Of Evil Zionists and the Great Satan

Ferozk #143
`` As a Pakistani, I thank other nations for their interest in promoting democracy in Pakistan and I would urge them to keep their opinions to themselves.``

Hey as an Indian I will certainly do so though I feel sure whatever happens India will be blamed for it as has been the Pakistani tradition :).

Re: Sadna

I do not want Musharraf to prevent the PML and PPP from winning the elections. I would much rather that these parties were to contest the elections unhindered. This way, their true electoral strenghts could be gauged.

Like Romair said, PPP is concentrated in rural Sindh and PML, the Nawaz faction, is urban Punjab based. I am not really worried about these parties winning the elections. In truth, I was always doubtful of their credentials of being national parties, when in reality they are merely provincial parties.

PML represents Punjab and PPP represents Sindh. Neither of these parties ever represented Pakistan. In fact, the majority of the political parties in Pakistan are either provincial minded (in the literal sense of the word) or they are a glorfied extension of a personality cult, but then that has been the bane of Pakistani political history!

Sadna, the best thing that Musharraf can do is to allow a free election and let people judge and elect their candidates. The reason being, that by doing this, the parties will have no excuse of being saying that they were victimized. The Pakistani people are disgusted by the political parties, because these parties use the lexicon of democracy as a justification for inaction and political infighting instead of legislating important issues.

Sadna, do not confuse democracy in Pakistan with the western tradition and assemblies. Pakistan has been more democratic under a dictator than it has been under elected governments.

As a Pakistani, I would much rather have a secure environment to live, with cleaning drinking water and a decent education for my children. If these conditions mean giving up some of consitutional rights, then I am willing to trade, because the bargain is worth it! Democracy is not the alpha and omega of Pakistan`s existence and Pakistan will thrive without democracy, because what Pakistan needs politically, in the present scenrio, is insitutional discipline. If this is ensured by one man rule, then it is better than living democratically under the rule of jungle.

I am a populist by choice; with a firm believe in the dictum that those who give up a little of their freedoms for a little security, end up having neither!

In my case, and Pakistan`s, there is no choice. Either way, we are cursed and we have to accept the bitter reality of our situation, which does not allow the indulgence of a democracy.

Narain was more astute in his observations that Musharraf is not the final solution for all that ails Pakistan, but his reforms might be if they are implemented and allowed to remain implemented, without unneccessary tinkerings. I do not believe in the myth of the man on the horse back and I do not think that Musharraf will remain alive eternally, but what I am hoping is he will be around, as the leader of Pakistan, for a long time to come and will have the luxury of time to implement all the policies he wishes.

I come from a family, which has always told the generals of Pakistan, ``either you are a democrat or a dictator`` and I wish that Musharraf comes out and admits that he is a dictator and does, what needs to be done! I am disappointed in Musharraf in this sense, because I think that he is being badly advised to prove himself as a democrat. I think, and am of the the opinion, that Musharraf`s best political quality and his greatest advantage is that he is a dictator and he should act like one, before it is too late!

Pakistan, if it is to improve does not need to be promised sugar coated dreams, but a swift kick up its collective gludius maximus.

As a Pakistani, I distrust the west and its call for democracy in Pakistan, because I do not trust them and I believe that they do not have a monopoly on what is good for Pakistan.

As a Pakistani, I thank other nations for their interest in promoting democracy in Pakistan and I would urge them to keep their opinions to themselves.

As a Pakistani, I think that we will solve our own problems and fashion our own version of democracy, without importing it from the west.

Sadna, what might be democracy to us might be dictatorship to you and vice versa!

Ciao

The Satan has Visa Express for Saudie ......Why should not a SATAN be Called Satan ......Zaidi you r Hypocrite white mans Man Friday

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/?id=110001991

State of Embarrassment

An American journalist is detained because he questioned Foggy Bottom`s Saudi policies.

