Free to Breed It was a good article and I must say that I feel shocked that majority of the Pakistanis are not out in the open condemning these bombings...Moreover I am equally shocked that some even endorse these tactics employed by Taliban and some think its grand USA conspiracy to defame Islam by "using" Taliban as front cover!!!!

Whereas the points are pertinent and I fully endorse them, Mr. NFP's real purpose was apparently to again "defend" PPP and Zardari....because frankly speaking the comparison was irrelevant... apparently the whole article was written just for the sentence “Men who are willing to scream bloody murder when Asif Ali Zardari is reported to twist his moustache….and the lower layer liberals are left either discussing the ins and outs of fashion, or contemplating lofty notions about constitutionalism, and (their favorite topic), the hideous crimes of Asif Ali Zardari.”

Come on Paracha…attack fanaticism but kindly do not use it to defend and justify Mr. Zardari…..Cronies like him are bringing a bad name to PPP and for that matter left wing and liberalism….. Article after article you have defended PPP using whatever way you could…

How real is your politik? What i really do not understand is the mentality where any attack on Mr Zardari is considered a disdain of the elite of the unwashed masses....I think croonies like Zardari bring bad name to left wing ideology.....Zardari is a cheap croony who has cleverly used his wife's death to gain complete hold over a party which is the party of the common people.....Mr Zardari's actions, his shameless betrayal of agreements are bringing a bad name to PPP which will result in more polarlization between lower die hard segment and lower to upper middle classes......Good article Shandana.... and dont take this naive criticism seriously that attack on Zardari is a reflection of "elite" mentality......

Local Liberal Dribble Its a good article though Mr. NFP is overly harsh on Shoib Mansoor. Firstly, Mr Shoib Mansoor's effort was not directed towards giving a freudian cum marxist explanation of religous fanatiscism, rather he targeted those who already were religus....After all the hard liners draw their human resource from people who beleive in religon ardently....
Regarding religous fanaticism being an outcome of pyschology and social circumstances....
Well partly true.....
The fanaticism is also an outcome in the present times, of the international developments and the way those developments are interpreted by both local and international media and how international heavy weights react...
Frankly if in tribal areas some one's brother is killed by security forces, he wont think about the international definition of terrorism before blowing himself up...
Moreover not all terrorists and suicide bombers are from poorer households....
so while socio economic conditions are one factor, these can not explain the entire phenonmenon....
Another aspect is that this brand of Islamic fundamentalism started gaining ascendency in 1980s.....
Once again this timing points towards a large role of international developmens....
it is the interaction of many factors which may at times be mutually reinforceable which account for extremism...
extremism becomes dominant in an ideology under particular circumstances...which are local as well as international

Myths Surrounding the Lawyer’s Movement Well Mr Ameer, I really do not know what to say over this post...
What more clarity do you want...
In urban areas, particularly Punjab, even PPP has been routed...
And you do agree that issues are more prominent in cities and cities have clearly shown where Mr Musharraf lies in terms of popularity...
Add to it, various opinion polls, including gallop which show Mr Musharraf extremely unpopular..
Khair, the criticism you are facing from almost all the interacters itself is showing that may be you have not made a proper case..
But I do appreciate you for having the courage to go to against the mainstream...

Myths Surrounding the Lawyer’s Movement I really do not understand how the author can easily draw conclusion that more people voted for pro musharraf parties...
Even if PPP voters did vote for their "implicitly" pro Mushrraf party, the intention was not to vote for Musharraf but to vote for their own party which always has retained a sizeable vote bank. PPP worker was not voting for PPP because it was "implicitly" pro Musharraf..
This is an overly simplistic kind of conclusion...
In fact "implicit" support for Mushi has cost party a lot in the urban areas....
Although PML N was always strong in urban punjab but this time the margin of victory in urban cities was much higher...
The most banal argument by the author is of PML Q...
To begin with PML Q's vote bank is not owing to party's ideology or its "explicit" pro Musharraf stance...
It had strong candidates particulary in rural areas.....
In fact many of the PML Q winners could have easily won as independents also...
Some of present independents members actually resigned from PML Q and contested independently
In rural areas the individual power matters a lot....
In cities the party ideology and its stance on issues normally has more influence...
Thats why stalwarts like Sheikh Rshid, Hamayub Akhtar. Wasi Zafar etc lost miserably in cities....
While some PML Q leaders like Raza Yar Hayat won from the rural constituencies...
From the entire urban areas, PML Q hardly won a seat...
So when you are trying to throw numbers....
You have to go a little deeper

