Please back off, Benazir!

#124 Posted by ferozk
“How will the KSE react to Benazir Bhutto coming to power?”
Feroz,

I really don’t know. She is not a favorite of business in Pakistan. Often stock market reactions are based on some very subjective reasons. They have never liked her and I don’t think that will change now.

You see the problem with Benazir is that she has no program. She does not offer any thing to people. People have a right to ask her why she wants to be the PM.

Here is a woman who has probably sacrificed more for a civilian set up in Pakistan than any one else. I have utmost respect for her for dealing with what she had to but her past scarifies are not enough for this Pakistan.

I am beginning to see the reasons that she is taking the risk to make a deal with Musharaf.

1. She promised that to the US
2. She needs to get her people out of the woods. There are plenty of PPP workers and leaders that are stuck outside of Pakistan and many have some cases against them. So in a way, I admire her loyalty to her people.

OTOH, the reality is that her negatives are piling up in every area and that is why I am asking her to back off, temporally.

Nawaz is not encumbered.

Harish, you are right but it is more than just looking over the shoulder. Why does she wanna carry a burden on her shoulders in the first place?

HP

Just curious. Please comment on this scuttle-bug doing the rounds...

How will the KSE react to Benazir Bhutto coming to power?

The rustles from the grapevines suggest that the financial markets and environment of Karachi will not react favorably to Bhutto coming back. The markets, according to the gossip, wants ideas, market reforms and programs for the future and not old failed policies of socialism.

Does Benazir Bhutto have an economic plan for the future, because in following her interviews, all I detect is a tale of foreign policy and no word on the real bread and butter issues, which impact the average person.

Would be interested in reading your comments.

Ciao

Re: HP # 121

I remember that discussion!

HP, I have had my share of brick-bats thrown at me, when I suggested, on this site, that politics/democracy in Pakistan is all about sharing power, with the military.

When the politicans of this land can imagine politics as existing without the army and are confident enough in their own ideas and accept and honor the fact that political and democratic legitimacy comes from the people and not the military, then maybe can debate the nature of democracy in Pakistan.

Ciao

#121 by HP

So at this time Nawaz represents the incremental benefit. I think Nawaz will probably learn democracy faster than Benazir and her party.

Also, the fact that Nawaz was humiliated and thrown out unceremoniously by Mushy (a man who NS had promoted out of turn (and undemocratically) to be the Army chief) and sent to exile could also push NS to respect democracy better and do his best to curtail future Army intervention into politics.

OTOH, if BB comes to power though a deal with Mushy, she will forever have to look over her shoulders to see if the Army is upto the same old mischief.

SONYA: Don't, Boris; sex without love is a meaningless experience.
BORIS: Yes, but as meaningless experiences go; it's one of the best.
— Love and Death, Woody Allen

Politics is like sex for us here. It is meaningless but we are addicted to it. So in this intoxicated state, I will explore some other areas too.

Couple of years ago in discussing with Ferozk, I said that both Benazir and Nawaz are not looking for democracy in Pakistan. They have no idea what democracy is all about. All they wanna do is share power with the army as they know that without the army, they can never reach the PM house again.

So I will attempt to adumbrate a case, well not exactly a case I will just be hypothesis-ing.

We are at a point where either one of the two will become the PM but would still share power with the army. However, in my thesis then, I did not count on an activist Judiciary. That helps but I also agree with Asadi that the activism will disappear in a jiffy when the right amount of pressure is brought down.

Here are the stages that will eventually take Pakistan to democracy.

1. The current situation: 80% Army, 20% civilians

2. Benazir’s solution: 60% Army, 40% civilians

3. Nawaz’s solution: 40% Army 60%civilians

4. After X numbers of years: 20% army 80% civilians

5. After another X numbers of years: 20% unknown, 80% civilian and that will be the dawn of democracy in Pakistan.

Now at this time we don’t know what those X’s represent but we hope the first X is hit in the next ten years or so.

So at this time Nawaz represents the incremental benefit. I think Nawaz will probably learn democracy faster than Benazir and her party. Nawaz comes from a business background and he has the ability to listen to people and advisers around him. Second, he knows when to rely on others to deliver.

