza on 11th December. Next day, Israel and Palestinians resumed
talks after almost seven years.
Four Hamas men were wounded in Israeli air strike on 16 th December.
Next day, Abbas urged freeze on Israeli settlements.
On 19th December, 13 Palestinians were killed in a wave of air raids
by Israel in Gaza. Next day, Hamas sought ceasefire with Israel.
Israel rejected ceasefire offer and killed two Palestinians on 20 th
December. Five days later, two more Palestinians were injured when
beaten by the Jewish settlers.
Israeli-Palestinian summit on 27th December produced no agreement.
Next day, seven more Palestinians were killed in Israeli raids.
Israelis killed a Palestinian near security fence on 30 th December.
Stranded Palestinian pilgrims headed towards Egyptian camps.
Israeli troops pulled out of Nablus on 5 th January 2008. Four days
later, three Palestinians were killed in Israeli attack.
Israeli troops killed 20 Palestinians on 15 th January. Next day, three
more Palestinians were killed.
Two Palestinians were killed in Israeli strike on 17th January. Two
days later, two Hamas men were killed in another air strike. OIC
begged UN to stop Gaza attacks.
On 23rd January, Palestinians started fleeing Gaza in the wake of
Israeli raids. Two days later, Hamas commander was killed in Israeli
air strike.
On 27th January, Olmert-Abbas meeting focused on Gaza; the former
promised to end Palestinian crisis. Next day, Egypt sent back 3,000
Palestinians.
1066

 Egyptians completely sealed border with Gaza Strip on 3 rd February.

Next day, an Israeli woman was killed in suicide attack.
On 5th February, nine Palestinians were killed in Israeli strikes. Next
day, Israel mulled increasing pressure on Gaza Strip (Hamas).
Israel killed seven Palestinians on 7th February. Egypt threatened to
break legs of infiltrators from Gaza. Three days later, Israel
threatened to kill Hamas leaders.
Factional fighting added to sufferings of the Palestinians. Hamas
police opened fire on Fatah protesters killing seven and wounding 40 others
on 12th November. Eight Palestinians were killed on 1st January 2008 when
Fatah founding celebrations turned into factional fighting.
Two days prior to Annapolis Conference, Maqbool Ahmed Bhatty
wrote: As US military frustrations in the Middle East underline the need for
diplomatic initiatives, the forthcoming conference at Annapolis, Maryland
on Palestine is becoming the focus of international attention. The split
between the Fatah and Hamas factions, with the latter in control of the Gaza
Strip has weakened the Palestinian negotiating position.
It is this pre-disposition to favour Israel on the part of the US that
raises doubts in many parts of the Arab and Islamic world about
Washingtons seriousness to facilitate a solution that would take into account
the UN resolutions
Israeli circles built up hype about the far-reaching offer made by
Barak to withdraw from nearly 98 percent of the occupied territory, by
giving territory in compensation wherever Israeli settlements were to be
retained. Yasser Arafat did not respond positively because two key elements
of Palestinian demands had not been addressed, namely the status of East
Jerusalem and the right of Palestinians expelled from their homes to return.
When George W Bush became president in January 2001, there had
been an impression, that he enjoyed cordial personal relations with Arabs,
owing to his extensive links with the oil industry. However, as he revealed
his real self, he not only had close links with the Jewish lobby, but even
his religious affiliation to the evangelical church carried with it a strong
sympathy for the Jewish cause in the Middle East.

1067

The 9/11 terrorist attacks enabled President Bush to launch a war

against terror that has virtually turned into a crusade against the
Islamic World. The ongoing liberation movements in Palestine and Kashmir
were described as terrorist operations, conferring on the government of
Israel and India the right to use every atrocity against the fighters, though the
UN had made a distinction between terrorists who were criminals and those
risking their lives for a lofty purpose, such as liberation from colonial rule.
The initiative taken by the Bush Administration to promote a
peaceful settlement of the Palestine issue is being seen as a late effort to
improve the historical image of the unique superpower. The road-map
Bush had launched in 2002 visualized a Palestine solution through a
series of steps by both sides that would culminate in the emergence of two
viable states.
In the very first step that was to be taken following the launching of
the roadmap, Palestinian militant organizations announced a ceasefire,
which they observed for a whole year. However, Israel continued the
construction of the security barrier well within the West Bank, annexing
an additional 8 to 10 percent of Palestinian territory on the West Bank and
imposing further restrictions on the movement of Palestinians.
During 2007, the break between the Fatah and Hamas turned into
an open conflict, so that Mahmoud Abbas was forced to flee to the West
Bank, while Hamas have gained total control of the Gaza Strip. The Arab
League, whose secretary general is from Egypt, had backed Fatah. King
Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who authored 2002 Arab Plan for Palestine, links
Arab recognition of Israel to its withdrawal from all territories occupied in
1967, conceding of East Jerusalem to Arab and a solution of the problem of
Arab refugees who were forced to flee when Israel occupied much of
Palestine in 1948.
The 2002 roadmap does not fully address these issues, whereas
reputable US newspapers including the New York Times concede that
durable peace in Palestine, in the Middle East, and indeed the Islamic world
as a whole will depend upon a fair and just solution of the Arab-Israel
conflict Given the constraints of the internal politicking in an election
year, in which the powerful Zionist lobby has decisive influence, one must
sadly share the skepticism of President Basharat al-Asad of Syria as to
the outcome.

1068

On the eve of conference The Nation commented: An international

conference beginning today at Annapolis, Maryland, USA, is being hosted
by the Bush Administration. Strangely, it will not have Hamas to represent
the Palestinian people even though it commands over 70 percent popular
support Thus, the validity of the Palestinian commitment made at the
negotiation table could be well imagined.
But this is not the only rider to the assumption that the conference
will bring peace to the highly troubled land. The Israeli intentions
constitute the most daunting hurdle. The Palestinians proposal of peace
for land stipulates Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders, resolution of
the problem of refugees and acknowledgement of the Palestinian claim on
Jerusalem. On none of them, Tel Aviv is in a mood to concede
Syrias consent to attend the conference on the assurance that the
Golan Heights will be on the agenda, will make it the 16 th Arab country,
including Saudi Arabia, to take part. Pakistan has also gone along with US
wishes and sent its foreign secretary to Annapolis. But unless the
Palestinians genuine wishes are fulfilled, all hope for Arab-Israeli entente
will prove groundless.
On the opening day of the conference Laila el-Haddad wrote. Even in
the worst times, theres one thing were never short of in our troubled
part of the world: another conference, meeting, declaration, summit,
agreement. Something to save the day, to steer us back to whatever
predetermined path it is we are or were meant to be on; and to help us
navigate that path.
As recently as September, Israel expropriated 1,100 dunams (272
acres) of Palestinian land in the West Bank to facilitate the development of
E-1, a five-square-mile area in the West Bank, east of Jerusalem where Israel
plans to build 3,500 houses, a hotel and an industrial park, completing the
encirclement of Jerusalem with Jewish colonies, and cutting it off from the
rest of the West Bank.
The conference simply generates new and ever-more superfluous
and intricate promises which Israeli leaders can commit to and yet
somehow evade. An exercise in legal obfuscation at its best: we wont build
new settlements, well just expropriate more land and expand to account for
their natural growth, until they resemble towns, not colonies, and have
them legitimized by a US administration looking for some way to save face.
1069

And then well promise to raze outposts. Each step in the evolution of
Israels occupation together with the efforts to sustain it and the language
to describe it has become ever more sophisticated, strategic and
euphemistic.
Israel has also promised the release of 450 Palestinian prisoners (who
have, by Israels own admission, nearly completed their sentences) on
Sunday ahead of the conference, while dozens of others are detained and
thousands of others remain in custody without charges or trial making
theirs the highest rate of incarceration in the world.
Still, Annapolis is being hailed as the most serious attempt in
eight years at getting back on track. According to the US State
Departments spokesperson, the conference will signal broad international
support for the Israeli and Palestinian leaders courageous efforts, and will
be a launching point for negotiations leading to the establishment of a
Palestinian state and the realization of Israeli-Palestinian peace. Support, I
gather, that will also entail arms and money to help Abbas rid Gaza of
Hamas once and for all.
If history has taught them (Palestinians) anything, its that they never
have much of a say in anything that involves their destiny To quote
Palestinian national poet Mahmoud Darwish: The siege will last in order to
convince us we must choose an enslavement that does not harm, in fullest
liberty. The stage has been set, the roles are the same, but the actors have
been switched. That is the feeling of many in Gaza.
Rafiq Husseini said: Lets dream together for a minute and
suppose that Annapolis will achieve the impossible, where the wise
leaders of Israel emulating King Solomon the Wise say:
We accept that the Palestinians can have a state of their own and live
with dignity and peace in 22 percent of historic Palestine (the West
Bank and Gaza) in return for the right of Israel to exist in the rest of
historic Palestine in peace and security.
We accept the Arab initiative and are ready (to talk about) the Golan
Heights and Sheba Farms in return for the normalization of relations
with Syria and 50 other Arab and Islamic states.

1070

 We are ready to work on a just and agreed-upon solution for the

Palestinian refugees.
We cannot accept that the Palestinians have a state in 22 percent of
historic Palestine; we can only offer them parts of the West Bank.
We dont accept the Arab initiative in its totality but we want to
normalize with the Arab and Islamic states, nevertheless.
We are not ready to return the whole of the Golan Heights to Syria
and Sheba Farms to Lebanon but want a full peace agreement with
both countries.
We are not ready to discuss the refugee problem and will not accept
any of the refugees back into Israel.
The gap between the dream and the reality is therefore immense.
As Palestinians, our expectations have dramatically changed since US
President George W Bush called for the Annapolis meeting five months
back, from dreaming about a document defining parameters and guiding
principles for the six final status issues (borders, refugees, Jerusalem,
settlements, water and security) to acquiescing to a statement of intent about
creating conditions for peace and working on the first phase of the roadmap
adopted by the Quartet (but without using the words immediate and
parallel in reference to each sides obligations).
At the start, the US administration wanted to define the end game
and to build the building, then put in the furniture but it, too, to moderate
its expectations. So how then do we move forward beyond the realistic
scenario of the Annapolis document? And how can we the Palestinian
moderates convince the Palestinian voters to support peace and give them
the perception that things will improve politically, economically and
socially?
Given all the deficiencies of Annapolis, and taking into consideration
what the Israeli position will most likely be at the conference, and since we
do not occupy Israel but the opposite is true, there are three tracks that we
(Palestinians, Israelis and the international community) need to move
along so that the Palestinian peoples perceptions are strengthened in the
direction of peace and coexistence.

1071

The first is, of course, advancing the political track that is

obviously not moving very far or very fast for reasons that only Israel
understands and enforces. Yet a well-drafted document and an immediate
serious-looking negotiations process would help give some of the
Palestinians some hope.
The second track involves creating access, movement and other
confidence-building measures, where most checkpoints are removed. The
third track involves economic revival in the West Bank and Gaza. This
means that many job-generating development projects are initiated and that
at the end of each calendar month, all government employees receive a full
salary without delay
The Palestinians for their part also need to continue to work
with full speed and intent on their obligations under the first phase of the
roadmap, especially with regard to security, which is Israels main pretext
for building the wall and denying us access and movement. The moderate
leadership will also have to convince the majority of the population in Gaza
that there is a way forward through peace and coexistence, so that they (the
people) force the extremists to rescind their coup detat and accept the
legitimacy of and new elections for both the presidency and the Legislative
Council. This way, we hope that the moderates armed with progress on the
above three tracks regain their control of PA institutions in a democratic
and non-violent manner.
Yoel Marcus observed: Bushs roadmap has tangled up everything
in a knot with its sequential demands: Before commencing permanent
status talks, the Palestinians are supposed to halt terror and dismantle the
terror organizations, and Israel is supposed to evacuate outposts in the
territories. These demands have set the proverbial dog running in circles,
chasing his own tail.
Condoleezza Rice is the one who urged Bush to cut this Gordian
knot with an international conference attended by the Quartet, the moderate
Arab countries, and anyone supportive of peace in the Middle East. The
conference thus created sponsorship for the two-states-for-two-peoples
solution, a return to 1967 borders, and the creation of settlement blocks
based on territorial exchange. Israel, which has always been traumatized by
the idea of an imposed solution, received a promise from Bush that the
Annapolis summit would only sponsor the talks, and not twist Israels arm.

1072

We have never had a president like George W Bush, and chances

are we will never have another. If we reach an agreement, we are not only
clinching a deal with Mahmoud Abbas, but with the whole of the moderate
Arab World. On the other hand, Israel could find itself under pressure and
sanctions from the whole of the international community if it fails to open
up and engage in a serious discussion of core issues, as Olmert promised to
do a few weeks ago.
It is doubtful that Americas next president will be as friendly
and supportive as Bush, who can be trusted not to pressure us on issues
that compromise Israels security and survival. So whatever can be achieved
we must try to achieve now, while Bush is still at the helm. We are not going
to be able to fool all the people all the time.
Israel will have to be more flexible in implementing the roadmap.
We will have to give up the sequential order, for example the idea of first
wiping out terror and only then embarking on final status talks. These two
things will have to be done simultaneously.
At the moment, the fact that part of the Arab world has cut itself
off from Hamas in Gaza is an impressive preliminary achievement.
Olmerts administration is facing its most important challenge yet. Now that
Syria has joined, the Annapolis summit is forging a new regional map, with
the sons of light pitted against sons of darkness. All credit for this
remarkable gathering goes to Bush. Its his baby. But the opportunity is all
ours an opportunity that we dare not pass up.
Yossi Beilin wrote: I hope this is the beginning of an intensive
process that leads to peace agreements with Syria and the Palestinians
by exploiting the final year of Abu Mazens presidency, the desire of the US
administration to leave behind some sort of diplomatic legacy in its last year
and the appeal by Syrian President Bashar Assad to initiate unconditional
negotiations with Israel.
It is the task of US President George W Bush, Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert and Abbas to ensure that the Annapolis conference, which
currently has no objective rationale, becomes a success. That means the
immediate convening of an Israeli-Syrian forum, along the lines of what
transpired following the Madrid conference in 1991.

1073

What happened in the course of recent weeks repeated a well-known

syndrome: the parties approach a moment of truth, get cold feet and decide
this is not yet the real moment of truth. After Olmert and Abbas had
appeared to find a common language and succeeded in overcome obstacles,
it emerged that the professional teams headed by FM Tzipi Livni and
Ahmed Querri (Abu Ala) regressed light years into the past and got
stuck at inexplicable corners
After Annapolis, Olmert and Abbas, with or without the assistance of
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, will have to maneouvre their
negotiating teams out of the corners and steer them back to serious
discussion of permanent status. The negotiators points of reference already
exist the Clinton parameters, the Ayalon-Nusseibeh document and the
Geneva initiative and should enable them to reach agreement within a few
months.
If the two partners understand that they have nothing to lose; if they
appreciate the negative significance of postponing a solution to a distant
date; if they comprehend the tremendous opportunity that has been created at
this strange and hard historical juncture, with Hamas controlling the Gaza
Strip; and if they grasp that their broad publics long for peace and an end to
violence and overwhelming support any peace agreement delivered by their
leaders then they can accomplish in 2008 what has not happened for
the past 40 years.
Tariq Alhomayed opined: Despite the conference date drawing near
and the Saudis leaving the door open to speculation regarding their
attendance or absence; I had always considered it more likely that Saudis
would attend the conference if some conditions were met. Abu Mazens
words are true, Annapolis is not in a state for normalization and sitting on
the negotiating tableAnnapolis is much easier than sitting on the
Madrid Conference negotiating table in the nineties.
And there a need for Saudi attendance since Saudis had
presented their own Peace initiative and Israel should never win the
game because of Saudi or Arab absence, especially if the objective behind
such conferences is to score points. It is enough to remember the Wye River
negotiations and what had been said and whats still being said in this
regard.

1074

Saudi Arabia agreeing to attend the summit, represented by its

Minister of Foreign Affairs Prince Saud al-Faisal, showed that they did not
rush into the situation, but were methodical in their approach, and in the
process achieved what it strived for even before their participation. What the
Saudis wanted was for the sponsors of the Annapolis summit to include the
Arab peace initiative on the agenda, therefore maintaining the
comprehensiveness of the peace process and guaranteeing it would not be
limited to one focal issue.
The Saudis also wanted the Americans to understand that concerning
the Palestinian issue; the goal of establishing a Palestinian state and the
existence of a time-bound framework for negotiations was imperative,
as well as the creation of measures to ensure a halt to Israeli settlements.
It is important to acknowledge here that the Saudi position was
important and necessary just like the Saudi attendance is of great
importance; the Saudi King is the one who presented the initiative which had
become the Arab Peace Initiative.
Hence, this is why Saudi Arabia was keen on strengthening the
Arabs stance and avoiding disunity. Such an attendance is aimed at real
action and not normalization as Prince Saud al-Faisal warned that he
would not participate in a theatrical show, including exchanging
handshakes with Israeli leaders.
It is vital here to state to all parties that the danger in the Annapolis
conference lies in raising the level of expectations and not anticipating
what should happen after the conference, particularly if the conference is
unable to achieve concrete results and that is what we truly fear the most.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette wrote: The meeting appeared to go well in
that a process was agreed upon that envisages talks on the issues beginning a
short two weeks from now. A target date was set at the end of next year,
which coincides with the end of the Bush Administration. Prospects for
success were enhanced by the presence of representatives of some 49
countries, including frequent spoiler Syria and Arab godfather Saudi
Arabia
Important regional players were absent, including Iran. The Bush
Administrations desire to mobilize Arab and other opposition to Iran was
one of its motivations in organizing the conference, after seven years of

1075

immobility in the face of the 60-year-old festering conflict. The government

in Iraq chose not to send a representative
The questions looming before the Annapolis meeting remain to be
resolved afterward if movement toward peace is to occur:
Is Mr Olmertable to negotiate and deliver on behalf of his country?
Is Mr Abbas, defeated both at the polls and in battlein principle,
represented the Palestinians at Annapolis able to negotiate and
deliver on behalf of his people?
Is Mr Bush, after seven years of disassociation from the issue, now
prepared to devote time, energy and his remaining political steam to
wrestling with these difficult issues and parties to bring home an
agreement during his final year in office?
A negative view says that a no to any of these three questions is a
show-stopper. President Bill Clinton applied his considerable energies to
the problem throughout his two terms, failing finally only in his last year in
office. The issues themselves are vicious and sensitive, including the Israeli
settlers, determination of borders, the fate of Jerusalem and the question of
Palestinian returns to properties in Israel.
A more positive view says that even the fact that the parties were
willing to come to Annapolis at Mr Bushs behest after he had ducked the
issue for so long is tribute to just how much an American president can
achieve if he wants. The Syrians and Saudis notably did not want to come.
Anyone who has watched years of effort to try to end the IsraeliPalestinian conflict end up on the trash of history has to be pessimistic. At
the same time, there is no denying that such a settlement is not only an
absolute pre-condition to Middle East peace, but also a critical remedy
to the widening gap between the West and Muslims in the world.
Americans can only hope that the overriding desirability of the
goal will help the parties get past the formidable barriers that stand in
the way. Caution even pessimism are dictated by history and
circumstances, but so is the eternal American belief that obstacles can be
overcome by perseverance and hard work.

