Myopic, Malevolent, Megalomaniac

correction Reply #36:

``Suka: To answer some of your questions and some you didn`t ask:``

should read

``Stuka: To answer some of your questions and some you didn`t ask:``

sameer - hallo. have absolutely noooo idea what u wrote up there about, but just thought i`d stop by to give u a shout seeing as u were so distressed over none of the ladies posting on yr thread. happy now? :)

Romair:

I take your point on the pre-poll aspect. My question is with poll counting. They were giving hour by hour counts, then they stopped. Sameer`s contention on the poll turn-out is valid, and all the parties, PPPP, PML(N) and MMA have objected to it. Several candidates who were leading till evening suddenly lost.

I understand what you say about the influence of Punjab on the national scene. But, within Punjab, candidates who were leading till day before night lost in the morning after sudden slowdown in vote counting. That is the aspect I am talking about.

Sameer #34
The winning of seats by MMA works in favor of Musharraf wrt the US. Musharraf now has the religious parties seats in parliament and assemblies to make stronger the same argument he has been making to the US since 9/11 that he is the only and indispensable Pakistani leader to stand between religious fundamentalists and nuclear weapons, heroically saving the world from disaster at great personal risk.

The mainstream parties and leaders will have to think of something really good if they want to dent this argument.

Suka: To answer some of your questions and some you didn`t ask:

So far every single international report has stated that there was nor rigging on the poll day. But they have all criticised the pre-poll influences of the govt. to form PML(Q) and banning BB, NS, as well as the constitution amendments.

The easiest way to tell in South Asia whether there will be rigging in anything is to see the govts.` attitudes towards allowing or banning international observors, etc. The fact that so many of them were present, and all have stated that no ballots were stuffed indicates no poll day rigging. All have criticised pre-poll influences of govt., so rigging in that sense, did occur. However, in the end, MMA (a party that is literally 180 degrees against Musharraf) won big. So they were able to counter the pre-poll stuff, successfully. The govts. two PM candidates both lost (this has never happened in the history of the country). One lost from two places. And the PPP won about as big as it could have. ANP, the usual dominant party in NWFP, which was pro-govt., especially in Afghanistan war, was completely swept by MMA - the later has completely an anti-Musharraff agenda. However, the ANP (like proud Pathans) has said the elections were fair. MQM, was openly pro-Musharraf, however it lost some unprecendented seats to MMA in Karachi. Imran Khan, by the end, was the biggest critic of pre-poll rigging, yet he won against a joint PPP-PML(Q) candidate, who was supported heavily by Q League. The traditional Baluchi sardar parties would have supported Musharraf, all lost big time. Lahore was the key city where PML(Q) wanted to establish itself, and replace Sharifs, however Q lost nearly all seats in Lahore. Larkana, is where the govt. wanted to dent BB seats, however PPP won all four pronvincial seats from there, etc. etc. So if the govt. rigged the vote, then it did a hell of a poor job of rigging, and every single observor team (EU, SAARC, Commonwealth, BBC, CNN etc.) missed the rigging. How is that possible?

The only issue now is how the EU team presents and criticizes the pre-poll stuff. The other organizations have generally said, on the whole, the election was fine.

The reason results in Pakistan go back and forth so much, overnight, in terms of seats, is because Pakistan is the only country in the world, where one province/state etc. has more seats than all the other provinces combined. This is the unfortunate dominace of Punjab over all other provinces (I hope the next govt. splits Punjab into three pieces). It has nearly 60% of the total seats of the NA. So whomever wins Punjab, generally wins. So until the results of Punjab come in, everything is really in the air. When they start coming, things can get turned on their heads. PML(Q)`s leaders were all the big Punjabi leaders. Infact, nearly all the powerful PML leaders had actually left PML(N), making Q the main PML, as the results have indicated. Q leaders were bound to win in Punjab. That is why, the seats scenario changed quickly. Interestingly, of the four main Punjabi founders of PML(Q) (Azhar, Abida Hussain, her husband Fakhr Iman, and Chaudhry Shujaat), only Shujaat won his seat. Another indication, the voting was fair.

