Compilation of Opinions on the Military Takeover in Pakistan
Chowk Staff October 18, 1999
#30 Posted by jay on October 20, 1999 7:00:16 pm
General PM is a man of integrity, no doubt, he refused to attend the welcome ceremony for Atal vajpaye in Lahore, may be he knew kargill is on the way.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#29 Posted by sansari786 on October 20, 1999 3:54:37 pm
Ever since the military took over. I have been watching all the news and views on TV as well as on the internet and newspapers. It sure is sad for Pakistan that military had to take over from Navaaz government. All the media specially the Western and Indian, have been condemning the take over by the army. To quote them, they are labelling the Navaaz government as a democratically elected government that was thrown away by military. Moreover, they say that the army took over without respecting the constitution. One thing I cannot understand is that why the western media labels Navaaz Sharif`s government or Benazir`s government for that matter a democratically elected government? Don`t they remember the percentage of votes casted in the last elections that were the lowest in the history of Pakistan? If I remember correctly it was less than 17%. That outcome clearly showed that Navaaz government was in no way a popularly elected government. Moreover, the overall Pakistani reaction, inside and outside country showed that majority of Pakistani people were fed up with Navaaz and his idiot cabinet members and their policies. If we carefully examine the scenario of the ousted government, we can clearly tell that Navaaz was bent upon destroying democracy in Pakistan. The dispute with Chief Justice, former COAS Jehangir Karamat, PML-N activists attacking the supreme court building and the conflict with present COAS. He never wanted to eliminate corruption. His Chief Ehtesaab Commission Saif-ur-Rehman, corrupt upto his neck was made Ehtesaaab Chairman. Newspaper journalists and editors being threatned and harrassed. Taking all these factors into account how can someone say that Navaaz Sharif was wrongfully removed.
Moreover, my concept is that country`s sovereignty, existence and well being is more important than a democratically elected government and the constitution. Navaaz was trying to make some amendments in the constitution that would have given him the sole power to do what ever he wants to do and that would have made Pakistan weaker. Someone had to stop him. And I fully support General Pervaiz Mussharaf for his actions. For those who say it is wrong, only time will show if the action taken is right or wrong. I hope that the army with the assistance of other civilian rule (advisory council based upon scholars, teachers, and scientists) can do a ruthless accountability from top to bottom and make sure that all the politicians are banned for life from entering into politics. All their assets be put into national treasury and new faces with strong educational backgroung and patriotism be brought in to run the the country.
Moreover, my concept is that country`s sovereignty, existence and well being is more important than a democratically elected government and the constitution. Navaaz was trying to make some amendments in the constitution that would have given him the sole power to do what ever he wants to do and that would have made Pakistan weaker. Someone had to stop him. And I fully support General Pervaiz Mussharaf for his actions. For those who say it is wrong, only time will show if the action taken is right or wrong. I hope that the army with the assistance of other civilian rule (advisory council based upon scholars, teachers, and scientists) can do a ruthless accountability from top to bottom and make sure that all the politicians are banned for life from entering into politics. All their assets be put into national treasury and new faces with strong educational backgroung and patriotism be brought in to run the the country.
#28 Posted by UR on October 20, 1999 11:32:29 am
macgupta #23:
You stated, ``Musharraf, of course, was one of the authors of the Kargil fiasco.`` I would have to disagree with this. I think Musharraf executed the Kargil affair, I highly doubt he authored it. The Pakistan and Indian military have certain scenarios and counter scenarios planned well in advance. This is how most militaries work. Operations like the Pakistan action in Kargil, or the Indian action in Siachen, require a lot of time, planning, and most of all training. Perhaps, years of planning. I have a feeling Pakistan has had various plans in place for counter-actions to the Indian action in Siachen, years ago. (at that time Musharraf was probably only a Brigadier). Kargil was one of these plans. A military offensive is never carried out at the spur of the moment.
