Musharraf and Robin Hood

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Nikki:

I have read more than one articles on this topic. The general consensus is that China`s share of the interenational trade will go up from 16% tjo over 50%, India`s from 4% to 15% and Pakistan`s from 2% to 4%. This increase is likely to happen gradually over the next decade. Pakistan will benefit because it is self-sufficient and a net exporter of cotton and has modernised its industry to prepare for the new era.

In my opinion, none of the above countries will gain as much as projected, as the other exporting countries will also try to take steps to protect their turf. For instance, I read how Cambodia is projecting itself as an ethical source and Gap was saying that it will continue to use Cambodia for sourcing even though it does not have as large a production base as China and India.

Re #7 by labyrinth1

“In Punjab Mushraff is bad just because he`s not a Punjabi but obviously they ( Punjabis) are happy coz they are in power - Chaudary Sahib and Rest of Punjabi Lobbey is happy is alright at the moment”

Which mainstream Punjabi party (or shall I say a party from Punjab) have you seen giving comments about Musharraf being a non-Punjabi and hence bad? I am quite sure that majority of Punjabis don’t even know Musharraf’s ethnicity.

Punjabis do criticize Musharraf but as far as I can tell only because of his infamous U-turns (and there are many of those I can assure you that). Did any Punjabis come out in Lahore, Rawalpindi, Faisalabad, Sialkot, and other cities in Punjab when a Punjabi Prime Minister was overthrown by a Mohajir COAS and his corps commanders? Did anyone in Punjab squeak when the courts sentenced Nawaz to life imprisonment or when he and his family was exiled?

And can anyone actually be fooled about who is really in power in Pakistan. I bet you even Punjabis know who really is in power..

“Mushraff is good in Big Cities like Karachi and Hyderabad ( thanks to MQM who shares a common agenda of Liberal Pakistan )”

So Punjabis (who don’t have a history of ethnic hatred like the one that MQM fanned in Karachi and other urban areas of Sindh) are basically content only because their “Punjabi chaudhry brethren” are in power but an ethnic party like MQM is only cooperating with Musharraf because they share his common agenda of liberal Pakistan? I guess Musharraf’s being a Mohajir has got nothing to do with the whole Musharraf-MQM wheeling-dealing.

Re#17:

``People will quitely tolerate any dictator, as long the economy is growing in any poor country. This includes Singapore, Korea, Malaysia, Taiwan and now China. ``

People were quietly tolerating the likes of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif also. Which mass movements were there against poverty and corruption either during BB`s or NS`s time (except for the odd long march or train march that BB & NS respectively held against each other)? So in the absence of any mass reprisals against either BB or NS during their rules, are we to assume that the economy was doing pretty well? So, I guess Musharraf`s coup was even more needless.

People not coming out of their houses to get shot is no indicator of the liking for a ruling individual ever since at least the MRD movement. Now in Pakistan, people can hate the rulers from the bottom of their hearts and still not come out.

The truth is, and I agree with Ayaz Amir on this- that our people have been numbed by being betrayed by one dictator (whether civilian or military) after another. They don`t really care much now. But just coz they are not on the streets doesn`t mean they love Musharraf. Anyone wanna bet if Musharraf were to be removed tonight, how many souls would come out into the streets crying and wailing at the loss of their Messiah? I bet not many an eye would be wet with tears of sorrow.

``Due to this, during the Ayub decade, economic growth was 6.7%. During the Zia decade, it was 6.1%. And now it is predicted to be 7.0% this year. ``

Fortunately or unfortunately whenever a military government takes over, there`s some strategic shift here or there which drops it right into the U.S`s lap (or it throws itself into U.S`s lap.. whatever :-)). When Pakistan came into being, the civilian government had to bear the burden of rehabilitation and starting of a new country from scratch. Ayub went for the U.S largesse. Bhutto again had the task of mending a broken Pakistan. Zia came and so came the Soviets in Afghanistan. The day Soviets left Afghanistan, I believe BB was incharge, and we saw one sanction after another being slapped on Pakistan. Nawaz had to deal with Nuclear explosions & Army`s mischief in Kargil. Musharraf struggled till 9/11 when the U.S. treasures opened up again. So all this 6.7%, 6.1% & the predicted 7% has to be seen in perspective.