1076

Daniel Levy opined: Annapolis could signify the rebirth of hope, but
for this to be the case the credibility gaps that have the skeptics buzzing
will need to be addressed. The first involves the revival of the roadmap
peace process talk for issues such as settlement freeze, outpost removal,
easing of closure and removal of check points, reopening Palestinian
institutions in East Jerusalem, Palestinian Authority institutional and security
reform.
Precious little from this list has been accomplished. The new
ingredient revealed at Annapolis is a US-led monitoring mechanism to
oversee implementation of these issues. This may lead to a partial
improvement on the ground, but it ignores the bigger structural reason for
the roadmaps failurethe core political issues that need to be addressed.
This takes us to the second credibility challenge Annapolis faces
post-conference: what kind of a process is being launched? Syrian
attendance implies the re-launching of comprehensive negotiations
between Israel and all its neighbours. Yet everyone, including Syrian
themselves, still seems to be in the undecided category regarding renewed
Israeli-Syrian negotiations.
The headline question, though, is whether Annapolis sets in
motion meaningful Israeli-Palestinian permanent status negotiations.
Was Annapolis more about isolating Iran, and defeating Hamas than it was
about actually delivering a viable and realistic two-state solution? While
these goals are sometimes described as mutually supportive, the opposite
argument is actually more convincing. The inability of the Israelis,
Palestinians and Americans to produce any guiding parameters for these
negotiations in advance of Annapolis hardly inspired confidence for the
morning after.
To really be credible, the post-Annapolis process will have to
overcome two remaining taboos: that Palestinians can deliver ongoing
security to Israel under conditions of occupation, and that a divided Palestine
can midwife a sustainable peace. The Hamas spoiler potential is not solely or
even principally about its ability to deploy violence. It is also about the
credibility and legitimacy of a process that excludes the party that polled
most votes in Palestinian elections.
The Bush Administration continues to view the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict through the lens of a global war on terrorism and as part of the
1077

momentous struggle of good against evil. The great irony of the Annapolis
conference is that the framing narrative of its convener is the one thing that
most undermined its chances of success. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is
grievance-driven and its resolution is all about ending the occupation
An America that accurately connects the dots in the region will likely
pursue a more inclusive and comprehensive that this is a vital American
interest The Americans are back in the Middle East peacemaking
business, but Annapolis needs to be about more than nothing. And it
shouldnt need 180 episodes to get us to something.
Analysts did not ignore other aspects of the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict. Kim Bullimore commented: The situation in Palestine continues
to deteriorate, both on a political scale and humanitarian scale. The
international blockade of Gaza and the continued illegal collective
punishment of its residents by Israel has resulted in soaring food prices
Hospitals are reporting zero stock availability of pediatric drugs and antibiotic, as well as a shortage in chronic disease drugs, cancer treatment drugs,
a range of kidney dialysis drugs and IV glucose solution.
Since July, the situation has deteriorated, more factories have closed
and more workers are now left without an income to feed their families.
There is no social security system in Palestine, so workers are forced to rely
on what little savings they have and their families. Many turn to crime,
while others engage in dangerous acts such as trying to collect scrap metal
near no-go zones or try to enter Israel illegally, both of which often results in
them being killed by Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF).
The IOF continues to bomb and attack Gaza, killing Palestinians
indiscriminately. However, Hamas is putting up a strong counterattack
inflicting damage to the IOF, resulting destruction of military hardware and
the loss of several IOF soldiers.
The blockade and political isolation is continuing to exert pressure on
Hamas, resulting in Hamas aligned police shooting on a rally crowd during
the anniversary of Arafats death. Both Fatah and Hamas are blaming the
other side for provoking the attack, with each claiming the other side shot
first.
The primary issue in relation to Hamas is how much has former
Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh and other moderates been sidelined

1078

Since June, Abbas regime has forcibly closed down media outlets including
newspapers they deem to be either affiliated with or sympathetic to Hamas.
Abbas has also made it illegal for West Bank media outlets to broadcast
speeches by Hamas or mention them.
Abbas argues the conference will be real and they wont concede
anything. However, he and his coterie are already conceding an immense
amount by attempting to dismantle the Palestinian resistance, refusing to
reconcile with Hamas and establish national unity (the thing most wanted by
the Palestinian population at the moment).
What is actually more important is not Annapolis but bringing
Nablus under PA control. If Abbas and Fayyad can bring Nablus under
their control, they will have succeeded in capitulating fully to the US and
Israel by all but destroying the Palestinian resistance in the West Bank.
Both Abbas and Fayyad believe that if they succeed in disarming
the Palestinian resistance they will be able to win concessions from the
Israeli. This, however, as a number of writers, including former CIA analyst,
Kathleen Christison, has pointed out is pure delusion on the behalf of Abbas
and Fayyad.
As Christison noted in the wake of the June state of emergency, that
while Abbas and his leadership are desperate to be seen as moderate and
reasonable, there has never been any clear evidence that Israel will never
make meaningful territorial concessions to the Palestinians or even any
real political concessions to Fatah, such as release of significant numbers of
Palestinian prisoners or that the US will pressure them to do.
While the focus on the Israeli and international media has been on
Hamas transgression in Gaza, such as the shootings at the rally, the arrest of
Fatah members, attack on journalists, theyve failed to mention that Abbas
and his regime has been systematically arresting and detaining Hamas
members in the West Bank for months They have also shut down at
least 110 Hamas affiliated charities and arrested journalists who have
reported Hamas speeches and statements.
Currently most of the other factions have opportunistically fallen in
behind Fatah, as many see it as opportunity to sideline Hamas. Whether or
not Abbas and his regime will be able to continue as they have is in doubt,
something which Israel, the US and even Abbas recognizes himself. If

1079

Hamas can maintain control of its forces in Gaza and withstand the blockade
a while longer, they continued to place themselves strategically in a good
position. Abbas will not be able to continue to ignore them and will be
forced to the negotiating table.
Also if Fayyad and Abbas continue seek to actively disarm the
resistance, this may result in pushing some of the other factions closer to
Hamas, thus placing more pressure on Abbas and Fayyad. However, if
Hamas are unable to keep control of its forces and starve of defeat in Gaza,
they may well begin to revert to their former hard-line positions rather than
capitulate to the dictates of the USs favourite quisling in Ramallah.
Bernard Lewis opined: Herewith some thoughts about Annapolis
peace conference, and the larger problem of how to approach the IsraelPalestine conflict. The first question (one might think it is obvious but
apparently not) is, What is the conflict about? There are basically two
possibilities: that is about the size of Israel, or about its existence.
If the issue is about the size of Israel, then we have a straightforward
border problem If, on the other hand, the issue is the existence of Israel,
then clearly it is insoluble by negotiation. There is no compromise position
between existing and not existing, and no conceivable government of Israel
is going to negotiate on whether that country should or should not exist.
Without genuine acceptance of Israels right to exist as a Jewish
State, as more than 20 members of the Arab League exist as Arab States, or
the much larger number of members of the Organization of the Islamic
Conference exist as Islamic states, peace cannot be negotiated.
A good example of how this problem affects negotiation is the
much-discussed refugee question What happened was thus, in effect, an
exchange of populations not unlike that which took place in the Indian
subcontinent in the previous year, when British India was split into India and
Pakistan. Millions of refugees fled or were driven both ways. Another
example was Eastern Europe
The Poles and the Germans, the Hindus and the Muslims, the Jewish
refugees from Arab lands, all were resettled in their new homes and
accorded the normal rights of citizenship. More remarkably, this was done
without international aid. The one exception was the Palestinian Arabs in

1080

neighbouring Arab countries. Lewis has bluntly said that these refugees
are the problem of Arabs rather than that of Israel.
The government of Jordan granted Palestinian Arabs a form of
citizenship, but kept them in refugee camps. In the other Arab countries, they
were and remained stateless aliens without rights or opportunities,
maintained by UN funding The reason for this has been stated by various
Arab spokesmen. It is the need to preserve the Palestinians as separate entity
until the time when they will return and reclaim the whole of Palestine.
There are signs of change in some Arab circles, of a willingness to
accept Israel and even to see the possibility of a positive Israeli contribution
to the public life of the region. But such opinions are only furtively
expressed. Sometimes, those who dare to express them are jailed or worse.
These opinions have as yet or no impact on the leadership.
Which brings us back to the Annapolis summit; if the issue is not the
size of Israel, but its existence, negotiations are foredoomed. And in the
light of the past record, it is clear that is and will remain the issue, until the
Arab leadership either achieves or renounces its purpose to destroy Israel.
Both seem equally unlikely for the time being.
Sajid M Ansari from Lahore talked of US hypocrisy. US State
Department spokesman Sean McCormack has said Any time you have a
terrorist organization making threats against a member of the United
Nations, thats something that should concern very civilized nation around
the globe. Can McCormack explain to the world if the US-backed
Israels blockade of Gazais a civilized and justified way of dealing with
the ones opponents?
Burhanuddin Hasan wrote: Considered the staunchest ally of Israel,
Mr Bush has no credibility and even less sympathy among the Palestinians
and Arab Muslims. After wreaking havoc in Iraq, Mr Bush cannot expect
any soft corner for him in the heart of Palestinians. He however, has
stepped into the hostile territory of the West Bank in the hope of playing a
role in the solution of the West Bank in the hope of playing a role in the
solution of the historic Palestine issue, which several US presidents, most
notably Mr Clinton failed to resolve
It is out of the question that he would impress on Israel to make
any real concessions to the Palestinians in order to accelerate negotiations,

1081

even though these already seem to be gasping for breath since the last
summit in Annapolis. Mr Bush made it abundantly clear that USA is
committed to the establishment of a viable Palestine state living side by side
with Israel
The thorniest part of Palestine state is Hamas-led Gaza Strip,
which does not recognize the authority of Mahmoud Abbas. Gaza today is a
wasteland. Since Hamas took power, the Israeli government has made it
extremely difficult for people of Gaza to travel outside their crowded strip of
land along the Mediterranean. Israel has also severely restricted imports to
Gaza of essential humanitarian goods. Four out of every five Palestinians
depend on international food aid, according to the UN relief and works
agency. No one is starving, but the economy has come to a virtual standstill.
Mr Bush said: It is vital that each side understands that satisfying
the others fundamental objectives is the key to a successful agreement.
This would require: 1) secure, recognized and defensible borders for Israel;
2) a viable, contiguous, sovereign and independent Palestinian state.
The agreement must establish Palestine as a homeland for the
Palestinian people just as Israel is a homeland for the Jewish people. The
statement set out some parameters within which he expected negotiations
to work. These included: 1) Palestinian refugee families should be
compensated, rather than returning to former homes in what is now Israel; 2)
adjustments to the pre-1967 boundaries to reflect current realities a
reference to Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
On the Israeli side, it includes ending settlement expansion and
removing unauthorized outposts. On the Palestinian side, it includes
confronting terrorists and dismantling terrorist infrastructure. These are very
complicated issues, but a negotiated settlement on them depends upon a
strong desire for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
David Cronin was critical of Israel. Diplomatic pressure from the
European Union has been credited as being party responsible for how Israel
allowed some deliveries of food, medicine and fuel to Gaza over the past
few days. But you would never guess that senior EU officials had been
flexing their metaphorical muscles if you saw one particular document
distributed to the Brussels press corps. This was a transcript of a speech
given by the European commissions vice-president, Franco Frattini, during
a visit to Israel
1082

Never shying away from some self-congratulation, Frattini took

credit for how Hamas was placed on the EUs list of proscribed
organizations when he chaired the unions council of foreign ministers in
2003. He claimed, too, that Hamas had provoked Israels armed response
in the Palestinian territories and that Israel lives and exists according to the
same traditions and values as European citizens.
Whatever one thinks of Hamas, this is clearly hogwash. Anybody
who looks seriously at the Middle East conflict would conclude that
Palestinian violence is a reaction to the relentless brutality and
provocation of Israeli forces. That doesnt excuse for a second the horrific
consequences of suicide bombing. But it does help explain them.
As for the argument about European values, I assume these refer to
the principles on which the EU is nominally based: liberty, democracy,
respect for human rights and the rule of law. But the Israeli human rights
organization BTselem has calculated that of the 810 Palestinians killed by
the occupying forces in Gaza in 2006 and 2007 just 360 belonged to an
armed organization. By what logic other than a very twisted one can
Israels state-approved slaughter of civilians be considered as a proof
that it upholds values we are supposed to cherish.
Daniel Barenboim urged: Israelis must accept the integration of
the Palestinian minority. They must also accept the justification for and
necessity of the creation of a Palestinian state, next to the state of Israel.
Their integration is an indispensable condition for the very survival of Israel.
The longer the occupation continues and Palestinian dissatisfaction remains
unaddressed, the more difficult it is to find even elementary common
ground.
A true citizen of Israel must ask himself what the Jews, known as the
intelligent people of learning and culture, have done to share their cultural
heritage with the Palestinians. A true citizen of Israel must also ask
himself why the Palestinians have been condemned to live in slums and
accept lower standards of education and medical care, rather than being
provided by the occupying force with decent, dignified and livable
conditions a right common to all human beings.
In any occupied territory, the occupiers are responsible for the quality
of life of the occupied and in the case of the Palestinians; the different Israeli
governments have failed miserably. The Palestinians, naturally, must
1083

continue to resist the occupation and all attempts to deny them basic
individual needs and statehood. However, for their own sake, this resistance
must not express itself through violence. Crossing the boundary from
adamant resistance (including non-violent demonstrations and protests) to
violence only results in more innocent victims, and does not serve the longterm interests of the Palestinian people.
At the same time, the citizens of Israel have just as much cause to be
alert to the needs and rights of the Palestinian people as they have to their
own. After all, in the sense that we share one land and one destiny, we
should all have dual citizenship.
Jonathan Steele wrote: Bushs engagement in the worlds most
intractable dispute is late, piecemeal and phony. Above all, it is onesided. In any conflict, responsibility for making the largest concessions
always rests on the stronger party, especially when most of the wrong is on
its side. But, despite his rhetoric, Bush has not used Washingtons enormous
leverage over Israel to end the occupation of the West Bank and East
Jerusalem.
He has not even applied pressure for an end to the expansion of
Israeli settlements or the dismantling of the spiders web of roadblocks that
make normal life for Palestinians impossible. A US plan for benchmarks by
which to judge Israeli progress was abandoned last year at the first whiff of
concern by Olmerts government. Occasional state department
pronouncements disapproving of settlement expansion are not followed by
measures to reflect US anger when Olmert makes it clear he will continue
the illegal construction of Israeli homes.
Any talk of dealing with core issues is meaningless without
measures to reduce the daily hardships of Palestinians and end the
kidnapping of hundreds of Palestinian leaders. About 40 Palestinian MPs
who are seized after Hamass election victory two years ago remain in Israel
prisons, uncharged. US and European policies towards Hamas remain
hopelessly unjust and counterproductive.
In the first phase of the so-called roadmap that Bush boasts of having
revived, Palestinians are supposed to build the institutions of a responsible
state. Yet Israel and the US continue to do all they can to undermine this
laudable goal by blatantly taking sides in the rivalry between Fatah and
Hamas. Bush's comment last week in Ramallah about the situation in
1084

Gaza was one of historys most extraordinary examples of tunnel vision.

Hamas has delivered nothing but misery for Palestinians, he declared
The human catastrophe deliberately inflicted on Gaza by
Western policies over the past two years is one of the great crimes of this
century so far. It is especially unjustified since Hamas had been observing a
truce in its attacks on Israelis for several months prior to winning the free,
fair and open elections that the roadmap asked for. Hamas continues to be
punished not for its occasional use of violence but simply for being popular.
And, as often happens with sanctions, it is not the leaders who suffer, but the
whole civilian population of the territory
Where does that leave Palestinians as the gathering wave of US
primaries prepares to reveal the two candidates for the Bush succession?
Will they have to wait as long as 2016 before President Clinton or President
Obama is free enough to confront Israeli intransigence and to insist on
concessions? Neither candidate has yet given any sign of breaking away
from traditional pro-Israeli views of the problem, so once again
Palestinians may have to wait for the eight-year miracle.

OTHER FRONTS
Peace continued evading Lebanon. Lebanese general was among five
killed in a car bomb blast in Beirut on 12 th December; Syria flayed the
murder and Arab League condemned the blast. Presidential poll in Lebanon
was postponed once again. Three persons were killed in an attack in Beirut
on a car of US Embassy on 15 th January. Ten people were killed in bombing
on 4th February.
Blowing hot and cold in the context of Iran continued. On 11th
November, Rice said US was not on warpath with Iran. Ahmadenejad
attended GCC Summit in Doha on 3rd December and proposed regional
security pact. He said the nuclear issue was closed. Next day, Iran welcomed
US report which recommended correction in claims on Irans nuclear arms
programme. Putin told Iran to keep its nuclear programme under IAEA
control. IAEA Chief said the US report vindicated Irans stance.
Iran expelled German diplomat on 6th January 2008. All options were
available to stop Iran going nuclear said Israel on 14 th January. About two

1085

weeks later, Rice said nuclear issue with Iran could be settled diplomatically.
On 4th February, Iran established a space centre and fired a rocket into space.
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal talked of the next Gulf War. Next Gulf War is
now on the fast track, with planning moving from drawing rooms (boards)
to actual groundwork. This time the coalition forces will target Iran. The
planning for attack has now reached a stage where the already secured
cooperation of the Gulf allies is now being actualized by establishing
military bases which will be used to stage the air and ground attack. This
time around France will be an active partner of the United States, for
America has found a perfect replacement of Blair in the French President
Nicolas Sarkozy. Britain is already on board.
The strategy for Iran is much different from the one used against
Afghanistan and Iraq. This time, the coalition of the willing will be much
larger and will include silent Arab partners who would not join the active
force attacking Iran, but provide all the logistic support needed for the
operation. To this end France is establishing a permanent military base in the
UAE under a deal signed during the January 2008 visit of President Nicolas
Sarkozy
Bushs address in Abu Dhabi was described by his aides as the
keynote speech of his regional tour. And it was an unusually harsh and
bombastic speech, even for Bush. He began by bolstering Arab ego: I am
honoured by the opportunity to stand on Arab soil and speak to the people of
this nation and this region. Throughout the history, the lands of the Arab
people call home have played a pivotal role in the world affairs Here in
Abu Dhabi, we see clearly the outlines of a new future
Then came his blistering attack against Iran: One cause of
instability is the extremists supported and embodied by the regime that sits
in Tehran. Iran is today the worlds leading state sponsor of terror. It sends
hundreds of millions of dollars to extremists around the world while its
own people face repression and economic hardship at home. It undermines
Lebanese hopes for peace by arming and aiding the terrorist group
Hezbollah. It subverts the hopes for peace in other parts of the region
If there is any doubt about the direction of the next Western invasion
of the Muslim world, the doubters should pay attention to what
happened when Bush arrived in Saudi Arabia after his blistering attack
on Iran in his UAE speech: Bush offered to the Saudis 900 satellite guided
1086

joint direct attack munitions as part of a long-awaited US arms package for

Gulf Arab allies worth $20bn
While Bush was still on Arab soil, his administration notified the US
Congress that it intends to go ahead with a major sale of sensitive military
technology to Saudi Arabia. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, the Democrat John Biden, responded by saying Congress
needed to be convinced that the sale made sense militarily, and would not
harm the security of America and its allies. What he meant by allies is, of
course, Israel. But regardless of this statement, the Congress is more than
willing to support this initiative; such is the collusion of interests for this
preparation of the next Gulf War.
Much of Bushs time in Saudi-occupied Arabia was spent behind
close doors. Whatever time he spent in public was devoted to ceremonial
appearances. King Abdullah awarded Bush the Saudi Order of Merit, Bush
met this or that dignitary, he visited king Abdullahs lavish farm, which
reportedly provides air-conditioned stables and acqua therapy for the horses,
but he did all this on the side, while remaining focused on the task at hand:
creating fear of Iran.
Iran has remained calm throughout the recent provocations, but
its Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, correctly perceived the intent of
Bushs Middle East trip and called it an attempt to create an atmosphere of
Iran-phobia in the region. This is, however, a weak and in-effectual
response to the strategic planning now underway in Washington...
His democracy touting, arm-selling trip may not have changed public
perceptions about him and his country, it is definitely a step forward for
those working on contingency plans for the next great adventure of the
United States of America in the Muslim World, this time, in the very
heart of Islams most sacred places and into the very source from where
much of the world draws its oil supplies.
Paul Craig Roberts wrote: The disclosure that the latest National
Intelligence Estimate concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program
several years ago, assuming Iran ever had such a program, has caused
consternation among Israeli government officials, and Bush regime ranks.
Members of the Israeli government have denounced the NIE
finding as contrary to Israels interests. Former Bush regime official John

1087

Bolton accused Americas intelligence agencies with conspiring to discredit

President Bush with politicized intelligence. According to Bolton, it is US
intelligence agencies, not the neoconservatives, who have their own agenda.
Bush has been trying to work up an attack on Iran based on a
non-existent nuclear weapon program. When asked how he could be
threatening World War III with a nuclear armed Iran when US intelligence
and the IAEA cannot find evidence, Bush said that nobody told me about
the new finding; absurd, say intelligence officials. The White House has
known about the finding for six months while Dick Cheney tried to suppress
the NIE finding.
The unasked question is: What is the real reason the Bush Regime
is determined to attack Iran? We now know for certain that it has nothing
whatsoever to do with Iranian nukes any more than the US invasion of Iraq
had to do with Iraq nukes. What is the real reason that is driving the Bush
Regime to seek to overthrow with military invasions the only Middle
Eastern states that are not US puppets or dependents?
Until we have the answer to this question, we cannot know why the
Bush regime wasted two administrations and $1 trillion at the minimum in
order to kill and maim civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bushs insane
wars have seen the US dollar plummet in value, the price of oil skyrocket,
Americas soft power destroyed, and the hardening of opposition to the US
worldwide.
What has been gained? How can American people and their
representatives in the two parties in Congress tolerate a criminal executive
branch that uses lies and deceit to lead them into illegal wars for secret
reasons? Surely, no one believes that Bush invaded Iraq because Saddam
Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, or that Bush and Cheney were
working up an attack on Iran because the executive branch did not know of
the intelligence findings of its own agencies.
And Bush has the Chutzpah to call on Iran to come clean about its
nuclear program or face diplomatic isolation. When is Bush going to come
clean and tell us the real agenda behind his lies, deceptions, and wars?