You stated, ``Musharraf, of course, was one of the authors of the Kargil fiasco.`` I would have to disagree with this. I think Musharraf executed the Kargil affair, I highly doubt he authored it. The Pakistan and Indian military have certain scenarios and counter scenarios planned well in advance. This is how most militaries work. Operations like the Pakistan action in Kargil, or the Indian action in Siachen, require a lot of time, planning, and most of all training. Perhaps, years of planning. I have a feeling Pakistan has had various plans in place for counter-actions to the Indian action in Siachen, years ago. (at that time Musharraf was probably only a Brigadier). Kargil was one of these plans. A military offensive is never carried out at the spur of the moment.
#27 Posted by UR on October 20, 1999 10:47:47 am
Whiteact #17
Interesting article. Would like to know your views on Siachen, and India`s action in India`s part of Kashmir, as well as the 500,000+ Indians soldiers there, and its effect on the Indian economy.
Could you let me know where Lal Advani was born.
Interesting article. Would like to know your views on Siachen, and India`s action in India`s part of Kashmir, as well as the 500,000+ Indians soldiers there, and its effect on the Indian economy.
Could you let me know where Lal Advani was born.
#26 Posted by bahmad on October 20, 1999 4:53:40 am
In response to macgupta (Reply # 22):
Dear Arun Gupta:
You have provided some interesting observations and arguments about the issue of Kashmir. To understand the complex legal and political background of Kashmir problem, I recommend (at least to hiba-sameen) Chapter 8: Kashmir and the United Nations in Mushtaqur Rahman`s Divided Kashmir (1996). Critical readers would also like to read a similar chapter written by an Indian author.
Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad
Dear Arun Gupta:
You have provided some interesting observations and arguments about the issue of Kashmir. To understand the complex legal and political background of Kashmir problem, I recommend (at least to hiba-sameen) Chapter 8: Kashmir and the United Nations in Mushtaqur Rahman`s Divided Kashmir (1996). Critical readers would also like to read a similar chapter written by an Indian author.
Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad
#25 Posted by tahmed321 on October 20, 1999 12:14:07 am
I Quote:
``The military could do good if the leaders of the new government are truly brilliant, economically informed, politically adept, principled, tolerant of genuine dissent and protective of human rights,`` said George Perkovich, a South Asia expert. ``But men of such virtue are extremely rare anywhere, let alone in Pakistan.``
And I pray for our long-suffering people.
``The military could do good if the leaders of the new government are truly brilliant, economically informed, politically adept, principled, tolerant of genuine dissent and protective of human rights,`` said George Perkovich, a South Asia expert. ``But men of such virtue are extremely rare anywhere, let alone in Pakistan.``
And I pray for our long-suffering people.
#24 Posted by macgupta on October 19, 1999 9:05:35 am
It has been repeated many times here that the Nawaz Sharif government was not democratic in that it did not respond to public opinion.
However, is it not true that the government was unable to impose a General Sales Tax, as required by the IMF, because of opposition from small traders and shopkeepers -- a good example of democracy in action.
The fact is that no one applied any pressure on the Sharif government for his acts of amending the Constitution, or attempted muzzling of the press, or degrading of the judiciary. Since no one protesting on the streets now against the dismissal of Sharif and that is taken to mean public support of the coup, no one protesting on the streets back then should be taken to mean public support of those actions.
We are treated to the spectacle of Pakistanis in arguing for Kashmiris` right to something that they deem themselves unfit for; the illegitimacy of Sharif`s government which did many things which provoked no street demonstrations; the legitimacy of the coup because it has provoked no street demonstrations. The public protests about Sharif, even on this forum, are all after the fact of his removal and this consensus supposedly legitimizes the coup in the way that an election cannot (by the way, the turn out in the last election in Pakistan was 34%, not 17% or 25% ).
The fact is that Sharif permitted reality to intrude on Pakistan`s national obsession with Kashmir, and this is the one cardinal sin that can never be forgiven. Musharraf, of course, was one of the authors of the Kargil fiasco, but the army is to be trusted, because as per its own statement, it is the only intact institution in the country, and so who can disbelieve the army, when it is the only intact institution in the country as per its own statement.....As it is, Pakistanis can still dream that the Pakistani army will have taken Srinagar by next summer; the army will never let them down.