``A corrupt and power-hungry Prime Minister would have been fired by the judiciary, for the first time in its history, and democracy would have been established in Pakistan. ``

It is quite amazing to see people hoping that the likes of Nawaz Sharif, (who was pampered by a dictator, brought to the national scene by a dictator, was made first the Punjab Finance Minister, then Chief Minister and then Prime Minister by the help of the Army & ISI) was actually expected to behave like a seasoned democrat. A guy whose face people got used to courtesy constant advertisement by government machinery and who won his first premiership of Pakistan through severe election rigging courtesy the Army should actually have behaved like Nelson Mandela??

And if he behaved any lesser, it is his fault and the fault of the people who so-called elected him through voting. It is no fault of the army and the generals who brought him to the spot of premiership in the first place?

It is amazing that our people can accurately predict the complex root causes of Iraq`s problems (and the solutions) but still think that incompetent Jamali deserved being fired, but Musharraf himself is not responsible even an ounce for the incompetence of people he imposes on Pakistan

Similalry if Nawaz was a tyrant in his character.. hey all blame goes to him and the people who went to the polling booths.. Could any generals or our manipulating ISI be blamed even a bit?? Noooooooooo.. don`t even mention that.

And here`s a little reading on how Musharraf tries to take credit for things he never did and how international events effect changes.. changes that are outside of Musharraf`s powers to introduce:

``6.- General Musharraf is crediting himself for events that were beyong his control and had little to do with economic reforms. The current account deficit, which exceeded six percent of GDP in 1995-1997 was reduced to 1.3 percent of GDP in 2000 owing to the strength of textile exports (thus exports generated under Nawaz Sharrif pro-business government), then swung into surplus in 2001 despite steeply falling exports. The reason for the swing is that imports declined drastically in the wke of 9/11 while overseas remittances surged as the war on terrorism cracked down on `underground` systems of repatriating Pakistani workers` earnings without using the banking system. Pakistan`s current account is subject to considerable volatility due to the heavy concentration of cotton-based exports and other commodities. Pakistan typically runs a deficit of US$1-2 billion in its merchandise trade account and a deficit on international services of about US$3 billion, but it has also typically received US$2-3 billion in remittances from Pakistanis working abroad, many in the oil fields of the Middle East. These repatriated earnings have made a significant contribution to the current account over the years. With more of such remittances moving through the banking system rather than through informal payment channels, Pakistan`s current account balance has indeed been be further improved in 2002 and 2003.

More significantly, Pakistan`s capital account, which had been surplus in the US$2-4 billion range in the mid-1990s, turned sharply negative by FY 1999/2000. Infusions of foreign direct investment, which had reached nearly US$1 billion in FY 1996/1997, declined, as did concessionary aid with sanctions taken after the nuclear tests affected these critical financial flows. A crisis situation existed as foreign currency reserves held by the government fell to less than US$1 billion providing less than one month of import coverage. But, with improved relations with the IMF upon satisfactory completion of Stand-by Agreement obligations and implementation of the PRGF program and a renewed relationship with the United States, funding to support Pakistan`s balance of payments turn positive. Official aid and the extraordinary remittance flows in late 2001 and early 2002 enabled the State Bank of Pakistan to rapidly accumulate an unprecedented stock of international reserves, holding more than US$3.3 billion in reserves as of the end of the first quarter of calendar year 2002 (a level more than double what it held in mid-2001) The current foreign reserves stand at $11.75 billion out of which around $3.2 billion will be placed in the global financial market through the approved fund managers.``

http://www.asian-affairs.com/Frame/asianaffairsonpa.html

Re# 17 ``Compare this to the lakh people who greeted Benazir, when she had yet to lose her credibility, after returning during the Zia days. Now she cannot get a fraction of that crowd, due to her financial scandals. ``

In 1986, the then PM Pakistan Mohammad Khan Junejo had convinced Zia to allow Benazir to return to Pakistan. As far as I remember there was no police harassment of people gathering for the jalsa, the police did not arrest PPP leaders in over night raids, and masked police wallas did not mercilessly baton charge people (like they did a few days back during Zardari`s re-arrest drama). In short, the jalsa was allowed to be manged, organized and proceed peacefully. Nothing to do with credibility.