This time, every single provincial party has lost seats. While the four national parties (PPP, PML(Q), N, MMA) have won. The only place where one party dominates, this time, is NWFP (maulvi brigade), and maybe PPP in Sind. Unlike previous times, when Sardars dominated Baluchistan, Sharifs dominated Punjab, MQM dominated (read ruled) Karachi, and PPP controlled rural Sindh. They spent there whole time, fighting each other.

I could have never dreamed that the Baluchi sardars could ever get kicked out. Shows how much I know about politics. The biggest David vs. Golaith story has to be the victory of Zubeida Jalal. A middle class (though ex-minister in Musharraf`s govt.) young women, running as an independent candidate, in one of the remotest parts of the world, where only 2% women are literate, in the heartland of tribalism, defeating sardari parties. Kind of like the scene from Mother India.

The secularitics of Pakistan, unfortunately, look only at secularism (or lack of it) as the only important criteria for Pakistan. A secular westernised feudal rapist, to them, is better than a non-secular philanthrapist. They have thus had a knee-jerk reaction to the victory of MMA. That is why I think the secularatics are as big a danger to Pakistan`s health, as the maulvi brigade. Only secularism is important to them - not education, egalitarianism, non-feudalism etc.

I don`t like the maulvi briagade (I am neither a secularist nor a religionist). I consider myself a humanist, and the maulvi brigade is not humane enough for me, in their policiies (specially on women`s rights and minority rights). But, they are better than the sirdars and feudals. The maulvi brigade will allow the poor village girl to go to school, it will build schools in cities, however, it will not make them co-ed, and will force girls to wear purdah. Very bad, and not good for Pakistan, if you ask me. But the feudal brigade, is not even concerned about education (in or out of purdah). What to talk of letting a peasant girl go to school, it will hold a panchayat in the village, and will pass a ruling authorizing the rape of the same girl. It will not even allow a school to be built on its land (after all, there is a reason, madrassahs did booming business in Pakistan - had the feudal elected idiots allowed normal schools to be built, poor folk would have some place to send their kids).

So who is worse? Feudals or maulvis? Both are bad - one less so than the other, however. That is why, the only group that willingly supports feudals is the upper class secularatic brigade. They don`t want to be forced into purdah by the maulvis (I don`t either), but they are completely unsympathetic about what the upper class feudals do the peasants in their lands. The peasants have now spoken up, and have brought in the lower middle class maulvis parties (the maulvis were the only alternative to the feudals, unfortunately - I had hoped progressive non-feudal parties like PTI would fill this gap).

As long as the maulvis don`t take over the whole country (like BJP - though most mainstream Pakistani maulvi parties are much milder than BJP), Pakistan will be alright, and this is a healthy development. It has sent a message to the powerful sardars, tumandars, feudals that hey, enough is enough. The maulvis, like many religous political parties, hate everyone except those following there version of Islam. But they hate the feudals also. And the feudals are very scared of them.

Oppressive or inefficient powerful systems, in many cases, get replaced by radical forces at the other extremes. Shah was replaced by Khomeini. However, once those extremes are in power, they have to deliver. When they don`t deliver, people start to move towards the moderates (in India secular Congress was replaced by fanatic BJP, but now things are slowly moving to moderation. In Iran, similar moderation is occuring). Getting rid of the incumbent, ``bad`` is the first step. In Pakistan, that has happened, to some degree, in this election. A huge upper class evil (sardarism, feudalism etc.) has gotten a kick in the balls by a smaller lower middle class evil (maulvi brigade). Now step two is for someone to kick out this smaller evil (maulvi brigade) in the next election. Luckily, the maulvi brigade is no. 3 or 4 on the elected power structure, and not no. 1. Hence, it cannot control the country. Hopefully, by next elections, the non-feudals and non-maulvi moderates (like PTI and urban non-feudal members of PPP and PML) will replace the maulvis and feudals.

I don`t think the MMA`s victory is a vote for religion in Pakistan. I think it is a vote against sardarism and against the status quo. It is also a vote against the influence the US has in Pakistan. Both of these are good things. Granted, they have been done by a smaller evil (maulvi brigade), but this brigade will probably split up soon enough and voted out in the next elections, if it doesn`t raise the living standard of the poor.