Monday, July 15, 2002 12:01 a.m. EDT Now we know: The State Department can get tough when it wants to, if only against fellow Americans. National Review writer Joel Mowbray had the temerity at Friday`s press briefing to question State spokesman Richard Boucher about ``Visa Express,`` a program that has made it easier for Saudi Arabian citizens to enter the U.S. without interviews. Mr. Boucher had denied that the U.S. ambassador to Riyadh wanted to terminate Visa Express, even though a classified cable had clearly said otherwise. Mr. Mowbray called the spokesman on his spin, and when the reporter went to leave the building he was detained and questioned by security officers for about 30 minutes. State`s line is that Mr. Mowbray was detained because he`d quoted from classified material, as if that`s any justification. It`s no crime to report such news, only to leak it, and the cable`s contents were reported in both National Review and the Washington Post. Mr. Mowbray`s reporting has embarrassed State, and its officers were clearly engaging in intimidation to dig up the source. It`s the kind of thing they do in, well, Riyadh.Mr. Boucher also continues to humiliate himself by defending Visa Express. Never mind the ambassador`s cable, and Colin Powell`s sacking last week of Mary Ryan, the career diplomat in charge of consular affairs. The firing was a clear effort to placate Congress, which is angry about Visa Express and had threatened to yank State`s visa authority.The Boucher response here is of a piece with State`s refusal to press Saudi Arabia on the plight of American women held in that country against their will. State`s instinct is always to attack Americans who raise questions, instead of pressuring the Saudis on behalf of U.S. interests. All the women need to leave under Saudi law is the permission of their husbands or fathers, which surely the House of Saud can arrange, if the State Department ever bothered to ask. But apparently it`s too busy harassing American journalists.

RESPOND TO THIS ARTICLE READ RESPONSES

E-MAIL THIS TO A FRIEND PRINT FRIENDLY FORMAT

BOOKMARK THIS SITE

Salam to chowkies ,I am a Persian American from Toledo,OH and I was drawn to the powerful conversations held here.

I even have some Kiyani friends from Pakistan who however do not speak Farsi, neither do they look Persian , but I am glad they share our interest in all things Persian.

Anyways thought I would share this tidbit from my friend , Narges who had the following chat with a Gul Mastoi from Pakistan

starts here

Man from Pakistan! ( madlocket4)

Madlocket4: friend I am a pakistani would you talk to me (course, Pakistani? no problem)

Neges yeah sure

Madlocket4: This is my first time to chat with some body (with that nickname!! I don`t believe him, he`s lying! lol)

Nerges this is ur first time? oh right

Madlocket4: could you tell me about yourself

Nerges what do u want to know?

Madlocket4: about yourself, your hobbies etc

Nerges I like dancing, I have brown hair, brown eyes, thin, 5ft6, ...u?

Madlocket4: I have black hair dark brown eyes, not so thin 5.4`` I like travel and music working with an NGO (not so thin? 5ft4? u mean fat and short!?? lol, working with what????)

Nerges oh right, nice (????)

Madlocket4: I am post graduate in social work, travelling all around Pakistan, got training on rural professional at Reading University and visited London, Oxford (he thinks he`s clever!!)

Nerges ok. where are u at the moment? pakistan or england? (haha I bet he expected me to be impressed)

Madlocket4: at present I am at Islamabad, Pakistan and working as Deputy chief for Pakistan

Nerges I`ve never been to pakistan, I`d like to go one day (not really, haven`t thought about it)

Madlocket4: You are welcome here and be my guest this is sincere offer (hey thanks!..but no thanks)

Nerges thank you

Madlocket4: Dear tell me something more about you or more about me (dear!!??, how am I supposed to tell him more about him??? I don`t know him!)

Nerges what do u want to know?

Madlocket4: oh my God how can I explain tell me about your life o.k. (hey! he doesn`t speak english too well! just spotted that...ur not so clever after all!!! hahaha)

Nerges im a Farsi teacher, I like to dance, that`s all I can think of lol

Madlocket4: When you have plan to come to Pakistan?? have you seen other countries also? (not interested in what I said then?...ok lol)

Nerges I have been to Spain, France, Italy, India and Holland. to Pakistan? ermm...don`t know, maybe next summer (nope)

Madlocket4: I have seen Holland and France Amigo do you want to chat more just say good bye (I was taking too long to reply I think)

Nerges I do want to chat

Madlocket4: Why are you not married?? (none of your business!!)

Nerges I was once

Madlocket4: Than what happened?? you are answering my questions just objective examination papers just saying yes and no, come on baby talk in detail (baby??!! ...he`s nosey too!!)

Nerges he found someone else (quick thinking! lol)

Nerges I don`t know why, probably better looking (not so quick that time)

Madlocket4: very sad friend

Nerges yes, oh well

Madlocket4: do you feel that you are not so smart or better looking? (what r u trying to say!??)