And if today the above conditions were to apply, the number of people greeting even a credibility-depleted personality like BB would probably be higher than in 1986.

And had there been the type of lathi-charge and mass arrests that are a hallmark of our system, I am afraid probably not even a single person would have shown up on that day in 1986. Again, nothing to do with credibility.

Simple fact... people just don`t wanna die.. not for BB.. not for NS... and certainly not for Musharraf... but their inaction does not automatically translate into their love.. for either BB or NS or especially for Mr. Musharraf.

I think we need to get out of our illusions regarding the sagacity of the Pakistan Army.........the fact is that Musharaff was forced to abnadon his original Kargil Plan when Nawaz Sharif made the statement......and he paid for it later. Musharaff had already factored in the Nuclear threat and he was infact ready with his bombs all the time.....he was inches away from the war and the nuclear exchange....and he had made his intentions for first use very clear...it was not a bluff...he was dead serious about it......and Nawaz Sharif knew that it was not a bluff.....

Looking back I think those who support Musharaf`s ``Nuclear Bluff`` as a ``tactical master stroke`` are infact living in a fool`s paradise...............they do not realize how Musharaff had kept the lives of millions of Pakistanis at stake only to get over the humiliation of the past wars........fortunately he was restrained by America and could only fume at India in the wagah border stamping-of-the-boots style ...........all this brings us back to understand the necessity of putting the Military under the Civilian rule.........OTH, the Indian Generals were equally willing to have a go at Mush.....they were only restrained by the Civilian government.....Imagine if we had no civilian rule in India.......then a nuclear holocaust was a certainity

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Pakistanis do not recognise this but they are passing through a golden phase of their history. Musharraf is no doubt a Robin Hood, indeed a plain outlaw who staged an illegal coup against an elected governement who continues to retain power through all means fair and foul. But he has done for Pakistan that no other leader had done. He has of course been helped in this by the geopolitical situation which has put Pakistan in a pivotal position wrt the Bush ``war on terrorism``.

But the Pakistan economy is booming, not only because of the help from America, but also the sensible policies pursued by Shaukat Aziz. The Pakistani textile companies were helped to invest heavily in modernising their capital assets and Pakistan is one of the few countries that is likely to gain from the ending of the textile quotas tomorrow.

Pakistani media is freer than it has ever been in Pakistan`s existence. Ironically, even the army is no longer a sacred cow for the media under this military dictatorship. The television channels are proliferating and freely showing Indian journalists and political pundits on their channels. Music, including classical music, and dance is being encouraged and bold films are being produced. Even sari, which had been bearing the stigma of the `hindu` dress since the time of Ayub Khan, is staging a comeback. Musharraf has been able to do all this, even though he is dependent upon the islamic parties for continuing in office, exposing the mullahs to be toothless tigers who can roar only as long as they have the backing of the army.

Too bad, none of this happened under democracy!