On the whole, I am quite happy with the direction Pakistan is going. Pakistan is not a maulvi country, and if anything, this election will do more to moderate the maulvis (who have always been in opposition, and hence extremist), than religionizing Pakistan. Now Musharraf and PPP need to smoke the peace pipe (BB should come back and face the courts and accept whatever punishment is handed out), and the next govt. needs to be allowed to complete its five years, as long as it isn`t massively corrupt (with BB and NS out, it will not be massively corrupt). Marginally corrupt is acceptable, but not massively corrupt.

Omair: Ayaz Amir sadly lost,by 3 thousand votes mind you, and he was leading for much of the day. Simialirly Imran was leading with a big margin till the last few hours. I am curious, while tehrik e Insaf has one confirmed MPA in karak in NWFP Provincial seats. I would assume he would have at least one confirmed MPA in the Punjab Assembly from Mianwali?

SameerJB
``...For Musharraf, EU observers do not count; US does...``
So the old dictum of the 3 A`s that count in Pakistan still holds true? Allah, America and Army.
Ferozk:
In reading your lengthy analysis, one thing becomes apparent -- in the emerging polity, there will be no unambiguos Numero Uno, and both Musharraf and the Parliament will be able to continue playing blame games. The people of Pakistan will get screwed in the process, since brinksmanship and conflict between Musharraf and Parliament will rule the day.

This seems to be the emerging situation in Pakistan.

A coalition government implies that parliament will be fractured and to oppose Musharraf, it will have to unite and unless they compromise with each other, they will continue to qurrel with one another. Just as nature abors a vacuum, Musharraf will still control the power and influence the policy, because the parliament will too busy denying power to others, as usual, than oppose Musharraf.

The religious parties will be given the choice of staying in power by following the government`s pre-ordained policies or risk being evicted from parliament. If, this is a critical assumption, the religious parties are prudent, they will prefer to stay in power rather than ``push`` their Islamic policies. If they ``push`` for a radical Islamization of Pakistan, Musharraf who has authority to dissolve parliament might use that power and dissolve this parliament and thus, the religious parties will be out of power.

That might be a mistake, because it will them a cry for arguing victimization and they will use emotionalism to as a ploy to garner support.

The role of the independents is interesting, because they all have to join a political party and how they opt, will decide the evolving balance of power in the 2002 national parliament. The most likely alliance is between PML and PPP-P, because despite their differences they have a similar dislike for Musharraf. Since the independents will more than likely split between these two parties, the MMA will not have the required votes to influence major policy changes.

In this sense, it is still to been seen how Musharraf will deal with this parliament in three important areas of goverance. The portfolios of foreign affairs, finance and defence will remain with Musharraf, and he will not allow any altering in these areas by the parliament. Musharraf has already stated that past policies of the government, which are deemed to be in the interests of Pakistan will not be changed. If this is true, then this leaves the domestic policy as the perserve of the parliament, but if the domestic policy areas of finance and defence are considered, then the question is if they can cannot be changed, what is the role of the new parliament?

The new parliament faces a hurdle from the beginning and that is, whether it will decide to take the oath of office according to the 1973 constitutuion or the new Provincial Constitution Order. PPP has said that it will take the oath according to 1973 constitution and if the PML (Q), the party with the most seats, decides to take it under the PCO, then there is a divide and this disunity will benefit Musharraf, because of a lack of a viable opposition to his rule.

If a party refuses the PCO, then will it be allowed to sit in the parliament, because without taking an oath of office, this parliament might simply end up being aborted in its infancy

How would MMA react to this? That would depend on whether the consitution or power or principle is important to MMA. If the MMA compromise on its Islamic principles, then it is another political party only interested in gaining power. If it stand for its principles, it will risk losing power, because the Islamic platform of MMA does not allow for compromises and their supporters, who elected them, will see this as ``sell out``. Thus, to prevent their support-bank from eroading, MMA will adopt a rigid political posture and to achieve their aims, they have to stay in power, which implies that they will opt for PCO oath over the 1973 constitutional oath. If this happens, then there is a possible alliance of MMA and PML to form the government.

If this happens, Sindh represented by PPP-P will be marginalized in the new parliament, lending further vindication to the Sindhi cries of being politically exploited by the Punjab (PML) and now NWFP and Baluchistan through MMA.

The evil beauty of this parliament`s reality is that, with the distribution of seats between MMA and PPP-P and PML and the independends, there is a slim chance of an effective coalition emerging to challenge Musharraf`s dominance of Pakistani politics. All the combinations of creating an effective coalition are a fraught with questions, because in order to create an effective coalition, all these parties will have to compromise with one another and maintain a united front in all the parliaments` dealing with Musharraf. Can they do it?