The Importance of Natural Selection Re: # 601
Well Nkg...
I have already said that religon is dogma....
And a problem is that dogma also tries to explain the evolution of the universe....
And those who profess faith unfortunately would try to profess beleif in its explanations...
You see the evolution or the qustion of being is he basic premise on which every religon stands...
It holds true for Islam, Christianity as well as Hinduism....

The Importance of Natural Selection Well the amount of heat this article has generated is enormous....
Khair I think the central problem is that religon is based upon unquestionable faith and those who profess to adhere will always be offended if its basic tenanats are questioned....
The funny thing is that their lives are full of contradictions of the preaching of religon.....
They dont often practice the those teaching which require moulding of the lives...
And yet are ferocious when a basic tenanat is even indirectly questioned......
Any how even then I think religon should not be abused on websites because it will also strenghten the reactionary elements..
Religon like ethinicity is identity....
or at least a part of identity...
After all even Einstien became proud of his faith despite being Athiest when jews were attacked...

Surviving Musharraf\'s Exit? In continuation of my post 530....
What kind of exit we are having illustions and misconception about....

This is the The News Editorial

Disturbing signs



Saturday, April 05, 2008
The issue of restoration of the deposed judges is already causing cracks and friction not only in the grand political coalition but within the ranks of the PPP as well. Barrister Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan has even gone on record to unfold what he calls a constitutional package, born and bred in the presidency, to selectively screen out the judges not liked by the presidency, foremost among them Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry. Under the attractive garb of providing sovereignty to parliament, Aitzaz says, all judges would be dismissed and then re-appointed after scrutiny by a parliamentary committee where the pro-presidency elements would rake up dirt against the unwanted judges and eliminate them. On Thursday this warning by Aitzaz was almost confirmed by PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari at the PPP CEC meeting at Naudero, when he said the restoration of the judges would be linked to the judiciary reforms package, a position different from the Bhurban Accord. There are also reports that Mr Zardari publicly snubbed and rebuked Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan in Naudero on the judges issue, asking him to stop threatening long marches and stop claiming the credit for the restoration of democracy because, according to Mr Zardari, it was Benazir Bhutto's ultimate sacrifice and not the lawyers' movement or judges' sacking which led to the elections and the return to democracy. These signs of bitterness within the PPP are unfortunate, but the main coalition partner of the PPP, the PML-N, is also not going to like the way things are moving and an urgent session of the party was held on Friday to discuss the developments.

Reforming the judiciary, and doing it through parliament, is the right thing but the impression that the presidency is pulling the strings has to be quickly dispelled by the PPP leadership. In fact instead of doing that, statements by new PPP ministers have almost confirmed that the party sees no harm in getting, and appearing, closer to Mr Musharraf. Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar has gone too far in calling Mr Musharraf "a national asset" and describing him as a marketable commodity to bring money into Pakistan. What could be more nauseating after the Feb 18 verdict of the people? Such public statements would only create fissures in the coalition and quickly stamp the label on the PPP of being Mr Musharraf's 'B' team. Mr Mukhtar's remarks also fly directly in the face of the massive anti-Musharraf mandate on Feb 18. It is also a fact that the administrative and legal machinery which was in place before the elections has not been touched as yet by the new PPP government. Even the key post of attorney general is still occupied by the insufferable Malik Mohammed Qayyum and the new law minister, Farook Naek, says there is no move afoot to replace him. The extra warmth shown by the PPP for former allies of Mr Musharraf, including the MQM, has not only raised some red flags within the PPP but has also added credence to the doubts that the PPP is trying to gather enough numbers to make the PML-N irrelevant because the presidency so desires.