-arun gupta
However, is it not true that the government was unable to impose a General Sales Tax, as required by the IMF, because of opposition from small traders and shopkeepers -- a good example of democracy in action.
The fact is that no one applied any pressure on the Sharif government for his acts of amending the Constitution, or attempted muzzling of the press, or degrading of the judiciary. Since no one protesting on the streets now against the dismissal of Sharif and that is taken to mean public support of the coup, no one protesting on the streets back then should be taken to mean public support of those actions.
We are treated to the spectacle of Pakistanis in arguing for Kashmiris` right to something that they deem themselves unfit for; the illegitimacy of Sharif`s government which did many things which provoked no street demonstrations; the legitimacy of the coup because it has provoked no street demonstrations. The public protests about Sharif, even on this forum, are all after the fact of his removal and this consensus supposedly legitimizes the coup in the way that an election cannot (by the way, the turn out in the last election in Pakistan was 34%, not 17% or 25% ).
The fact is that Sharif permitted reality to intrude on Pakistan`s national obsession with Kashmir, and this is the one cardinal sin that can never be forgiven. Musharraf, of course, was one of the authors of the Kargil fiasco, but the army is to be trusted, because as per its own statement, it is the only intact institution in the country, and so who can disbelieve the army, when it is the only intact institution in the country as per its own statement.....As it is, Pakistanis can still dream that the Pakistani army will have taken Srinagar by next summer; the army will never let them down.
-arun gupta
#23 Posted by macgupta on October 19, 1999 8:24:20 am
In reply to Hiba_Sameen, the clearest indication that Pakistan considers Kashmir to be its property is that it ceded several hundred square miles of Pakistan-held Kashmir to China, way back in the 1960s.
The second best indication that Pakistan considers Kashmir to be its property is that Azad Kashmir, the so-called independent state sheltered by Pakistan is only a small part of Kashmir that is held by Pakistan. The rest supposedly ``acceded`` to Pakistan.
The third best indication is the record of past failed negotiations with India, where the Pakistani stand that India should yield all of Hari Singh`s state to Pakistan, regardless of ethnic composition is on record (e.g., talks in the early 60s).
Please examine the original boundaries of Raja Hari Singh`s state and a current map of the region if you do not believe me.
While Pakistan keeps harping on UN resolutions, no Pakistani seems to remember that a precondition of implementation of the resolutions is that Pakistan withdraw from all of the area that was Raja Hari Singh`s state. After Pakistan`s actions, these resolutions are clearly not implementable, and one can conclude that Pakistan is not serious about Kashmiri self-determination; it is serious only about capturing the territory.
There are also innumerable editorials, opinions and letters to the editors in Pakistani English newspapers that an independent Kashmir would be a disaster for Pakistan.
You may argue that public opinion does not matter; but then neither you nor I can speak for the only people whose opinion matters -- the military. All indications are, however, that they are for annexation of Kashmir.
-arun gupta
The second best indication that Pakistan considers Kashmir to be its property is that Azad Kashmir, the so-called independent state sheltered by Pakistan is only a small part of Kashmir that is held by Pakistan. The rest supposedly ``acceded`` to Pakistan.
The third best indication is the record of past failed negotiations with India, where the Pakistani stand that India should yield all of Hari Singh`s state to Pakistan, regardless of ethnic composition is on record (e.g., talks in the early 60s).
Please examine the original boundaries of Raja Hari Singh`s state and a current map of the region if you do not believe me.
While Pakistan keeps harping on UN resolutions, no Pakistani seems to remember that a precondition of implementation of the resolutions is that Pakistan withdraw from all of the area that was Raja Hari Singh`s state. After Pakistan`s actions, these resolutions are clearly not implementable, and one can conclude that Pakistan is not serious about Kashmiri self-determination; it is serious only about capturing the territory.
There are also innumerable editorials, opinions and letters to the editors in Pakistani English newspapers that an independent Kashmir would be a disaster for Pakistan.
