Stop Placating Pakistan

March 22, 2007

The Bush administration has looked the other way as its ally in the war on terror veers from democracy.

SUPPOSE THAT a supreme court justice in an unstable but pro-American country becomes unwilling to take his cues from the authoritarian government. He orders its intelligence services to answer charges that they are holding 100 citizens who have disappeared. He is widely believed to oppose a presidential scheme to get around a constitutional ban on running for reelection. The government suspends the justice and places him under house arrest. Street protests erupt, and government riot police using tear gas quell demonstrators, haul away opposition leaders and smash their way into a TV station that covers the controversy.

How does the U.S. government react? With few exceptions, in the bad old days of the Cold War, the United States turned a blind eye to such thuggery by friendly strongmen in Third World countries so long as they remained reliably anti-communist.

That was then. President Bush now argues that radical Islam showed that where freedom and opportunity were squelched — as in much of the Middle East — extremism would flourish. “We will encourage reform in other governments by making clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people,” Bush declared in his second inaugural address. “America’s belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed.”

Yet Bush is failing to live up to his own standard, acting instead very much under Cold War rules. The above example is from Pakistan last week. President Pervez Musharraf, who seized power in a coup more than seven years ago, continues to squelch his democratic domestic opposition and appears determined to engineer his reelection as president while retaining his post as army chief, in violation of the constitution. Yet so long as he mouths anti-terrorism bromides, Washington seems loath to mention his anti-democratic behavior — even as it shells out billions in aid to Pakistan each year. This flawed notion that there is no alternative to the friendly dictator, even when he is behaving like, well, a dictator, is the same logic that led the U.S. to cozy up to such anti-communist leaders as Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua and the shah of Iran .

The Bush administration’s unwillingness to distance itself from Musharraf, or to at least express disapproval of his behavior, is shortsighted in the extreme. To sacrifice U.S. values to fight terrorism is to lose the broader struggle.

Source: LA Times


Middle East Crisis – General Musharraf’s New Ad-Venture

February 2, 2007

Recently, greatest American ally in the history Mr. General Musharraf has started his efforts to solve the Middle East Crisis thru his visionary ideas. What exactly he has in mind, is yet to be disclosed. Whether his recent trips would or wouldn’t yield any results is a separate issue – but he certainly has added a lots of burden on Pakistan’s economy as he has visited several countries of Arabian peninsula & to far east Asian countries like Indonesia & Malaysia.

Thru his statements on media, he has been depicting that Islamic World (if one exists) should get ready for a solution to Middle East Crisis & Islamic World would have to recognize Israel.

There are only 2 countries on the face of earth founded in the name of Religion – one is Israel and other one, you name it, is Pakistan.

What has Muslim world gained by not recognizing Israel? Nothing — What has non-Muslim states gained by recognizing Israel — a lot. for example, India, the enemy neighbour of Pakistan – has gained a lot by Pakistan’s enmity against Israel – what they say friend of enemy is an enemy – enemy of enemy is a friend.

Well Well, I started to write this blog to show my point of view regarding Musharraf’s recent efforts to solve the subject problem – but am ending up supporting him.

Yeah, the point which I had in mind is that – instead of addressing internal & external problems of Pakistan – why is so keen to be a hero by solving the issue which is not directly related to Pakistan?

Has his selected government and his chosen prime minister aka Short-Cut Aziz (Shaukat Aziz) addressed the economy? a BIG NO!!!

Has poverty vanished from Pakistan – the only Nuclear State in Islamic World?

Has everybody in Pakistan shelter, education, food, health facilities, bright future? NO…

Do we have democracy in Pakistan? the NAB (Nawaz-Altaf-Benazir) – 3 most popular leaders of the country are sitting outside Pakistan

People are dying due to hunger, shelter, by freezing cold in Oct-8’s earthquake hit areas

Then why to waste people’s money in something which has nothing to do with the things mentioned above.

Let’s see how things go – so far, Clinton tried to solve it – people received Nobel prizes and nothing was achieved – let’s how future folds itself.

paeywasta reh shajar say umeed e bahaar rakh – be hopeful of the dying tree to blossom in spring.