CONCLUSION

1088

The United States has apparently succeeded in crushing the resistance

to Iraqs occupation. Its ability to cause widespread death and destruction,
reinforced with deceit to wedge disunity in Sunnis, has been instrumental in
winning this victory. But it would not last for indefinite period as it lacked
involvement of hearts and souls of Iraqis.
Annapolis came and went; many more Annapolis would follow but
the peace would remain elusive. It would remain elusive because the main
stake-holders have been rendered irrelevant and condemned to continue
suffering. However, there has been one good thing that Arab rulers refused
to support Bushs plans against Iran;
17th February 2008

TOWARDS POLLS

1089

Ever since Musharraf announced his intention to hold general

elections the media and political observers have been clamouring about few
things. They expressed their apprehensions about the very holding of the
elections. And, they did not hide their suspicions about transparency and
fairness of the polls. Despite their apprehensions and suspicions, many
analysts indulged in predicting the results of the polls
With less than two weeks to go, holding of general elections
becoming almost a certainty, the suspicions about fairness of polls have
multiplied. The election commission has received the complaints in
hundreds and has done little to address them. Many of the complaints may
be pre-emptive in nature; yet, the setting seemed to be clearly favouring the
Kings party.
Predictions about the outcome of polls have become somewhat easier
as two major political parties enjoyed clear edge over others. The PPP was to
enter the contest riding high on sympathy wave and the PML-Q has
atmosphere more or less similar to home ground. And, there was little to
suggest any last minute electoral sway.

EVENTS
On 4th February, Kurd was again placed under house arrest for one
month. Musharraf reiterated that there was no way for the deposed judges to
return. In the Senate debate the caretaker minister said let bygones be
bygones. Achakzai asked Nawaz to differentiate between friends and foes.
Imran warned of civil war if rights were denied.
Next day, retired generals and soldiers created history by staging a
protest rally near GHQ. Participants chanted Go Musharraf Go slogans and
demanded his immediate resignation. PPP made political part of Benazirs
will public. Qazi asked COAS to pull out of NSC. Shujaat was optimistic
about Q League emerging as the largest party after polls. Pervaiz Elahi saw
no chance of polls rigging. Nawaz rejected the allegation that he was
following Benazirs agenda.
On 6th February, PML-N candidates for all assemblies were
administered oath by former Chief Justice Saeed-uz-Zamman Siddiqui that
they would adhere to party discipline after their election, play their role in

1090

restoring superior judiciary to November 2 position, purge 1973 Constitution

of all controversial amendments and work for abolishing political rule of
military. Pervaiz Elahi told the EC that this oath was a contempt of court.
SHC dismissed the suo moto case regarding May 12 carnage.
ANP Vice President Fazlur Rehman Atakhel was killed in Sohrab
Goth by unknown gunmen. APDM said boycott of polls is must for
independence of judiciary. The new law-givers of Pakistan, Malik Qayyum,
said NRO wont require validation by the Parliament. The Supreme Court
adjourned the hearing till last week of February. The PCO Supreme Court
dismissed the case against 499 Chak Shahzad farm owners, including
Musharraf and Shaukat Aziz.
On 7th February, Election Commission notified 64,176 polling stations
to reduce the possibility of ghost polling stations. US Embassy will train
election observers. Pervaiz Elahi urged that Sharif must take oath not to flee
the country. Vindictive MQM once again deported Imran Khan from their
city-kingdom. ANP accused the government of harbouring murderer of its
leader in Karachi.
On the occasion of Benazirs Chehlum Zardari vowed to take revenge
of her murder by winning elections and changing the system. Arrest of two
more suspects in murder of Benazir in Rawalpindi was termed a major
breakthrough. General Kayani approved the plan to pull armymen out of
civil bodies. Lawyers protested across the country.
On 8th February, Scotland Yard team handed over its report confirming
the findings of Interior Ministry, which were made public within couple of
days of the murder; BB did not die of bullet injury. The US was quick in
expressing its satisfaction over the findings of Scotland Yard team.
Aitzaz questioned the authenticity of the Scotland Yard report.
Rehman Malik reserved his comments. Sherry said the PPP wanted to reach
the mastermind. Nasirullah Babar claimed that Benazir had admitted her
mistake of trusting Musharraf. Advocate Abid Ali Shah of PPP said the West
and politicians were involved in her murder.
Nazims guard killed two PPP activists in Dadu. Election Commission
quietly expressed its inability to control nazims. Pervaiz Elahi hoped to win
115 NA seats from Punjab. He claimed that previous estimate of winning
110 seats was revised to increase in popularity of the party.

1091

Imran Khan said that the government was not allowing Scotland Yard
to visit Pakistan for a probe into May 12 carnage in which MQM leader
Altaf Hussain was involved. Nawaz Sharif claimed that he had rejected five
offers on reconciliation by Musharraf through his emissaries. Aitzaz was
surprised over Bhoons appointment as a judge.
On 9th February, 27 people were killed and more than 40 wounded in a
blast in election meeting of ANP near Charsadda. ANP accused MQM of
killing Akakhel in Karachi. Rockets were fired at EC Office in Awaran. The
government was satisfied with Scotland Yard report; Jehangir Badar blamed
the UK team for not digging out the facts.
Zardari warned rulers about the consequences of rigging; Pervaiz
Elahi promised to educate Baluchistan on Punjab-lines; and Shahbaz said
looters have to cough up the money. PBC announced total boycott of courts
till 18th February. Lawyers were beaten and arrested in Islamabad as they
tried to approach residence area of deposed judges. Justice Aslam took oath
as CJ of Islamabad High Court.
On 10th February, APDM leaders threatened civil disobedience. ANP
staged province-wide protests against Charsadda blast and Karzai expressed
his grief over the blast. Nawaz said the end of usurpers was drawing close.
Shujaat vowed to resolve Waziristan issue (just as he resolved the issue of
Bugti and Lal Masjid).
A suicide bomber attacked election rally of ANP on 11th February and
killed ten people including a party leader. Six APDM leaders were arrested
in Quetta. A rally was held in Islamabad in favour of Musharraf. General
Kayani recalled 152 army officers working in civil bodies to reduce army
interference in politics. Musharraf flanked by Ebad inaugurated Lyari
Express way for the pleasure of Altaf Bhai and his MQM and EC could do
nothing about it.
Zardari sounded diplomatic about working with Musharraf after polls.
Nawaz alleged massive rigging in polls and his party issued a fact sheet on
pre-poll rigging. Some lawyers appeared before the Supreme Court despite
PBCs boycott call. Bhoon was sworn in as judge.
On 12th February, Nawaz and Zardari met in Lahore to join forces to
save the country. Zardari vowed to hit back in case of rigging. Eight people,
including four journalists, were wounded in a blast in election offices of two

1092

candidates in Khuzdar on 12th February. APDM leaders urged masses to stay

away from polls. Mr Ghalatbiani issued White Paper on corruption of
Nawaz Sharif.
Ansar Abbasi reported that midnight operation to forcibly evict the
deposed CJP and his family was considered last week but was abandoned by
hawks like General Hamid Nawaz on advice from saner quarters. Lawyers
boycott continued but about fifty of them before the SC. Zardari met Aitzaz
Ahsan.
Additional IG CID addressed a press conference in Islamabad on 13 th
February to tell media the tale of Benazirs murder. The crux of the details
was the motive of the attacker; the revenge. Brother of one of the killers was
murdered during Lal Masjid operation and BB had admired this heinous act
of the Musharraf regime.
Pervaiz Elahi termed Zardari and Nawaz two sides of the same coin.
Zardari warned the would-be turncoats of dire consequences. Nawaz said
there would be law of jungle if deposed judges were not restored. Zardari
and Nawaz cant form next government, predicted Mr Ghalatbiani.
PPP decided not to challenge Scotland Yard report. Two persons were
killed in attack on a candidate in Swat on 13th February. An election office
was blown up in Mastung. SCBA decided to collect complete record of
lawyers attending the Supreme Court in order to take punitive action against
them.
On 14th February, Musharraf asked the foreign organizations not to
disturb Pakistans peace by conducting poll surveys. He was angry because
some surveys showed his popularity in constant decline. Memon said that
3,000 foreign observers had been issued visas. APDM termed all poll
contenders as Musharraf allies.
Maulana Fazl and his three brothers were contesting polls. Mushahid
also admitted mishandling of sensitive issues like Baluchistan and Lal
Masjid. The PCO Supreme Court issued detailed judgment on legitimizing
the emergency rule and promulgation of PCO. Lawyers boycott and protest
continued and tributes were paid to Justice Ramday.
On 15th February, the Supreme Court rejected review petition against
PCO verdict. US lawmakers asked Musharraf to hold fair polls or be

1093

prepared to face the consequences. Attorney General rejected HRW report

in which his voice was taped predicting massive rigging in polls.
Shujaat said his party would support Musharraf on Kashmir. Nawaz
promised to recover written off loans. General Kayani sought peoples help
for peaceful elections. Police arrested another suspect in Benazirs murder.
Jemima interviewed Musharraf for UK daily The Independent. APDM
decided to observe Black Day on 18th February.
In a press conference the journalists demanded that the government
and PBA should give statements giving reasons for banning appearance of
six journalists on their respective TV channels. Hamid Mir targeted
Musharraf and was quite bitter in expressing his views on his high-handed
approach.
On 16th February, 37 people were killed and about ninety wounded in
a suicide attack in Parachinar on the election office of a candidate backed by
PPP. Two polling stations were blown up in Bajaur. Six people were injured
in PPP rally near Shujaats house in Gujrat. APDM rally was thrashed and
tear gassed in Quetta. Attorney General served defamation notice on HRW.
PPP and PML-N agreed to support each other in NWFP.

VIEWS
General elections ought to have been the focus of attention during
the period. Various aspects of the elections were discussed during the period;
though these were repetitions of what had been said in last three months.
Some of these comments are reproduced in the succeeding paragraphs.
Saad Sayeed talked of election related hostility and violence. Much
has been made of the PML-Q advertisement excluding Sindhis from the
relief programme for victims of the post-Benazir violence. The Kings Party
has been accused of putting out an ethnic propaganda campaign in an
attempt to alienate the Sindhi population and secure a voter base in the
Punjab. Even members of the party based in Sindh have expressed shock
and stated that they are being excluded by the PML-Q. The Chaudhrys have
come in for considerable slack with many claiming that they are responsible
for the whole debacle. The PML-Q, for its part, has made the insufficient
excuse that it was not a deliberate manoeuvre but a simple mistake.

1094

Unfortunately, there are no simple mistakes in political world and a

country historically divided along ethnic lines. The first question, is why the
PML-Q chose to spell out the ethnic groups affected by the violence that
followed Benazir Bhuttos assassination and especially now, when the
ethnic card could truly trigger the fault lines that the country rests on.
So far, the act has not had any real repercussions, with the
populace showing much greater understanding than the politicians who
claim to represent them. but who knows when the volatile politics of
ethnicity might spark more hostility on the streets and highways.
The civil war raging in Balochistan is an example of historical
conflict tinged by ethnic representation Terrorism within Pakistans
borders is looked at as a Pashtun product with ideas associating the
population of the NWFP with Afghanistan being routinely promoted.
Even if the PML-Qs advertisement was a mistake, and this appears
to be highly doubtful, such errors can have fatal consequences. While
the populace are aware of the manipulative politicking that takes place
around them, the rioting that followed the assassination of Benazir Bhutto
demonstrated that there are others waiting to pounce on opportunities such
as this there is profit in chaos, after all. There are ethnic differences in
Pakistan and there are those who are compelled to point them out and even
call for violence The need to see through ideas such as ethnicity and sect
has never been greater. Divide and rule is an old policy lest we forget.
Zeena Satti wrote: Mere ban on mass rallies, without their
replacement by something of equivalent or better value, invites
suspicion of the public who attribute it to the governments inherently
authoritarian nature and its fear of open debate. If Musharrafs government
shows a dedicated commitment to the replacement of rallies by all inclusive,
government mandated, televised debates that are made available, through a
multiparty commitment of resources, in every halqa of the country, it will
mute all criticism and thwart all non-cooperation that is otherwise likely to
emerge against governments banning of mass rallies. If the government
pursues this task with sincerity, in addition to pre-empting terror attacks on
mass rallies, it will be alleviating the poverty of information amongst rural
communities while simultaneously increasing voters capacity for informed
decision making. Such a development is only likely to strengthen the forces
of participatory democracy as opposed to mere electoral democracy as

1095

opposed to mere electoral democracy. The former strengthens a society. The

latter is no more then a futile drain on its resources.
Kamila Hyat opined: The bomb explosions will almost certainly
bring down the turn-out for the polls. The sense of fear that now runs
through society is after all a powerful force. This factor in turn reflects on
the electoral results, given that the PPP stands out to benefit most from a
larger number of people casting ballots.
Ahmad Bilal of PILDAT in his interview to Nadeem Iqbal
apprehended that polls wont be fair. In reply to a question about methods
being employed by political parties which amount to pre-poll rigging Bilal
said: I will not attribute that to any single party. This is a collective situation
of our society and of the various arms of the Executive. The society as a
whole is responsible and it is going to bear the brunt if the elections are not
free and fair. The factors we have identified include the neutrality of the
head of the state he being the symbol of the federation.
Unfortunately, that is not the case. The president has openly sided
with one political party or a group of parties that were part of the
previous coalition government. At least on one occasion, in a public
meeting, he reportedly asked the people to vote for the parties that support
him. So, in a way, he was campaigning for the political groups at the
expense of the state.
The caretaker government is also not neutral. Then, the judiciary
is not independent. Since the proclamation of the so-called Emergency, the
judiciary has been purged of around 60 independent judges. This created
fears among the rest of the judges that they could be treated the same way.
The message that has gone out to the judges is that if they act the way Chief
Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry did, their fate will be similar to his. The message
for the CEC is that he can also be removed the same way.
The state-run media which is supposed to act even-handed and
give equal time to all the players is not doing so. The private media has
been put under certain known as well as unknown restrictions. Similarly, as
per law, the local government cannot take sides. But they are biased as most
of the election staff comes from the local government. All these factors point
in the direction that the polls will not be fair.

1096

Kamal Siddiqi opined: If our presidents proclamations are anything

to go by, the elections would be possibly the most free and fair polls held in
the history of the country. But on-ground realities tell us a different tale. It
is a tale of contradictions and false assumptions. We have now been over
run by international election observers and journalists all out here to cover
the elections. Many have termed them the do or die elections of Pakistan.
Nothing could be further from the truth despite the fact that the government
wants many to believe this for its own reasons.
It is amusing to see that some top government officials are quick to
dismiss the local media as putting out speculative and false stories about
Pakistan. At the same time, they fall over each other to grant exclusive
interviews to foreign journalists and are happy to give sound-bites that cause
immense damage to Pakistan by showing them in a prominent light. Nothing
is ever said about them or action initiated against them for damaging the
national interest
Who will tell our eagle-eyed election observers that the days of
stuffing the ballot box are over? The elections that will be held shortly
have already been stolen for most parts. For one, the composition of the
caretaker government both in the centre and in the provinces should give us
an idea of the impartiality, or lack of it, in the government. Coalition allies of
the government, from the PML-Q and other parties, are also ministers in the
caretaker governments. Where is the neutrality?
Transfers and postings have happened despite the ban imposed
by the Election Commission. Opposition parties have complained that the
Election Commission has ignored most of their complaints. The role of EC
is under question. How can we expect transparency?
The only thing transparent about the elections, possibly are, the
ballot boxes imported from China and the great expense to the tax payer.
There is controversy about the electoral lists, about the identity cards and
also the manner in which the initial results will be posted, or not.
The manner in which some candidates are being allowed to flout
rules is also indicative. The PML-Q got away with a slight slap on the wrist
over its smear campaign against opposition parties despite the clear
instructions of the EC. Need one say more?

1097

The million dollar question, of course, would be who would be the

next PM of Pakistan. In all honesty, does it matter? Someone else would be
calling the shots. More important is how the mainstream political parties will
fare in the elections. How widespread would the adjustments be to deny
some parties power? And how would these parties then react? In the larger
picture, denying the mainstream parties like the PPP and the PML-N
their due share in parliament would be a victory for the militants not for
Pakistan. Their hand will become stronger and we will end up with the
same dubious government that we had prior to the elections.
The News wrote: The call made by the EU, in a statement issued
Wednesday, for the creation of an environment conducive to free and fair
elections is an important one. It coincides with comments made by US
Secretary of State These comments, from two different quarters, act as a
reminder of the apprehensions and fears that still hang over polls.
At present, as the EU has indicated, conditions are far from ideal.
Complaints of rigging continue to come in from parties who oppose the
former ruling party, the PML-Q. Key figures, including Aitzaz Ahsan,
detained and restrictions on the media persist It can only be hoped that
those running the affairs of the country are aware of the risks that
would be posed by any attempt to intervene in the electoral process or
distort the verdict of the people.
Kamila Hyat cautioned: At present, with the shivers of uncertainty
continuing through the nations collective spine, the elections scheduled just
days ahead offer the first possibility of calm after months of storm. But the
omens lurking over this poll mean that, eventually, things may not go
quite according to the script written out by those who still hold on to
power. And as such, efforts to tamper with the outcome of the polls can
bring only greater turbulence and a tempest that cannot easily or quickly be
quietened.
Shahzada Irfan Ahmed talked of incompetent ECP. Large scale
postings, appointments and transfers of government servants have been
observed in different parts of the country despite Election Commissions
strict orders in this respect. To date the commission has received 128
complaints regarding transfers of civil servants after Nov 20, 2007 the day
the election schedule was announced.

