Pakistan Affairs Desk

Professional Wrestling

2008-06-13T21:50:00.000-07:00

PM Gilani "assails" and "protests"
His ambassador to DC says nothing to protest here; all is fine.

In Urdu we have a phrase for fake wrestling; "noora kushti". There is no equal term in American English. We refer to fake wrestling with the very positive phrase: "professional wrestling."

I have not seen the Pakistani or Global media pick up this professional wrestling between Gilani and Dick Cheney. Brian Cloughley in CounterPunch did notice:

It was slightly disturbing, however, that Pakistan’s representative in Washington, the highly intelligent Mr Hussain Haqqani, who has lived in the US for seven years and is still a professor at Boston University, was apparently instructed to deny that the government in Islamabad had considered the airstrikes as an intentional hostile act. He told Reuters that the incident would not cause Pakistan to reconsider its relationship with Washington, “but rather find ways of improving that partnership”.

So there appear to be two messages coming from Islamabad about the killing of Pakistani citizens : “totally unacceptable” and “cowardly act” on one hand ; and an opening to “improving partnership” on the other. But what partnership, what trust, can there be with a nation whose artillery, drones and bombers regularly kill citizens of Pakistan, be they civilians or soldiers?

What evidence is there for Mr. Haqqani's intelligence? I have seen his love letters to Daniel Pipes. I have read his argument why the lack of democracy within PPP is a good thing for democracy. I think he is kinda dumb.

2008-06-13T21:45:00.000-07:00

"Sharif, the man Musharraf overthrew to first come to power almost eight years ago, returned to sweep large section of the country in the election earlier this year."

Mr Sharif did not sweep anything. He is not elected to anything. The party that he leads did the sweeping. Its an important distinction make. We want our elected officials to be answerable to the voters, and not just be puppets of their unelected party bosses.

What are we going to do about the Taliban

2008-06-03T10:48:00.000-07:00

Says NYT.

The article talks about Baitullah Mahsud of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, and introduces Qari Hussain. "Much of Mr. Mehsud’s strength lies in his alliance with Mr. Hussain, a militant groomed in the anti-Shiite group Laskar Jhangvi."

This week I listened to a couple of interviews of Imran Khan on Pakistan TV that were posted online. He is starting to make more sense than he ever has in the past. He makes some important points about how "Islamic" terrorism and the war on terror are not a religious war but a colonial/imperial struggle. He is only half right. It is both.

There is some wishful thinking in Pakistan that the religious violence will go away once we get rid of Musharraf. It will not. Lashkar Jhangvi is not a product of Bush and Musharraf. It is a product of our own ignorance (jahalat) and savagery. It is also a product of the Israel+Saudi vs Iran power games, that are also not related to Musharraf. We will have to come to grips with all of this if and when Musharraf packs his bags.

Pakistani opinion makers act with revulsion when MQM blows up innocent civilians. They do not express the same revulsion when religious (or pseudo-religious) nut cases blow up innocent civilians.

Sharief-Zardari's one accomplishment

2008-06-02T09:24:00.000-07:00

Laura King of LA Times has a standard piece today about how everyone in Pakistan is beating up on Musharraf. Here is the part that I disagree with.

After two months in office, the ruling coalition, made up of the Pakistan People's Party of assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and the Pakistan Muslim League-N, led by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, is deeply divided, with no real policy accomplishments to point to.

They have one real accomplishment. They have broken from the Bush policy of "bomb first ask questions later" in Western Pakistan and have started to talk to the folks in that region. Of course it does not take much to improve on Bush's policy, and it is too soon to say what the results of this new policy will be, but it most certainly is a new policy accomplishment. She is right about the rest of it. These clowns have done pretty much nothing else.

US and Pakistan military

2007-12-07T13:16:00.000-08:00

Aijaz Ahmad talks about the the relationship between U.S. and the Pakistan military.

Based in New Delhi, Aijaz Ahmad is The Real News Network Senior News Analyst and Senior Editorial Consultant and political commentator for the Indian newsmagazine, Frontline. He has taught Political Science and written widely on South Asia and the Middle East.

Chaudhrys of Gujrat

2007-11-30T08:41:00.000-08:00

Reuters has a standard fluff piece about the horses running in the Pakistani elections. To their credit they add the Chaudharys of Gujrat to their list.