Nerges sometimes

Madlocket4: how can I see your good face (u can`t)

Nerges I don`t know I can`t sent u a photo because I don`t have a scanner

Madlocket4: my dear you are really so simple (what!!!!)

Madlocket4: would you kindly note down my adrress and send me your photo, H.No. 9, strett 89, G-6/3, Embassy Road Islamabad Pakistan and my name is Gul Mastoi (haha! He expects me to send a photo to Pakistan!! …maybe it IS his first time on chat)

Madlocket4: note down my email address: (not gonna tell you his email address! that`s evil!)

Nerges ok thanks

Madlocket4: I don`t know how many friends you have but I like your friendship (whatever)

Nerges thank you, I will email you (nope)

Madlocket4: thank you dear how can I chat with you again (u can`t..and stop calling me dear!!)

Nerges I`m on here most days (nope)

Madlocket4: I will try tomorrow and will out of city upto 16th July

Nerges where will you be going?

Madlocket4: I will go to different cities of Pakistan to conduct workshops from 4th july to 16 th july and myself will atend workshop on result based management here fro 18th to 21st july (huh?)

Nerges oh right, ok

Madlocket4: O.K. dear Goodbye I really enjoyed talking with you, I am thankful to you for giving me some time and I hope you will be in touch on email also (in your dreams!!)

Nerges yes, nice talking to you, goodbye

ends here

I also realise the Mastoi belongs to the tribe that performed an unreligious act in Pakistan`s Punjab province.

FerozK # 133

``In that sense, he is indebted to Zia-ul-Haq, who filled ranks of the army with Urdu speaking people with middle class backgrounds and broke the tradtional dominance of Punjab in the army.``

Coming from you,it`s not even funny.Is there any scientific study or just an assumption?

Regards.

Urstruly

Sincere apologies for late response. You may have misunderstood me, let me clarify:

I am not denying the external factor - it is a fact - what I was suggesting is that there is much that we have control over or exert considerable influence over - Enemies and Adversaries do not necessarily fit under our control or considerable influence - What does however fit is what we can do about ourselves.

Dost Mittar

Read the above - ``our heroes are their villans...`` -- I think Shankar or Shammi said it on this board: ``leave India alone`` - I agree completely and add that Kashmir ought to be resolved by a process of dialogue.

Narain

Your post assumes the Army has already blundered with the amendments - Lets leave this for history to decide - What most of the so caled ``democratic rights`` type on these boards never imagine is that a strong executive is not an aborgation of such ``democratic`` rights, neither is accountablity - The ground work is being laid for a Pakistan that can focus on nation building - Mr. Musharraf and his team may not win all the rounds with the politicians, but it is already clear that Mr. Musharraf and his team have already won over Pakistani public opinion; even after these three years it seems some of the ``democractic`` types to whom, it seems the ``right`` to plunder and apportion Pakistan to their supporters, is what democracy means - have not gauged the public anger at the humiliation and failures - Was the armed forces blameless? How much blame? What difference does it make? the State has been restructured - will it survive? Show me something that has, it is not natural - but what matters is that it will levae Pakistan better prepared to distribute opportunity to it`s citizens and not historicist and obscuritanist policies. Afghanistan was become an imperative for Pakistan, this will not change - the idea of Pakistan, a non-ethnic Pakistan, in which Liberty and the freedom of conscience are fundamental values, is an idea that has only now begun to experience appeal across traditional boundaries.

Romair #137
``He has so far outsmarted every politician in Pakistan``.

Romair, its relatively easy to outsmart every politician if the National Assembly and legislatures stand dismissed and no elections are held for three years. The only way a politician could challenge Musharraf during this period was through agitation through political rallies, which he also banned during these three years.

But now elections are called. Will he continue to ban political meetings and rallies? And once members are elected, how will he control them if he opposes them openly now and hence they oppose him later?

Politicians are fickle opportunists and go with the winners, so donot depend on his present supporters remaining with him, if BB or NS win significant seats.

You say urban parties sympathetic to Musharraf and his other supporters will win enough seats to counter PPP/PML victories. How can anyone be sure enough about this to bet the future of the government and its proposed constitution on it? Have any studies or surveys been done that confirm that the results of the election will be favorable to Musharraf?

Is it being considered that if this assumption is wrong(that most of those who win will be Musharraf supporters), then what kind of instability and power tussles may result?

Not talking to or making peace with the two major parties NOW about the post-election scenario, what exactly does Musharraf gain for Pakistan by this?