1098

The complaints have been mainly filed by different political parties

who claim these transfers have been made to benefit certain political
partys candidates in the upcoming elections. Though all postings and
transfers made at this moment can be subjected to criticism, these parties are
most concerned about those made in the police and education departments
and local governments. While the police and governments have a great role
in defining the course of local politics, the education department employees
are assigned election duties on the polling day.
In this backdrop, the notice issued by the CEC Justice Qazi
Muhammad Farooq to Inspector General of Police Sindh, came as a pleasant
surprise. He simply directed the IGP to submit a report to the Election
Commission on transfers of police personnel immediately and reverse the
recent transfers and postings. The Sindh government had taken plea that
these large scale transfers had failed to stop violence that erupted
immediately after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Dec 27, 2007.
The News wrote: The comments made by the secretary of the
Election Commission of Pakistan regarding its helplessness in dealing with
rigging by district nazims are hardly reassuring. This is particularly so as
complaints have poured in from across Punjab and also other provinces of
activities by nazims that are obviously intended to favour candidates of the
former ruling party, the PML-Q.
In its own defence, the EC has said that even where video-taped
evidence against nazims exists, this will carry less weight than the reports
from district returning officers (DROs). Commenting on the current
situation, it has said DROs have dismissed complaints about the role of
nazims. The EC secretary also cited a case from the 2002 polls, when it had
ordered a re-poll in a Sindh constituency following widespread rigging
complaints. However the Sindh High Court, after receiving an account from
the DRO, over-turned the CEC decision.
The EC has also confessed it knows little about the confusion over
postal ballots. Recent press reports had stated that while 80,000 postal
ballots, most from prisoners, had been received, jail superintendents denied
any role in initiating this process. The EC has said it is looking into the
matter. With only days to go before polls, there is obviously little time to do
so.

1099

The implication of these comments by a senior EC official is that the

body which is entrusted with all responsibility to conduct fair and free polls,
particularly after the COASs clear-cut warning that the army will take no
part in this, lacks power to ensure the process is transparent. This would
seem to confirm as at least partially accurate the many apprehensions
expressed in this regard by opposition parties, who have stated that
malpractices of all kinds are taking place
Over the past years, it has become obvious that rigging that takes
place before polls often plays a crucial role in determining the final result.
Monitors who observe polling stations on the day of balloting itself thus gain
only a limited perspective on the whole exercise, especially since they
cannot visit far-flung rural areas where many of the problems occur. This has
already been pointed out by independent organizations within the country
that have followed elections over many years. For these reasons, it is crucial
that the EC immediately move into top gear and ensure it fully plays the role
assigned to it by guaranteeing an even playing field for all contestants in the
forthcoming polls.
Mustafa Nazir Ahmad commented on caretakers role in the polls.
The impartiality of the caretakers is before everyone to see and analyze, as
their balance is tilted heavily in the favour of those political parties that
are supportive of President Gen Pervez Musharraf and his policies. So,
to say the least, the caretakers themselves pose the most serious challenge to
what is their primary responsibility: the holding of free and fair elections.
What has been handed down to the nation in the form of caretaker
governments can, at best, be termed a hotchpotch of political leaders who
lack credibility, mainly representing the outgoing ruling party (PML-Q) and
its allies (MQM, PPP-P, PML-F, NPP and PPP-S, to name few).
Starting from caretaker Prime Minister Mohammedmian Soomro to
the last rung of the ladder, there are few names that can even narrowly be
defined as impartial in essence, capable of ensuring that free and fair
elections are held on Feb 18. Even those caretakers who may appear to be
gentlemen or gentlewomen otherwise are found lacking as far as their
primary responsibility is concerned
A look at the caretaker federal cabinet, which comprises 28
ministers, gives you a fair idea of what is in store for the nation in the
forthcoming general elections. It is no secret that Mohammedmian Soomro
1100

is affiliated with the PML-Q and is a staunch supporter of Musharraf, who

appointed him first as the governor of Sindh and later helped his election as
the chairperson of the Senate. For all the favours Musharraf has been dolling
out to Soomro, it makes perfect sense to expect the latter to oblige those
whom the former wants to win the elections.
As if this is not enough, Soomros sister Maliha Malik and nephew
Fahad Malik are contesting the elections from the platform of the Kings
Party and he is extending full support to them as well as other candidates
fielded by the PML-Q by using his position as the prime minister.
The situation at the provincial level is even bleaker. Not only are
most of the provincial caretaker ministers related to some contestant, the
caretaker chief ministers are also controversial on one account or the other
The composition of caretaker governments at the provincial level varies,
with Sindh and the NWFP emerging is the most controversial ones.
Aoun Shahi made his observations on rigging and manipulation
through nazims. In Punjab and Sindh, an overwhelming majority of
nazims is politically affiliated with PML-Q and its allies. In Punjab, 34
out of 35 district nazims belong to PML-Q while in Sindh just two district
nazims are PPP-prone and the rest have associations with PML-Q, PML-F or
MQM.
For most political parties, their role is even more important than
that of the caretaker ministers. It is practically the nazims who have been
running the affairs of the local areas since 2005, while many of them are
serving their second term which means that they have been in power for the
past eight years. The nazims have famously enjoyed influence on the
government machinery for the sake of their party interests.
In all districts, the local governments are famously using their
resources to support the PML-Q candidates, he tells TNS, adding that the
close relatives of a majority of these nazims are contesting elections
from the platform of PML-Q, and the nazims have been announcing
development projects, using police to harass their opponents and also
pressuring the government employees to vote for PML-Q candidates.
Ahsan says that all these acts of district and tehsil nazims are a
violation of election code of conduct as well as the Constitution of Pakistan.
This is rigging, put in other words. We have sent complaints to the Election

1101

Commission of Pakistan repeatedly against these district and tehsil nazims

but to no avail. So far not a single nazim has been suspended on charges of
involvement in the electioneering process. According to the data offered
up to 100 complaints against the district, tehsil and town nazims
allegedly involved in running election campaigns for the candidates of
PML-Q, PML-F and MQM in their official status.
Nafisa Shah, PPP candidate on a reserved seat of NA, feared rigging
at gunpoint. The current regime of President Pervez Musharraf is now an
old hand at rigging elections. It rigged his referendum, it rigged the 2002
elections, it rigged the 2005 local government elections and he rigged his
presidential election of 2007 by dismissing the judiciary and the chief
justice. It has already set the stage for rigging the 2008 elections.
Musharrafs visit to Europe must be seen in this context. The
same old rhetoric, of bringing the essence of democracy, is his refrain. But
by ticking off the West and telling them that our democracy cannot be like
theirs, and by posturing that he is the final arbiter on defining and
circumscribing democracy is, he not making very obvious, this intention for
manipulating elections?
If one is to see elections as a process and not a one day event, then, it
is quite evident that elections 2008 are neither free nor fair. Keeping the
2005 experience before me, it is quite likely that, all things being equal,
technique, power and violence, will be used by remnants of the last
government parties in these elections. But to what extent, would depend on
how much the intelligence agencies want to arbiter elections in favour of the
last government parties
The overseeing of election process is the responsibility of caretaker
government, and the nazims, and both of them are supporting the former
government candidates. A large number of caretakers, and nazims, have
fielded their brothers, uncles, cousins, sisters and nephews, and all
manner of kinship, as candidates. The prime example is the caretaker
prime minister whose sister is contesting in Jacobabad where his mother is
the sitting nazim...
The caretaker government sides with the former government parties,
which is quite likely, and their candidates are given a free hand to rig, then
on the election day, vote theft is likely to take place at gunpoint.
Violence, or the ability to use force, will be a central tool in the elections.
1102

As campaigns build up, arms and private guards are being used
as a campaign strategy. Candidates are carrying private guards, grandly
displaying weapons, using sirens, firing their election campaigns and
threatening each other It will be the political opposition; especially those
most likely to threaten the status quo that will be at the receiving end of
violence.
The display of private force is reinforced by the development of
organized militant outfits, and crime that is patronized by the local elite. A
larger number of candidates display arms to deter the other side from using
violence. Arms and limitless ammunition is ordinarily available, and a slight
conflict leads to firing.
It is imperative to note that violence may be a key strategy by those
who want to steal vote taking votes not only be farce but by force. The
responsibility of ensuring the safety and security of both candidates and
voters must be the prime responsibility of the caretaker government. But
because the caretaker government is clearly partisan, this seems unlikely.
The election day will be made lawless deliberately, and this will of course
favour the government backed parties. It will keep the real voter away and
the police and the criminals will jointly take over some polling stations.
Hence, we are possibly going to witness rigging at gunpoint this time round.
Nasim Zehra was of the view that Pakistanis go in to cast their vote
the eighth time since the 1970 elections in an unusually challenging context.
Let us document it for posterity. One, the security environment has
perhaps never been worse. Pakistan is now struggling with the spreading
phenomenon which was once unknown to us; the suicide bombing
phenomenon which essentially stands the paradigm of security on its head.
Two, the country has never been so polarized before. We are
polarized along ethnic and regional lines, along the lines of the have and
have-nots, along ideological lines. These are grey zones of our multiple
identities these are shifting identities and sharpen according to the changing
socio-political context
Three, the Centres relations with the smaller provinces have
never been so strained and laced with violence before. The post-Bugti
Balochistan may have less violence, but that is misreading. Balochistan still
remains alienated from the Centre and Baloch leaders and activists still seek
justice
1103

Four, the trust level between the State and the people has never
been at such a low. Ranging from the tribal areas to the policy with the
United States, from the assassination of Benazir Bhutto to the economic
situation, from the fair conduct of elections to the back room dealing with
the politicians, from the growing problem of terrorism to the impending
threats to politicians seem to buy into the governments information
Five, the widespread public criticism of the armys invasion of the
non-constitutionally-mandated space and positions in running the affairs of
the State has never been greater. Some of this is now changing as the new
chief begins to try and wean away the army from some of the zones it had
unconstitutionally occupied.
Six, the playing field for these elections is less than level. The
caretaker government has card-carrying member of the contesting party, the
PML-Q, the Nazims who control the local administration have relatives
contesting the elections, yet the power of Nazims for at least a fortnight
before the election period were not suspended, the IB chiefs brother who
wields the mighty machine of the Intelligence Bureau is contesting the
elections.
Seven, the institutional weakness of the EC and its near-inability
to implement its constitutional mandate has never been so obvious.
Admittedly, some glitches to make the process somewhat fairer were
removed including making the election rolls less controversial, and
transparent, the documentation of all the countrys polling stations to rule
out the ghost polls phenomenon and the submission to the party polling
agents of signed result sheets by the presiding officer to reduce vote
tempering
Eight, the institutional battles have never been so fierce and
unrelenting. The year 2007 witnessed the battles between the judiciary and
the presidency Pakistan needs to settle the crucial matter of an
independent judiciary if we must move ahead as a progressive and
contemporary state.
Nine, the elections have never been held under the watch of a
president who has wielded state power in violation of the spirit of the
Constitution. President Musharraf is not only a legally controversial
president, but with all the pluses of his tenure today he is unfortunately
viewed by many as part of Pakistans problems, not its solution. He is no
1104

less a partisan president banking on the PML-Q victory primarily for his
survival.
Ten, the call for the boycott of elections has never been so
coherent, coordinated and audible, despite being restricted to smaller
political parties and the lawyers community. There are thousands and
thousands of voters who will not vote because of this boycott call. Those
calling for boycott recall many of the points underscore the futility of
participating in the elections. They argue the outcome is predetermined.
I conducted a poll asking about 200 educated citizens if they would
vote Here are some of the responses The criticisms are valid, but
inaction is not. With the vigilant media present, with party workers active,
with observers group in place and with a relative better electoral system in
place it is impossible to avert mass rigging. The media will indeed be the
eyes and ears of the public; it will keep a sharp check at the polling booths.
Massive rigging will not be easy to hide. What is indeed needed is also the
energy of the voter to serve as a deterrent against rigging. Voters must go
out. We must vote. Some of our refusal to vote may be self-serving, it
legitimizes our inaction our indifference and our lethargy. It is time we walk
and talk.
Our vote is the only lever of change we have in our hands. A
revolution is not around the corner that will change our state of affairs,
neither a perfect messiah arriving for our deliverance. Those of us who are
here and who care, which means all of us, must go and strengthen the
democratic system by voting. That is the first crucial step to start the birth
of a new Pakistan where the Constitution and rule of law will reign supreme,
no individuals and no institutions. Already since March 9 those who
destroyed the judiciary are greatly weakened and discredited.
Casting our vote is a first necessary step in a system which is full of
problems, yet for now this is what we have. This is an interim step in a
transition stage. We believe there can be no genuine democracy with a
destroyed judiciary, so lets take this step in the spirit that this will take us
closer to our final objective. We are only inching ahead maybe and that too
in a very treacherous environment, but we must. Pakistan needs us to stand
up and be counted. Just sitting around and criticizing will not do.
Boycotting, unless in complete unison by all political parties, too is not a
potent tool. We must use the lever which is in our control let us vote.

1105

Imtiaz Alam indulged in electoral arithmetic. In a latest survey,

conducted during January 19-29, 70 percent of respondents want Musharraf
to quit as support to PML-Q plums down to 12 percent, as opposed to 36.7
percent supporting the PPP and 25.3 percent opting for the PML-N.
Although the 62 percent supporting the moderate block of PPP-PML-N may
indicate a two-thirds majority for the democratic opposition, the electoral
arithmetic may not turn out to be as simple. What are the prospects of the
various parties?
If 70 percent want Musharraf to quit and 62 percent accuse the
agencies and parties aligned with the president of complicity in Ms Bhuttos
assassination, the support for the Taliban and al-Qaeda has reduced by half.
A vote against Musharraf and Taliban-al-Qaeda and overwhelmingly
favouring the moderate-democrats is quite stunning in many ways.
Not even one-third of PML-Q candidates are firm in their
allegiance to the party or the Chaudhrys of Gujrat, and most of them are
contesting the elections on their own and, of course, with the backing of the
administration. Most of them avoid inviting the party leadership from fear of
losing votes in their constituencies. The more promising among them are
abandoning the party symbol and are free not to go along with their
provincial mates.
The PML-Qs expected rout in Punjab is in fact written by the
PML led by Mian Nawaz Sharif, besides the PPPs revival and a sympathy
wave for Ms Bhutto. The main focus of Mr Sharifs campaign in Punjab has
been to oust the Q faction and retrieve his space hijacked in his absence by
the kings party mainly constituted by defectors from his own
organization
Now as the traditional League votes are divided into two factions,
and if the PPP votes remain at its historical average of 38-40, not counting
the Benazir-sympathy factor, and the PML-N wins 25-30 percent of the vote,
the PPP, with a huge margin of 13-15 percent, could sweep almost all
those seats in Punjab where the PML-Q and the PML-N are likely to
divide their 38-49 percent combined votes. Wherever a PML-Q or PML-N
candidate stands third with 15,000-25,000 votes, the PPP candidate will have
an easy win. A 5-10 percent swing in voting pattern in Punjab can sweep the
polls from one end to the other in terms of seats.

1106

If the PPP leads its major challenger by 10-15 percent votes in

Punjab, then in terms of seat it can set a new record in its electoral history.
Out of 150 seats in Punjab, with a 10-15 percent edge in votes, the PPP
can easily win 20-30 percent more seats than its immediate rival, and
most seats where tough triangular fights are taking place
The overall picture tends to give the PPP an overwhelming edge
over its major rival, the PML-Q, at the national level. The democratic
parties together can garner a two-thirds majority in the next parliament, if
the elections are free and fair on Feb 18. And if they are selectively rigged,
even then a comfortable majority cannot be taken away from the democratic
opposition. A hung parliament can only be the product of mass rigging
The turnout will not be low as being predicted, if the PPP and the
PML-N manage well on Feb 18 and bring out their voters. The
competitiveness in a three-way contest should kick it up. My guess is that it
will be over 60 percent in the rural areas and should not go below 40 percent
in the cities. The higher the turnout, the greater the possibility of the
oppositions victory. The election may turnout to be a referendum against the
Musharraf regime. The transition must bring democracy, if it is to be
meaningful. Any attempt to disrupt it would cause a colossal loss.
Nosheen Saeed, PML-Q candidate, expressed her partys viewpoint.
Elections 2008 are a defining moment in the history of Pakistan; its a
chance to either transform the country into a strong, stable and democratic
Pakistan or push it towards further uncertainty, mayhem and derailment
The election is largely shaping up to be a three-way fight for the
right to form the next government, with parties of Sharif and Bhutto battling
the PML-Q. The latter appeared as a powerful contestant dividing their votes
which perhaps remains the motive behind their mud-slinging simply
ignoring the skeletons that exist in their closet However, even the critics
of PML-Q agree that the women and majority issues, education, political
victimization, sectarian violence, promoting a democratic culture our track
record is comparatively better than both the PPP and the PML-Q.
Political analysts have predicted a hung parliament which seems
likely but will the result be accepted by the drum-beaters of thumping
majority. Though PPP is banking on sympathy vote what they fail to realize
is that political ideology doesnt change overnight. A jiyala will seldom shift
his loyalties to the PML and vice versa.
1107

Secondly, Zardari is not as popular with the masses as Benazir was. If

the PPP does not achieve a clear majority in the coming elections it should
be prepared to either coalesce with another party to form a government or sit
in the opposition with sincerity and not repeat the past mistake of not
accepting majority rule as it did after the 1970 elections. Its okay to blow
your own horn, just dont try to be the whole orchestra.
Ayaz Amir viewed it differently. The Q League was heading into
these elections on the assumption that an all-powerful, still-clad-inuniform president would look after their interests and see to it that it did
well at the polls. These assumptions have come unstuck largely because the
emperor is now without his military clothes.
Sure, the caretaker governments are extensions of the Q League.
The district nazims, still armed with a lot of nuisance value, are out helping
their kith and kin. But the public mood is against anything identified with
the last eight years, which leaves the Q League in a very vulnerable position.
Anyone still thinking it will do well at the polls is living in an isolated
world.
But whatever anyones assessment of the likely election results, the
aftermath of the elections remains clouded with uncertainty because
given the weakness of our constitutional structures, and given also the
ambitions of those at the helm, we cant be too sure how all the pieces will
fall in place...
The agreement the Americans had laboured so hard to broker
between Benazir Bhutto and Musharraf envisaged both coming together in a
broad, liberal coalition that, having greater political legitimacy, would be
better able to fight the war on terror. Is that agreement still in place, and is
Zardari still faithful to it, or has it been overtaken by events? Again, we
dont know for sure.
What we can be sure about is that Zardari hobnobbing with
Musharraf after the elections will really be the cake, proving perhaps once
for all the definitive bankruptcy of the Pakistani political class. Zardari
would like us to believe that he has come of age as a politician. We shall
have to wait and see because although he has been very sensible about so
many things after his wifes assassination his real test will come after the
elections