The way things stand, Musharraf will benefit from this lack of unity and the question is, was this the tacit intention all long?

There is an old saying, which says that when a person begins a journey, it is always nice to know the destination. Was there a destination in mind, when this journey was started on October 10, 2002? Things do not happen coincidently and there is always a reason behind events and if that is true, what is the reason behind the lack of a majority in parliament? What does a parliamentary majority implies for Musharraf and his policies? Is a parliamentary gridlock better than dissolving the parliament, specially when both secure similar results and that is prevent civlian rule in Pakistan?

What about the elections to the senate in November 2002? If the sentators are elected by provicial parliaments, and the provincial parliaments are dominated by PML, PPP-P and MMA, will a similar gridlock emerge in the senate with similar questions and a lack of a clear majority?

Everything hinges on the practical reality that these political parties, if they want to challenge Musharraf, will have to compromise with one another and if they do not, Musharraf will emerge as the ultimate winner with the real political power from the elections of 2002.

Was that destination in mind, when this journey was started?

Ciao

Romair: AT least I agree with you on one point that Amin Fahim deserves most to be the PM. It is possible to have a coalition between PPP (P) and PML (Q) but the problem will be dealing with Musharraf, referendum results, future of BB, LFOs and constitutional amendments. It would be difficult for PPP (P) to support and work under the overlordship of Musharraf. They will lose massive public support in doing so. More likely it will be PML (Q) government at center and in Punjab with the help of independents and NA. However, Punjab government have to work from the bastion of NS and his PML (N), i.e., Lahore.
Here are the official results:
Official results
Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal - 45 seats
Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid-e-Azam - 77
Pakistan People`s Party - 63
Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz - 14
Others - 68
Poll void in one constituency
There will be repolling in two constituencies
It is a simple mathematics to add 77 and 68 to cross the 137 barrier to forming a government .
Assad_K: Here was the unofficial party position at midway throught he election, i.e., after MMA clearly winning in NWFP and all the results of Lahore unofficially known.
Unofficial results/ trends at midpoint during counting
Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal - 47 seats
Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid-e-Azam - 59
Pakistan People`s Party - 73
Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz - 41
Just compare the official results with these and make your own judgement. With a steady unofficial trend, PPP (P) and PML (N) were in a position to form government at the center, Punjab and Sindh with the help of 20 others from independents.
Moreover, the total vote cast is far exceeding the generally believed 20-30 percent turnout. The pre-poll rigging made 59 seats for PML (Q) possible and counting fraud added 18 more seats to them. Is it difficult to discern?
shammi: For Musharraf, EU observers do not count; US does. He is trying to tell US that he is lot more important than tey think but the problem is that even an ordinary person knows the tricks he is playing; USA is not stupid to believe in Musharraf`s ploy. BB is charging Musharraf with orchestrating MMA success to make him look bad in the eyes of USA. Bottomline is: pleasing USA is more important than whatever the costs would be at home.
FerozK: Good analysis but I still think PPP will be left out in cold not only in center but also in Sindh.

If Najam Sethi is correct in his assessment that the Pak military engineered MMA`s victory to obtain better leverage against the Americans, then it shows how foolish and reckless Pak generals can be. They are willing to squander every Pakistani cause to perpetuate their unsteady grip on power. All those who used to take pride in the fact that fundamentalists never had more than 2% of the vote in Pakistan, should now sit up and pay attention. If an MMA regime comes to power in Pakistan, then its nuclear weapons and Kashmir policy are toast. Will they be prevented from coming to power via Algeria/Turkey methods? Or will future elections be rigged like this one was to ensure their defeat? Pakistan is now set to be in the spotlight of global attention for decades to come. Little hope of Western business investment going to NWFP and Baluchistan anytime soon though.
Does anyone still believe that NS/BB were ousted because of corruption, or because they proved to be a huge threat to Musharraf`s well-being. The former chief of the Pak Navy who resigned just before the coup has just broken his silence, and publicly stated that Musharraf engineered a coup to preempt a certain court martial over Kargil.
http://www.satribune.com/archives/oct7_13_02/P1_fasihbokhari.htm

The results of the 2002 elections in Pakistan are slowly trickling out and there seems to be a distinct change; notably in Baluchistan and the North-West Frontier province. It is too early to make a definative prognosis about the results of the elections or what they foretell for Pakistan, but a few observations can be made about the election results.