The military may be a respected institution, but its not omniscient. In 1970 the military government was caught by surprise and totally unprepared for the possibility that the Awami League would win strongly enough to win majority and form the government. In some subsequent year, they couldnot engineer BB`s defeat.

Ferozek, Sadan #previous: I agree with pretty much everything Feroze has stated. I think both him and I, view the current political situation, nearly identically.

``How will Musharraf prevent either PPP/PML from winning a large number of seats in the coming elections?``

He cannot prevent this, other than rigging the elections; which he won`t do.

It is impossible to change hundred year old power hold of feudals in three years. He has slowly started denting into it, however.

People consider Musharraf far more naive than he is. He has so far outsmarted every politician in Pakistan. He has been able to get everything approved that he wanted, without having to use military force (barring an odd breakup of a small rally here and there) No politician has been able to get the people against him. Added to this is the fact that the West loves him also. Added to this, he is still the hottest commodity in the South Asian interview circuit.

While the center of Pakistani law-making politics sits in feudal Pakistan (due to the most seats), the center of agitation politics sits in urban Pakistan. No political party can kick out any govt. by striking and causing problems in Larkana, Muzzafargarh and Dera Ghazi Khan. They have to do it in big urban cities Lahore, Karachi, Pindi and Peshawar (and Quetta, to a smaller extent).

Either intentionally or unintentionally, Musharraf has outsmarted all the bigwig ARD politicians in these areas. Urban Sind is completely controlled by MQM. And MQM is a strong and open supporter of Musharraf. He is a fellow Muhajir, after all.

Pushto speaking urban NWFP is divided between PML and ANP (used to be PPP center also). ANP is fully and openly behind Musharraf (they have not supported the Constitutional amendments, but have supported most other actions). PPP has a breakaway faction, which supports Musharraf in NWFP. This leaves just the PML, and that is divided also. However, ANP, with a completely Pushto speaking leadership, is generally considered the rep of Pushto speaking NWFP folks, and carries the most weightage in this area.

Non-Pushto speaking urban NWFP is the base of Asghar Khan`s party (no seats) and PML (QA; the breakaway faction). Both these groups support Musharraf.

Urban Baluchistan is tiny, and under no one`s control. However Quetta (the only urban city there) is the center of the Army and PAF.

This brings us to urban Punjab (the heart of Pakistan). Urban Punjab used to be a PPP stronghold. Until PML, under NS, completely routed the PPP, out of Punjab. The five most influential parties in urban Punjab now are PML(N), PML(QA), PPP and Tehrik and Jamaat. The Jamaat can cause a lot of problems through riots, but never wins a single seat. PML(QA) and Tehrik both solidly support Musharraf. This leaves the PML(N) and PPP, as the opposers (both are feudal based, with urban wings).

PPP and PML(N) hate each other so much, that it is impossible to describe. BB jailed NS`s father. NS jailed BB`s husband. Their speeches against each other are filled with verbal and sometimes physical abuse and vulgarities. Every one, from their feudal MNAs to their misguided student leaders, hate each other. I doubt they can ever unite, for more than a week.

So Musharraf is strong in urban Punjab also. Added to this, all of Potohar (Norh-Western Punjab) and lower NWFP is very strong Army territory. The whole Army is recruited from here.

This means that PPP and PML(N) will have the seats, but they may now all be in rural and feudal Sind and Punjab. They are still the biggest parties, and will get the most seats (since most seats are feudal), but their influence in urban Pakistan is limited now. Due to this, it is only their leaders who have been crying for the removal of Musharraf, while hardly any common person in urban Pakistan has wanted Musharraf`s removal. Even the cynic urban press just wants him to change his amendments/referendum etc. They don`t want him to leave, all together.

Urban Punjab elections will be the key. If PML(N) and PPP can win Lahore and Pindi, then Musharraf is in trouble. But if PML(QA) and Tehrik win there, then he is set.

On the whole, I think he has outsmarted NS, BB and Altaf, without taking any military action. While the average politician is gagged and frustrated, the average Pakistani, from their sleevless shirts to their critical editorials to their ability to write against the maulvis is freer now than it ever was under democratically elected NS and BB. No one from urban America to the average urban Karachiite to Lahoriite is willing to listen to BB and NS, any longer. Pakistani politicians normally launch an agitation at the drop of a hat. If the ARD folks (PPP and PML(N)) felt people would follow them in urban Pakistan, they would have launched an agitation, long ago.