Here is a 2004 Newsline article about Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain that furnishes a few more details. We might as well start talking about these clowns.

One Demand. For and against.

2007-11-29T13:13:00.000-08:00

For

Imran Khan was on NPR again last week. He has been very clear about his political priorities. He is currently on a hunger strike to make his one demand, and was recently seen ripping up his nomination papers. A guest on a TV sidewalk talk show noted that Imran's party PTI was advertising for candidates in a newspaper ad. Does anyone know more about this?

Retired military men join in on the one demand.

Against

CNN news story this morning tells us that Musharraf will lift the emergency on December 16th. The words "constitution" and "supreme court" do not appear in this story.

Professor Juan Cole lists a sample of editorials from the Urdu press yesterday upon the return of Nawaz Sharief. The tone of the Urdu editorials is shockingly different from that of the TV talk shows. The focus is on having nice clean elections, and not on boycotting the sham elections till the supreme court is restored.

BBC tells us how events are widely seen

2007-11-27T19:46:00.000-08:00

Sometimes BBC can be so trashy. Today's article titled "Pakistan's big three - the options" is good example of the worst writing about Pakistan. Here is the first sentence:

The retirement of Pervez Musharraf from the army is widely seen as the most significant development in Pakistan since the coup of 1999 which brought him to power. (my emphasis)

Widely seen? Really? There are those who have no regard for the rule of law in Pakistan. BBC adds its name to that list. The lines are clearly drawn.

Pakistan Supreme Court's successful fight back against the firing of its chief justice earlier this year was a much more significant event. The current sacking of constitution is even bigger. These events dwarf uniform doffing games of this week. Shame on BBC for trivializing the rule of law in Pakistan.

Something happened this week that involved BBC iteself that may have been more significant that the uniform change. Musharraf admitted that his actions of Nov. 3rd were illegal.

"Have I done anything constitutionally illegal? Yes, I did it on 3 November," he said, referring to his imposition of emergency rule. "But did I do it before? Not once."

Bravo General Sahib. You may plead as a first time criminal. Bravo BBC for staying focussed on what is important.

The seething anger of the Pakistani population at the trashing of legal institutions and news media far outweighs their reaction the clothing change. Maybe The BBC's M Ilyas Khan just woke up from a long nap.

In Bhutto's profile, BBC neglects to mention her criminal past. There is no mention of how she is widely seen by ordinary Pakistanis. Much of her profile is devoted to her cozy relationship with the US Administration, but there is no mention of how this is "widely seen" by Pakistanis.

Musharraf had to push through the odious National Reconciliation Ordinance to forgive her criminal past. There is no mention of the NRO here, neither is there any mention of how Bhutto is dependent on the destruction of the supreme court to benefit from the NRO. Of course, BBC will not discuss how the NRO is widely seen in Pakistan.

The BBC's M Ilyas Khan is almost dismissive and disdainful towards Pakistan's push for the rule of law. Who is this clown?

What we are up against

2007-11-26T20:32:00.000-08:00

Pakistan civil rights revolt is up against the police, military and intelligence agency apparatus of our own country. This we know. We are done with Musharraf and his chamchas.

We are also up against imperialism and the genocidal war on terror that operates above the law. It destroys legal institutions it finds threatening. This we have not addressed this so much.

We are also up against the ignorance and apathy of the rest of Pakistan that is on the sidelines. This we hardly ever talk about.

Here is an account of a college student in Lahore reporting on a scene of police brutality. His/her questions (#2and #3) about numbers and "the show" are really heartbraking.

1. Can’t the police ‘capture’ such protesting ‘terrorists’ without baton charging? Can’t they ask lady police to ‘grab’ the protesting ladies?
2. Can’t we stop asking questions like ‘how was the show’? (Show? SHOW?)
3. Can’t we think beyond numbers? (Kitna crowd tha? Kitnay zakhmi huyay? Kitnay maray? Kitnay giruftaar huay?)
4. Can’t we do something more than posting the pictures and videos on blogs? Discussing this issue on email forums only?

Musharraf gets on the wrong train

2007-11-20T17:31:00.000-08:00

Nawaz Sharif makes only one demand

2007-11-15T23:04:00.000-08:00

Nawaz Sharif promotes the One Demand idea (in Urdu) while talking to Faeza Dawood of ARY TV. I found the link on Pakistan Politics. Look for it at about the 21 min mark on the Nov 14, episode of Focus with Faeza.