Ignoring Son`s of Bal Thakrey on the channel who just don`t give up I back Romair Bhai .
Romair bhai somehow the feudrals and co. ( including some top army
officers ) raped our country for 1o years . As far as your remarks about
Altaf Hussain yes theres this thing about Altaf Hussain which most of the
people inside MQM don`t like but as we did discuss in a different forum ,
that MQM lost a chance to be Mutthaida Quami Movement in late 80`s but
we are a changed party now - things are changing now I think for the good
let me assure you . PPP workers are good middle class people but there
top leadership consist of Feudrals but there are good an bad people in
everywhere . I think we are maturing as a Nation . Whoever rules Pakistan
they always intended to rule Pakistan with honestly and I don`t blame BB
and Baba ( Nawaz ) for corruption - I blame our system of check and balances - and Army who never allowed Judicary to be free -
I wish everyone on the forum a happy new year - and advise everyone
here to atleast donate a peeny - for the effected people of India and other
brother countries which are stuck by earthquake

So, you`re telling me that Musharraf & Co. can actually fix the entire problem in this country? No, the fact that Musharraf is in power right now itself bares testatement to the fact that there are still `corrupt-bargains` taking place in the country. I`m not calling Musharraf or any of his henchmen corrupt, I think they are relatively the best bet we have for Pakistan. The thing which worries me most is Musharraf has simply bypassed the Benazir Factions and the Nawaz Sharif factions by taking some of the more filaparous members in their parties and putting them under his belly. Defense Minister Rao and the Chaudhry`s are living examples of this `corrupt-bargain`. The thing is, A might not be corrupt, but B-Z are still as corrupt as before. It`s the system, which needs some cleaning, which may only be done with vigor and vitality.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#16 by labyrinth1
//....I am astonished .... Indians on one hand says that they want peace and friendship ( two wonderful words ) - peace never comes `free` ....whats the cost ?//

Who said the peace is free? India has already paid huge costs fighting 15 years of bloody war against paki-sponsored jihad. Now the war is over and you pakis have lost the war - your jihad has failed ........ So it`s time to pack the bags and drag your sorry-a$$es home.

Cost calculations of this war will be done the usual way - the l00sers are going to pay for it. So pakis are going to make all the ``sacrifices`` ..... and Mushy has already started to do so, slowly but surely. That`s the way real world works. I am astonished you still don`t get this.

But if you guys really want a face-saver - Indians are ready throw in a few ``sacrifices`` - like, they will forsake claims on POK and let you intergrate POK with pakiland officially. I know - that`s not much of a deal, but beggars cannot be choosers, can they?

It`s time accept defeat and move on. Whining will not get you anything - especially the things that you could not win even after unleashing a full-fledged jihad, the best weapon islam has given to you to fight against kafirs. That`s a huge shame - you guys have let islam down.

labyrinth1 #7

`` well to me Mushraff is good but I must say that to rest of Pakistanis ``

We will see how long you keep saying it

`` for years - as far as Kargil is concerned ,it was a good plan but US spoiled it
but in the end of the day Pakistan did made it clear to US and EU that
we ( Pakistanis ) could go to war again and again on Kashmir if the West
don`t get serious about it - and its Kargil who highlighted Kashmir - and after
Kargil US seriously got engaged into Kashmir .``

What was so good about Kargil ? Indian forces regained half of the heights by force. It is not clear Pakistani military would have kept the other heights. Indian military has been getting plenty of new hardware for the next war in the future. Plus it is Mushy (Nawaz was just a proxy) when went begging to Washington. Do not blame the Americans for your defeats.

If you really want Kashmir try launching a massive ground attack across the LOC and see where it goes. If you cannot succed with a 600,000 man army you will never succeed with any other tactic.

Re:labyrinth1#16

It is easy for Pakistan to ask for independent Kashmir since it does not own the real estate. You cannot sacrifice something that you don`t possess!! Also, we Indians are committed to secularism. As a proof, this year we comprehensively voted out the BJP government when it tried to fool with secularism. In fact, hindutva is losing out in India and recently the Shankaracharya was arrested without any repercussions. Of course, our system is not perfect but it is way better than anything in our neighborhood. Morever, if you see the news, India has been declared a free country along with Europe and USA. Even Indian Kashmir got the ranking of partially free. Pakistan, along with Azad Kashmir got the not free ranking.

I think India is willing to make a lot of compromises in Kashmir with respect to autonomy, softer LOC and even some kind of joint control where Pakistan plays a role in the administration of the territory. However, if you think India will just walk away and hand territory over, you are being totally unrealistic.