And Benazir- the Less said, the better.

On the presently evolving events in Pakistan:

It is the USA which is pulling all the strings in this puppet show.

But for the US pressure, Mushy (and his khakis) would have reacted to the agitations in the usual, knee-jerk manner - by taking control and beating up a few people (the rest would simply cow down or would not care!) In fact, but for that call from the Condi, a state of "emergency" would have come embraced the Pakistani awaam so warmly that it would have promptly forgotten all its other troubles!

Now...can this forced march to democracy continue?

Only as long as the USA is engaged, which, looking at the calendar - should last until the first week of November 2008 when GWB the US President transitions to GWB the lame duck!

Is that enough time for that delicate seed of democracy to take root and start thriving on its own?

Let's see - how long has the US occupation and forced democratization of Iraq been ongoing?!!

I am not good at math - let somebody else figure it out!

Re: # 111

Tahmed Sahib:

Indira Gandhi indeed spent time in Jail. The following is from her obituary in Time Magazine dated Monday, Nov. 12, 1984.

"Mrs. Gandhi surprised everyone by calling elections early in 1977. She apparently believed that the people would once again rally behind her. To her consternation, the vote went overwhelmingly against her. Desai emerged from prison to become the new Prime Minister. Mrs. Gandhi was arrested on a charge of corruption, then released, then rearrested the following year and released again. "

Dear HP,

Masadi mian feels he can score some points with someone by abusing Jinnah.

He started it. If he makes erroneous and factually inaccurate comments, as is his wont, I will respond to him. Otherwise I don't feel the need to discuss Jinnah, Bhutto or Gandhi.

#31 Asadi,
“very well written article. I feel the the NS would be of greater incremental benefit to Pakistan, even though the US is going to be the "major beneficiary", simply because being pushed against the Army/BB alliance of convenience,”

I agree with the first part of the incremental benefit.(I will explore that in my next post)

There is something I would like to say about the US. I agree with most of your thesis and see nothing that people can easily dispute. Mostly people don’t have the information or don’t have the skills to figure out what the US establishment or the elite has been doing for a long time.

No mater what you may think of this behemoth called the US, you still have to deal with it. You don’t deal with the US by just getting mad at it all the time. The better way is to educate people. You are a professor and you know teaching is the other name of patience.

We know the US is playing a horrible game in Pakistan but just yelling foul, foul will not stop the US. What will stop the US would be for us to find ways to strengthen institutions in Pakistan. Strong political system and institutions are the first line of defense.
However, the countries that have strong institution still would not like to see the US on the wrong side.

#50 Posted by zeemax

“Wasn't it you who was calling the CJ 'corrupt' in March and the reference against him fully justified?”

I have not changed my opinion about him. Please read the para where I discussed the CJ issue and also read the para before and the one right after, hopefully, you will figure out what I meant.

“perhaps with the military/agencies clandestine support - as you're wont to saying often?”

Assuming that things happen in Pakistan without wink-wink, nod-nod from some interested group(s) is naive.

The only importance of Taliban from the Pakistan pov is that they are a source of trouble in a small part of Pakistan. They can’t take over Karachi, Lahore or even Islamabad.

If the US and Pakistan finally decide to remove them from the tribal areas, they can accomplish that fairly quickly. But then War on Terror would end too.

#32 Posted by Dash_Dot

“(a) that the sovereignty of pakistan flows from the US”

That appears to be the case but the US presence in the area is a reality. It is also a reality that Pakistan-US relations, no matter how lopsided, have almost 60 years of history. With the big powers, you really are never an equal partner sometime you give up a few things to gain others. I think on the whole Pakistan has been a net gainer. But in the process Pakistani Army has become entirely depended on the US.
I am avoiding bringing India into this discussion but if you notice some features of the current US-Indian relations resemble the US –Pak relations in the 60s. And, this can lead to anywhere. ( Again, I will not discuss anything more about India on this thread)

“(iii) Why hark back to Bibi and Shareef-Badmash? I mean these two guys have been out of the country for a long time. A generation (10 years is like a generation these days). Yet they seem to be holding on to the levers of power and seem to have an influence on events in Pakistan. So was Mush-e-ruff and the Army absolute failures here?”