You may argue that public opinion does not matter; but then neither you nor I can speak for the only people whose opinion matters -- the military. All indications are, however, that they are for annexation of Kashmir.
-arun gupta
#22 Posted by macgupta on October 19, 1999 8:24:20 am
In reply to Hiba_Sameen, the clearest indication that Pakistan considers Kashmir to be its property is that it ceded several hundred square miles of Pakistan-held Kashmir to China, way back in the 1960s.
The second best indication that Pakistan considers Kashmir to be its property is that Azad Kashmir, the so-called independent state sheltered by Pakistan is only a small part of Kashmir that is held by Pakistan. The rest supposedly ``acceded`` to Pakistan.
The third best indication is the record of past failed negotiations with India, where the Pakistani stand that India should yield all of Hari Singh`s state to Pakistan, regardless of ethnic composition is on record (e.g., talks in the early 60s).
Please examine the original boundaries of Raja Hari Singh`s state and a current map of the region if you do not believe me.
While Pakistan keeps harping on UN resolutions, no Pakistani seems to remember that a precondition of implementation of the resolutions is that Pakistan withdraw from all of the area that was Raja Hari Singh`s state. After Pakistan`s actions, these resolutions are clearly not implementable, and one can conclude that Pakistan is not serious about Kashmiri self-determination; it is serious only about capturing the territory.
There are also innumerable editorials, opinions and letters to the editors in Pakistani English newspapers that an independent Kashmir would be a disaster for Pakistan.
You may argue that public opinion does not matter; but then neither you nor I can speak for the only people whose opinion matters -- the military. All indications are, however, that they are for annexation of Kashmir.
-arun gupta
The second best indication that Pakistan considers Kashmir to be its property is that Azad Kashmir, the so-called independent state sheltered by Pakistan is only a small part of Kashmir that is held by Pakistan. The rest supposedly ``acceded`` to Pakistan.
The third best indication is the record of past failed negotiations with India, where the Pakistani stand that India should yield all of Hari Singh`s state to Pakistan, regardless of ethnic composition is on record (e.g., talks in the early 60s).
Please examine the original boundaries of Raja Hari Singh`s state and a current map of the region if you do not believe me.
While Pakistan keeps harping on UN resolutions, no Pakistani seems to remember that a precondition of implementation of the resolutions is that Pakistan withdraw from all of the area that was Raja Hari Singh`s state. After Pakistan`s actions, these resolutions are clearly not implementable, and one can conclude that Pakistan is not serious about Kashmiri self-determination; it is serious only about capturing the territory.
There are also innumerable editorials, opinions and letters to the editors in Pakistani English newspapers that an independent Kashmir would be a disaster for Pakistan.
You may argue that public opinion does not matter; but then neither you nor I can speak for the only people whose opinion matters -- the military. All indications are, however, that they are for annexation of Kashmir.
-arun gupta
#21 Posted by macgupta on October 19, 1999 7:51:45 am
In reply to Hiba_Sameen, the clearest indication that Pakistan considers Kashmir to be its property is that it ceded several hundred square miles of Pakistan-held Kashmir to China, way back in the 1960s.
-arun gupta
-arun gupta
#20 Posted by Moez on October 19, 1999 7:38:37 am
Re: Al-Muhajiroun
Give power to ULEMA!!!!!!!!!!
What the hell you smoking, you are telling us through your `esteem intellect` that let the wolves guard the sheep.
Oh, boy, just the thought of so called Uleema running the Nuclear Pakistan bring the shiver down my spine.
Uleema! These are the barbaric, primitive, uncivilized bunch of hordes, whose only passion is to kill `infidels`
(Muslim or non-Muslim alike).
Moez `Momin`
#19 Posted by Peer on October 19, 1999 6:07:02 am
Dear Friends at chowk,
Heartiest Greetings at the takeover by the army of our Pakistan.Feel ShariefMian was operating the government machinery of Pakistan as a family corporation.I have reliable information to prove that he has property worth 23 million pounds in Hampstead (U.K.)This is over and above the various financial frauds he has commited.
May Allah take note of these details and treat him with out mercy.