There are two things the Army does, due to which it is able to stay in power, and take over power, literally whenever it wants:

- It has a very stable command structure. The top command of the Army has never turned against its boss or institution. While the top command of the judiciary has turned against its Chief Justice, under politcal pressure. And the top command of the beaurecracy has done the same. The top command of the political parties, on an almost weekly basis, turns against its own party. Thereby giving rise to the term, ``lota.``

Nawaz Sharif was able to turn the Supreme Court judges against their Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah. He then tried to turn the corps commanders against Musharraf, by appointing his own man, out of turn, as the new COAS. The corps commanders didn`t split and in turn Nawaz Sharif ended up losing his job.

Had the justices of the Supreme Court not split and remained loyal to their institution and to their boss, Sajjad Ali Shah would have gotten rid of Nawaz Sharif through a judicial process. A corrupt and power-hungry Prime Minister would have been fired by the judiciary, for the first time in its history, and democracy would have been established in Pakistan. The PM would have been removed in the correct way rather than through a coup. However, NS turned the Chief Justice`s own judges against him, and got the Chief Justice fired instead.

The recent splitting up of the Supreme Court by the Army is another example. As well as the political parties splitting up. Both the PML and PPP have split to gain power. And if the charges against BB are dropped, I am sure the remaining PPP will also happily join the Army.

- The second part is the fact that when the Army takes over, it isolates the financial sector and finds the most capable financial minds and lets them fix that side. Zia had Mahbub-ul-Haq, and Musharraf has Shaukut Aziz and his team. Due to this, during the Ayub decade, economic growth was 6.7%. During the Zia decade, it was 6.1%. And now it is predicted to be 7.0% this year.

The Army has correctly calcuated that most of Pakistan is poor. And poor people prefer economy over democracy. While rich folks (Chowk crowd) prefer democracy over economy, since most of them are not affected by a poor economy. People will quitely tolerate any dictator, as long the economy is growing in any poor country. This includes Singapore, Korea, Malaysia, Taiwan and now China.

Based on the above there are three ways that the political forces can force the Army out of power, permanently, as an institution:

- The first is to be able to get the general populace into the streets. This does not happen, because the major political parties have completely lost credibility amongst the population. After the last coup, barely hundred people came on the street. I know this for a fact, since I know that even a credible Imran Khan has been trying like anything to get people on the streets, against Musharraf, and no one seems interested.

Compare this to the lakh people who greeted Benazir, when she had yet to lose her credibility, after returning during the Zia days. Now she cannot get a fraction of that crowd, due to her financial scandals.

- The second way is for the politicians to stay united and not break ranks. Much like the Army never breaks ranks. Regardless of how much effort the Army puts in, they should not split and aspire for power. Nor should they try to bring the party in power down, regardless of how much they hate it. However, even now, the PPP and MMA is trying like hell to bring the current govt. down, before the next elections. They should let it complete its term, till 2007.

- The third way is to ensure a high economic growth rate while in power. At least as high as the growth rate the Army is able to achieve. This can be done by appointing competent people in the financial sector, and not allowing political influence for things like bank loans etc........Not to mention not having 61 off-shore companies in the Caymen and Virgin Islands...........

I don`t see any of the above happening, any time soon. It won`t happen till the major political parties get out of their heridatory power structures, and allow their common party members into leadership positions. The only party that allows such a transfer of power to the common folk is Jamaat-e-Islami. MQM could have been like that also, however Pir Altaf seems to be its President for life. and PPP`s Benazir is the official President for life of her party. etc. etc. I think PPP is the only organization in the world that has a, ``President for Life`` job title.......

It is impossible for any Army in the world to take on strong middle-class based political parties that achieve a respectable rate of growth. The people would be out on the streets in a second, if the Army took over in such a scenario. Much like they came out to support BB under Zia. She had the opportunity of a lifetime and she screwed it up........