So it is incorrect to think that just because the two largest parties` leaders (PPP and PML(N)) oppose Musharraf, every Pakistani party, and Pakistani, opposes him. The urbanite parties and people generally support him. And as long as they and the Army support him, I don`t think the PPP and PML feudals can do much to get him out.

The PPP, after the last elections, is now only a rural Sindh party. They lost in all urban areas. The PML is a rural Punjab and urban Punjab/NWFP party (due to leadership of urban Sharifs). If Imran Khan`s party wins in urban Punjab, then the true faces of the PML and PPP will be exposed. They will still have the most seats, but will be influential only in rural/feudal Punjab and rural/feudal Sindh, respectively. These are the two largest constituncies in Pakistan. They are also the most backwards constituencies in Pakistan (alongwith tribal Baluchistan, which has very few seats). And these are really the two constituencies that these two, ``largest`` parties belong to. PPP`s feudal face has already been exposed. All its top leadership is now from feudal Sind. PML(N) needs to be exposed also.

I think if urban Punjab kicks out PML(N) and PPP (which has already been kicked out, but may make a comeback), then under the leadership of an urban President, with the urban parties supporting him, the feudals will be in trouble.

P.S. It is a bit of tragedy that the PPP leaders in urban Punjab are now down and out, even within their own party. The only decent politicians I know of, in the PPP, are from urban Punjab. All the PPP feudals (in Punjab and Sind) are useless.

ref: Ferozek #133

Dear Feroze,

Even if one agrees that Musharraf is the greatest thing to ever happen to Pakistan, it may be good to remember that he will not last forever, but the system he is creating will. Thus arguments for or against his proposed constitutional amendments should be based on how well they will secure the people`s democratic rights and sovereignity, if for eg. Zia or Ayub rose from the grave and became President.

In any case, the army has already sown the seeds of discontent and discord in Pakistan for many years to come. What remains to be seen is only how bad things will actually get.

-narain

Romair,

#132

Informative post. I think you give Zia too much credit for thwarting the Soviet Union. The Russians had no designs on Pakistan, otherwise they would`nt have sent their ``second string`` central Asian troops to Afghanistan.

Pakistan thinks it played a DECISIVE role in crumbling the Soviet empire. The Soviet Empire crumbled because of its own internal inefficiency, not some great Reagenesque or Pakistani policy. The real rot had begun to take place long time before. The Afghan misdaventure was just something that tipped the scales.

During Gorbachev`s era, it came out that the decision to move into Afghanistan was made by just the select few octogenerians in the highest echelons of the Soviet Politburo, who were in complete denial of what the real state of affairs in the country was. It took the ``younger Gorbachev`s`` generation of Soviet communists by complete surprise (& shock). That was one of the reasons why Gorbachev wanted ``glasnost``. Its because leadership is vulnerable to believe its own bs propaganda.

NOBODY, but NOBODY predicted that the Soviets would collapse like a house of cards.

You continue to harp on the 6% economic growth of Pakistan. Yes, Ayub`s policy was correct. But from then on, that 6% is DEPENDANT on 2 factors...US aid & Gulf jobs. Thats NOT sound economic policy! Its largely true even now! Why do you think Pakistan CANNOT formulate an independant foreign policy & is constantly held by its ear & dragged by the US, wherever Uncle Sam wants it to go...not to mention the Arabs? Thats an awful big price to pay, if you ask me...

If Pakistan wants to return to its golden pre 65 economic age..cant you learn something that is STARING AT YOU?...leave INDIA ALONE!! put a Berlin Wall between the 2 countries...have NOTHING to do with India...& Pakistan will thrive:)))

Ferozk #133, Romair #132
How will Musharraf prevent either PPP/PML from winning a large number of seats in the coming elections? How is he going to ensure that the majority of MNAs will not be his opponents supporters?

The sole source of his power, the Army, is not putting up candidates for election, but a whole range of political parties he has declared adversaries, will be doing so.

IMO, its a mistake to base the success and durability of Musharraf and his constitutional changes solely on his person, his personality, his good intentions and his position as army chief. After all, he too came into power through a coup and many may be tempted to think that he too can similarly be displaced.