The PML-Q, minus the Chaudhrys of Gujrat, is also privately claiming to come on board the grand coalition soon. There have been reports that the unqualified and unconditional support to the PM extended by the PML-Q, led ironically by a former PPP stalwart who defected in 2002, Makhdoom Faisal Saleh Hayat, was at the behest of the presidency. Likewise Pir Pagara's group, and all others on the fringe, did not blink an eye and joined the PPP bandwagon for a unanimous vote. If it was all for democracy it might be welcome, but this definitely is not so. The stubborn attitude of the presidency, despite public rebuffs and embarrassments, points to some hope somewhere that the new political setup could be moulded according to the wishes of Mr Musharraf. At least he is not giving up without a fight. This scenario does not provide hope for a stable polity. The PPP has to stem this growing feeling of approaching turbulence by asserting that it will stick to its commitments to the Bhurban Accord and would not let the basic coalition with the PML-N break up. It must take the PML-N into confidence before this issue erupts on the public stage. The main partners should be clear about the reforms package and the PPP's soft overtures to the Musharraf camp. Any constitutional package in parliament should not have the stamp of a child born out of conspiracies in the presidency. It must be acceptable to the civil society and not negate the electoral mandate against Mr Musharraf.

An Unnecessary Interview with History I really do not know why the author of this article is being critisized so much..
For all those who think that we should not "humilate" a sitting president....just see the international and local media...they are all critisizing him...
Regarding this argument that politicians have been corrupt whereas Musharraf is a better choice,
I am pasting an article written by an Indian....kindly see it...it does make a very strong case…its an outsider’s view which demonstrates as to why there is a difference in fortunes between two countries…


Junta versus Janata by Shekhar Gupta, The Indian Express
Published on January 21, 2008

The Indian politician bumbles, the Pakistani general strides purposefully in his natty suits. Guess who keeps his country stable. Pakistanis surely coin more colourful political slogan than us. They are also less subtle. So, the next time you see visuals of a PPP protest rally on your TV screens following Benazir¡¦s assassination, strain your ears a bit to catch a most telling slogan: Amreeka ne kutta paala, vardi waala, vardi waala. It would lose much flavour in transliteration, but the meaning would not be lost on even a non-Hindi speaker. Now when was the last time you had the army called a dog, and that too an American poodle, on Pakistan¡¦s streets? And this is a Pakistan under an almighty (lately, former) general who has the power to declare and suspend emergency in televised speeches, the power to make 36 (or thereabouts) amendments in his ¡§constitution¡¨ at a press conference, and whose ability to take the biggest decisions on the spot is the envy, often, of the Indian politician, and has been a cause for admiration among India¡¦s chattering classes.
How many times, since he came on his first visit for the Agra summit, have we heard fellow Indians, including serious, knowledgeable people, talk of him with a sense of awe? See, how confident he looks, how well he speaks, the swagger, so impressive, knows his mind, is so fit and energetic, so much in control, so macho, can-do and so on. The sub-text was, view this is total contrast with our own political class: overweight, badly dressed, clumsy, evasive in their answers, indecisive, inarticulate and, horror of horrors, not even able to speak any English.

And then came Shaukat Aziz, on secondment from Citibank. So smart, articulate, in his smartly cut suits, blah, blah and blah. And what kind of people did we have holding the same job in India? Gowda, who slept in Parliament. Vajpayee, who never seems to answer any question. Gujral who only uttered diplomatic platitudes that meant nothing. And Narasimha Rao, who mostly pretended he had not even heard the question.

Now let me tell you a few stories. Not necessarily connected either by timing or context, but yielding an interesting conclusion, nevertheless.