1108

Most pundits are writing these elections off as an exercise in

irrelevance. But what other avenue leading to some kind of change do we
have? Ours is a weak and feckless political class our political environment is
not conducive to the spread of radical ideas. The only choice on offer is a
soft alternative.
Meanwhile, we can also aim at some things. Our political milieu
would be the better for developing some sturdier political principles that
those we have lived by all these years. Our politicians are too used to
standing in line and kowtowing to authority, no matter what the nature of
that authority. This has probably something to do with our history. Punjab is
the leading element in our national life and the Punjab, except for the brief
intermission of the kingdom founded by Maharaja Ranjit Singh, was never
called upon to play a leadership role. Now that history has thrust this task
upon it, the Punjabi political class is just not up to it.
So from where do we get the administrators and political
managers that Pakistan needs? There are no ready answers to this
question. Our great poets, some of them in words never be forgotten, have
raged against darkness and injustice. Where the Pakistani political class has
produced collaborators, it has also produced dissidents. Our lawyers and, for
the first time in our history, judges have raised the banner of revolt against
unconstitutional authority. Their struggle, which has not been without its
glorious moments, continues. If only our political leadership could rise to
the level of our poets.
The News commented on the possible impact of opinion polls and
large turnout on election results. Three back-to-back opinion polls
conducted by neutral and independent organizations have not brought any
good news for President Pervez Musharraf or his political allies nor do they
encourage the Taliban and their supporters inside Pakistan. In one poll, that
of US-based International Republican Institute (IRI), 75 percent of
Pakistanis want Mr Musharraf to quit and give him only 15 percent approval
rating. Another poll by Gallup Pakistan puts the number of people who think
Mr Musharraf should resign at 81 percent.
The polls found that PPP had between 36.7 (TFT) to 50 percent (IRI)
support while 25.3 percent favour the PML-N. This data will act as a major
boost for these parties ahead of the polls. In contrast, the pro-government
PML-Q found favour with just 12 per cent (TFT) and 14 percent (IRI). The
survey results then obviously deviate from the PML-Qs own optimistic
1109

forecasts of a sweeping success and indicate that the results of a fair and
free poll in the country may not quite conform to the script written out by
the leaders of the party.
There is, however, another factor in all this. The PPP and the PMLN obviously stand to benefit from a large voter turnout on February 18.
Various analyses have suggested that persuading the silent majority to visit
polling booths, and to bring back to its camp disgruntled voters who have
abstained from polling in the last few polls, is what would most benefit the
PPP. Yet the continuing series of suicide attacks appears to be aimed at
preventing just such a turnout. Fears of terrorism have already resulted in a
decline in the number of people visiting public places, and similar
apprehensions may well keep them away from the melee of polling stations.
Kamila Hyat wrote about the purpose of polls. The mood then is
quite contrary to what would be expected weeks ahead of a general
election. Campaigning has remained limited, with government advice
against the conduct of mass rallies and dire warnings that the interior
ministry says extends to all leaders acting as further damper With streams
of mourners still reaching her (Benazir) grave in the village, most observers
in Sindh harbour few doubts that across the province an immensely
emotional sympathy vote will be cast for her party.
The question, though, is what validity, what purpose, these ballots, or
those cast by people in other provinces, will have. The talk of national
governments, before or after the polls, leaves doubts as to whether elections
will even go ahead. Even greater doubt, of course, exists as to whether
they will be transparent or impartial. The fact that so much of the state
apparatus in many places continues to be used for favoured candidates adds
to these concerns.
The primary point is that balloting alone solves nothing. The
uncertainties lingering over even this means that turnout may be low, interest
lacking. Security concerns add to these apprehensions. Without an electoral
process that fully involves people and without the confidence that their
verdict will be respected both in the conduct of the polls and in the setting
up of a government after it is completed, the election can have little
meaning. This is unfortunate, because only the conduct of an unbiased, just
democratic process can now help the country move towards a resolution of
its problems. If even the process is abandoned, for the sake of self-interest
and the consolidation of power, the faint light still visible at the end of the
1110

tunnel of difficulties that must in the future be circumvented, will grow even
dimmer and even more distant.
M B Naqvi mentioned election-related paradoxes. True, many
leaders are mealy-mouthed and less than audible in demanding
restoration of pre-Nov 3, 2007 judges and the ethos they had created. It is
puzzling why leaders of democracy-chanting parties do not welcome the
new leaders thrown up by the lawyers movement. Why should Aitzaz
Ahsan, Munir A Malik and others be ignored and politicians of indifferent
quality continue to boss over parties? Real leaders have been thrown up and
have evoked genuine popular support; they should be in the centre of
leadership of all parties.
The biggest paradox is that no major political party is talking of an
actual programme through which they want to serve the people. Have they
ascertained the main problems concerning the people? Who does not know
the unvarying problems concerning disparities of income and opportunity?
There is much talk of poverty
General rhetoric about serving the people or doing airy fairy
things that is neither here nor there. It is time that precise promises are
made and kept. One is aware of what the mandarins and their bosses will
say: the Pakistan is too poor to do that. But Pakistan is rich enough to
splurge in expenditures that are not really necessary and do nothing
important to ensure that people have two square meals a day plus something
for their children.
Pakistan has plenty of other problems. While talking of democracy,
everybody knows the basic problem: It is to ensure that the military does
remain out of politics and General Ashfaq Kayani must be enabled to keep
his troops under strict professional control and devoted to the job for which
an army is created: the defence of the realm and not to rule. And Gen Ashfaq
Kayani himself has to be kept to the promises he is making that he
would remain out of politics.
The other aspect of democracy that has to be implemented is that we
cannot now have the same sort of governments that Ayub, Yahya, Zia and
Musharraf had. We need a more real federation in which primacy goes to
states and further down to what are district governments and union
councils More autonomy to provinces will not hurt or harm Punjab. The
same rights and privileges will be available to the people of Punjab, though
1111

some dilution is necessary in the advantage of overwhelming representation

in the civil and military services.
In an earlier article Mr Naqvi had talked about the need for new
leadership and tasks ahead of it. It became blindingly clear, especially
during the endeavour of lawyers, judges, journalists and civil society that
what Pakistan needs is a new and more adequate leadership. The new
leadership did emerge but the old leaders in opposition parties did not accept
it. Indeed, these fine individuals were hounded out, sacked and put in
indefinite incarceration. The very first task for the opposition parties should
be, in 2008, to acknowledge this new and authentic leadership.
The new leadership has to be allowed its due place and unless the
nation accepts this new leadership that has so strongly and clearly emerged
and gives its due place in major political parties, Pakistanis shall risk the
continued all round stultification. What is needed is a new social contract
that would involve ridding the 1973 Constitution of the anomalies that
various dictators have heaped on it, or writing a new constitution might be
an even better idea, provided the stakeholders stay united. Fear of opening
old debates is now no longer adequate. That opens even bigger debates. One
reason for it is that the 1973 Constitution envisages only an amended
structure of governance given by the Government of India Act of 1935; it is
wholly outdated, conceived as it was by the colonial masters.
An early election impends. That many think it will again be
postponed and many others fear that it will be rigged can only be noted here.
But the powers that be have to remember that an unfree election can cause
much more damage; fixing or again postponing it had better be avoided.
Pakistan is already in a bad shape and there are widespread fears of the
incipient civil war spreading, implosion and economic meltdown. All these
should not be dismissed as negative. The fears are real and are entertained
by patriots. Why create other and potent causes for more trouble?
Shafqat Mahmood explored prospects of change due to forthcoming
elections. Pakistan confronts today three major challenges that
combined have assumed the dimension of a crisis. At the core is the political
challenge that stems from the determination of Mr Pervez Musharraf to hang
on to power, by whatever means possible, despite his deep unpopularity
among the people. To ensure this, he has emasculated the constitution,
destroyed the judiciary, and fractured the main national political forces in the
country.
1112

Destroying political parties has consequences because of having

support in all the provinces they guarantee national unity. Making them
weaker; amounts to making the nation weak. Mr Musharraf has
assiduously pursued this task heedless of the consequences.
He has also not cared for the reputation of the institution that has
nurtured him and given him this pre-eminence. By relying on the strength
of the army for many of his precipitate actions, such as the November 3
martial law, he has cast a dark shadow over this important national
institution.
General Kayani has taken important steps to rehabilitate the
image of the army but it will take a lot of doing and much effort. By
prohibiting the military officers from interacting with politicians, he has
signaled his intent to remove the army from the political sphere. By slowly
withdrawing serving officers from civilian jobs, he has also tried to defuse
criticism that military is taking over every important government. These are
necessary first steps and laudable but much more will have to be done before
the damage is fully repaired
The security challenge comes from the extremists who are waging
an open warfare against the state in the tribal areas and adjoining districts
of the NWFP. They have also demonstrated a capacity to wage suicide terror
attacks in major cities of the country thus creating deep insecurity among the
people. The army seems to have drawn a line, since General Kayani took
over, and is taking the terrorists head on, but no sooner is one problem
solved that another erupts
The next month in which elections are due is crucial, because the
results of the polls will determine whether a smooth transition takes place or
instability grows Only a miracle can ensure a fair election and a
smooth transition afterwards. The election will probably be peaceful
because the army will be deployed to help to maintain order, but will they be
fair. This is the responsibility of the Election Commission and not of the
army as has been made clear by its leadership. Does the commission have
the wherewithal to ensure this?
Ayaz Amir observed that the reality of power has undergone a
fundamental shift. In the lexicon of the military saviour elections make
sense only if they lead to predetermined outcomes. Elections in 2002 were
conducted much as those calling the shots wanted them to be. But 2008 is
1113

not 2002. Much water was flowed down the Indus and options on the
Pakistani political scene have shrunk. While appearances may suggest
otherwise, the reality of power has undergone a fundamental shift.
Even if someone wants to rig the coming elections, the power to do
so comprehensively, minus the armys decisive input, is no longer available.
In 2002 corps commanders kept a close watch on the elections. Bright young
officers from the intelligence agencies were spread all over the country. In
many a key constituency with their gift for higher mathematics they
made a difference
Pity the powers-that-be who despite wanting the moon have it no
longer in their power to repeat the performance enacted in 2002. The sands
have shifted, leaving them vulnerable to the change of seasons. To be sure,
there are still rigging enthusiasts around, the kind of folk for whom an
election without rigging is like meat without salt and pepper. But these
champions are on their own, left to their own civilian devices.
The corps commanders wont be backing them and although, spooks
being spooks, intelligence operatives will still keep an eye on the
elections, the dynamic intervention we saw last time will sadly be missing
on this occasion. The new dispensation in the army is not interested in
queering the pitch for someone else, or pulling someone elses chestnuts out
of the fire. This is a story line as old as the hills. Power is loyal only to itself,
serving only those who possess its magic lamp
Musharraf stuck to his uniform for so long for the same reason:
because he could brook no competitor in General Headquarters. His
justification for remaining army chief was a marvel of sophistry. He said his
uniform was his second skin and how could anyone discard that? He forgot
that snakes shed their skin all the time and are not any weaker for that.
He was not imaginative enough and perhaps was too slow of foot, neither
able to move with the times nor reinvent himself. No wonder events
outstripped him
The Q League is a victim of association. While it was only a front
for the policies of the Musharraf regime, it has become a target of public
anger. Just as the Convention League got blamed for the failures and follies
of the Ayub regime, the Q League has come to symbolize someone elses
failures.

1114

So pundits and political weather gurus are doing no service to the

nation when they say, day in and day out, that everything is in place for
fixing the election results. The process we are in is a flawed and tainted,
no doubt about it. But it is a chance to begin a new journey the people of
Pakistan are getting after eight years and four months. The journey promises
to be long and arduous and the promised kingdom, lets not kid ourselves, is
nowhere in sight. But at least begin it.
The best antidote to rigging, actual or intended, is voter turnout, the
greater the better. So please an end to moaning and whining. On Feb 18 just
get out to vote, if for no other reason than to keep the ghosts of rigging at
bay The only power we have is the power of the ballot. So even if there
are a hundred thousand objections regarding the conduct of these polls, use
this power and, caveats notwithstanding, it will make a difference.
In another article Ayaz Amir wrote: Two questions loom. Can these
elections bring about a change in the present setup in Islamabad? If yes,
thats a huge step forward. If not, what are these elections worth? And, as a
result of these elections, can we see a situation emerging where we stop
taking orders from foreign patrons and stop bleeding ourselves on our
western frontier? If not, then what is all the fuss about?
The Americans have a simple aim: broadening Musharrafs
support base by getting major political parties to support him, so that the
war on terror has greater legitimacy. Everyone understands that the Q
League is a liability. And no one is dumb enough to seriously consider
Pervaiz Elahi as Pakistans next prime minister. The Americans want other
political players to tag along with Musharraf
We need strong leadership. We need wise leadership that can safely
make the transit from the doghouse of decrepit, no longer-working,
authoritarianism, to something approaching representative rule, leadership
that, without provoking our American friends too much, can tell them this is
where our paths diverge.
The so-called war on terror has made a prisoner of Pakistans
soul, hurling Pakistan into a pit from which there seems no escape. Let us
heed the fate of Cambodia, a once smiling land set on the path to ruin and
destruction when pulled into Americas war in Vietnam. But why go that far?
Let us heed Afghanistans fate, a once near-serene land ravaged by
externally-imposed conflict.
1115

About one thing we can be sure. Self-proclaimed caudillos, straw

champions of fictitious causes, uninvited saviours dont go off their own
accord. The cottage industry that has mushroomed urging Musharraf to quit
could therefore take a badly needed rest. He is not stepping down as per the
advice of any bleeding hearts. Only the result of these elections can put
second thoughts in his mind. That too if, after the results are in and a
democratic majority emerges in the new National Assembly, the PPP and the
PML-N can together map out a common course for the restoration of
democracy.
Shakir Husain opined that election would be crucial to shaping the
future of Pakistan. The Kings party, the PML-Q is petrified, and other
than the Chaudhrys of Gujrat and their few remaining loyalists, no one from
the party in inclined to make the thundering address and statements which
are usually associated with the Kings party. This is largely because the King
himself finds himself without any real power after relinquishing the position
of army chief to General Kayani.
Unlike President Musharraf, the members of the PML-Q are
professional politicians who know that change is in the air, and when the
wind starts blowing in the other direction they want to have some deniability
and be able to find some cover. The Chaudhrys are also aware of this, but
rising to unimaginable heights, which they have under Musharraf, they have
their backs to the wall. Rumour has it that they have hedged their bets by
liquidating a majority of their assets. There has been no confirmation or, for
that matter denial, on the matter, so they must be just rumours.
This election will be crucial to shaping the future of Pakistan and
the direction the country will take for decades to come. On one side you
have the Kings party which stands for everything which is wrong with this
country, and on the other hand you have the opposition, which according to
its leaders and manifestos offers the people of Pakistan hope
Musharrafs graduate assembly produced just about as much
as a neutered bull can, and it is time that the politics of reconciliation are
put into play to rectify all that has gone wrong in the past decade. Cosmetic
buzzwords like enlightened moderation and devolution need to be put to
sleep, and the real work needs to begin, and that can only happen when the
will of the people is respected and recognized. But for that to happen, the
people need to get out and vote.

1116

Massive rigging is expected and several political parties have

issued whitepapers as to how it will be done. Certainly, urban areas will be
less prone to rigging tactics, given the numbers of observers and journalists
on the ground, but the rural areas are where the games are played without
any fear
Democracy is not a magic wand which is going to fix all our
problems overnight, but it is the beginning of the solution. With
responsive elected leaders who are more interested in resolving their
constituents problems rather than acquiring wealth and German automobiles
for themselves, we will actually have a shot at social and economic success
for everyone, not just tiny minority a minority which is largely irrelevant
without knowing it. We may not have a Barack Obama, but we still have
good people who are worth going to the polling station for.
The News wrote: Increasingly the western world is focusing its
attention on the Feb 18 polls in Pakistan and the consensus emerging in
many important capitals is that the future of relations between the west and
Pakistan will depend on how the elections are conducted. The
Commonwealth has said it will review Islamabads suspension after the
polls.
The Pakistan opposition has been lobbying in Washington and though
the Bush Administration is reluctant to make a major course correction,
the Democrats are talking in almost the same language as the UK leaders.
The overall view thus is that President Musharraf is under tremendous
pressure on this issue and while a flawed election could create an enormous
domestic uproar, the international community would not take it lightly either.
February 18 could thus become a very critical date in the countrys history.
Musharraf has been repeatedly saying at every forum that the
elections would be free, fair, transparent as well as peaceful, a term he has
recently added to emphasize that no trouble would be tolerated. He even
talked recently of shoot-at-sight orders for all such trouble makers. Yet,
despite all his exhortations the overall perception about the fairness of the
elections is not changing
That the caretaker set up is partisan is obvious. The Election
Commission has been controversial from day one and nothing has been done
to enhance its credibility. The former PML-Q ministers and leaders are still
behaving as if they were in power, holding official meetings and issuing
1117

orders, getting protocols Musharraf therefore has to match his words

with action on the ground when he promises free, fair and transparent
polls. The transparency he talks about is nothing but opaque, so far.
Non-election issues continued to be analyzed during the period. Ansar
Abbasi commented on Scotland Yard report. What took the Scotland Yard
so many weeks to reach the conclusion that Benazir Bhuttos death was not
caused by a bullet but by head injury, and how could Pakistani authorities
reach that conclusion within hours? This and many other questions have
been raised by the report released by the British investigators on Friday.
The Yard report suggests that the death of Benazir Bhutto was
caused by the force and intensity of the suicide bomb blast, which hurled
her head to dash into some part of the vehicle resulting in her death. Within
24 hours of her assassination local agencies had reached the same conclusion
and even forced the Interior Ministry to announce the killer lever theory.
The only disparity between the conclusion of the Yard and the
Pakistani authorities has been over the number of suspect killers involved.
The Yard has concluded that it was only one while the local authorities
had concluded that the number of suspected terrorists was two.
Although the PPP has rejected the Yard report, which has generated
yet another controversy, still it has added credence to the Interior Ministrys
formal statement that the death was not caused by a bullet or shrapnel of the
bomb but apparently because her head had struck the vehicle.
Brig Javed Iqbal Cheema, who made the announcement, faced
criticism for what at that time was seen as a goody tale. So much was the
skepticism and distrust all around that the government never repeated the
killer lever story and even President Musharraf had to express
discontent over the conclusions announced by the interior ministry.
The doctors, who had tried to save the life of BB on December 27
and conducted her external examination, distanced themselves from the
interior ministry conclusion over the cause of death. Sources said following
this scathing criticism, the interior ministry also lost confidence and the
blame of the killer lever theory was shifted to intelligence agencies. Later
tongues within the ministry started wagging and fingers were pointed at the
intelligence agencies for the initial goof-up; now Scotland Yard has
turned that theory into great work.

1118

Air Cdre Azfar A Khan opined: This is no different from what the
Pakistani authorities have been claiming since December 27. We all know
that the death of Benazir Bhutto didnt occur all of a sudden. It was
definitely a well orchestrated attempt on her life. Its immaterial how she
died if we dont get to know the fact who murdered her.
The News wrote: The Scotland Yard report says nothing as to who
sent the killers and is behind Ms Bhuttos assassination. It also raises
questions as to the conclusion that one killer was involved; particularly
given that a taped conversation of Baitullah Mehsud, released to the media
by Pakistani authorities, had spoken of at least two killers being involved.
The implication of these findings, then, is that if they are correct, the taped
conversation is inaccurate, and its authenticity suspect. Questions are also
being asked as to how the Yard reached its conclusions in the absence of an
autopsy and the washing away of crucial forensic evidence.
All these matters will no doubt continue to be debated. The more
detailed report on the death by a joint Pakistan-Scotland Yard team is still
awaited. But for all the media hype, perhaps the key point about the
released report is that it really says very little, and changes nothing in
terms of the suspicions and doubts that continue to surround the most
sensational political murder in Pakistans history.
M Azhar Khwaja from Lahore observed: The report endorses the
point of view of the Pakistani government on the tragic murder of Ms
Bhutto. It is surprising that the detectives of such a reputed investigative
agency did not care to examine the body of the slain leader. The Scotland
Yard should have interrogated the people who were traveling with Ms
Bhutto before submitting its report to the government.
The report can be totally eyewash. The government must have paid
heavily for the Scotland Yard probe yet the affected party is not satisfied.
The PPP has apprehensions about the report and the government must satisfy
the members of slain leaders party by accepting their demand regarding a
UN-based probe into the murder.
Shakir Lakhani from Karachi wrote: The PPP has expectedly rejected
the Scotland Yard report which discussed the cause of Benazir Bhuttos
death. Although the British detectives made it clear in the beginning that
their assigned task was to find out how the PPP leader was killed, not to
investigate about the people involved in it, the PPP leadership did not ask the
1119

government for widening the scope of the investigation. Common sense says
that it is more important to find out who planned the murder than to
determine what caused it.
Kh Abdul Samad from Karachi said: Quite expectedly, the PPP
leadership has rejected the findings of the Scotland Yard experts and called
for UN-backed probe into the December 27 tragedy. If the PPP leadership
really wants to find the truth, then the only option remains is to exhume
the body of the slain leader and carry out a post-mortem.
On the contrary, the PPP leadership has not only refused to allow a
post-mortem but also withheld whatever valuable information they have by
saying that the same will be submitted when the UN-sponsored probe will
commence. It is criminal on their part to withhold what they describe as
undeniable, concrete evidence while the Scotland Yard investigators were
carrying out sensitive investigation.
Alizeh Haider commented: It seems the Scotland Yard had been
inducted as proof of the governments genuine and earnest efforts to
investigate the murder of Ms Bhutto. However, far from vindicating itself,
the government has only succeeded at drawing further criticism.
Perhaps what incriminates the government the most is that the Yard
was mandated only to assist the government in its finding of how Ms
Bhutto was assassinated but fails to address the more important questions
of who were the forces behind the killing and why.
Blaming Baitullah Mehsud is not enough and as such does not
exempt the government from the plethora of questions casting suspicions at
elements within the government But lets suppose for a minute that the
government is right and that Mehsud did really sponsor Ms Bhuttos murder.
The question then arises, firstly, who are the people within the establishment
and the administration of the government who are acting as Mehsuds agents
and are facilitating him with the support network needed to execute this
plan? Secondly, why is the government not exposing them?
We are all by now aware of the secret email Ms Bhutto had written to
Foreign Secretary Milliband in September, naming three individuals who
were determined to assassinate her Instead of ordering investigation of
these individuals, who, upon being identified by the victim ought to be
treated as prime suspects, General Musharraf has gone on record for

1120

saying the Scotland Yard team will not be allowed to goose chase
elements in the government on the basis of suspicions
While it is the undeniable duty of the government to ensure that a
credible probe is conducted into the assassination of the ex-prime minister of
the country; the government should also be wary of patronizing those
sinister elements within its machinery who only thrive by destabilizing the
country.
Ali Abbas Rizvi was of the view that several factors provide a grim
insight into the tragic episode, especially after Cheemas statement and the
release of the report. First, the finding shows that Pakistani intelligence
agencies have the relevant equipment and the expertise to quickly draw the
conclusions that the Scotland Yard reached after several weeks of hard
work.
Second, while the Pakistani intelligence agencies have drawn correct
conclusions soon after the tragic incident, it was a folly to go ahead with the
findings so soon after the assassination. Brigadier Cheemas statement about
the sunroof or the escape hatch was not digested by anyone in the country
and around the world. At that stage, the people of Pakistan had not overcome
the shock of the death. For such a big tragedy, which was followed by
senseless mayhem and spate of murderous rioting in Sindh, the people
required some time to accept the fact that Benazir was gone. They were not
ready to acknowledge and understand Cheemas announcement that on its
face value looked suspicious, especially since the electronic media
constantly showed a gunman firing on Benazir Bhutto. Therefore, the
interior ministrys assumptions were disregarded.
Third, the escape hatch of an armoured vehicle like the one she was
riding in was made up of extremely tough material unlike the sunroofs of
normal SUVs. The vehicle she was in was a Toyota Land Cruiser 200VXR
armoured capsule B-6. It had armoured doors and joints
It has also been reported that Benazir Bhutto suffered from ear
infection and in the early nineties had undergone surgery at a London
teaching hospital for removal of Mastoid bone on the side of the skull. When
the bone is removed, the skull becomes weaker, causing major trauma in
case the affected spot is hit by force, what to speak of the massive force
generated by a bomb blast.