ALI
Heartiest Greetings at the takeover by the army of our Pakistan.Feel ShariefMian was operating the government machinery of Pakistan as a family corporation.I have reliable information to prove that he has property worth 23 million pounds in Hampstead (U.K.)This is over and above the various financial frauds he has commited.
May Allah take note of these details and treat him with out mercy.
ALI
#18 Posted by whiteact on October 19, 1999 6:07:02 am
I am an Indian (presently Non-Resident Indian). I have been following the events in Pakistan with interest since some time.
Kargil was unfortunate. Whatever may be the justifications for Pak army, the action was not right. Not even a moment I was worried about Indian defence. The only a question was the period of time required to repel the intruders. But what I was worried was the cost of war. The immediate cost and the demands from Indian army in the forthcoming budgets.
Both India and Pakistan spend unnecessarily huge amount of scarce funds for the defence. We both have huge population which needs support for education and civic amenities. Our children deserve a better society and better standard of living than we had. The rich in both the countries continue to enjoy all the facilities. Only the government can provide facilities and ooportunities to the poor and the lower middle class to improve their standard of living.
I know many Indians are happy that Pakistan lost its democracy. Many may even envy that Pakistan got stability (through its army)and it may actually rebuild its shattered economy.
But the sad fact is that both the countries will suffer. In Pakistan with the military controlloing the purse, more funds will be diverted to defence. In India, because of Kargil and the presnt military control in Pakistan defence budget will be increased. So less funds towards the social welfare.
An unrelated point: The time spent on issue of Kashmir, as seen in PTV programmes, is amazing. It looks as though a substantial part of Pakistan`s productive time and energy is wasted on Kashmir. (And it does not have impact on India)
A teaser: I am happy that an Indian is ruling Pakistan!! Your Chief Executive was born in India and so he is as Indian as myself!
Kargil was unfortunate. Whatever may be the justifications for Pak army, the action was not right. Not even a moment I was worried about Indian defence. The only a question was the period of time required to repel the intruders. But what I was worried was the cost of war. The immediate cost and the demands from Indian army in the forthcoming budgets.
Both India and Pakistan spend unnecessarily huge amount of scarce funds for the defence. We both have huge population which needs support for education and civic amenities. Our children deserve a better society and better standard of living than we had. The rich in both the countries continue to enjoy all the facilities. Only the government can provide facilities and ooportunities to the poor and the lower middle class to improve their standard of living.
I know many Indians are happy that Pakistan lost its democracy. Many may even envy that Pakistan got stability (through its army)and it may actually rebuild its shattered economy.
But the sad fact is that both the countries will suffer. In Pakistan with the military controlloing the purse, more funds will be diverted to defence. In India, because of Kargil and the presnt military control in Pakistan defence budget will be increased. So less funds towards the social welfare.
An unrelated point: The time spent on issue of Kashmir, as seen in PTV programmes, is amazing. It looks as though a substantial part of Pakistan`s productive time and energy is wasted on Kashmir. (And it does not have impact on India)
A teaser: I am happy that an Indian is ruling Pakistan!! Your Chief Executive was born in India and so he is as Indian as myself!
#17 Posted by ariff on October 19, 1999 6:07:02 am
BEWARE FROM WESTERNS
The example in pakistan which is set by the military of pakistan should be appreciated by all over the world especially to third world countries. The ordinary peoples in the countries dont know what the rulers are doing. There should be check and balance out side from the parliament.
If i will take the example of third world countries like India, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Thailand etc then we see that these countries are on the mercy of there politicians. What ever the steps they are taking they ignore the common peoples.They use to take only consideration of following the westerns. Now if i will comre into this point that what is the difference between westerns and others. Actually now a days any concept comes like globalisation, trade blocs, etc it comes from westerns. These concepts are actually made to demolish the already poor countries and make the richest countries more and more rich.