One Demand gathers steam

2007-11-15T18:20:00.000-08:00

Most of the news coverage of Pakistan continues to focus on the showdown between Benazir and Musharraf. There is talk of elections, but very little talk what a fraud such elections would be without a functioning Supreme Court.

So far no one else has fully signed on the the one demand strategy. A few folks in the media and the web are starting to champion the cause of Pakistan's rule of law.

William H. Neukom, the presedent of the American Bar Association, tells us to stand with the Pakistan's heroes in the Christian Science Monitor today. The world has embraced its heroes, and they are Pakistani. Never thought that you would ever hear that, did you?

Tony Karon at Rootless Cosmopolitan tells us that Benazir v.s Musharraf is a bogus showdown within Pakistan's Team America. I highly recommend this piece. Be sure to follow some of the links in the article. (Thank you Cursor for the link)

Folks from the International Crisis Group have and article in the Washington Post title The Answer in Pakistan. They seem to think that the only problem facing Pakistan is how to best fight America's war on terror. But they do mention restoring the judiciary in the second to last paragraph. That's a good start. They do not mention what would happen if this independent judiciary were to decide that some of the GWOT tactics are illegal, or the new Pakistani democracy were to elect someone who has his or her own ideas about how to best handle the extremists.

The Guradian has an excellent article about the corruption and incompetence of Benazir Bhutto. Guardian claims that the evidence is voluminous.

NYT dances the Back-room boogie

2007-11-15T13:22:00.000-08:00

New York Times tells us today how U.S. Is Looking Past Musharraf in Case He Falls. Friends of Pakistan should make one thing very clear. There is one and only one legitimate path in ahead for Pakistan: A fully restored and independent Supreme Court.

Here is a quick word count of the NYT article.

General 29

Musharraf 27

Army 14

Bhutto 3

Supreme 0

Court 0

NYT continues...

Officials involved in the discussions in Washington said the Bush administration
remained wary of the perception that the United States was cutting back-room
deals to install the next leader of Pakistan.

The Bushies, or NYT for that matter, have never bothered with avoiding the perception of back-room deals. They are the ones who have appointed Ahmed Chalabi and Hamid Karzai as saviors. Why bother now?

Anyone who talks about Pakistan's future, without mentioning the one demand is not a friend of Pakistan. Any plan that does not address the one demand is a back-room, back-door illegal plan. Any plan that mentions Benazir Bhutto, without mentioning the fact that she can only come to power through back-room deals, is a back-room plan. Any plan that does not address the illegality of the odious NRO is not a legal plan.

We will pick up some of these themes in the upcoming days.

Zakaria's fantacy about keeping Musharraf

2007-11-14T08:36:00.000-08:00

Holding on to Musharraf is good for Pakistan, argues Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek. Here are a few gems:

On many of these issues, Musharraf's reforms were not as comprehensive as he
claimed, nor was his break with the Taliban. But he did things that neither
of his democratically elected predecessors—Nawaz Sharief and Benazir
Bhutto—had dared to do.

Musharraf did not come to power on an anti-Taliban platform. He broke with them because Dick Cheney put a gun to his head. There is no reason to believe that Sharief and Bhutto would have sucked up to Cheney any differently.

The best course for Pakistan would be for Musharraf to be forced to get
back on the course he had outlined before imposing emergency rule—to hold
elections soon and resign as Army chief of staff. Were he to do this quickly
and end the emergency, he might be able to keep the presidency, though it
will be a far weaker position than he might expect.

Wrong! Best course for Pakistan would be the restoration of an independent judiciary. And that would put a quick end to all Newsweek fantasies about keeping Musharraf in power. Maybe Mr. Zakaria is right, Pakistan does not need the rule of law as long as the Newsweek approved dictator creates some tiny illusion of democracy. Even so, I wish Mr. Zakaria had explained in detail how exactly Musharraf would get elected were he to put down the gun and the uniform. Now that would have been an interesting article.

most Pakistanis seem to see him not as a monster but as a man who
overstayed his welcome. There are those who hate him with a passion—Al Qaeda and the Taliban—but they are enemies of modern Pakistan itself.