1121

Fourth, one wonders how come the party is challenging the findings
of an agency like the Scotland Yard, which enjoys an impeccable reputation.
Does the PPP think that the Scotland Yard bribed by the Pakistan
government to confirm its own findings? Or was it influenced by the
Musharraf regime to prove that the PPP chairperson died of the bomb impact
and not of bullet wound? This is awfully probable and rather silly to
conclude. Also, would the Yard put at stake its hard-earned international
reputation by making wrong conclusions for the sake of our government?
Unlikely. It should also be kept in mind that the Yard found sufficient
evidence to draw its own conclusions. The agency did not speak about the
alleged lack of cooperation from the Pakistani side and hiding of evidence. It
came out with its judgment as it found that there was enough evidence
available to reach a verdict.
Finally, in the case of most Pakistanis, even those who do not
support the PPP, the killing of Benazir has a strong emotional aspect
attached to it. Never mind the controversies associated to her two stints as
the prime minister. She was a woman, a mother, the only Pakistani political
leader of national caliber and international standing, a brave soul who was
tyrannically killed while the whole world watched. Again, let us not forget
that we Pakistanis are highly emotional people who react first and then think
about what really happened what should have been done. The volatile
reaction after the killing certainly proves it
On the whole, the PPP demand for the UN investigation has been
greatly weakened by the Scotland Yard findings, which covers just one
aspect i.e. how party chairperson died and not who was behind it. While
some PPP leaders may think the west would understand their point of view
regards the UN investigation only a few would attempt to challenge the
findings of the British investigating agency.
As such, the PPP should concentrate on finding out who
committed the horrendous crime and what the motives were. Some
people are wondering why certain foreign quarters were so insistent on
Benazirs return to Pakistan when there was little doubt that her life was in
acute danger. Is there more to this? if the government is telling the truth
about how Benazir died, is it also telling the truth about who killed her?
The issue the restoration of the deposed judges was not forgotten
during the period. M Riaz Khattak from Peshawar condemned Musharrafs

1122

remarks about the judiciary. It is unfortunate that President Musharraf chose

to wash dirty linen in public by maligning the judiciary during his visit to the
five European countries. On the one hand he says the foreign media
interferes in Pakistans internal affairs and on the other he maligns the
country himself on foreign lands. He castigated deposed Chief Justice
Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and other sacked judges of the superior
judiciary for their corruption which is unproven in any court of law.
Why is that the president generally feels more comfortable with the
westerners than the people at home? He should be asked as to how a judge,
who has earned public sympathy by taking up the cases of human rights, can
be a risk to his countrymen. In actuality, President Musharraf himself is a
security risk
Khurshid Anwer from Lahore commented on dismissal of petitions
related to May 12 killings. Over 50 men were murdered and scores of
women and children were widowed and orphaned on May 12 last year, but
the Sindh High Court deemed it appropriate to dismiss the petitions
regarding the mayhem, saying the matter was out of its jurisdiction.
Dispensation of justice has always been out of jurisdiction of kangaroo
court established by the dictators.
It is strange that tens of people were murdered and their families
traumatized on May 12, 2007, and when the victims turned to the Sindh
High Court for justice, it termed their petitions inadmissible on the
jurisdiction basis; strange logic.
The News wrote on AGs demand for release of lawyers. Attorney
General of Pakistan Malik Mohammad Qayyum has sort of shocked
everyone by coming out strongly in favour of releasing the detained
leaders of the lawyers movement, Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan, Justice Tariq
Mahmood and Ali Ahmed Kurd. His categorical statement that he had
advised the authorities to immediately release them else there would be legal
complications cannot be dismissed as a political or professional wish
On another level Malik Qayyum has, by implication, further
widened the credibility gap that this administration was already facing.
The caretaker governments, in this scenario, look like a faade for those who
may be ready to accept them, mostly western and foreign supporters of the
status quo who fear a change may upset their calculations because these

1123

foreign powers have no interest and stake in Pakistan having any kind of
rule of law as long as the present rulers serve their interests.
The fact that attorney generals advice, for immediate release of
lawyers, has not been considered also proves how helpless these top
functionaries are, even though they hold top constitutional and legal posts. If
the key legal officer is so helpless, why, some may ask, should it be
believed that others do have powers, like the chief election commissioner,
who is required to hold free and fair elections. Ironically the new army chief,
General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, and his corps commanders have placed all
the burden of a free and fair election on the CEC, who would appear to be a
dummy of sorts, if no one cares a bit about the attorney general and his
advice.
Dr Masooda Bano condemned utter indifference of the regime. The
publics ability to make the sitting governments accountable has always been
limited in Pakistan due to weak democratic structures but the level of
indifference maintained by the current government towards public
demands is unparallel. Aitzaz Ahsan, Tariq Mehmood, and Ali Kurd have
been detained once again, after being released very briefly on completion of
their ninety days under detention, even when the law provides no provision
for it.
Military operations continue in the tribal belt with little
accountability of the civilian casualties, and at the same time, the state is
failing on all counts of basic service delivery... Ideally, the state exists
primarily to act as a neutral arbitrator and ensure law and order in the society
and to ensure provision of certain core services necessarily for public
wellbeing. The current state in Pakistan is, however, least concerned with its
primary responsibilities
The most striking aspect of the current government, however, is
not the actual failure to deliver but the attitude, which shows a complete
lack of concern about these problems. When bomb blasts take, or people
suffer from long hours of load shedding, there is no longer an expression of
apology heard from the government ministers. There is no pressure to soothe
the public anger by at least saying that the state recognizes its failure
Yet, at the same time, the very same state machinery is over
active in areas from which it should by all means refrain. Since the
emergency, the government has been blaming judicial activism on the part of
1124

the disposed judges for the current mess in Pakistan, yet it is the over active
state that is stifling all productive forces within the society. The states
ability to keep Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry along with some other senior
judges and lawyers under detention
The newspaper also commented on mass oath by PML-N. At an
unusual ceremony in Lahore, at least 600 candidates of the PML-N have
taken oath vowing to restore the pre-November 3 judiciary after entering the
assemblies. The ceremony, attended by many prominent personalities
including retired judges and civil society activists, underscored the fact that
it may not prove so easy to consign the question of the judiciary to
history. President Pervez Musharraf, quite evidently, believes this is what
will and should happen and has stated on more than one occasion that the
deposed judges will never be restored.
By publicly taking an oath administered by former LHC chief justice
Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui the PML-N candidates have sent out a strong
signal indicting they are in no mood to compromise on this key issue.
The high-profile ceremony should also help squelch rumours on another
Saudi-brokered deal between the Sharifs and Musharraf
It also now seems obvious that the issue of the deposed judges will
figure within the next parliament. It is too big to be abandoned or set
aside. The PML-Ns prospective MNAs and MPAs are morally bound to
raise the matter in the new house, and the developments within it on this
matter will undoubtedly be intriguing.
The suggestion by US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher
that President Musharraf could dissolve the house if it restored the deposed
judiciary has quite rightly been condemned, and a warning issued that such
as step would be unconstitutional. It is obviously absurd that the US
should opt to intervene in Pakistans internal matters so openly, and then
give an opinion that goes so totally against the Pakistanis need for justice.
Developments in the new assemblies will, as such, be closely
watched. The PML-N has shown, through its action that political parties in
the country cannot so easily be dismissed as being unprincipled or interested
only in power. It now remains to be seen how many other forces will join
hands with the party on the crucial issue of an independent judiciary, in
the absence of which Pakistans problems can never be solved.

1125

Farah Zia talked of PPPs stance on judiciary. Clearly, there is a

disconnect between the PPP stand and that of the lawyers community,
which thinks that the time to ensure the judiciarys independence is now and
the effort must begin with restoration of the ousted judges. On its part, the
PPP seems discounting the role the lawyers movement played in the
situation after March 9, 2007 There indeed is a trust deficit, because what
the PPP understands as blackmail is pressure by the lawyers community to
keep the issue alive for the parties as a top priority item once they get into
parliament. The fact remains that the PPP has refused to accept it as a moral
question.
If the recent vibes coming from Naudero are to be believed, the PPP
has not taken too kindly to the fact that no condolences were offered by
either the serving or ousted judges of the superior courts on what it thinks
was a national tragedy. The absence of formal condolence letter must have
been seriously felt within the party at a time when virtually every other
institution (including traders and the military) was present.
Elsewhere, in functioning democracies, big parties do get a
chance to bring their own people into the judiciary. Since democracies
work by rotation, the judiciaries inevitably get a good mix of all shades of
thought; or so they should. The PPP, on the other hand, despite being a major
political force, rarely had a chance to bring its lawyers to the bench and thus
change its complexion
The PPP may well be concerned about the structural issues to ensure
an independent judiciary and should proceed on that count, but will it ever
get a chance to get a clean slate, to start anew? What is it going to do about
the current judges and the new appointments being made in the caretaker
setup? The courts are indeed being packedlike there will be no
tomorrow.
If the Peoples Party can engage in a dialogue with Musharraf to
ensure a transition to true democracy, it should be able to put up with the
ousted judges after bringing them back and thereby strengthen the
institution. This is the only way to prevent PCOs in future. It could always
improve upon the method of sacking and appointment of judges.
Omar Ali from Karachi criticized US interference in judges issue.
The US official (Richard Boucher) stated that if the sacked judges were
restored after the Feb 18 general election, President Musharraf could
1126

dissolve the incoming parliament. Nothing can be more shameful than this.
It is a blatant attack on our national sovereignty. The government must
condemn Bouchers statement. It also indicates that the Bush
Administration played a supportive role in the imposition of emergency
and the removal of the judges in Pakistan to validate President Musharrafs
re-election.
Ansar Abbasi had an optimistic view of grim realities. Change is in
the wind and can be seen and felt. Days of suppression and containment are
about to be over as with every passing day the hope for the restoration of
independent judiciary is increasing. On the contrary the voices, defending
the Nov 3 emergency cum martial law and the subsequent actions, are fast
sinking and now confined to the Presidency alone.
Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain has admitted that the sacking of the
judges was one of the major blunders during the partys rule in the last
five years. This public admission from the Q-Chief Chaudhry Shujaat
Hussain has come after the leadership of the same party has been secretly
distancing itself from the Nov 3 actions and holding President Musharraf
squarely responsible for the same. However, the fact remains that the party
and its coalition partners during those days had endorsed through a
resolution adopted by the last National Assembly President Musharrafs
PCO, whose main targets were the independent superior judiciary of the
country and the vocal media of Pakistan.
With the general elections just round the corner, the focus is fast
shifting on the issue of the restoration of the deposed judges. Demands
for the same are on the rise. The lawyers fraternity, despite the lapse of
almost three months, remained dedicated and firm to win back the pre-Nov 3
judiciary.
On the other side all the deposed judges including those who are
detained since Nov 3 seem to be in high morale. They are also not
showing any sign of regrets but are positive that the good days are about to
come. Seeing the deposed judges and the lawyers community unwavering,
different sections of the society are fast joining the struggle for the
restoration of the judges.
Besides the political parties that prominently include PML-N, JI, TI
and those included in the APDM, the ex-servicemen, the intelligentsia, the
media, the students and members of the civil society and human tights
1127

organizations have become more vocal to demand the restoration of the preNov 3 judiciary. The invisible Establishment has also tilted towards the
demand of the masses and the PML-Qs remorse to Nov 3 action is an
obvious sign of this change of hearts and minds of the powers that be.
The measures adopted by the COAS to keep the army out of
politics were appreciated. Rahimullah Yusufzai wrote: For sure, General
Kayani is aware of the controversies that Pakistani elections generate. That
is the primary reason for him to dissociate his soldiers from the electoral
process. It is also possible that Kayani has had a premonition that the
outcome of the polls may not be acceptable to opposition parties and this has
prompted him to keep the army out of the electoral arena.
The army could still find itself at the centre of controversy if the
elections are rigged. Expectations from the armed forces have risen
following the change of command at the GHQ and the appointment of a new
army chief in place of General Musharraf. Some people expect the army
to ensure the sanctity of the ballot and respect for the choices made by the
voters at the polling booths
There is no doubt that the armys reputation suffered when Musharraf
dragged it into politics The situation has changed and the few steps that
General Kayani has taken to reduce the armys intrusion into politics has
already won him goodwill among the masses and whetted their appetite
for more.
These measures are certainly a rebuke to his predecessor because
General Musharraf had facilitated the appointment of serving officers on
prized civilian jobs. He had also encouraged interaction between the military
officials and politicians by holding a political office while wearing the
generals uniform. By undoing those decisions, General Kayani has acted
like a professional soldier and one hopes further steps would be taken to
ensure that the armed forces perform the task assigned to them. That task is
defending the countrys borders and ensuring its integrity.
Alizah Haider opined: As General Kayani finds himself
firefighting to salvage the image of the military much to the credit of the
one of his own he vows that the future shall see the army as an apolitical
force. Measures taken in the recent past are suggestive of the decoupling of
military and politics, yet the signals are sometimes mixed.

1128

On the one hand, General Kayani has made a decided effort to visibly
distance himself from the current regime and its political blunders. He is
attempting to deflect mounting resentment against the military and politics
and has no intentions of crossing it. Yet, a message of a different kind is
being conveyed by President Musharraf. At an international forum in
Davos, President Musharraf confidently lay claim to the loyalty of the chief
of army staff and said to a rather stunned audience: His loyalty is personal to
me.
Ideally, speaking, if the army surrenders its monopoly of powers,
restricts itself to the role defined by the constitution and curtails the agencies
from destabilizing the country, the scene would be set for state institutions to
strengthen and democratic process to evolve. However, once a genuine
democracy begins to take root, life as they know it would change for the
army. Budget allocations will have to be stringent and more transparent.
Military spending would have to be axed significantly. And priority would
be given to the grossly neglected civic and social sectors.
A government answerable to the people and dependent upon its vote
for re-election will have to commit itself to a robust foreign policy which
strongly asserts its national interest. This would inevitably result in
diminished interference of unabashed foreign interests in our domestic
matters. As a result, the armys role over the years would become less
intrusive on matters of the state.
Much depends on our new army chief. General Kayanis test lies in
the extent to which he is willing to heed this call. Not only to vindicate the
army, but also to genuinely place the interest of the nation before that of a
person or an institution. And to ensure that the military adheres to the role
laid down for it in the constitution.
Adnan Ali from Nowshera cautioned: I appeal to the national press
not to praise and appreciate excessively the new army chief; otherwise
we will have yet another military coup without any resistance from the
masses. The media is praising General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani for his
apolitical views, and making us believe that he is highly professional just
like it always does before the imposition of martial laws.
Adnan Gill from USA chose Musharrafs meeting with Altaf for
commenting. President Musharrafs attempt to please the MQM chief is
obvious due to the sensitivity of the forthcoming general elections. It is
1129

beyond my comprehension as to why has President Musharraf been

allying himself with a politician like Altaf Hussain. The two bhais are not
twins but have plenty in common.
Although Mr Hussains party has been in power at all the levels of
the government since the 2002 general elections; he has been living in selfexile in London. What is keeping Altaf Hussain from ending his self-exiles?
I hope President Musharraf will enlighten the nation as to why did he
extend an olive branch to the MQ chief after he jumped into the political
arena?
Malik A Rahim Khan from Peshawar wrote about Shujaats
admission of mistakes. This is in reference to the news report about
Chaudhry Shujaat Hussains statement that he and his party made mistakes
on the Balochistan, Lal Masjid and judiciary issues. I am surprised that after
this he still had the courage to field his morally bankrupt and incompetent
candidates in the forthcoming general elections in order to seize power for
yet another five years and take the nation further down with its flawed
economic policies.
The mistakes made by the Chaudhrys of Gujrat are of mammoth
proportions. In case a genuine government comes into power after the
elections, the entire party leadership can be held accountable for the criminal
blunders they committed during the five-year government.
The News commented on Benazirs will. With the release of the
political will of the late Benazir Bhutto, the document which the opponents
of the PPP were challenging as non-existent, some even alleging that it had
been faked, the muted controversy over who should lead the party should
now come to a rest. The will is written in her handwriting and there is
nothing to suggest that she did not do it.
More significantly her will would settle the contentious issue of who
should lead the PPP. Benazir was wise, prudent and pragmatic in naming Mr
Zardari as the leader of her party but only for one interim period. She has
asked Mr Zardari to lead until he and the workers decide what is best for the
party. This puts a heavy burden on Mr Zardaris shoulders as he now
has to work out an acceptable and unifying compact with his party cadres
to continue as PPP leader.

1130

She justified her decision saying Mr Zardari is a man of courage and

honour who spent eleven and a half years in prison without bending despite
torture. She clearly stated that Mr Zardari has the political stature to keep the
party united. For Mr Zardari this task given by his late wife and leader is
easier to accept but harder to carry out. He needs all the vision, prudence
patience and political skill to meet this challenge. It is a difficult call and he
has not much time to prove himself.
Muzaffar Iqbal reviewed Benazirs book Reconciliation: Islam,
Democracy and the West. The book was primarily meant to win the support
of the West for herself and that could not be done without pointing an
accusing finger at Islamic militants. To this end, she blamed them for in
tending to start clash of civilization, as if the inventor of this idea was a
mulla.
Reconciliation: Islam, Democracy and the West was bound to create
a stir in certain quarters, but once its glitter and glow fades from a first-time
readers conscious awareness of her sad existence, what remains is a
portrayal of contemporary Pakistan by a woman who strongly believed in
what she believed in, but whose analysis of the ailments were utterly
flawed. Therefore, the solutions she proposes are equally flawed. And if
her husband were given the opportunity to implement those solutions
through the revival of some kind of posthumous alliance with the man who
now controls Pakistan, we will spiral into a chaotic situation.
She rushes us through the rollercoaster ride of her homecoming only
to repeat what she has been saying for several years: Pakistan has
become a major threat to the west, and the only one who can solve the
problem is Benazir Bhutto.
What is missing from the book is equally intriguing: Her frequent
biting remarks about the military notwithstanding, she says nothing of her
secret deal with the general; she accuses the ISI and the establishment of
not providing security to her, but says nothing of her American connections
which had promised security. She wrongly states that the military entered
Pakistani politics with Zias military dictatorship in the 1970s. She
criticizes the Musharraf dictatorship, which has presided over the
mushrooming growth of militant groups and militant acts that have exacted a
heavy human toll, but does not tell us why she entered into an alliance with
the same military dictator.