Re: Romair #132

An excellent summary of the demi-gods,who have ruled Pakistan for most of its existence. I agree with your thoughts and I second your observations. I also support Musharraf, because he a progressive, liberal and a far sighted leader. Even more than that, he not an average Pakistani leader, who is governed by his/her emotions and convinced by his/her personal prejudices in taking a certain decision. Musharraf is honest, because in the three years that he has remained in power, there has been no scandal of embezzlement associated with him.

Musharraf`s Achilles` Heel is the people who surround him and who advice him. Musharraf`s problem, in the Pakistani political lexicon, is not that his intentions are flawed, but that the changes he is seeking to implement are resisted since they undermine the traditional interests, in Pakistan, who have mis-governed the nation.

Musharraf needs time to effect the policy changes he wants to, but the Pakistani public, disappointed by the last 55 years of false promises, is impatient to wait. Therein lie the problem. Pakistani public supported Musharraf in October 12, 1999 because it felt that things would change for the better; three years later, having heard more offical pronouncements, but seeing no difference in the reality, they are suffering from an actue case of perception-expectation angst.

Musharraf`s latest manuevoer - the graduation requirement, is aimed at lessening the hold of the feudals. This is the second part of the plan, which was annouced nearly two years ago. In that plan,there was a reference that the rural areas would be urbanized. Since feudalism holds sway based on its power to dominate the land,the rate of urbanization will lessen the feudal hold on power and the educational requirement will mean that the new candidates will be urban based and not rural oriented ones.

The new generation of the feudals is highly educated, but they are ``urban feudals`` and have a less of a connection with the land than their forefathers. The idea is to break the monopoly of the rural feudals and give the power to urbanites, where the educated feudals will have to, for the first time, compete to win elections and will no longer be able to win elections from the so-called ``safe family seats``.

Getting rid of feudalism in Pakistan is difficult, because in its heart Pakistan is a feudal based culture. The previvious land reforms in Pakistan failed, because these reforms were undertaken by assemblies composed of feudals and these reforms were intended to consolidate their political-economic hold on the land, though the guise of land reforms.

Musharraf is the only Pakistani leader, who does not need the support of the feudals to rule, because his base is the army. In that sense, he is indebted to Zia-ul-Haq, who filled ranks of the army with Urdu speaking people with middle class backgrounds and broke the tradtional dominance of Punjab in the army. The Pakistan army is a middle class institution and its strenght, in the officer corps, is from the non-feudal segment of the Pakistani society.

In Pakistan, the traditional trokia of power has always been the military, the bureaucracy and the feudals. A combination of two of these groups, against the third, would dominate the politics of the nation. In the past, it was normally the army (feudal based) with the bureaucracy. This was the case throughout Ayub Khan`s One Unit experiment and it lasted all the way through the Zia`s Dark Ages. In the so-called decade of democracy in Pakistan, it was army plus the bureaucracy, with the legislative assemblies heavily dominated by the feudal class.

In the present situation, Musharraf has disorganized the bureaucracy and it is more interested in protecting its traditional role in Pakistani politics than seek new confrontations with the army. Since the army is now exclusively non-feudal, it is targeting the last bastion of political power in Pakistan and is seeking to undermine it via consitutional methods.

Sadna, rest assured, the feudals in Pakistan are on the army`s ``threat perception radar`` and they will be tackled. The cautionary afterthought is that since Pakistan is an agricultural nation, a direct attack on its basic economic foundation could be dangerous. Hence, the army is moving carefully against the feudals.

Ciao

sadna #122: Pakistan`s political history is marked by errors, excesses and corruption of the ambitious military leaders and the ambitious feudal class. I will be the first to state that. And have stated in regularly.

I have seen the regimes of Ayub, Bhutto, Zia, NS, BB, and now Musharraf. And a few others like Yahya, Junejo etc., who came for short moments. Of these, I was too young to remember anything about Ayub and Yahya (but have read enough about it). The rest I am aware of.

I oppose(d) Bhutto, NS, BB and Zia.

- Having read about Ayub, I support his economic reforms and oppose his political interventions (I am not sure whether to put his govt. in the good or bad category. It made Pakistan the fastest rising economy of South Asia, but introduced too many social and political problems). As a person, I cannot support Ayub, because his family, through him, ended up heavily intertwined into the feudal based politics.