¡E One of the great untold stories of the Agra summit is how challenging it was for both Vajpayee and Musharraf to deal with each other. One thought he had the answer even before a question had been asked. The other would think for ever, and often tire out his interlocutor. Apparently at one of the mid-day review sessions Musharraf shared his exasperation with his aides. He said something like, I know you guys told me he takes time responding to anything, but how do I deal with somebody who takes so long and then says nothing? A bit like John McEnroe tossing his racket in exasperation while playing Ramesh Krishnan and screaming: how do I play this guy? He serves at five miles per hour!

One of his aides tried to suggest that Vajpayee takes so long because he is processing Musharraf¡¦s question in his wise, old head. Musharraf was still irritated and somebody senior in his inner council said, with humour laced with disdain: to unka processor Pentium nahin, 286 hoga (then his processor must be a 286, not a Pentium).

¡E Now listen to the story from the other end. What exasperated Vajpayee most of all was Musharraf¡¦s cocky ¡§decisiveness¡¨. ¡§You are the prime minister, I am the president, if we agree on something, let¡¦s sign,¡¨ he would say, while at the same time making changes on the draft of a likely agreement and asking Vajpayee to okay it. He simply wouldn¡¦t buy Vajpayee¡¦s argument that he had a cabinet to go back to. ¡§Par aap prime minister hain. Aap faisla keejiye (but you are the prime minister, you decide),¡¨ Musharraf would say. So when Vajpayee briefed his aides and fellow members of the Cabinet Committee on Security (who, barring George Fernandes, were in Agra), he said about his counterpart pretty much the opposite of what he said of him: ¡§He is in such a hurry. Kuchch sochne ko taiyyar nahin hain. Sub kuch faisala abhi chahte hain, kaise samjhaoon bhai.¡¨ Or words to that effect.

¡E In the main lounge of the Congress Centre at Davos, Switzerland, where all kinds from heads of state to global corporate leaders to rock stars to ordinary journalists congregate and rub shoulders during the World Economic Forum January meeting, I found my old friend, Pakistani journalist, part-time politician, now a full-time exile, Boston University professor and also an Indian Express columnist, Husain Haqqani. As we exchanged gossip, Shaukat Aziz walked past, accompanied by a couple of minders, perfectly cut suit, pompous, smug smile and all. Just that morning he had lectured many of us senior editors over breakfast, laying down the law for India: nothing would move, the gas pipeline, even the permission to Indian private airlines to fly to Pakistan unless the ¡§core¡¨ issue was addressed. Again there was some admiration for his confidence and clarity even among the Indian contingent as he was ¡§so unlike our bumbling politicians¡¨.

Haqqani¡¦s eyes were now lit up with mischief. He pointed his finger directly at Aziz and said: ¡§You know what they say, Davos is the Disneyland of the mind. If that be so, there goes its Mickey Mouse.¡¨

How have the relative fortunes of the two competing kinds of leaderships and nations under their charge evolved over these seven years? Musharraf now looks bumbling and unconvincing, an international joke, a pitiable, forlorn figure, hated by his countrymen, distrusted by the world and mentioned dismissively even by Barack Obama. Shaukat Aziz has disappeared from the scene, even losing out to an ordinary mortal ¡X coincidentally from India ¡X for the top job in his alma mater, Citi. Their country is a mess, their own army, for the first time, is seeing its credibility, power, its pre-eminent position in Pakistan¡¦s society and power structure questioned. Its political class is decimated, its institutions fatally wounded. How do people as proud as the Pakistanis feel when their dictator offers to salvage his credibility by summoning the Scotland Yard to investigate the assassination of their most prominent political leader? Nobody believes their election commission¡¦s intentions, motives or judgment in postponing their election.

Vajpayee, on the other hand, sits at home, having lost power in an election, not in the pink of health, but satisfied at the way his country is moving. His successor, from the opposite side of the political fence, even comes to wish him on his birthday. His country has meanwhile had many more state elections and another general election within a year or so will give his successors in his own party another crack at power. Now, think, who finally won. The indecisive, inarticulate, ineffective slob who did not seem to have an answer to anything, or the macho, confident, smart, decisive, modern smartie who seemed to have an answer to everything?