1131

The high drama she creates in her last book is sustained through
a flawed description of the current situation: First, the extremists aim to
reconstitute the concept of caliphate, a political state encompassing the great
Ummah (the Muslim unity... Second, they aim to provoke a clash of
civilizations between the west and an interpretation of Islam that rejects
pluralism and modernity. The goal, the great hope of the militants, is a
collision, an explosion between the values of the west and what the
extremists claim to be the values of Islam.
On the factual plane, she is wrong because except for Hizb alIslami, there is hardly any group of the so-called extremists which has
declared the restoration of caliphate as its goal. And the Hizb does not have
much of a following. But even if this were the case, the fundamental
assumption here is that the coming together of a large part of the Muslim
world in some kind of political unity is extremism. Applying the same
warped logic, one can say that the European leadership which envisioned
and implemented the plan for the EU consisted of a bunch of extremists.
Built into the same logic is a tacit assumption that any kind of Muslim unity
constitutes a threat to the west.
Her second claim (extremists want to provoke a clash of
civilizations) clearly shows how far behind she was in her study of
history: the clash of civilizations is no more a distant possibility that needs
provoking; it is all around us. Islamic civilization is under attack by
modern western civilization and it has been under attack since the arrival of
the first missionaries and the first merchants with hidden agendas. Yet, it
must be understood that it is not a clash of civilizations, for civilizations are
not the primary unit here; it is clash of two visions of life and death. One is
based on a revealed religion; the other is man-made.
A civilization based on a revealed religion is a civilization which
exerts its energies in establishing a kingdom of God on earth; a civilization
based on human reason and knowledge exerts its resources to establish a
kingdom of man. Modern western civilization is a product of the latter;
Islamic civilization, now being rapidly destroyed, is the product of former
vision. That Islamic civilization is under attack for three centuries now,
is not the position of extremists, but a fact borne out of a sober and deeper
understanding.

1132

Anjum Niaz analyzed the issue of martyrdom. The latest aspirant

to martyrdom is Asif Zardari. If I am martyred before completing the
mission of Benazir Bhutto, then I should also be buried in Garhi Khuda
Bakhsh, he tells his followers while seeking their votes apart from him,
the rest of the power hopefuls starting from President Pervez Musharraf,
Mian Nawaz Sharif, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and miscellaneous have not
expressed such a death wish. Perhaps they are not tempting the gods and
sticking their necks out. Wisely, they are keeping out of harms way by
shunning a rendezvous with rallies of death.
Who is a martyr and who is a terrorist? The official mouthpiece,
that being the PTV, has for dog-gone years indoctrinated its viewers that the
martyr is one who works for the government of the day and gets killed, i.e.
General Ziaul Haq. Never mind if he loses his life in an accident or while
doing a routine job or even dies a natural death. The spin doctors at Pakistan
Television posthumously award the deceased the little of a martyr as long as
the person was on government patrol and enjoying all that goes with it. Last
weeks sad helicopter crash killing an army general, brigadiers and others
were all called shaheed. The mandarins at the PTV has been getting away
with such man-made titles. None has challenged them. A terrorist on the
other hand is always someone who is on the opposite side. It can be the
clerics at Lal Masjid or tribal warlords fighting against foreign occupation or
even ordinary humans daring to defy the writ of the government.
Another idiocy the PTV is famous for is its form of address
according to the flavour of the day. When Benazir Bhutto arrived last
October, there was no prefix attached before her name, while every charlatan
in the government was cloyingly addressed as janab. Later things changed
and suddenly one noticed BB being elevated to mohtarma or sahiba.
Obviously the orders for the change of address came from the presidency.
Now after her death, while the official media refrains from calling her
shaheed, everybody else has taken to declaring her a martyr.
The world martyr has been corrupted, says Air Commodore Sajad
Haider, who put his life on the line to defend his country in the 1965 and
1971 wars against India. The martyrdom of Imam Hussain was the
watershed of the definition of who is a martyr. It was a sacred thing for the
Muslims. In contemporary times, anyone who gives their life for the sake of
the defence of their country without any personal gain or ambition to seek a
high office or fulfilling a personal dream by flaunting the word democracy

1133

cannot be called a martyr. He thinks neither ZAB and BB nor Zia can be
called martyrs. All died trying to hold on to power.
After going through the history of corrupting the word martyr, Anjum
added: Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto hired world renowned writers
and lesser Pakistani beings to work full time on singing hosannas of her
father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto via biographies, TV series and feature films. It
became her project and she spared no state money on immortalizing the
martyrdom of ZAB.
Fortunately Pakistanis were spared reading tales of heroism of the
martyred General Ziaul Haq. His son Ejazul Haq never made it to the
prime ministerial slot despite all the money, sympathy and military backing.
With a non-descript portfolio like religion or whatever, Ejaz failed to attract
greedy ghost writers who demanded a ransom writing his dead dads
memoirs.
Similarly, another son of an army president the honest Ali Yahya
could not afford a glossy grand memoir of General Yahya Khan. All Ali has
are bits of handwritten notes by his late father which have been made into a
booklet. But Ali does not lie, nor try to make his father a hero. Like Sajad
Haider, Ali wants the world to know that ZAB, Ayub Khan and others sidestepped the truth, showing them as the good guys and Yahya Khan as the
villain.
The Pakistani media has not played its investigative role in
getting to the truth. As writers, we allow emotion and a sense of patriotism
to dull our urge to plumb out the real facts as they happened. Currently we
are engaged in canonizing Benazir Bhutto. How long the exercise will last is
anyones guess. Should her husband Asif Zardari become the next prime
minister, then we are in for a long haul. He is bound to follow in her
footsteps and hire hobos to pen as many epitaphs as the state largesse can
dish out on the slain leader.
Why not instead seek out many of the actors both civilian and
military who are still around to shed light? While some may not have the
guts to tell us the truth because they still are hoping to land a government
job or getting their kids official favours, others who have retired and not in
search of any rewards can be reached.

1134

At the end excerpts from comments in one the leading newspaper, The
News, published over the week-end on the eve of Election Day , are
reproduced. This would help in understanding the frame of mind in which
the people of Pakistan went to the polls.
Mumtaz Alvi wrote about the violations of election code. The Code
of Conduct, issued by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for the
Election 2008, is in place but it is widely believed that it has lost any
relevance because of its massive and perennial violations by all the
stakeholders
It goes without saying that violations continue to mar the
environment in the run-up to elections, President Musharraf and the ECP
have vowed to hold in a free, fair and transparent manner. Going by
statistics, as many as 1,678 complaints have so far been filed with the
ECP relating to pre-poll violations of the rules of the game with 222
against civil servants. However, the ECP website has stopped displaying the
number of complaints so far resolved or taken up.
Political analysts and parties believe the ECP was yet to develop a
mechanism on how to take up complaints, and then swiftly go for action
or remedial step when needed. On the face of it, the code, no doubt,
encompasses the general conduct, meetings and polling day related dos and
donts for the contesting parties and candidates. And it is needless to say that
if followed even 60 percent, the irregularities and rigging be reduced
significantly. This, of course, can lead to holding of free, fair and transparent
elections, something this nation has been longing for decades.
But ironically, this is not going to happen because the code of
conduct is being openly flouted, whether it is the federal capital or any farflung constituency in Balochistan or the tribal belt. Its non-compliance has
virtually turned it into a piece of paper, having no value whatsoever
Majority of the news conferences held so far since the election schedule was
announced has been regarding the code violations
How far these decencies, envisaged in the code, like respecting
private life are being taken care of by the stakeholders? Partially or not at all
is anybodys guess. The rules of the ECP and Indian Election Commission
are quite similar, but the difference is that the latter makes sure no major
violation takes place, whereas the former finds itself unable to some extent
to do the needful, political scientists charge. Will the ECP ever develop
1135

with the assistance of political parties the much-desired and required

effective mechanism?
Lubna Jarar Naqvi was of the view that the rigging could tear us apart.
I agree with the political parties which claim that pre-rigging is going on
in the country and that the elections results will not be transparent. And
I also agree with Mian Nawaz Sharif that rigging will tear Pakistan apart, but
I would not solely blame the government for this rigging, as Mr Sharif does.
The political parties have been accusing the government of prerigging, and vow to take up the matter after the election if the results are
not what they expect. There have been statements from various political
parties which have actually dictated the results they want, and threatened to
boycott everything post-election making the running of the next government
a misery if the result didnt match their demands. This is very myopic view,
but it is convenient for political parties to use anti-establishment lines suiting
their political agendas, easily overshadowing the antics of their political
parties.
As much as we want democracy in the country, for disillusioned
citizens like myself this seems like the most difficult task to achieve for a
nation like Pakistan. People will question my pessimism, especially when
according to the majority of the political parties we are finally on the path of
democracy and all-round happiness. But no one can blame the majority
for being pessimistic after continuously facing lies and being cheated for
the last 60 years.
The majority hoped that this time around the elections would be
fairer and more structured, but it seems that that is too much to hope for in
Pakistan. I agree with those who say democracy cannot survive under a
military man, and democracy can only flourish under the auspices of
democratically inclined political parties. But the question is, do such
parties exist in Pakistan and have they existed?
The News commented on Musharrafs threatening statement about
conduct of opinion polls. Musharrafs veiled threat to foreign organizations
conducting opinion polls in the country, some of which have recently
released findings showing a sharp decline in the presidents popularity, is
regrettable. The gist of the argument which has been also expounded
recently by a government spokesman is that by asking a few thousand
people, these foreign polling organizations cannot possibly be holding
1136

surveys that are representative of the opinions and views of a population

of 160 million.
However, this argument is facetious at best because it fails to
understand the mechanics of how polls are held by such organizations.
There is a whole science (backed in large part by the statistical side of
mathematics) behind such polls and the whole idea of surveying a small
sample of the population is that if done according to certain rules and
guidelines one of which is that the survey be a random one the results
will by and large tend to be accurate.
The point is that the reason why opinion polls are so widely used in
countries like America and Britain is precisely that they trend to accurately
reflect the general opinion of the population surveyed. Hence, to warn such
organizations over conducting such polls and accusing them of acting in a
malicious manner and with an ulterior motive, as is being done by the
government is most unfortunate. If anything, it goes to show that those
hurling these unfounded accusations are somehow afraid that perhaps
the polls are in fact a reflection of reality.
The newspaper also feared that the results of opinion polls could
prompt rigging. The row stirred up by the release of an audio-tape recording
of a telephonic conversation during which Attorney General Malik
Muhammad Qayyum has apparently said the polls will be massively
rigged and has advised an unknown person, in view of this, to seek a PMLQ ticket rather than one of the PML-N or PPP, is extremely disturbing.
This is the second time Qayyum, who appears to be particularly
susceptible to taped phone conversations, has been caught in an
embarrassing position The conversation, apparently taped by a journalist
who was interviewing Qayyum on another line, is highly damaging not
only to Malik Muhammad Qayyum, but also to the government as a
whole. This has already been acknowledged by Qayyum himself, who has
opined the recording is intended to hurt President Pervez Musharraf to
whom he is close.
No matter what happens now, the perceptions created by the tape,
which has also been played over television channels, will persist in
public mind. This is all the more so as the new row has broken out at a time
when allegations of rigging are already rife.

1137

As for President Musharraf himself, he seems totally unwilling to

accept the mounting evidence that most Pakistanis wish to see him out
of office. Indeed, many believe the countrys multiple crises can be solved
only in a post-Musharraf environment. Rather than heeding such advice,
Musharraf has lashed out in an irrational diatribe against the highly reputable
foreign organizations that have conducted the opinion polls showing his
sliding appeal and accused them of attempting to meddle in Pakistans
affairs.
The presidential descent into the unfortunate state of disbelief
regarding reality and of apparent megalomania makes it all the more likely
that an attempt could be made to rig polls. With the president, the PML-Q,
the party closely associated with him since 2002, has also registered a
marked slump in popularity. The indication that neither PML-Q leaders nor
Musharraf himself are apparently willing to release their hold on power and
the apparent reaffirmation of rigging plans devised at one point by the
former party, contained in the recording that has hit the country only days
before the polls, can only add to apprehensions regarding the
impartiality of the elections.
Ghazi Salahuddin wrote: While we hold our breath to wait for what
happens tomorrow, we should have no doubt that the people, in a general
sense, have already spoken. You can hear them loud and clear. You can
also understand the verdict that they have delivered.
What is the verdict? Take the public opinion surveys that have been
conducted by reputable organizations on a scientific basis. The trend has
been there for some months but of particular significance are surveys that
have been released this week. All these surveys have certified that public
support for President Pervez Musharraf has plunged to an all-time low.
There is statistical evidence to suggest that the opposition parties could score
a landslide victory in tomorrows elections
Obviously irked by these reports, Musharraf, in an official seminar
held in Islamabad on Thursday, asked foreign organizations conducting
public opinion polls in Pakistan not to disturb peace in the country and
the region. Incidentally, it was in this seminar that the president said: This is
the mother of all elections. Does this not remind you of Saddam, who had
designated the 2003 Iraq war as mother of all wars?

1138

Anyhow, Pakistani officials, responding to public opinion polls and

reports in the western media, insist that the foreign analysts are not aware of
our ground realities. Alas, the ground realities, when objectively explored,
would show that the polls and the reports may be an understatement.
After more than eight years of this dispensation under Musharraf, the state
of affairs at the ground level is heart-brokenly distressing.
Nadeem Iqbal commented on the role of foreign observers. Contrary
to the exaggerated claims of the government that elections can not be rigged
in the presence of a large number of international observers, there are either
very few international observers present in the country or they have a
very little scope to observe the whole election process.
According to international standards, election observation is a
whole process that includes observing the pre-poll environment, poll day
freedom and post election transfer of power to the majority vote-getter.
Many of the observers are not undertaking to observe all these three phases.
The foreign office spokesperson said that around 500 observers
from abroad and foreign mission are to observe the Feb 18 elections.
These include 35 observers from Democracy International Inc (DII) USA,
four from the OIC, eight observers from Pakistani American leadership, four
observers from SAFMA, and the largest numbers of observers, 110 from the
EU.
US Senators (Senator John Kerry, Senator Joseph Biden and Senator
Chuck Hagel) and Congress members (Sheila Jackson Lee, Elton Gallegly
and Jane Harmen) are also on their way. In addition, around 500 foreign
journalists are also to cover the elections. Majority of these observers are
going to watch only one phase. For an analysis of the two other phases,
they will be dependent on second hand information and will not have direct
access to primary source at the grass root.
In addition, the official restrictions citing security environment
has virtually curtailed the observers option of conducting unannounced
surprise visits to polling stations and exit-polling at polling stations.
Justifying this, the Foreign Office spokesperson said, there has never been
any practice of exit polls either in Pakistan or any country in the region. Exit
poll can confuse the voters. It is also not needed when the process is fully
transparent and conducted in the presence of polling agents of the
candidates. Therefore, although the American International Republican
1139

Institute belonging to Republican Party has conducted five national public

opinion surveys since 2002, it is no longer undertaking this activity
There are some local observers as the Free and Fair Election Network
(FAFEN), a coalition of thirty leading Pakistani civil society organizations,
whose establishment was facilitated by Asia Foundation with the support of
a donors consortium including the governments of Netherlands, Canada,
Switzerland, Norway, and the United Kingdom, as well as Australia.
Established in 2006, it is to observe the election process, educate
voters, and advocate for electoral and democratic reform. It has deployed cocoordinators in more than 264 National Assembly constituencies across the
country to observe all aspects of the election process. Since Nov 2007, these
observers send weekly election updates to the FAFEN in Islamabad.
An official of FAFEN told TNS that, by Election Day; the number of
its observers would reach 20,000 covering 45,000 polling stations out of
total 65,000. All these observers are trained on how to be a neutral onlooker
and have specially designed form that they fill and send it to FAFEN. But
despite this elaborate system, the FAFEN official said that the reports based
on observations from field reflect up to 60 percent of reality.
In its recent election update, FAFEN said that still as many as 15
million voters (17.65 per cent of an estimated 87.5 million citizens of voting
age) may still be missing from the Final Electoral Roll (FER), while 7.5
million voters on the FER (9.30 percent of 81 million records) may be listed
more than once and: 1.26 million CNIC numbered (1.55 percent of 81
million FER records) may be listed more than once.
Mir Jamilur Rahman expressed his views on Zardari-Nawaz contacts.
The meeting in Lahore between Nawaz Sharif and Zardari was not
productive, to say the least. The two leaders must have tried to bridge the
political gap between them that is widening by the day. While Nawaz Sharif
has made the restoration of the judges a cardinal point of his election
campaign, the PPP stance on this subject is different. Its emphasis is not on
the sacked judges but on the independent judiciary
Sharif follows a rigid policy for working with President
Musharraf. The PPP on the other hand is ready to cooperate with
Musharraf if he stays the course for democracy. Sharif has said repeatedly
that he would have no truck with Musharraf. This is not a rational attitude

1140

and is bound to damage the process of democratizing Pakistan. By Mondays

midnight the nation would know which way the countrys politics is
moving.
B A Malik from Islamabad wrote: A pro-Musharraf rally was
organized in Islamabad on February 11 whose participants were transported
by bus from various cities of Punjab. The reason for this show of artificial
popularity is best known to the president himself. It seems that the display
of bravado was aimed at dispelling the impression that his and PML-Qs
popularity was declining.
Ishtiaq Ahmed felt that it was time for democracy. Now, when we go
to the polls on 18 February it would be imperative that the vote is cast on
the basis of some reflection on the suitability of the candidate and the
party he/she represents. If we are allowed to take in a free and open election;
it should be celebrated as the first step in our right to enjoy all the other
rights given by our Constitution.
The elected representatives of the people of Pakistan should
consider this as the last chance to save this country from going to the
dogs. This I say somewhat rhetorically and in a prejudiced manner because I
find that dogs are faithful creatures who return more love than what is given
to them, but we human beings are not that reliable. We are capable of divine
magnificence as well as down right meanness and treachery. That is why
democracy must be able to accommodate all sorts of human beings as long
as they obey the law.
Ayesha T Haq analyzed the party manifestoes. Party manifestoes
are out, by and large they all say the right things and in varying degrees
the same things. They also do not disclose a plan of how they propose to
implement the goals set out in the manifesto It looks like everyone has a
plan and good intentions. It appears that we can, in varying degrees, look
forward to a better and brighter Pakistan.
If that be the case, then why the skepticism? Why the sense of
disbelief? The feeling that it will just be more of the same and absolutely
nothing is going to change? That we can move from a government that has
enjoys five years in power, its president continuing to enjoy power and
continuing the policies of the last eight years. And if all goes according to
plan, the president will remain in power for another five years, presumably
with the same policies to keep Pakistan on the trajectory it has found
1141