If i come to the political aspects of world then it is common thinking that the westerns like the thing which is more beneficial to them. For example they they gave hidden support to Gen Zia in Pakistan, Gen Irshad in bangladesh and sohartu in Indonesia. but when ever they found any time to weaken the regions of asia they never missed the chance like East temur is current example. Even Indonesia is in great trouble and instead of solving its problem the so called UNO divide it through western plans.
now if i come to nuclear capability then before Indopak there was no any rule or act to stop the nations from this disastrous plans but now when the contries are advancing towards this capability for the solidarity of their on nations the westerns started making noise.
If i come to economy, the westerns were well established in several kind of industries but now they are afraid of from the other third world countries because the third world countries started producing the products in competition with westerns. so the western mind started exploiting the third world countries by making issue of child labour and sweat houses.
So what ever is going on in ASIA is not in favour of westerns because now no body will listen on them.One of the example is Pakistan. Through the governments of their own choice they use to exploit the region. But the Pakistan nation is a nation full of pride and the step the army took recently in pakistan is not only favourable for pakistan but also to asia and third world countries. the step taken by millitary in pakistan should be appreciated by us at least there is some body who can save the puplic from cruel rulers. Democracy does not means that to be a prime minister but acting as a cruel dictator.
I hope that the change in pakistan will be good for asia.
Ariff Mahmood
Sunway College
Malaysia.
The example in pakistan which is set by the military of pakistan should be appreciated by all over the world especially to third world countries. The ordinary peoples in the countries dont know what the rulers are doing. There should be check and balance out side from the parliament.
If i will take the example of third world countries like India, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Thailand etc then we see that these countries are on the mercy of there politicians. What ever the steps they are taking they ignore the common peoples.They use to take only consideration of following the westerns. Now if i will comre into this point that what is the difference between westerns and others. Actually now a days any concept comes like globalisation, trade blocs, etc it comes from westerns. These concepts are actually made to demolish the already poor countries and make the richest countries more and more rich.
If i come to the political aspects of world then it is common thinking that the westerns like the thing which is more beneficial to them. For example they they gave hidden support to Gen Zia in Pakistan, Gen Irshad in bangladesh and sohartu in Indonesia. but when ever they found any time to weaken the regions of asia they never missed the chance like East temur is current example. Even Indonesia is in great trouble and instead of solving its problem the so called UNO divide it through western plans.
now if i come to nuclear capability then before Indopak there was no any rule or act to stop the nations from this disastrous plans but now when the contries are advancing towards this capability for the solidarity of their on nations the westerns started making noise.
If i come to economy, the westerns were well established in several kind of industries but now they are afraid of from the other third world countries because the third world countries started producing the products in competition with westerns. so the western mind started exploiting the third world countries by making issue of child labour and sweat houses.
So what ever is going on in ASIA is not in favour of westerns because now no body will listen on them.One of the example is Pakistan. Through the governments of their own choice they use to exploit the region. But the Pakistan nation is a nation full of pride and the step the army took recently in pakistan is not only favourable for pakistan but also to asia and third world countries. the step taken by millitary in pakistan should be appreciated by us at least there is some body who can save the puplic from cruel rulers. Democracy does not means that to be a prime minister but acting as a cruel dictator.
I hope that the change in pakistan will be good for asia.
Ariff Mahmood
Sunway College
Malaysia.
#16 Posted by ariff on October 19, 1999 6:07:02 am
HUM ZINDA QUAM HAIN
The example in pakistan which is set by the military of pakistan should be appreciated by all over the world especially to third world countries. The ordinary peoples in the countries dont know what the rulers are doing. There should be check and balance out side from the parliament.
If i will take the example of third world countries like India, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Thailand etc then we see that these countries are on the mercy of there politicians. What ever the steps they are taking they ignore the common peoples.They use to take only consideration of following the westerns. Now if i will comre into this point that what is the difference between westerns and others. Actually now a days any concept comes like globalisation, trade blocs, etc it comes from westerns. These concepts are actually made to demolish the already poor countries and make the richest countries more and more rich.