One; This has to be the most nationalist/provincial elections since 1971. It seems that, as per practice, PPP-P will dominate Sindh; PML (all factions) will dominate Punjab; the religious parties will end up dominating Baluchistand and NWFP. Taking the latter two first, it was only natural that the religious parties ended up winning considerable seats from those provinces, because those provinces have always been conservative and secondly, this was an anti-Musharrraf reaction based on his pro-western policies and lessening of the traditional tribal autonomy under his rule - for example joint US-Pakistan military operations in the the tribal belt.

For the first time in the history of Pakistan, there is a national representation in parliament as both the secular (PPP-P and PML) parties will share power with religious parties and there is a city-village representation and for the first time, NWFP and Baluchistan have representation without resorting to any interalia representations in parliament. The new parliament represents Pakistan, because all of Pakistan`s regional parties have now assumed a national character and have been elected to power.

Two; since none of the parties have managed to win a clear majority, the country will have a coalitation government and this means that all political parties will have to compromise (an extermely crucial by-product of the 2002 election results) or there will be another political gridlock, thus giving the military another exuse to justify its tangible disdain for civilian rule.

Three; the people of Pakistan are disgusted by the political system and in giving their votes, they voted for the candidates and not the party as can be seen in the defeat of the many ``traditional`` candidates.

Four; this is a ``national government``, because it represents Pakistan due to the fact that the regional parties have attained national significance and thus, (emphasis added) this parliament must be allowed to finish its entire term regardless of their performance.

This will achieve two aims; one it will reinforce the habit of changing governments in Pakistan via elections helping democracy and secondly, it will finally answer the question whether the religious parties can actually ``deliver the goods``. It is easy to sit in opposition and make comments, but it is difficult to run a government, where the compromises are necessary and that is what these religious parties will find out.

If the religious parties fail to deliever, they will be just like PPP and PML and will stand discredited in the eyes of the Pakistani public. In this sense, it is good, because having been elected, the viablity of religious parties in Pakistan will experience a ``litmus test`` testing their capabilities.

Having no clear majority, these parties will compete for power and they will have to compromise, another good development of the 2002 elections and in doing so, they also act as ``check and balance`` on the other parties to prevent them from gaining too much power and this will develope an institutional framework of checks and balances in Pakistan, which will/can lessen the role of the National Security Council over a period of time.

Thus, it is crucial for this parliament to finish its term of office.

Ciao

Assad_K: Your remarks make a lot of sense, as usual.

The results are as predicted (except MMA). I thought the maulvis would get wiped out, however they won big. Most of my other predictions (read hopes) ended up being quite accurate. There was going to be a change in the assemblies, since people were fed up with the old politicos. I was hoping PTI would fill the vacuum, but MMA ended up filling it.

MMA has basically won on the Sept 11 scenario. The ANP supported the US attacks and has been completely wiped out. I have got to hand it to the ANP leadership though. They accepted defeat in an upright manner. The congratulated their opponents and all their leadership has resigned from their party positions. All other parties are still busy blaming each other.

The election was as fair as any my lifetime (except maybe the pre 71 election). The govt. favored the Q league before the election, by setting it up. But it did not rig the elections.The govts. two PM candidates (Azhar and Soomro) both lost. And the maulvis won, which indicates fairness, since they were anti-Musharraf.

I am glad to see a change in leadership, even if maulvis are the catalysts. The worst thing that can happen in politics is for the same parties to come back in, while the country is going down. Now the MQM and ANP and Baluchi sardars have gotten a kick in the pants. Next time they will work more for their constituencies.

If I were Musharraf and the Q league, I would try to form a joint PPPP and PML(Q) govt. in the center. And if I were PPPP, I would tell BB to shut up, and leave Pakistan alone. It is about time, Pakistan (and PPP) get out of the remote control of Bhuttos. (please read Mazari`s Journey to Disallusionment for info on Bhuttos).