Perhaps it is a series and, in many cases, betrayals, that have led to

awareness among voters, an awareness that goes beyond the quick fixes of
yesteryear. It is an awareness that now analyzes the reasons for Pakistans
many problems. There is an awareness of a lack of fundamentals, of no
foundations on which to build a system that will work and sustain itself and
not be dependent on individuals. The awareness that this is a feudal
patriarchal society where even basic tights are granted by dispensation; not
as of right.
The voter has, it seems, become aware of the fact it is not the
individual who must be strong but the institution. whether the awareness
is a result of the intense struggle for an independent judiciary that began on
March 9 of last year or its to do with the debates, discussions and coverage
of major issues on television or the political parties themselves which have
picked up and highlighted some issues, or Aitzaz Ahsans Kal, Aaj or Kal, a
rather revolutionary and emotive poem filled with hope and the roadmap for
a better tomorrow, which found its way to YouTube and then, courtesy of the
BBC Urdu Service, to the voter. Or whether it was a combination of all of
the above, one does not know. What one has come to see is a new breed of
voter, one who is talking about the fundamentals required for a sustainable
democracy
Talking to people in Punjab about the elections, and whether they
think democracy is a slogan or a panacea and whether elections themselves
bring democracy, the majority said that while elections are good thing they
cannot on their own turn Pakistan into a functioning democracy. For that the
political parties need to build institutions, and to do that they need to
answer some basic questions. The first being; who will enforce our right to
all that is being promised us in the manifestoes? We have an independent
judiciary and what judge will be independent when he knows that any signs
of independence may lead to a life behind barbed wire?
The political parties need to be clear on many issues, including
that of an independent judiciary. There is a range of issues that concern
the citizen. These include the freedom of the media, in particular on the
doing away of all draconian and arbitrary rules and regulations. Will the
political parties work to make parliament supreme or will we continue to
have an over-powerful president? Will the president be subject to election
from the current assemblies? What about ratification of all post-Nov 3
actions? Will the political wing of the ISI be demolished; and what of the

1142

NFC Award? Is there any mainstream party talking about how they are going
to deal with all these thorny issues in the first few months of government?
I A Rehman observed: Circumstances have invested tomorrows
general election with extraordinary significance. The events of past few
months have no precedent in peoples memory. The forces of continuity
and change are locked in a contest which may determine Pakistans
capacity to emerge from the many crises it faces as a modern, stable, and
democratic state.
The Nov 3 manoeuvres were designed to tell the people that they
could find refuge neither under the Constitution nor under the law and,
at the same time, to allow the forces of status quo (continuity is the term
they prefer for themselves) to occupy the high ground of presidency the
forward line of defence against the forces of change. What has been
happening since then amounts to an all-out war to destroy the peoples right
to change their rulers as a step towards changing their lives. The scale of
pre-poll rigging witnessed over the past few weeks has no precedent in our
peoples history, which includes electoral experience over almost a century.
It was right to conclude that the general election had become
meaningless in the sense that high blocks had been placed on the road to
change. A boycott of the polls was the only option for forces of change.
But then these forces suffered a split Both sides found themselves stuck
in their holes.
The disagreement between the two sides calls for serious
reflection. The boycott camp says the election will not bring the desired
change. Those joining the electoral race have no answer to the argument that
the election will not instantly result in a transition from the garrison state to
a democratic one, in a dispensation that will allow the exploited masses a
say in their affairs.
At the same time the boycott camp has not been able to convince
their critics that the Pakistani society has the organization and the skills
needed to offer an alternative to the electoral route. Above all there seems to
be a lack of appreciation of the autocracys attitude towards elections.
It is necessary to bear in mind that authoritarian rulers do not like
elections The present regime has done everything possible to ensure that if
some of the opposition parties do not stay out of the electoral process the

1143

people must be scared away from the polling stations. In this crusade the
establishment has been joined by the militants who are abusing peoples
belief as it has rarely been abused before
The statusquowallahs hope to kill both the birds the boycotters as
well as the contesters. The former will lose points if a low turnout is ascribed
to voters fear of terrorists than to their call and latter will lose because a
poor turnout will favour sarkari candidates as it always does,
everywhere.
The fact is that the differences between the boycotters and the
contesters have become irrelevant. Both of them face a common
adversary who hopes to defeat them by frightening the voters. The most
important question today is: Can the two opposition camps that together
claim to represent the forces of change, see their common interest in foiling
this design? If the people are kept away from the polling stations the odds in
favour of the forces of status quo will improve, if they come out in great
numbers the odds in favour of the forces of change will improve.
The boycottwallahs are likely to say, that, firstly, the electionwallahs
do not stand for change and, secondly, their verdict about the election
being a farce will hold the ground regardless of the size of the turnout.
The first argument should not be pressed because it will degenerate into
acrimony as to who is holier than the other one.
The second argument needs to be reviewed, because the boycott
camp should not be complacent about any extension of the status quo.
They should see their interest in the weakening of the forces of the status
quo, howsoever small the margin of change. They may also realize that in a
long-drawn-out war small battles do always matter and a tactical retreat is
preferable to rout, for it is crucial to survive so as to be able to fought for
another day.
The situation at the moment is that for the common citizens the issue
has been reduced to a choice between a National Assembly dominated by the
party of status quo and an Assembly in which the forces of change can keep
the government on the run even if they cannot dominate the house (or in
which they can dominate the house). Whether one likes it or not the
political scenario will change after the election. The regime will try to
hide behind a new faade and the new faces in offices (not necessarily in
authority) will become its props and apologists.
1144

The democrats will have the task of ensuring that the movement
for the realization of democratic ideals, beginning with the restoration of the
judiciary, continues and becomes irresistible. For this it may be necessary to
forge an understanding between the democratic forces outside parliament
and whatever like-minded elements can be found inside parliament, because
any rift between them will harm the cause of democracy.
The foundation of this grand alliance can be laid tomorrow if the
boycotters and contesters both defend the peoples right to freedom from
fear and their right to vote. Since the interests of terrorists and the regime
appear to have coverage on an anti-democratic agenda, the people should
also close their ranks. Although the justification for boycotting the polls is
no longer as strong as it was a couple of months ago, the decision of those
still for a boycott is worthy of respect. Let them not vote but they can gather
at polling stations to support the voters bid to stand up to merchants of fear.
The overriding reason for unity in the peoples ranks is the realization
that Pakistans crises have reached a scale that any extension of the regime
(status quo) will be an irreversible disaster. This regime has made a mess of
governance. Its failures have gravely undermined the federation. On the one
hand the Baloch, the Pakhtoon and the Sindhis feel more alienated from the
state that ever. On the other hand the militants are threatening to tear away a
sizeable part of the country. The citizens have no security of life and liberty
and the economy is in ruins. A regime change has become a prerequisite not
only to stability and democracy, it is needed for survival. That makes
tomorrows poll a make and break event.
Shafqat Mahmoud discussed various post-polls scenarios before
saying that it was time to quit for Musharraf. There are only a few broad
results possible given that there are only three major players in the field. The
first but unlikely scenario is that Musharrafs favourite, the Q League
wins a majority of seats, over a hundred, with the PPP and PML-N
restricted to between fifty and sixty.
On the face of it, this seems like a happy scenario for Mr Musharraf
because with his allies in power, his position will become secure. However,
the problem for him is that this result will be widely seen as rigged. This
will bring all the opposition parties on a joint platform, not just the PPP
and PML-N but also after making a point of telling everyone how wrong
they were the parties in the APDM. They will not accept the results and
will launch a movement against it.
1145

The politicians will be joined in this struggle by the lawyers and

the civil society activists and perhaps the journalists, who have enough
reason to dislike the present dispensation. Can this have the potential of
becoming a true movement given that the earlier showings were not exactly
million man marches? It is difficult to make an accurate prediction, but with
some mobilization already having taken place during the election, it could
become more potent than before.
The regime will of course respond with large scale detentions and
arrests. The protesters will also be treated harshly and it is possible that the
movement may be temporarily suppressed but it will not go away. The
turbulence will continue necessitating actions that are even more repressive.
This will deteriorate the situation further until a point is reached where Mr
Musharraf will be left with no option but to resign.
A very important element missing in Mr Musharrafs armoury
this time around is the army. While I am not suggesting that it has turned
against him, General Kayani has initiated enough steps to distance the army
from politics and by extension from Musharraf. If the movement against Mr
Musharraf gathers momentum, it is unlikely that the army would come to his
rescue. He is now on his own
The second scenario is that the PPP wins big the PML-N making
a decent showing and the Q League lagging far behind. If this happens,
Mr Zardari and the party would be faced with a critical decision, to go with
Mr Musharraf or create a coalition against him. To me this is no brainer. The
party is convinced the Musharrafs caretaker government is doing everything
to rig the election against it. The rank and file also hold Musharraf negligent
if not complicit in the murder of Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto. I just cannot see
the PPP teaming up with him.
The more likely scenario is that the PPP will team up with PMLN and every other major and minor party sans the Q League. If this
happens, Mr Musharraf might as well resign but he will make one last
desperate effort to divide the PPP. Just as the patriots were created last time,
he will try to create a splinter group that will not accept Mr Zardaris
leadership and effectively try to scuttle an anti-Musharraf alliance. This
attempt is unlikely to succeed
The third scenario is a truly hung parliament in which all three
major parties get somewhere between sixty and seventy seats. This will
1146

open up a Pandoras Box because firstly, the election will again be

challenged as rigged by the PPP and PML but more importantly, much
wheeling and dealing will commence. If the Q is at seventy it needs another
sixty-five to form a government. I cannot see this happening. The more
likely scenario will still be that the PPP and PML-N will jointly form a
government albeit with a small majority
If any anti-Musharraf government is formed, the police, Rangers and
all other paramilitary forces come under the government and not the
presidency. The same is true for the ISI, the IB and of particular relevance to
the media, PEMRA. With army distancing itself from the president, he
will have nothing to counter an opposition government. Imagine
hundreds of thousands of people converging on the presidency and no one
stopping them, how long can Musharraf last?
Crystal ball gazing in our environment is a hazardous proposition but
whichever way one looks at it, the wheels of fortune have now turned
against General Musharraf. The only question is the timeframe for his
departure. Post election repressive measures, if successful, can buy him
some time but it will not change the eventual outcome. For the sake of the
country, time has come for him to make a graceful exit after the election.
Babar Sattar opined that the nation was relying on the upcoming polls
to usher change. Pervaiz Elahi avowed in a meeting with foreign envoys
last Tuesday that election would not bring a drastic change in the country
and predicted that the PML-Q would continue to rule. Could there be a
nightmare for this nation more horrid than that Whether one is troubled by
the oligarchic and unrepresentative structure of the state and its wrecked
institutions or worried sick about subsistence and basic utilities, this nation
is relying on the upcoming polls to usher change both in the
composition and mindset of the ruling elite.
Let us not set ourselves up for disappointment by thinking that
there are quick fixes for troubles we are presently mired in. We will
unfortunately have to continue to pay for the mutilation of institutions,
politics, economy and our social fabric by the general and his cronies for a
while irrespective of who forms the next government. But in order to stem
the rot, drain some pent-up anger and engender hope for a better future, this
country needs to turn a new leaf on February 18. And to that end alone,
routing of the Q-League in the elections will provide a welcome respite and

1147

catharsis, even if temporary. But a couple of days before the polls, making
wishes seems more appealing than making predictions.
The foremost wish then is to see the judges restored. Let us not
forget that the generals second coup was against the judiciary and not a
political government. It was the Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary-led
judiciary struggling to dispense justice while trying to break free from the
shackles of executive domination that provided hope to this nation when all
political parties were failing to rally people for change. The imperative of an
independent judiciary is best captured by the oft-quoted dictum of Lord
Chief Justice Hewart when he said that justice should not only be done, but
should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done? Thus, when it comes
to the questions of justice, no sensible distinctions can be drawn between
perceptions and reality.
And it is the perception of bias that fundamentally plagues our
post-November 3 judiciary. It might have judges whose financial integrity
is beyond reproach. But their timidity in face of the generals assault on their
parent institution and their complacency vis--vis a manifest wrong makes
one hesitant to swear by the intellectual honesty of even the best of the PCOjudges
While all excuses and justifications for the generals sinister attack on
the judiciary have been debated and discredited, the issue of the previous
oath of Chief Justice Chaudhry and others deserves comment. Simply put,
they were wrong then but are right now. And, two wrongs dont make a
right. But lets delve deeper. The two pro-PCO arguments in 2000 were (a)
a few judges cannot prevent martial law when overwhelming public opinion
supports the overthrow of constitutional government, and (b) in such an
event good judges are of more use inside the court than outside, to be able to
play their due role when time is ripe.
The arguments are week because (i) constitutions are meant to
guard against sudden lurches in popular opinion as well as the tyranny of the
majority and their unraveling cannot be justified on the basis of some roughand-ready public opinion poll, and (ii) conventional thinking suggests that,
once a judicial apologists for military intervention, always a judicial
apologist for military intervention...
Musharraf has no history of accepting mistakes (as obvious from
a quick read of his autobiography) and so the ruling regimes mulishness
1148

toward this judicial faux pas is expected. It is the smugness of the PPP
towards the defunct judges that are inexplicable? Asif Zardari has recently
stated that while he understands the importance of an independent judiciary
and would like to institutionalize it, rather than run after individuals. But
he must appreciate that the judges removed through the November 3 coup
constituted a majority of the superior judiciary and the demand for their
restoration is rooted not in personal loyalties but in principle and is drive by
the desire to develop an independent judicial organ.
Could a PPP government institutionalize the judiciary under
the able supervision of Chief Justice Dogar? Independent institutions are
not mechanical contrivances, but are run by individuals who are empowered
and rewarded for functioning independently. On November 3, the rightthinking judges were taught a lesson in subservience. If it is allowed to stick
we can bid adieu to the idea of independent minded judges. The PPP has
nothing to gain and much to lose from its tongue-in-cheek policy toward the
restoration of judges
In view of Mr Zardaris appreciation for institutions and for the sake
of his partys future, let us also hope that the PPP is also able to reinvent
itself as a party based on internal democracy. In the absence of consensual
charismatic leader, Mr Zardari will need to democratize the party and its
internal decision-making process if he wishes the PPP to live beyond a
prospective stint in power. He has the opportunity to preside over the
process of creating a mainstream democratic political institution that is
larger than individuals and allows for continuity and change of leadership
and ideas. If he succeeds in achieving this fiat he would be prevented from
divesting the party as personal heritage. But he will leave behind an organic
institution impervious to mortal fears of existence, apart from transforming
the political culture of the country and forcing other parties to follow suit.
And while we are wandering in the land of wishes, let us hope that
political opportunists such as those comprising the Q league become as
endangered species. The reason is simple: Q-league epitomizes most of
what rotten is in our political culture. The primary factor binding its
members is not shared loyalty to an ideology or political program or even an
individual, but their proclivity to seek power by all means and all costs. In
seeking public support the party principally relies on aligning parochial
interests and drumming up hate, prejudice and fears amongst a diverse
population. And its preferred system of governance is founded on either

1149

intimidating people through threat of illegal force or co-opting them through

a nepotistic system of personal patronage. It is hard to imagine a political
entity equally lacking in principles, convictions and scruples.
The more astute Q-leaguers have already flown away to greener
pastures. The rest will lick their wounds and try and return to their erstwhile
parties. It is hoped that mainstream parties, and especially PML-N, will
exhibit the prudence to focus on reorganizing themselves and injecting fresh
unadulterated blood into the party instead of mixing the separated shaft back
into the wheat. Instead of our independent judges, it is the Q-League
type politicos that need to be retired. Let us also hope that many of us
come out to vote in order to make some of these wishes come true.
Rahimullah Yusufzai looked at the prospects of religious parties and
termed it as the moment to truth for Fazlur Rehman. Maulana Fazlur
Rahman cannot campaign publicly due to security concerns in an
election that could drastically reduce his importance and cut down to size the
MMA, the religio-political alliance that he and fellow Islamic political
leaders led to a spectacular victory and power in the October 2002 general
elections.
Visiting the Maulana at his home a few days ago, one saw him
delivering a speech on the phone to an election rally of his party in Ziarat in
Baluchistan province One wasnt aware of the impact that the maulanas
speech would have made on the voters in Ziarat. His physical presence in
Ziarat and the rest of Balochistan would certainly have made a difference
and swung sections of the electorate to vote for his party candidates. Thanks
to the London-based MQM leader Altaf Hussain who introduced the idea of
telephonic speeches due to his inability or unwillingness to return to
Pakistan on account of security concerns, this innovative method to keep in
touch with supporters and run election campaign has now caught on. Islamic
politicians, forever keen to make use of modern technology even if they
initially suspect the western innovations to be some kind of a trap, are now
increasingly using all kinds of phones, emails, SMS texts and websites to
mobilize supporters, organize rallies and seek votes...
Being a realist, the pragmatic maulana conceded that the Frontier was
heading for a split mandate in the elections. However, he was hopeful that
the MMA despite the disunity in its ranks would emerge with the largest
bloc of seats in the NWFP Assembly. In his view, MMA would have to be
accommodated as part of the ruling coalition in the province and at the
1150

centre as the alliance would be holding the balance of power. Known for
long to be nursing ambition to become the prime minister, he humorously
remarked that the parties could agree to his becoming a consensus candidate
in view of the likelihood of a split mandate at the centre as well. That is
unlikely to happen.
Neither PPP nor PML-Q and PML-N would forego claim to the
prime ministers office in favor of someone like Maulana Fazlur Rehman
with much fewer number of seats in the National Assembly. In fact, his best
chance to grab the prime ministerial job was after the 2002 general
elections when the MMA had almost 70 seats in the NA and was the
dominant electoral force in the NWFP and Balochistan. That is now history
and there is no chance that the MMA would repeat this unprecedented
electoral performance.
However, it would be wrong to underestimate Maulana Fazlur
Rahman, who is widely acknowledged as a shrewd politician. One cannot
help recall that his late father Mufti Mahmoud too bargained for and got the
chief ministers job in the NWFP despite having only three seats in the
provincial assembly compared to 13 won by its coalition partner, NAP, the
predecessor to Khan Abdul Wali Khans ANP Times have changed and
Maulana Fazlur Rahman cannot claim or be expected to practice principled
politics in a country where politics has become the name of a money-making
and power-grabbing game and political parties have been turned into family
businesses.
As for the Maulana, he possesses a trump card that would keep
him and his ilk of Islamic politicians relevant even if they lose elections.
Here is how he explained it: The MMA is a wall that is blocking the
militants and hardliners. If the MMA compromising moderate Islamic
parties is removed from the scene and made irrelevant, then it would not be
easy dealing with the militants, particularly the emotional young men among
them, who believe in the power of the bullet unlike us striving for a peaceful
change through the power of the ballot.

REVIEW
Election Day approached with long list of complaints of pre-poll
rigging lodged with the Election Commission which did little to address

1151

them. Due to pre-poll attitude of the ECP and caretaker governments the
apprehensions about large-scale-rigging remained in place. At the same time
the fears of terrorist attacks could result in low turn out of voters.
The prevalent environments left two political parties as favourites to
win. The PPP was likely to benefit from sympathy vote. The PML-Q, as
already said, had the advantage of playing under conditions familiar to
home ground. But, these two parties by indulging in mudslinging overtime,
allowed PML-N to remain focused on positive electioneering in relative
calm and that could help it win a few more seats than expected.
This general election had a unique feature of absence of party leaders.
Qazi Hussain, Imran Khan and Mahmood Achakzai had boycotted the polls.
Sharif brothers were disqualified. Asif Zardari and Altaf Hussain stayed
away because of their own game-plans.
Quite astonishingly, the Scotland Yard Team arrived at definite
conclusion about the cause of Benazirs death despite the absence of
autopsy. The US also seemed in hurry in agreeing with the findings. This
haste on the part of Musharraf-Brown-Bush Axis raised suspicion.
General Kayani recalled 152 army officers working in civil bodies to
reduce army interference in politics. They had to pay the price for one
mans deeds, who remained in the senior most civilian slot and continued
staying in the army house even after his retirement from army.
The restoration of deposed judges did not receive the attention it
deserved because of the hustle of elections. The PCO Supreme Court,
however, kept consolidating its position by obliging the regime. A truly
enlightened bench dismissed the case against 499 Chak Shahzad farm
owners, including Musharraf and Shaukat Aziz. Similar judgments would be
appreciated by the democratic rulers as well.
20th February 2008

1152

1153