- As for the rest, Bhutto, being the most capable and intelligent and misguidedly ambitious, committed the biggest faults. He encouraged Pakistan into 65 and 71 wars, and then jumped ship right at the end, and started opposing the same regimes that he had supported (like a VP deliberating getting his company into trouble, so he can take the CEO`s position). Most of all, his nationalisation of a fast growing economy (Pakistan at one point, was ahead of Korea, Singapore etc.), was the biggest crime ever committed against Pakistan. He did have some virtues, as well, though. He was not (too) corrupt, from what I have heard. And he introduced Pakistan`s first post-Jinnah massive political movement (unfortunately, he ended up giving more importance to his feudal instincts, than his patriotic political ones).

- Zia was too narrow-minded, and too clever, to become a leader. He was too narrow-minded to lead Pakistan, and too clever to be removed. He would not have become even COAS, had Bhutto not personally picked him through nepotism. I opposed Zia, even though I was in the military. Not too many people in the military like him. I can clearly remember the day he held his referendum. I was on a parade ground in Sargodha, and remember the disgust on the officers` and soldiers` face, when they were told to vote.

Zia brought back economic growth to 6% (through good luck due to UAE expatriate money and US aid). But he destroyed Pakistan`s society. He bifurcated into into two parts, Shariah and non-Shariah, and introduced way too much religion.

Zia did fight the Soviets and kept them out of Pakistan. Which was an achievement. And though some people say he was very corrupt, most people I have talked to say he was personally financially relatively honest (though dishonest in his statements and actions).

But most of all, Zia committed the cardinal sin of Martial Laws, i.e. he introduced Martial Law, thereby stunting the political process, and did not solve any major problems. And his next generation is now also part of Pakistan`s feudal PML.

- BB and NS had absolutely no interest in Pakistan. They were out to make a fast buck; plain and simple. Both of them were representatives of Pakistan`s feudal parties (even though, Sharifs were urbanites). There is no need to go into the details of their massive financial and social corruption. This is well-documented, even in Indian papers.

Uptil the late 80s, Pakistan despite all its problems, had at least been able to support its 6% rate of economic growth. Within the 90s, BB and NS introduced a corruptive free-for-all, that resulted in all the previous problems, plus a growth rate of 3%. No international financial instititution was even willing to give Pakistan a loan.

Unlike Bhutto and Zia and Ayub, I don`t think NS and BB had any virtues, and did not do anything for Pakistan. They were, and are, just robbers.

There have been two points when I thought Pakistan was finished. The first was when the Soviets launched a full fledged assault into Afghanistan, with an intention of going into Pakistan. I was in the military at that time, and have first hand knowledge of the counter-measures Pakistan had to take to handle the Soviet incursions.

The second point was towards the end of NS`s last term, before the recent coup. NS and his cronies had brought Pakistan to a failed state point. By this time, my family was actively involved with Imran Khan`s political party, and I had a rude awakening to Pakistan`s politics and the various thugs and mafia that dominate it, under the garb of, ``Democracy.``

Then the coup occured, and I thanked God. People had tried to paint Musharraf as a religious extremist and a dishonest man. I had worked with enough Generals to know, that he is honest and a liberal progressive minded person. I have supported him for a three year Martial Law.

In that sense, in my whole lifetime, the only Pakistani leader I have supported is Musharraf. I opposed every other, for one reason or another. Primarily, because I felt they were all personally dishonest, either financially or in their intentions. I don`t agree with everything Musharrafs` govt. has done, but I think even his harshest impartial critics agree that he is progressive, honest and patriotic. In essence, he is the better choice out of NS, BB, Altaf Hussain, and Qazi. Ideally, I would like to see someone like a democratically elected Imran Khan, Omar Asghar Khan (now dead) as the heads of Pakistan, i.e. honest, philanthrapic very educated people.

Now to your questions:

``Very true, but that hasnot stopped me from expressing myself. ``

Please go ahead and express yourself. That is what this site is for.

``What were those?``

More on this later. It is too detailed to cover here. And you need to realize that the current Pakistani military is different from that in 71. 99.9% of the current soldiers wasn`t in the Army in 71.

``If there is such a consensus against feudals, why didn`t the military institute land reforms in these 3 years?``

This is the million dollar question. And I wish I had the answer. I don`t know why. Musharraf has taken on evey status quo group in Pakistan. That is why they are all united against him (to me, this is a compliment to him).

He has taken on the maulvi brigade (which no one in the history of Pakistan has done, including the most liberal noise-makers on this site, and in Pakistan). Infact, I wouldn`t be surprised if Musharraf is assasinated someday, by one of them.

He has completely defanged Pakistan all-powerful beaurecracy. Their hundred year power, derived from British law, is gone.