PPP is a decent party, if the Bhuttos leave it alone. I think BB is sh//t scared now. Why? Because she is afraid she may lose control of the PPP, if PPP is offered the PM spot. The PM will then automatically start dominating the party. Therefore she has stated that she will pick the PM candidate from the PPP side (how arrogant - the elected PPP membes should pick the candidate). BB actually hasn`t been put in exile by Musharraf, as many people keep saying. She is in self-exile, because she has corruption cases against her, filed by Nawaz Sharif which are open and shut legally. So she knows she will be put in jail, by the courts, if she returns.

I think Amin Fahim will (should) be the PM. PML(Q) will form the govt in Punjab, with independents. MMA in NWFP. Q/PPP in Baluchistan. And PPP/MQM in Sind. I think Q and Musharraf may have offered this to PPP. If PPP is really concerned about Pakistan, then they need to retire BB. She and her husband are a chain around PPP`s feet. She wasn`t here in the elections, yet PPP still did as well as it could have done. BB was always a liability to Pakistan, she is now a liability to PPP also.

Musharraf has come out smelling like roses. He outsmarted everyone. He held a free and fair election. Got the hung parliment he wanted. Q won the most seats, which he wanted. And the maulvis are there to keep USA on its toes, reminding the USA to remain engaged in Pakistan. Now if he brings PPP into power, it will be a great gesture, and will result in the start of the end of BB (I think). If he shoves PPP into opposition, then BB will have a field day again.

The guy who is really down and out is Nawaz Sharif. He is a spent force now. If the remaining PMLs unite, then Sharifs are finished. If PPP and Q unite, N is in opposition, and out in the cold. Altaf Bhai is no longer the badmash of Karachi either (thank God). It is good to see Karachi split amongst parties. Altaf Bhai cannot control it now. The Muhajir voters simply didn`t come out and vote. Normally, MQM wins by the largest margins of any party.

Imran Khan made it in. This should be a good start for PTI. It now has a foot in the door. And people finally believe that Imran Khan is a legitimate political entity. PTI will now attract some powerful personalities. Interestingly, Imran Khan won from very rural, extremely conservative and borderline feudal Mianwali. While the conservative Jamaat won from urban Lahore, wher Imran lost. Imran beat the combined PPP and PML candidate, which is an achievement.

The, ``English speaking overly secularatic`` brigade of Pakistan is now in a huge dilemma. It is funny to see them squibble. They (correctly) wanted free elections and democracy. They (correclty) wanted an end to Marial Law. Both have occured. However, the results have been exactly the opposite of what they wanted, i.e. maulvi brigade is in. Now, they don`t know what to say. They hate the maulvis and they hate Musharraf. But now, Musharraf is the only thing keeping the maulvis from power. Hence, they don`t know whom to hate now. I hope they don`t start hating democracy. They are thus using conspiracy theories to satisfy themselves.

I am happy with the results. Pakistan is not a maulvi country, so I can never see a BJP type scenario occuring in Pakistan. The MMA is too fractured an alliance, and will have to balance its views. I think MMA may eventually, fall apart. No one party has won big. Which is good. Pakistan has had its shares of, ``ahvy mundaats.`` Now it is time for the political parties to stop their political bickering, join together, and form a united govt. This is a golden opportunity for them to show that they can actually govern, and not just get elected and rob.

As for Musharraf, he has done his good deeds for Pakistan. Not counting the referendum, he has done a good job, and has kept his word. He should now give PPP part of the power. In return PPP leaders should vote him in as President. The constitutional amendments should be voted in, with a sunset clause of ten to fifteen years. Musharraf should now become the elder statesman and retreat into the background, and only come into the front, if the govt. starts getting really corrupt.

A change in leadership, in countries with poor political governance, is a good thing (even if by the maulvi brigade). The sardars of Baluchistan will now finally start losing their sardari. And the feudals (even though as a whole, they are still in power) will have to rethink their priorities. All of this is good. Once the feudals are kicked out, the maulvi brigade will automatically lose popularity, and a more urban version of the PPP and PML, alongwith parties like PTI, will form the leadership of Pakistan.

P.S. do you know if Ayaz Amir won?

nasah!

Do you live in Chicago Land area? Just curious.

Myopic, Malevolent and Megalomaniac - The author describes himself.
The author correctly predicted the winner of the Nobel prize therefore he ``science`` dictates that he is also correct, in his other exertions. So much for megalomania.