This is a great, great point really. I think politicians in our part of the world just don’t retire. These two have served the army well at different times so they are maintained for situations like the one we are facing in Pakistan now. (Read between the lines now, details some other time.)

“you have done a good job of joining a few dots, and setting the scene –“

Thanks.

I agree with your #39. even the French, British, Chinese and Germans can’t ignore the US.

#40, you are beginning to surprise me. I will respond to your comment on this thread.

#111 Tauheed sahib

Mrs. Gandhi was jailed for a week for the "Contempt of Parliament" right after she was defeated in the 1977 elections (which followed her "emergency" reign of 1975-77).

I hope you are right about better days ahead in Pakistan. Unfortunately, based on the track record, a lot of caution and realism is necessary!

Because all the "players" are old dogs - which have a difficult time with new tricks.

Asadi and Manto,

I think there is no need to continue with the Jinnah or ZAB discussion.
Asadi,
There are some political realities that one person cannot change. I will come back to this later but for the time being, lets restrict this discussion to the current situation in Pakistan.

I don't see any reason to change what I said a few weeks ago on another board. Here it is again for those who were not on that board:

#10 Posted by dost_mittar on August 6, 2007 7:42:50 am
Mufti Saheb:

ADVANTAGE NAWAZ SAHRIF!

I think that you have got it all wrong. Things are moving in Pakistan at a breakneck speed, but if I were a betting man, I would place my bet on Nawaz Sharif at this point. Here are my reasons:

1. Benazir has screwed up badly. Under her personal compulsions, she has not realised that Musharraf has become so unpopular that any alliance with him is going to hurt her more than help her.

2. She seems to have overestimated her dictatorial hold over her party. There is a mini exodus from her party, all kinds of anonymous rebellious statements are coming out. If Aitezas Hussain joins the fray against her, it would be all over for her, at least in Punjab.

3. As if alliance with Musharraf was not enough of an albatross, she has also the support of the US, which has never been as unpopular in Pakistan as now. And she seems to be unabashedly parading this support by making trips to Washington and advertising her special relationships with leaders there.

4. Her strength has been the very people who have led the campaign for the Chief Justice. How can they support her after tasting blood in their fight against Musharraf?

5. Nawaz, on the other hand, has been playing his cards very well. He has been consistent in his opposition to Musharraf and has made joint alliance with all those opposed to the dictator. He has the additional halo of the martyr as he was the victim of military coup.

6. He has steadfastly refused to support the US actions.

7. Members of the PML (Q) have already started deserting the sinking ship of Musharraf and coming back to his party.

8. Javed Hashmi's release has boosted the morale of his troops. If he wins his case in the Supreme Court for his reentry, he will make a triumphant entry to Pakistan.


So, get ready for another term for the "vadi tind" under the new wig.

anil #85 you write "In India, after all, Indira Gandhi was sent to jail by active and independent judiciary."

Is this really true? I dont think you meant to write this, since I dont recall Indira Gandhi ever being jailed (at least after 1947).

As for Pakistan, I think the Supreme Court of Pakistan has set a example of standing up for the rule of law that is unique not merely in Pakistan history but indeed in the history of any other country in the world!!! I cant recall a Chief Justice ever being submitted to the type of bullying by a dictator in any country - and refusing to bow down - as the Chief Justice. Nor can I recall the public in any country coming out on the streets to support a Judge's stand for the rights of his people.

As a Pakistani, I can hold my head high - thanks to the Chief Justice and the people who came to support him.

Masadi: you say you agrees with the point I made!! I must be slipping in my old age. :-(

On the point of what caused Musharraf's weakened position - I think my friend that you are confusing cause and affect.

The cause of Musharraf's weakened position is the courageous stand of the CJ who refused to bow to Musharraf's pressure, and the widespread public support (including unity shown by all political parties except mqm) for the CJ's call for the rule of law. The result has been Bush's call for free and fair elections.

Without the CJ's stand, without the sacrifices of made on May 12 by the true martyrs of for democracy in Pakistan, Musharraf would have gotten away with claiming "business as usual" in getting himself rubber-stamped for another 5 years.