There are many interesting, and important conclusions to be drawn from this complex argument. But the most significant is this: a modern nation needs democracy and so it needs its politicians, however clumsy, corrupt, effete and power-crazed they may be. Because a military dictator can also be all of these things. The difference is, the political leader draws his power from the democratic process, so he has a stake in preserving that system, howsoever cynical he may be. The general draws his power by throttling the democratic system and its institutions and you can see the results of that in Pakistan. So, in a democracy, howsoever powerful a Lalu or Mayawati, they have to shut up and listen when the Supreme Court speaks. The election commission can publicly upbraid both Sonia Gandhi and Narendra Modi. We, the media, can question and curse who we want. It happens because the political class has the biggest stake in the democratic process, howsoever much it may wish to manipulate it. In contrast, a military dictator owes his power to the absence of institutions, of checks and balances. That is exactly what Musharraf has done to his judiciary, the election commission and even the media. That is why he has to summon the Scotland Yard to investigate Benazir¡¦s assassination.

Surviving Musharraf\'s Exit? Re: # 529
I have written "if" to indicate a contigency...
I am not saying that PML (N) will move out...but merely indicating that PPP will not face problems of survival if they do
Regarding Mr Musharraf...well NRO had been put into implementation even before the picture became clear...
It is obvious that Mr Musharraf is doing his part of the deal....
Regarding 3rd November steps....well frankly it is a legal debate whether you need 2/3rd majority to give them a constituional cover or not...there are enough sellouts who are claiming that it takes a 2/3rd majority to roll those steps back.....
Wesay is there any law in the Pakistan in the first place...
Did 3rd November itself orginated out of some provision in the constitution....

Socialist Yuppies 3: The Jihadi It was brilliant.....
Showing that what is said is never that easy to practice...
Wesay some of it applies to Our old fasioned marxist icon with "great" ability aka Nadeem Farooq Paracha...
You know talking about unwashed masses...writing jingles for corporates...calling junoons sell outs for appearing in coca cola ad...and calling himself a creative person for the ads he himself wrote...

Surviving Musharraf\'s Exit? Its a good article and rightly it has been pointed out that at present he is the punching bAG...
I do have doubts that he has any intentions to leave or will actually be forced to leave....
The way things are shaping up does not indicate that things are moving towards his dismissal or impeachment....
NRO was borought in with the condition that PPP would support Musharraf....
Now cases against Mr Zardari have been withdrawn....
Mr Musharrraf has done his part of the deal...and with 58 2 (b) and still friendly army behind him, PPP will do its part....
Its funny the way MQM had a "hiostoric" truce and Q league gave vote of confidence....
The reliance of PPP on PML (N) has more or less been eliminated...
If PML (N) moves out of coalition...
PPP will survive....
And will perform their part of the deal with out any problems....
The punching bag will continue to stay there.....though gradually the focus would be more and more on apprently vibrant Parliament
And some "progressive" psuedo intellectuals who also have been supporting Mr Musharraf and think that his opposition is just "reactionary" will be happy......

The Nawaiwaqt Generation and the Power of No! Re: # 327 Well the post is reflective of the clarity of the article itself......
It is just a jibe at various "scientific" explanations of the CJ crisis....

The Nawaiwaqt Generation and the Power of No! Mr HP do you really think that things are as planned as you seem to portray....
Really so urban Punjab in a collective planned way decided to challenge army through a CJ crisis.....
You see ever since that crisis happened and the people responded, I have been reading all kind of explanations....
There are people who have actually called it a reflection of anal middle class morality....called it an epic struggle of the survival of middle class ...The class which had always kept the common man out!!!!!
Or some cried that reactionaries were chanting slogans for restoration of CJ while "progressive" elements were above the trivialities of protest as they understood that history moves according to a logical plan and such "minor" hiccups in the dialectic process can be ignored...Since justice has a “right wing” tinge to it therefore any one talking about is a self contradictory idiot and not “progressive” …..
And now comes this masterpiece!!!!!!!!!!

It seems to combine the class mentality theory with regional disparities!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bravo Mr HP…..
You take the prize!!!!!!!!!!!!