Wrong again. Most Pakistanis do see him as a monster and hate him with a passion. He knows this. This is why he is demanding prison terms for anyone who as much as pokes fun at him. The only way for Mr. Zakaria to weave his pre-Musharraf narrative is for him to repeat the idiotic lie that the current conflict is between the general and the jahadis.

Mr. Zakaria opens his article with an anecdote about how even the general himself has given up on this pathetic lie. Musharraf is openly telling foreign diplomats that his conflict is with the supreme court of Pakistan and not the Taliban.

Musharraf declares war on school kids

2007-11-14T00:47:00.000-08:00

Video

Every revolution needs Swag

2007-11-14T00:09:00.000-08:00

Posters and stickers that my friend Abbey and I made for the demonstration in San Francisco last Saturday. Swag

Won't get fooled again

2007-11-13T22:47:00.000-08:00

The editorial today in the San Francisco Chronicle:
Democracy involves more than scheduling an election.
Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's embattled president, fooled no one (emphasis added) Sunday when he pledged to hold elections in January - while continuing to ban rallies, arrest political opponents and suspend other rights.
A legitimate election requires government transparency, freedom of expression, uncensored media and an independent judiciary that can referee the process if necessary.
None of those elements now exist in a nation of 160 million people constrained by Musharraf's Nov. 3 declaration of emergency rule.
The Chronicle makes some very valid points. I only disagree with the part that Mushaffar has fooled noone. Most Pakistanis are not fooled, for sure. Most international players that matter seem utterly and completely fooled. I am aware of not one international organization or goverment that has put its emphasis directly on free media and independent judiciary instead of elections and "lifting of the emergency." Not one of them have declared that the elections would be null and void without those two ingredients. US and EU, who give all this money to Musharraf, are certainly not making any noise about restoring the Pakistani Supreme Court. Shouldn't that be worth an editorial.
Lets find some ways to turn up the heat.

Zarar Khan of AP butchers Pakistani Lawyers

2007-11-13T21:52:00.000-08:00

The San Francisco Chronicle today ran a story about Bhutto's house arrest (page 8). I could not find it in the online version after a quick search. The second paragraph of the story reads thus:

The showdown intensified the political crisis engulfing Pakistan and further clouded the prospect of a pre-US alliance forming between Bhutto and President Pervaiz Musharraf against rising Islamic extremism (my emphasis) .

The alliance and the emergency are against Pakistan's civic institutions; judges, journalists and human rights advocates. The only people who believe the crass lie that the alliance or the emergency are about fighting Al-Quaida in Pakistan are Musharraf's cronies and Zarar Khan of Associated Press. The rest of Pakistan has seen the hand that the alliance and the emergency have shown. The fists have fallen only on those who demand the rule of law.

One demand. Keeping it simple

2007-11-13T21:21:00.000-08:00

These days I hear a lot about bringing democracy to Pakistan. There is talk of elections, and even whispers about lifting the emergency. They funny thing is the criminals and their victims are making the same noise. People who have done the most to damage Pakistani civic institutions have the loudest voices.

There is one issue where the bad guys are hardly making any noise; the restoration of the Pakistan Supereme Court. The friends of democracy, and wellwishers of Pakistan should makes things very clear and simple. Make only one demand:

Restore the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Everything else will fall into place. An empowered SC will restore democracy, champion civil society and put the criminals behind bars. It is very easy to visualize sham elections, and sham democracies. But the bad guys currently lack the imagination to pull of a sham restoration of Pakistan's Supreme Court.

I know this is asking a lot. The greatest leverage in Pakistani affaris belongs to the "prepetual war" crew of Bushies, neocons and the Bush-lite Democrats. These are the same folks who have spent the last six years diligently shredding their own constitution over equally bogus pretexts.

Time has come to ask a lot. Our one demand must be met.

In a world full of villians

2007-11-13T20:39:00.000-08:00

This week the world has some unlikely heroes. This week they are the Pakistani lawyers. They are the brave men and women who are risking their freedom and their limbs to stand up for the rule of law.

I hope they last on the scene a little longer than the Burmese monks. What can we the people of the internet do to make sure the world does not ignore them? I seek your ideas. Please lend me your imagination.

Maybe an early Nobel Peace Prize campaign would be a good idea.

In the upcoming days, I intend to use this space to suggest some ideas of my own.