He has taken on Pakistan`s powerful business groups. Many of the big ones, with corruption charges, are in jail. And the small non-tax paying ones are now being forced to pay taxes. Even their refusals to invest in local industry, hasn`t stopped his efforts.

He has stood up to India successufully (in my opinion), even though India has larger forces threatening Pakistan, than ever before in its history. Pakistan`s position vis-a-vis India is a lot stronger than it was when he carried out the coup. I had suggested at the time of the coup, that it was the perfect opportunity for India to corner Pakistan, and negotiate some sort of a Kashmir setlement, since Pakistan was at its weakest. India would have had to only give up a little bit, and would have gained a lot. I think India lost a golden oppourtunity.

He has even taken on his own Generals. And has retired some of the ones, who helped him carry out the coup. Nearly, all of Pakistan`s new Lt. Gens. and Maj. Gens. have now been appointed by him. And I have it from my friends in the military, that Pakistan`s military is going back to its British traditions (their was some deviation during Zia`s rules), i.e. gora officers (like Musharraf and Asif Nawaz) are being preferred over maulvi officers (like Zia and Hameed Gul).

But he has not taken on the feudals, as a whole. He has defanged them constituitonally, and has kicked out and jailed and disqualified many of their top members. He has taken away their executive power at the National level, by devolving power to the lowest level.

But no land reforms. I don`t know why. Maybe he will do it through an elected Assembly. Maybe it is just too difficult. I don`t know....

The problem isn`t just land reforms. The feudal lands weren`t even taxed. Can you believe that. An agricultural country, not taxing feudal lands. That is another reason, feudals want to keep the status quo.

``Your argument seems to be that a number of people must be excluded from the political process for the country`s good. Who is most fit to decide who must be left out?``

This is difficult to answer. In a democracy, it should be the voters and the Supreme Court who decide who should be in or out. But what to do in a country, where a person, in feudal lands, can be adbucted and raped, at the whims of a feudal MNA. And a Supreme Court can be stormed by the hooligans of an elected PM, and then be too scared to give a decision against the same hooligans. Instead, the Supreme Court ends up firing its own Chief Justice.

Who should decide, in a country, in which the pre-requisites of democracy haven`t even been established (I think Indian politics has progressed to a point, where the pre-requisites are filled, buy Pakistani politics never will until the feudals are de-feudalized). And the elected feudal MNAs and MPAs want to make sure these pre-requisites don`t get established. That is their sole purpose of being in politics. Otherwise, they would be in agriculture.

Your guess is as good as mine on who should decide. My guess is an honest progressive dictator, or a union of all the urban political parties in Pakistan maybe able to do it. I am hoping Musharraf fits the first bill, and Tehrik, MQM, etc. fit the second bill (nearly all the urban parties, generally support the current govt).

Let`s see what happens. Hope that answers some of your questions.

Azad, Reg:

` think the problem is the manner in which those resources are used, not the resources themselves. The idea that a nation must be forced into resource-less penury in order for them to develop character and right the ills of their society is, in my opinion, needlessly harsh`

What you took from my post is not what I meant. Perhaps I did not explain it very well. There is nothing wrong with the resource. The problem is the entity handling the resource.

There is a punjabi adadge that goes like this:

``Dumme hath katora aya pani pee pee dhid phulaya``

The gist of my post was that the resourse has been used more towards consumption and useless glorification projects than for productive enterprises.

ON GANG RAPE,

The pakistanis are very upset by this report. It is more than likely that the jirga has given this type of punishment before, but now because of the fbi and others crawling around, it got reported. If this is the first ever, at least the jirga is trying new modes of punishemnt, is progressive, exploring new ways and have to be commended.

One aspect not mentioned at all is the hoodood ordinance. Even when the culprits are brought to book, the law requires that two men will have to testify to the rape.

It is pathetic that no pakistani wants to address the fundamental issue, the hoodood ordinance that sustains rape.

Re: Reply #: 126, hari inder

| Is it possible that the very resources that you

| think are an asset is in fact the bane of

| Muslim countries?

I prefer not to view it in those terms. I think the problem is the manner in which those resources are used, not the resources themselves. The idea that a nation must be forced into resource-less penury in order for them to develop character and right the ills of their society is, in my opinion, needlessly harsh. If one presumes that a nation will abuse and misuse whatever resource are available to it, the argument is over before it even begins.