Student Politics in Pakistan: A Profile It was a good descriptive article....
Though I think it would have been better if Mr NFP had analysed the actual effectiveness of these student wings in influencing the mainstream politics...
The article mentions the names of some politicans which have emerged from the student unions but does not talk much about the reciprocal relationship between the main parties and their student wings and how it has actually evolved over time....
Likewise to what extent the student unions have actually influenced the society in general...
Another important aspect is about the likely future of the student unions...
With the mushroom growth of the private universities, the unions with political unserpinnings will be hard hit as generally the public sector universities have been their breeding ground....

Voting For Change Re: # 477
That was well said.....
Wesay bhee I do not understand about this non sense of NS or BB or AZ versus Musharraf...
It is the self sustainable system with adequate checks and balances which is important....
I think there was a very good article by an Indian author and i am pasting it below. This will set all the detractors of democracy right....



Junta versus Janata by Shekhar Gupta, The Indian Express
Published on January 21, 2008

The Indian politician bumbles, the Pakistani general strides purposefully in his natty suits. Guess who keeps his country stable. Pakistanis surely coin more colourful political slogan than us. They are also less subtle. So, the next time you see visuals of a PPP protest rally on your TV screens following Benazir¡¦s assassination, strain your ears a bit to catch a most telling slogan: Amreeka ne kutta paala, vardi waala, vardi waala. It would lose much flavour in transliteration, but the meaning would not be lost on even a non-Hindi speaker. Now when was the last time you had the army called a dog, and that too an American poodle, on Pakistan¡¦s streets? And this is a Pakistan under an almighty (lately, former) general who has the power to declare and suspend emergency in televised speeches, the power to make 36 (or thereabouts) amendments in his ¡§constitution¡¨ at a press conference, and whose ability to take the biggest decisions on the spot is the envy, often, of the Indian politician, and has been a cause for admiration among India¡¦s chattering classes.
How many times, since he came on his first visit for the Agra summit, have we heard fellow Indians, including serious, knowledgeable people, talk of him with a sense of awe? See, how confident he looks, how well he speaks, the swagger, so impressive, knows his mind, is so fit and energetic, so much in control, so macho, can-do and so on. The sub-text was, view this is total contrast with our own political class: overweight, badly dressed, clumsy, evasive in their answers, indecisive, inarticulate and, horror of horrors, not even able to speak any English.

And then came Shaukat Aziz, on secondment from Citibank. So smart, articulate, in his smartly cut suits, blah, blah and blah. And what kind of people did we have holding the same job in India? Gowda, who slept in Parliament. Vajpayee, who never seems to answer any question. Gujral who only uttered diplomatic platitudes that meant nothing. And Narasimha Rao, who mostly pretended he had not even heard the question.

Now let me tell you a few stories. Not necessarily connected either by timing or context, but yielding an interesting conclusion, nevertheless.

¡E One of the great untold stories of the Agra summit is how challenging it was for both Vajpayee and Musharraf to deal with each other. One thought he had the answer even before a question had been asked. The other would think for ever, and often tire out his interlocutor. Apparently at one of the mid-day review sessions Musharraf shared his exasperation with his aides. He said something like, I know you guys told me he takes time responding to anything, but how do I deal with somebody who takes so long and then says nothing? A bit like John McEnroe tossing his racket in exasperation while playing Ramesh Krishnan and screaming: how do I play this guy? He serves at five miles per hour!

One of his aides tried to suggest that Vajpayee takes so long because he is processing Musharraf¡¦s question in his wise, old head. Musharraf was still irritated and somebody senior in his inner council said, with humour laced with disdain: to unka processor Pentium nahin, 286 hoga (then his processor must be a 286, not a Pentium).