If i come to the political aspects of world then it is common thinking that the westerns like the thing which is more beneficial to them. For example they they gave hidden support to Gen Zia in Pakistan, Gen Irshad in bangladesh and sohartu in Indonesia. but when ever they found any time to weaken the regions of asia they never missed the chance like East temur is current example. Even Indonesia is in great trouble and instead of solving its problem the so called UNO divide it through western plans.
now if i come to nuclear capability then before Indopak there was no any rule or act to stop the nations from this disastrous plans but now when the contries are advancing towards this capability for the solidarity of their on nations the westerns started making noise.
If i come to economy, the westerns were well established in several kind of industries but now they are afraid of from the other third world countries because the third world countries started producing the products in competition with westerns. so the western mind started exploiting the third world countries by making issue of child labour and sweat houses.
So what ever is going on in ASIA is not in favour of westerns because now no body will listen on them.One of the example is Pakistan. Through the governments of their own choice they use to exploit the region. But the Pakistan nation is a nation full of pride and the step the army took recently in pakistan is not only favourable for pakistan but also to asia and third world countries. the step taken by millitary in pakistan should be appreciated by us at least there is some body who can save the puplic from cruel rulers. Democracy does not means that to be a prime minister but acting as a cruel dictator.
I hope that the change in pakistan will be good for asia.
Ariff Mahmood
Sunway College
Malaysia.
The example in pakistan which is set by the military of pakistan should be appreciated by all over the world especially to third world countries. The ordinary peoples in the countries dont know what the rulers are doing. There should be check and balance out side from the parliament.
If i will take the example of third world countries like India, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Thailand etc then we see that these countries are on the mercy of there politicians. What ever the steps they are taking they ignore the common peoples.They use to take only consideration of following the westerns. Now if i will comre into this point that what is the difference between westerns and others. Actually now a days any concept comes like globalisation, trade blocs, etc it comes from westerns. These concepts are actually made to demolish the already poor countries and make the richest countries more and more rich.
If i come to the political aspects of world then it is common thinking that the westerns like the thing which is more beneficial to them. For example they they gave hidden support to Gen Zia in Pakistan, Gen Irshad in bangladesh and sohartu in Indonesia. but when ever they found any time to weaken the regions of asia they never missed the chance like East temur is current example. Even Indonesia is in great trouble and instead of solving its problem the so called UNO divide it through western plans.
now if i come to nuclear capability then before Indopak there was no any rule or act to stop the nations from this disastrous plans but now when the contries are advancing towards this capability for the solidarity of their on nations the westerns started making noise.
If i come to economy, the westerns were well established in several kind of industries but now they are afraid of from the other third world countries because the third world countries started producing the products in competition with westerns. so the western mind started exploiting the third world countries by making issue of child labour and sweat houses.
So what ever is going on in ASIA is not in favour of westerns because now no body will listen on them.One of the example is Pakistan. Through the governments of their own choice they use to exploit the region. But the Pakistan nation is a nation full of pride and the step the army took recently in pakistan is not only favourable for pakistan but also to asia and third world countries. the step taken by millitary in pakistan should be appreciated by us at least there is some body who can save the puplic from cruel rulers. Democracy does not means that to be a prime minister but acting as a cruel dictator.
I hope that the change in pakistan will be good for asia.
Ariff Mahmood
Sunway College
Malaysia.
#15 Posted by pratham on October 19, 1999 12:47:50 am
Almost all the above opinions are on the spur of the moment. Military intervention is not the answer anywhere in the world for getting rid of corrupt politicians. Five years is too small a period in the life of a nation for any force to totally annihilate a countrys wealth or its standing. Re-elections are always there in the hands of the people for ridding themselves of the corrupt and inefficiant.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- _arjun29: #12 Posted by... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- dost_mittar: Congratulaltions, Geelani Saheb: Mehbooba has... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- pinku: #318 Posted by tahmed32... Historian Amaresh Misra on
- vatanparast: Yes rf786 Saheb, one... MQM - History and
- KaalChakra: DM ji, the same... Historian Amaresh Misra on
- tahmed32: #72 "When we look... MQM - History and
- _arjun29: #97 Posted by... Reforming Religious Fundamentalists
- tahmed32: #317 pinku: if self-serving... Historian Amaresh Misra on