The results are indeed fortuitous and the elections themselves by and large, free, fair and transparent, at least that is the opinion of observers -but why allow facts to get in the way. When the facts do not support theory, we`ll just change the facts, Science! Malevolent! and ignorant.

The rise of MMA in the particular regions of the NW and SW is fortuitous, promising, and not without implications for events across the border. It strengthens the position of the federal government, while offering resolve and direction for governance beyond the border. The promise rests in the opportunity to shapae policy and in the ability to learn from failure. Myopic?

Good morning ladies and gentlemen: Here is part of Nawaz Sharif`s statement from Jeddah after reading this article on chowk and lengthy discussion with one, SameerJB from NY........:-)
[Referring to media reports, the former prime minister claimed that an order had been given to the Election Commission to delay announcement of the results. “The election results from city of Lahore has set the trend of an overwhelming victory of the PML(N) after which the government ordered the Election Commission not to announce any result so that the vote count could be rigged.”
Nawaz said that those PML(N) candidates who had already won in physical count before the returning officers and polling agents had later discovered they had lost by a narrow margin of votes. ]
nasah: You said it right. Trying to iutsmart everybody forgets the downside of such practices. NS tried hard to destroy BB but could not and Musharraf failed miserably to destroy NS and BB. I am not sure about closet Jamaatia but many in the military are like General Aziz, JCSC, having sympathies for religious parties and their contributions to Afghan and Kashmir policies.
Assad_K: The way I calculated numbers was PPP + PML (N) + MMA = less than half of total seats. I do not know the situation this morning as I have not browsed through news from Pakistan. I guess EC has yet to declare quite a few results. BTW, what is your take on announcing MMA winners much before than anyother party all over the country. Why counting was fast and declaration of final results quickly for MMA? Is it possible that it gave free hand to manipulate rest of the results because now USA would not have objected to the efforts of keeping MMA out? Of course, you know what happened in Lahore, once unofficial results were made public - wiping out of King`s party.
rozaiba: Bargain is mich bigger part of civilian discourse than military. Under military rule, basically following the order is order of the day without worrying about changing the order or compromise.

EU observers say Pakistan poll seriously flawed (Reuters)
By Zeeshan Haider
ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - The European Union on Saturday dismissed last week`s general election in Pakistan as seriously flawed, saying authorities had favoured parties which backed President Pervez Musharraf.
``The holding of a general election does not in itself guarantee the establishment of a democracy,`` the EU`s chief election observer, John Cushnahan, told a news conference.
``Regrettably... the Pakistan authorities engaged in a course of action which resulted in serious flaws in the electoral process.``
An EU report said had misused state resources to favour political parties -- in particular the Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid-e-Azam) which emerged as the strongest party in the election.
With just five of 272 constituency seats still to be confirmed, the League -- dubbed the ``king`s party`` for its backing of Musharraf -- had won 77 seats.
The Pakistan Peoples Party of exiled former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, with 62 seats, has already dismissed the election as rigged.
The EU report also criticised constitutional changes enacted before the poll which gave Musharraf the right to dismiss the parliament, and which institutionalised the role of the military through a National Security Council.
``The restoration of democracy in this country is about the transfer of power from a military to a civilian administration,`` Cushnahan said.
``The powers that have been reserved to the president and the National Security Council raise serious questions as to whether or not this will happen.``
Since seizing power in a bloodless coup in 1999, Musharraf has become a key Western ally in the U.S.-led war on terrorism.
The EU`s report contrasted with more supportive comments from Washington on Thursday which described the election as ``an important milestone in Pakistan`s ongoing transition to democracy``.
The EU said it had ``solid evidence`` that government officials, both at local and national level, had been actively involved in partisan electioneering, and criticised the Election Commission for failing to prevent state resources being misused.
It said state television had consistently promoted government views, and described an eve-of-election broadcast by Musharraf as ``inappropriate``.
The EU said laws designed to exclude exiled former prime ministers Nawaz Sharif and Bhutto from standing in the elections were based on ``questionable legal grounds and clearly had a negative impact on the overall electoral process``.
Bhutto and Sharif have also complained that the vote was rigged and the vote count manipulated against their parties.
Cushnahan said taken note of those comments but had not received any evidence from the parties about specific irregularities at individual polling stations.