¡E Now listen to the story from the other end. What exasperated Vajpayee most of all was Musharraf¡¦s cocky ¡§decisiveness¡¨. ¡§You are the prime minister, I am the president, if we agree on something, let¡¦s sign,¡¨ he would say, while at the same time making changes on the draft of a likely agreement and asking Vajpayee to okay it. He simply wouldn¡¦t buy Vajpayee¡¦s argument that he had a cabinet to go back to. ¡§Par aap prime minister hain. Aap faisla keejiye (but you are the prime minister, you decide),¡¨ Musharraf would say. So when Vajpayee briefed his aides and fellow members of the Cabinet Committee on Security (who, barring George Fernandes, were in Agra), he said about his counterpart pretty much the opposite of what he said of him: ¡§He is in such a hurry. Kuchch sochne ko taiyyar nahin hain. Sub kuch faisala abhi chahte hain, kaise samjhaoon bhai.¡¨ Or words to that effect.

¡E In the main lounge of the Congress Centre at Davos, Switzerland, where all kinds from heads of state to global corporate leaders to rock stars to ordinary journalists congregate and rub shoulders during the World Economic Forum January meeting, I found my old friend, Pakistani journalist, part-time politician, now a full-time exile, Boston University professor and also an Indian Express columnist, Husain Haqqani. As we exchanged gossip, Shaukat Aziz walked past, accompanied by a couple of minders, perfectly cut suit, pompous, smug smile and all. Just that morning he had lectured many of us senior editors over breakfast, laying down the law for India: nothing would move, the gas pipeline, even the permission to Indian private airlines to fly to Pakistan unless the ¡§core¡¨ issue was addressed. Again there was some admiration for his confidence and clarity even among the Indian contingent as he was ¡§so unlike our bumbling politicians¡¨.

Haqqani¡¦s eyes were now lit up with mischief. He pointed his finger directly at Aziz and said: ¡§You know what they say, Davos is the Disneyland of the mind. If that be so, there goes its Mickey Mouse.¡¨

How have the relative fortunes of the two competing kinds of leaderships and nations under their charge evolved over these seven years? Musharraf now looks bumbling and unconvincing, an international joke, a pitiable, forlorn figure, hated by his countrymen, distrusted by the world and mentioned dismissively even by Barack Obama. Shaukat Aziz has disappeared from the scene, even losing out to an ordinary mortal ¡X coincidentally from India ¡X for the top job in his alma mater, Citi. Their country is a mess, their own army, for the first time, is seeing its credibility, power, its pre-eminent position in Pakistan¡¦s society and power structure questioned. Its political class is decimated, its institutions fatally wounded. How do people as proud as the Pakistanis feel when their dictator offers to salvage his credibility by summoning the Scotland Yard to investigate the assassination of their most prominent political leader? Nobody believes their election commission¡¦s intentions, motives or judgment in postponing their election.

Vajpayee, on the other hand, sits at home, having lost power in an election, not in the pink of health, but satisfied at the way his country is moving. His successor, from the opposite side of the political fence, even comes to wish him on his birthday. His country has meanwhile had many more state elections and another general election within a year or so will give his successors in his own party another crack at power. Now, think, who finally won. The indecisive, inarticulate, ineffective slob who did not seem to have an answer to anything, or the macho, confident, smart, decisive, modern smartie who seemed to have an answer to everything?

There are many interesting, and important conclusions to be drawn from this complex argument. But the most significant is this: a modern nation needs democracy and so it needs its politicians, however clumsy, corrupt, effete and power-crazed they may be. Because a military dictator can also be all of these things. The difference is, the political leader draws his power from the democratic process, so he has a stake in preserving that system, howsoever cynical he may be. The general draws his power by throttling the democratic system and its institutions and you can see the results of that in Pakistan. So, in a democracy, howsoever powerful a Lalu or Mayawati, they have to shut up and listen when the Supreme Court speaks. The election commission can publicly upbraid both Sonia Gandhi and Narendra Modi. We, the media, can question and curse who we want. It happens because the political class has the biggest stake in the democratic process, howsoever much it may wish to manipulate it. In contrast, a military dictator owes his power to the absence of institutions, of checks and balances. That is exactly what Musharraf has done to his judiciary, the election commission and even the media. That is why he has to summon the Scotland Yard to investigate Benazir¡¦s assassination.